Sidor som bilder
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Sesostris. o Mizraim and his son's peopled Egypt, Libya, Philistia, and the bordering countries, and they might probably be known in Canaan and Phoenicia ; but we have no reason to suppose, that any of them made an expedition into India. The Assyrian empire lay as a barrier between Egypt and India ; and we have no hints either that the Assyrians conquered India, or that the Egyptians before Sesostris made any conquests in Asia, or passed through Assyria into the more eastern nations.

It may, perhaps, be here said, that Sesostris was.. Bacchus, who conquered the East, and founded the Indian polity. But to this I answer; 1. India was not in so low and unsettled a state in the time of Sesostris, as it is described to have been, when this Bacchus came into it; for, as I remarked before, these nations were powerful in the days of Ninus, and so continued until Alexander the Great; and it is remarkable, that even he met a more considerable opposition from Porus a king of this country, than any which had been made to his victorious arms by the whole Persian empire 2. All the writers, who have offered any thing about Bacchus and Sesostris, are express in supposing them to be different persons Diodorus Siculus P refutes at large a mistake of the Greeks, who imagined that the famous Bacchus was the son of Jupiter and Semele ; and intimates how and upon what foundation Orpheus and the succeeding

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

P Lib. 1. p. 20. Edit.

• Diodorus lib. 1. Rhodoman.


poets led them into this error. Though there were persons in after-agés called Bacchus, Hercules, and by other celebrated names, yet he justly observes, that the heroes so first called, lived in the first ages of the world. As to Sesostris, the same writer, after he has brought down the history of Egypt from Menes to Myris,' then supposes that Sesostris was seven generations later than Myris, which makes him by far too modern to be accounted the Bacchus, who lived according to his opinion in the first ages of the world. 3. But Sesostris cannot be the Indian Bacchus, be. cause Sesostris never came into India at all. Diodorus, indeed says, that Sesostris passed over the Ganges, and conquered all India as far as the ocean; but he must have been mistaken in this particular. Herodotus has given a very particular account of the expeditions of Sesostris, and it does not appear from him, that he went further east than Bactria; where he turned aside to the Scythians, and extending his conquests over their dominions, returned into Asia at the river Pharis which runs into the Euxine Sea. Now this account agrees perfectly well with the reason assigned by the priest of Vulcan for not admitting the statue of Darius to take place of the statue of Sesostris ; u because, he said, Sesostris had been master of more nations than Darius, having subdued not only all the kingdoms subject to Darius, but the Scythians besides. India was no

a Kata The e agxons yeyeon 'Ay gwaw. Id. ibid. • Id, p. 34.

* Id. p. 35. • Lib. 2. c. 103.

• Herodot, lib. 2. c. 110.



part of the Persian empire, and therefore bad Sesos-
tris conquered India, here would have been another
considerable addition to his glory, and the priest of
Vulcan would have mentioned this as well as Scythia,
as an instance of his exceeding the power and domi.
minion of Darius. But the truth was, neither Darius
nor Sesostris had ever subjugated India ; for, as
Justin remarks, Semiramis and Alexander the Great
were the only two persons that entered this country.*
The accounts of the victories of Sesostris given by
Manetho, both in the Chronicon of Eusebius, Y and in
Josephus,' agree very well with Herodotus, and con-
fine his expeditions to Europe and Asia, and make no
mention of his entering India. To this agree all the
accounts we have of the several pillars erected by him
in memory of his conquests; which were found in every
country where he had been ;. but we have no account
of any such monuments of bim in India. Ctesias,
perhaps, might imagine he had been in this country,
and from him Diodorus might have it; but though
Cusias' Assyrian history bas by the best writers been
thought worthy of credit, yet his accounts of India
were not so well written, but were full of fiction and
mistakes. It appears from what all other writers have

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Justin. lib. 1 c. 2. Indiæ bellum intulit; quò præter
illam & Alexandrum nemo intravit.
Chronic. p. 15.

Contra Appion, 1. 1.
Herodot, ubi sup.
Hen. Steph. de Ctesiâ Disquisit,

[ocr errors]

ot be the persone was in India

ty of these l

offered about Sesostris,' that he never was in India, and therefore he cannot be the person who first settled the polity of these kingdoms.

It may perhaps bc thonght more difficult to say who this Indian Bacchus was, than to prove that Sesostris was not the person. The ancient writers have made almost an endless confusion, by the variety of names which they sometimes give to one person, and sometimes calling various persons by one and the same name. Diodorus Siculus was sensible of the many difficulties occasioned hereby, when he was to treat of the Egyptian gods. Several persons have been called by the name of Bacchus, at least one in India, one in Egypt, and one in Greece ; but we must not confound them one with the other, especially when we have remarkable hints by which we may sufficiently distinguish them. 1. For, the Indian Bacchus was the first and most ancient of all who bore that name. 2. He was the first who pressed the grape and made winie.' 3, He lived in these parts before there were any cities in India. 4, They say he was twice born, and that he was nourished in the thigh of Jupiter.

These are the particulars - which the heathen wriem ters give of the Indian Bacchus; and from all

[ocr errors]

"I have followed the accounts which are given of Sesostris ; though I shall have occasion hereafter to remark how far they go beyond what is true: Sesostris was not ko great a conqueror as he is represented. Lib. , p. 21,

Id. lib. 3. p. 197. Edit Rhodoman, rId. lib. 4.

1 Id. lib. ii.

seal these hints it must unquestionably appear that he

was Noah, and no other. Noah being the first man in the post-diluvian world, lived early enough to be

the most ancient Bacchus; and Noah, according to u RHM Moses," was the first who made wine. Noah lived

in these parts as soon as he came out of the ark, earlier than any cities were built in India ; and as to the last

circumstance of Bacchus being twice born, and brought lebec forth out of the thigh of Jupiter, Diodorus gives us

an unexpected light into the true meaning of this,
tradition. He says, “ That Bacchus was said to be
twice born, because in Deucalion's flood he was thought
to have perished with the rest of the world, but God
brought him again as by a second nativity into the sight
of men, and they say mythologically, that he came
out of the thigh of Jupiter.". It seems very probable
that this had been the ancient Indian tradition, in
order to perpetuate the memory of Noah's preserva-
vation ; and Diodorus, or the writers, from whom he
took it, have corrupted it but very little. Deucalion's
flood is a western expression ; the Greeks indeed called
the ancient Flood, of which they had some imper-
fect traditions, sometimes the flood of Ogyges, and

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"Gen, ix. 20. 1 Δις δ' αυτα την γενεσιν εκ Διoς παραδεδoσθαι, δια το δοκειν μετα των αλλων εν τω κατα τον Δευκαλίωνα κατακλυμν φθαρηναι KX TUTUSTUS xagmes, xxo MET& Tuvetage Opixy Wadov avxpusulas, ώσπερει δευτεραν επιφανειαν ταυτην υπαρξαι τε Θεα σαςανθρωποις, καθ' ην εκ τ8 Λιος μηρο γενεσθαι παλιν τον Θεον ταΐον μυθολογισι Diodorus lib. 3, p. 196.

« FöregåendeFortsätt »