CHAPTER IX.

_ASSYRIAN MYTHOLOGY._

"But surely there is nothing improbable in the supposition, that in the poems of Homer such vestiges may be found. Every recorded form of society bears some traces of those by which it has been preceded, and in that highly primitive form, which Homer has been the instrument of embalming for all posterity, the law of general reason obliges us to search for elements and vestiges more primitive still.... The general proposition that we may expect to find the relics of scriptural traditions in the heroic age of Greece, though it leads, if proved, to important practical results, is independent even of a belief in those traditions, as they stand in the scheme of revealed truth. They must be admitted to have been facts on earth, even by those who would deny them to have been facts of heavenly origin, in the shape in which Christendom receives them; and the question immediately before us is one of pure historical probability. The descent of mankind from a single pair, the lapse of that pair from original righteousness, are apart from and ulterior to it. We have traced the Greek nation to a source, and along a path of migration which must in all likelihood have placed its ancestry, at some point or points, in close local relations with the scenes of the earliest Mosaic records: the retentiveness of that people equalled its receptiveness, and its close and fond association with the past, made it prone indeed to incorporate novel matter into its religion, but prone also to keep it there after its incorporation.

"If such traditions existed, and if the laws which guide historical inquiry require or lead us to suppose that the forefathers of the Greeks must have lived within their circle, then the burden of proof must lie not so properly with those who assert that the traces of them are to be found in the earliest, that is, the Homeric form of the Greek mythology, as with those who deny it. What became of those old traditions? They must have decayed and disappeared, not by a sudden process, but by a gradual accumulation of the corrupt accretions, in which at length they were so completely interred as to be invisible and inaccessible. Some period, therefore, there must have been at which they would remain clearly perceptible, though in conjunction with much corrupt matter. Such a period might be made the subject of record, and if such there were, we might naturally expect to find it in the oldest known work of the ancient literature.

"If the poems of Homer do, however, contain a picture, even though a defaced picture, of the primeval religious traditions, it is obvious that they afford a most valuable collateral support to the credit of the Holy Scripture, considered as a document of history. Still we must not allow the desire of gaining this advantage to bias the mind in an inquiry, which can only be of value if it is conducted according to the strictest rules of rational criticism."--_Gladstone on Tradition in "Homer and the Homeric Age_," vol. ii. sect. i.

Having laid, as I think, in what has been premised in the last chapter, grounds for a presumption that primitive traditions may be shrouded in the ancient mythology, I proceed to seek traditions of the patriarch Noah among the inscriptions and monuments of the Chaldæans; for then we shall find ourselves in a period when the results of modern archæological science are in contact with the events and incidents of primitive patriarchal life recorded in Scripture; and, in seeking them where we shall best find them, in the able and discriminating pages of Rawlinson, we shall at least feel that we are treading on safe and solid ground.

The deities in the Chaldæan Pantheon are thus enumerated by Professor Rawlinson--

"The grouping of the principal Chaldæan deities is as follows:--At the head of the Pantheon stands a god Il or Ra, of whom little is known. Next to him is a triad, Ana, Bil or Belus, and Hea or Hoa, who correspond closely to the classical Pluto, Jupiter, and Neptune. Each of these is accompanied by a female principle or wife.... Then follows a further triad, consisting of Sin or Hurki the moon-god, San or Sanci the sun, and Vul (or Yem, or Ao, or In, or Ina, according to various readings of the hieroglyphics) the god of the atmosphere (again accompanied by female powers or wives).... Next in order to them we find a group of five minor deities, the representatives of the five planets, Nin or Ninip (Saturn), Merodach (Jupiter), Nergal (Mars), Ishtar (Venus), and Nebo (Mercury). [The bracket indications are Rawlinson's.]... These principal deities do not appear to have been connected like the Egyptian and classical divinities into a single genealogical scheme" (i. 141).

In a note at p. 142 it is said, "These schemes themselves were probably not genealogical at first ... but after a while given to separate and independent deities, recognised in different places by distinct communities, or even by distinct races" (_vide_ Bunsen's "Egypt," iv. 66; English Tran.)

Now to this opinion I venture unreservedly to adhere, and I connect it with the statement (_id._ i. 72), that "Chaldæa in the earliest times to which we can go back, seems to have been inhabited by four principal tribes. The early kings are continually represented in the monuments as sovereigns over the Kiprat-arbat, or 'Four Races' (_vide supra_, p. 30). These 'Four Races' are sometimes called the Arba Lisun or 'Four Tongues,' whence we may conclude that they were distinguished from one another, among other differences, by a variety in their forms of speech ... an examination of the written remains has furnished reasons for believing that the differences were great and marked; the languages, in fact, belonging to the four great varieties of human speech, the Hamitic, Semitic, Aryan, and Turanian." Compare pp. 39, 40.

If it is allowed that there may have been mythological systems corresponding to these divers nationalities, we may fairly conclude that the deities above enumerated may not necessarily have been different deities, but the same deities viewed in different lights, or included in duplicate in the way of incorporation, or in recognition of subordinate nationalities. If, therefore, I find the representation of Noah in any one of these deities, is there not a _prima facie_ probability that I shall find the reduplication of him in others? I consider, at least, that I shall have warrant for thus collecting the scattered traditions concerning the patriarch who stands at the head of the second propagation of our race.

But first as to the god Il or Ra--

IL OR RA.

The form _Ra_ represents, probably, the native Chaldæan name of this deity, while _Il_ is the Semitic equivalent. _Il_, of course, is but a variant of _El_, the root of the well-known biblical _Elohim_, as well as of the Arabic Allah. It is this name which Diodorus represents under the form of _Elus_, and Sanchoniathon, or rather Philo Biblius, under that of Elus, or _Ilus_. The meaning of the word is simply "God," or perhaps "The God" emphatically. _Ra_, the Cushite equivalent, must be considered to have had the same force originally, though in Egypt it received a special application to the sun, and became the proper name of that particular deity. The word is lost in the modern Ethiopic. It formed an element in the native name of Babylon, which was _Ka-ra_, the Cushite equivalent of the Semitic _Bab-il_, an expression signifying "the gate of God."

Ra is a god with few peculiar attributes. He is a sort of fount and origin of deity, too remote from man to be much worshipped, or to excite any warm interest. There is no evidence of his having had any temple in Chaldæa during the early times. A belief in his existence is implied rather than expressed in inscriptions of the primitive kings, where the Moon-god is said to be "brother's son of Ana, and eldest son of Bil or Belus." We gather from this, that Bel and Ana were considered to have a common father, and later documents sufficiently indicate that that common father was Il or Ra."--_Rawlinson_, i. p. 143.

If in the Il or Ra of the Chaldæans the primitive monotheism is not revealed, I do not see how it can be discerned in the Zeus of the Greeks. We have the same god in the same relation in the Scandinavian, or at any rate in the Lapland mythology. Leems ("Account of Danish Lapland," Pinkerton, i. 458) says--"Of the Gods inhabiting the starry mansions the _greatest is Radien_, yet it is uncertain whether he is over every part of the sidereal sky, or whether he governs only some part of it. Be this as it may, I shall be bold to affirm that the Laplanders never comprehended, under the name of this false god, the true God; _which is obvious from this_, that some have not scrupled to put the image or likeness of the true God by the side of their Radien, on Runic boxes."[145] If, however, of their gods "the greatest was Radien," they would not have placed the true God by his side until they had become acquainted with the true God, or until they had come to commingle Christianity and Paganism; but then would they not have placed "Ra" by the side of the true God as His counterpart? I am assuming that "Radien" means simply the god Ra, as I suppose Mr Max Müller would recognise "dien" as cognate to "Dyaus" ... "Dieu."

[145] In like manner, the Peruvians recognised "Pachacamac" (_vide infra_, p. 304), in the description which the Spaniards gave of the true God; and in so far as they had retained the monotheistic belief, this was true. Garcilasso de la Vega, a most competent witness who testifies to this, adds--"If any one shall now ask me, who am a Catholic Christian Indian, by the infinite mercy, what name was given to God in my language, I should say Pachacamac."--Hakluyt Society, ed. of Garcil. de la Vega, i. 107.

Yet it has been opposed, _in limine_, to M. L'Abbe Gainet's valuable chapter on the "Monotheisme des Peuples primitifs," "that he does not meet the specific assertions of historians such as Rawlinson, who finds idolatry prevalent among the Chaldæans on their first appearance on the stage of history."

I must submit, however, that although the discovery of idolatry at this early period may appear to disturb the particular theory, yet on closer examination it will be found to sustain L'Abbe Gainet's argument, on the whole, by sustaining the truth of tradition upon which his main argument reposes; for the idolatry which we find is intimately bound up with the worship of Belus, identified with Nimrod, whose rebellion against the Lord has always been in tradition, and is according to the more accepted interpretation of the sacred text. The discovery of idolatry, therefore, under the particular circumstances, is exactly what we should expect, and affords a remarkable confirmation of the fidelity of tradition.

Moreover, there are Chaldæans and Chaldæans, as we have just seen in Rawlinson (_sup._ p. 184), and as will be made more evident in the following passage from Gainet's "Monotheisme," &c.

"It is sufficiently agreed, says Lebatteux (Mem. Acad. t. xxvii. p. 172), that the Babylonians recognised a supreme being, the Father and Lord of all (Diod. Sic. l. ii.) St Justin Cohortat. ad gent. Eusebi. Prep. Evan., l. iii. Porphyry (Life of Pythagoras) cites an oracle of Zoroaster, in which the Chaldæans are coupled in encomium with the Hebrews for the sanctity of the worship which they paid to the Eternal King. These are the words of the oracles--The Chaldeans alone with the Hebrews have wisdom for their share, rendering a pure worship to God, who is the Eternal King."--_Gainet_, iii. 408.

The pure monotheism here alluded to may have been preserved in Chaldæan families of Semitic origin, but the extract I have just given from Rawlinson seems to prove that the knowledge was preserved also, dimly and obscurely, among the predominant Chaldæans of Hamitic descent. This will be more apparent from the monotheistic epithets attached to the three next deities.

ANA.

"Ana is the head of the first triad which follows immediately after the obscure god Ra." "Ana, like Il and Ra, is thought to have been a word originally signifying God in the highest sense." "He corresponds in many respects to the classical Hades, who, like him, heads[146] the triad to which he belongs." In so far he is undistinguishable from Il or Ra, and may only transmit the monotheistic tradition through a different channel. But Ana has human epithets applied to him very suggestive of hero-worship. "His epithets are chiefly such as mark priority and antiquity." "He is the Old Ana," "the original chief," "the father of the gods" [_inter alia_, of Bil Nipru, _i.e._ Nimrod]. He is also called--which imports another association of ideas--"the lord of spirits and demons," "the king of the lower world,"[147] "the lord of darkness or death," "the ruler of the far-off city."

[146] "This is not a mere arbitrary supposition, for it is expressly said in Holy Writ, that the first man, ordained to be 'the father of the whole earth' (as he is then called), became, on his reconciliation with his Maker, the wisest of all men, and, according to tradition, the greatest of prophets, who in his far-reaching ken, _foresaw the destinies of all mankind_ in all successive ages down to the end of the world. All this must be taken in a strict historical sense, for the moral interpretation we abandon to others. The pre-eminence of the Sethites chosen by God, and entirely devoted to His service, must be received as an undoubted historical fact, to which we find many pointed allusions even in the traditions of the other Asiatic nations. Nay, the hostility between the Sethites and Cainites, and the mutual relations of these two races, form the chief clue to the history of the primitive world, and even of many particular nations of antiquity."--_Fred. Von Schlegel's "Philosophy of Hist.," Robertson's trans._, p. 152.

[147] Compare these epithets, and what was said above, of resemblance "to classical Hades," with the following verses from the "Oracula Sybillina," lib. i. 80--

"Orcus eos cepit græco qui nomine dictus Est _Ades_, quod primus eo descenderit _Adam_, Expertus mortis legem," &c.

Setting aside such titles as belong exclusively to the Deity, but assuming hero-worship--supposing man deified--who more appropriately placed in these primitive times at the head of the list, than their original progenitor Adam.[148] To whom would these titles, "the old Ana,"[149] "the original chief," "the lord of darkness and death," he who introduced death into the world, more exactly apply? Rawlinson also says--"His position is well marked by Damascius, who gives the three gods Anus, Illinus, and Aüs, as _next in succession to the primeval pair_, Assorus and Missara," i. 145. Now, it will not be contested, I think, that Assorus is the same as Alorus, the first of the ten antediluvian (deluge of Xisuthrus) Assyrian kings enumerated by Berosus, and which correspond to the ten antediluvian patriarchs. Consequently Assorus = Alorus = Adam.[150]

[148] Osiris also is "the judge of the soul, or the god of the world of spirits." "Osiris is never represented in an animal form, but is called the Bull" (_infra_ pp. 203, 204), _vide_ Bunsen's "Egypt," iv. 332. Bunsen's own view is, that "the history of Osiris is the history of the cycle of the year, of the sun dying away and resuscitating himself again." Mr Palmer ("Egyptian Chronicles," i. p. 3) says--(and I think it as well that I should state that I had come to an almost identical conclusion, and had written this and the following chapter before I became acquainted with Mr Palmer's profound and yet still neglected work, _vide_ ch. vi.)--"The first human ('Osiris = Adam and Isis = Eve') having been thrown back into pairs of anthropomorphous deities (p. 2), the original Osiris and Isis, formed by the divine potter as parents of all, disappear in name, and are represented by Seb and Nutpe, while Osiris, Typhon, and Horus, the progeny of Seb and Nutpe, answers rather to Cain, Abel, and Seth, in the old world, and to the three sons of Noah in the new.... From Osiris-Seb (whether he be viewed as Adam or Noah) are derived downwards all the successive generations of Egyptian, gods and demigods, patriarchs, kings, and other men" [and for a parallel exposition of the Phoenician myth, _vide_ Palmer, p. 53 and seq., "each dynast in turn, in the early generations, being identifiable at once with Seb and Osiris, as father of those following, with Osiris again by sharing the same mortality, and with Horus as renewing his father's life and being the hope of the coming world. _So each ancestor in turn went_, it was said, _to the original Osiris as patriarch of the dead_, and to his intermediate Osirified fathers, and was himself Osirified like them, all making one collective Osiris." [I have not space to discuss the question at what stage the mythology became pantheistic.] "Waiting for that reunion and restoration which was to come through successive generations by the great expected Horus, who was to take up into himself the old, and to be himself the new Osiris."

[149] In a note to Cardinal Wiseman's "Science and Revealed Religion" on Conformity between Semitic and Indo-Europ. grammatical forms, it will be seen that _Ana_ in Chaldaic is the pronoun of the first person singular, and corresponds with the revealed appellation of the Deity, "I Am who Am" (Exod. iii. 14) = the [Greek: tò Egô].

[150] Max Müller, Chips i. 153, refers to Dr Windischmann's ("Zoroastrian Studies") discovery that there are ten generations between Adam and Noah, as there are ten generations in the Zendavesta between Yima (Adam) and Thrâstouna (Noah), and without controverting the point. Mr Palmer ("Egypt. Chron.," i. 45) says--"And though the fancy of making the ten kings to begin only after 1058 years, and to be not all named from the same city, seems to distinguish them from Adam and the nine patriarchs his descendants, still Xisuthrus, the tenth, being clearly identified with Noah, by the flood and the ark, the very number ten, and the relation of the succession in which they stand one to the other, show that Alorus, the first of them, is no other than Adam."

Here, then, we have a reduplication, or else what I have above referred to, the tendency to place the head of the dynasty at the top of the list superior to gods and men. In any case, granting this juxtaposition, would there not have been the proximate risk and probability of the two running into one another and becoming confounded, on the supposition that Ana and Alorus were not originally identical?

This will become more evident when we have considered the next in the triad--

BIL OR ENU.

But the evidence, though it will more clearly establish the fact of hero-worship, will perhaps raise a doubt whether we have rightly regarded Adam as the object of hero-worship in Ana, a point which we will then consider.

Rawlinson says of this god--"He is the Illinus (Il-Enu) of Damascius." "His name, which seems to mean merely lord" (again the primitive monotheistic appellation) "is usually followed by a qualificative adjunct possessing great interest. It is proposed to read this term as Nipru, or in the feminine Niprut, a word which cannot fail to recall the scriptural Nimrod, who is in the Septuagint Nebroth. The term _nipru_ seems to be formed from the root _napar_, which is the Syriac "to pursue," to "make to flee," and which has in Assyrian nearly the same meaning. Thus Bil Nipru would be aptly translated as "the hunter lord" or the "god presiding over the chase," while at the same time it might combine the meaning of the "conquering lord" or "the great conqueror."

Here, at any rate, it must be admitted that "we have, in this instance, an admixture of hero-worship in the Chaldæan religion" (Rawlinson, i. 148). But if in one instance what _à priori_ reason is there that it should not be so in others? Let us, then, examine further. The name of this deity, as Bel Nipru or Nimrod, has, I consider, been completely traced in the pages of Rawlinson (to which I must refer my readers). But what are we to say about the alternative name of Enu? And why, although no great stress can be laid upon the location of a deity in a genealogy or a system, yet why is Nimrod thus placed intermediate between Adam and the third of the triad Hoa, whom, on grounds quite irrespective of the similarity of name, I identify with Noah?[151]

[151] Gainet (i. 211) quotes as follows from "Ceremonies Relig." i. vii.: "The Mandans pretend that the Deluge was caused by the white men to destroy their ancestors. The whites caused the waters to rise to such a height that the world was submerged. Then _the first man, whom they regard as one of their divinities, inspired mankind with the idea of constructing, upon an eminence, a tower and fortress of wood_, and _promised them that the water should not rise beyond this point_." Here seems a very analogous confused tradition of Adam and Nimrod, the Deluge and the Tower of Babel. Comp. with the distinct testimony to the Mandan tradition, _infra_, ch. xi.

If Ana is Adam, and Hoa Noah, why should not Enu, in another point of view, be Enoch? There is, I admit, an absence of direct evidence, but I think I discover a link of connection in a note in Rawlinson (i. p. 196). "Arab writers record a number of remarkable traditions, in which he (Nimrod) plays a conspicuous part." "Yacut declares that Nimrod attempted to mount to heaven on the wings of an eagle, and makes Niffers (Calneh) the scene of this occurrence (Lex. Geograph. in voc. Niffer). It is supposed that we have here an allusion to the building of the Tower of Babel." But I cannot help regarding it as much more certainly like an allusion to Enoch's disappearance from the earth. At p. 187, Prof. Rawlinson notices the confusion of Xisuthrus with Enoch, which proves that the tradition of Enoch was amongst them, and would have been common also to the Hamitic Arabs.[152]

[152] I find that the Egyptians had the same confused tradition respecting Menes, who stood to them in the same relation as Nimrod to the Assyrians (_vide_ Bunsen's Egypt, ii. p. 65). "The statement in Manetho's lists that Menes was torn to pieces by a hippopotamus, is probably an exaggeration of an early legend, that he was carried away by a hippopotamus, one of the symbols of the god of the lower world. The great ruler was snatched away from the earth, to distinguish him from other mortals, just as Romulus was."

I will now return to my doubt as to Ana. For although I feel tolerably certain that Ana in his human attributes represents one or other of the antediluvian patriarchs, it may well be that he is only a reduplication of Enu = Enoch. If we are to seek in the translation of Enoch the clue to the origin of the deification of man, and its commencement in the person of Nimrod (_vide supra_, p. 160), it is likely, in the legend of the apotheosis of Nimrod, that all the analogies should have been sought for in the striking historical event which was in tradition. There is, moreover, the analogy of name with Annacus, Hannachus = Enoch.[153] If he is Enoch, he naturally also falls into his place as second to Assorus.

[153] "Etienne de Byzance dit qu'à 'Icone' ('de urbibus' voce 'Iconium') ville de Lycaonie près du Mont Taurus dans les régions occupées par les habitants antediluviens regnait Annacus dont la vie alla au-déla de trois cents ans. Tous les habitants d'alentour demandèrent à un oracle jusqu'à quelle époque se prolongerait sa vie. L'oracle répondit que ce patriarche étant mort, tout le monde devait s'attendre à périr. Les Phrygiens à cette ménace jetèrent les hauts cris, d'où est venu le proverbe: 'Pleurer sous Annacus, ce que l'on dit de ceux qui se livrent à des grands gémissements. Or le Déluge étant survénu tous périrent.... Dans ces récits tout est conformé à la Bible. Annacus a vécu trois cents ans avant le Déluge. Il a averti ses concitoyens: il est entouré du même respect que le patriarche Noë lui-même. Annacus parait venir d'Enoch; tout announce une identité de personnages." (Gainet, Hist. de L'Anc. et Nouv. Test. i. 94, 95.) The connection between the death of Enoch and the destruction of mankind may accord as well with the traditional belief in his reappearance at the end of the world.

Compare the Grecian tradition of Inachus, son of Oceanus (_vide_ Bryant, ii. 268), and with it, Hor., Od. 3, lib. ii.:

"Divesne, prisco et natus ab Inacho, Nil interest, an pauper, et infimâ De gente," &c.

I retain, however, my original opinion, that Ana is Adam (though possibly with some confusion with Enoch), in addition to the arguments already urged, upon the following grounds:--

Rawlinson mentions (i. 147) "Telane," or the "_Mound_ of Ana," distinct from Kalneh or "Kalana." We know that there has been a constant tradition that the bones of Adam were preserved in the ark, and this name of the "Mound of Ana" may be connected with it. If so, it will also account for Ana (Dis = Orcus) being the patron deity of Erech, "the great city of the dead, the necropolis of Lower Babylonia" (Rawlinson i. 146).

The son of Ana is Vul. If Vul could be identified with Vulcan, and Vulcan with Tubalcain, it would go far to decide the point that Ana was Adam.

But in the matter of etymology, I do not know that we can advance beyond the quaint phrase of old Sir Walter Raleigh in his "History of the World," that "there is a certain likelihood of name between Tubalcain and Vulcan." I rely more upon the wide-spread tradition of Tubalcain in the legends of Dædalus, Vulcan, Weland, Galant, Wielant, Wayland Smith, which approaches very nearly an identification. _Vide_ Wilson's "Archæologia of Scotland," p. 210. Compare the Phoenician tradition, Bunsen's "Egypt," iv. 217, 219.

It is to be noted, however, that although Ana (_vide_ Rawlinson) "like Adam had several sons, he had only two of any celebrity" (we can suppose that Abel had died out of the Cainite tradition), "Vul and another whose name represents 'darkness' or '_the west_,'" which might well be the view of Seth from a Cainite point of view (and it is traditional that the Cainite lore was preserved by Cham in the ark). Now it is remarkable that the Scripture (Gen. iv.) expressly says that Cain dwelt on the _east_ side of Eden.

I now come to

HEA OR HOA.

"The third god of the first triad was Hea or Hoa, the Ana of Damascius. This appellation is perhaps best rendered into Greek by the [Greek: Ôê] of Helladius, the name given to the mystic animal, half man half fish, which came up from the Persian Gulf to teach astronomy and letters to the first settlers on the Euphrates and Tigris. It is perhaps contained in the word by which Berosus designates this same creature--Oannes ([Greek: Ôánnês]), which may be explained as Hoa-ana, or the god Hoa. There are no means of strictly determining the precise meaning of the word in Babylonian, but it is perhaps allowable to connect it provisionally with the Arabic Hiya, which is at once life and 'a serpent,' since, according to the best authority, 'there are very strong grounds for connecting Hea or Hoa with the serpent of Scripture, and the paradisaical traditions of the tree of knowledge and the tree of life.'

"Hoa occupies in the first triad the position which in the classical mythology is filled by Poseidon or Neptune, and in some respects he corresponds to him. He is 'the lord of the earth,' just as Neptune is [Greek: gaiêochos]; he is the 'king of rivers,' and he comes from the sea to teach the Babylonians, but he is never called the 'lord of the sea.' That title belongs to Nin or Ninip. Hoa is the lord of the abyss or of 'the great deep,' which does not seem to be the sea, but something distinct from it. His most important titles are those which invest him with the character so prominently brought out in Oë and Oannes, of the god of science and knowledge. He is 'the intelligent guide,' or, according to another interpretation, 'the intelligent fish,' 'the teacher of mankind,' 'the lord of understanding.' One of his emblems is the 'wedge' or 'arrow-head,' the essential element of cuneiform writing, which seems to be assigned to him as the inventor, or at least the patron, of the Chaldæan alphabet. Another is the serpent, which occupies so conspicuous a place among the symbols of the gods on the black stones recording benefactions, and which sometimes appears upon the cylinders. This symbol here, as elsewhere, is emblematic of superhuman knowledge--a record of the primeval belief that 'the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field.' The stellar name of Hoa was Kimmut.... The monuments do not contain much evidence of the early worship of Hoa. His name appears on a very ancient stone tablet brought from Mugheir (Ur), but otherwise his claim to be accounted one of the primeval gods must rest on the testimony of Berosus and Helladius, who represent him as known to the first settlers.... As Kimmut, Hoa was also the father of Nebo, whose functions bear a general resemblance to his own."--_Rawlinson's Ancient Monarchies_, i. 152.[154]

[154] _Vide_ his other epithets, _infra_, p. 239; also Rawlinson (Herod. i. p. 600), says that "upon one of the tablets in the British Museum there is a list of thirty-six synonyms indicating this god (Hoa). The greater part of them relate either to "the abyss" or to "knowledge."

Compare this with the following verses from the "Oracula Sybillina," i. ver. 145--

"Collige, Noë, tuas vires ... ... Si scieris me Divinæ te nulla rei secreta latebunt."

Now, without entering into the question of the authenticity of the Sybilline verses, I may at least quote them in evidence of the current tradition concerning Noah in the second century of the Christian era, supposing them to have been forged at that period.

I have said that I shall not rely too much on the resemblance of name, Hoa; but I must draw attention to the curious resemblance which lurks in the name "Aüs" to the words upon which the Vicomte D'Anselme has founded an argument in the appended note.[155]

[155] "Comment le nom du premier navigateur connu, tel qu'il se prononça en Hébreu et qu'il nous est transmis par la Génese, 'Noh, Naus, Noach,' serait-il devenu le nom d'une arche flottante, d'un navire, en Sanscrit et en vingt autres langues? _Nau_, sanscrit; _Naw_, armenien; _Naus_, grec; (_Navis_, latin); _Noi_, hibernien; _Neau_, bas breton; _Nef_, nav. franc; _Noobh_, irlandais; _Naone_, vanikoro; _Nacho_, allemand vieux; _Naw_, timor; _Nachen_, allemand; _S'nechia_, islandais; _S'naeca_ ou _Naca_, anglo-sax.; _S'nace_, ancien anglais; _Sin-nau_, cambodge, &c.

"Enfin nous demandons comment le nom Hébreu de l'arche de Noë. Tobe, prononcé comme on écrivait généralement en Orient, en sens inverse, donne le nom d'un vaisseau dans vingt langues qui sont des dialectes du Sanscrit? L'écriture boustrophedone, qui fait les lignes alternativement à droite et gauche sans interruption a pu donner naissance à cette manière de lire:--_Boat_, anglais; _boite_, français; _bat_, anglo-saxon; _boot_, hollandais; _bat_, suedois, _baat_, danois; _batr_, islandais; _bad_, breton; _bote_, espagnol; _boar_, persan; _batillo_, italien; _pota_, sanscrit." _Vide_ other similar proofs from Vicomte d'Anselme's "Monde Païen," &c. In Gainet,