CHAPTER VI.
On the Deluge and certain after events. £,,r
Man's wickedness after the Fall multiplied to a fearful extent. *' The earth also was corrupt before God J and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt: for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth."
One honourable exception is, however, noticed. Noah tt/as found righteous, and grace was in store for him. " And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Make thee an ark of Gopher-wood: rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch."
The dimensions of the ark were nest prescribed, and Noah was warned of " a flood of waters" coming upon the earth " to destroy all flesh." He was advised to enter into the Ark with all his house, and take pairs of all animals to keep them alive, and ample provisions for the use of all in the ark.
The flood is then described in its waters increasing, assuaging, abating and ultimately drying up. In the seventh month the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat. In the tenth month were the tops of the mountains seen. Forty days after that, Noah opened the window of the ark, and, to try the state of things below, he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth. Then he sent forth a dove, but the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned into the ark. After seven days he again sent forth the dove, and the dove returned in the evening with an olive leaf in her mouth. Noah perceived now that the waters had abated, and after another seven days sent the dove a third time when she no more retiimed.
Then Noah removed the covering of the ark and saw that the surface of the earth was dry, and on receiving another divine mandate, he came out of the ark with his &mily, and got out all that were with him.
" And Noah builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of every dean fowl and offered burnt-offerings on the altar."^
The above may be considered a l«ief summaiT' of the Mosaic account of the deluge. The principal points that are noticeable are (I), the increase of human wickedness which occasioned it; (3), the timely warning given to Noah, singled out as a r^kteous man in that generation; (3), the instruction for the building of an ark of given dimensions; (4), the number of persons that entered the ark with pairs of living crea- turra, and adequate provisions; (5), the resting of the ark on " the mountains of Ararat"; (6), Noah's sending out birds to try if the waters had dried up; (7), Noah's building an altar, and offering burnt-offerings.
We shall now see to what extent this narrative is confirmed by Arian legends. The Iranian scriptures appear to be silent on the subject. The Indo-Arians have several legends of which the first in the following from the Saiapaiha Brdhmana. We give it as it has been rendered by Dr. Muir, the most accurate and faithful translator of the passage.
" In the beginning they brought to Manu water for washing, as men are in the habit of bringing it to wash i^ith the hands. As he was thus washing, a fish came into his hands, (which spake to him) ' Preserve me; I shall save thee.' (Manu enquired) * From what wilt thou save me f (The fish replied) * A flood shall sweep away all these creatures; from it will I rescue thee.' (Manu asked). ' How (shall) thy preservation ' (be effected)?' The fish said: * So long as we are
* small, we are in great peril, for fish devours fish j
* thou shalt preserve me first in a jar. When I grow
* too large for the jar, then thou shalt dig a trench, ' and preserve me in that. When I grow too large
* for the trench, then thou shalt carry me away to ' the Ocean, I shall then be beyond the reach of ' danger.' Straightway he became a large fish; for he waxes to the utmost. (He said). ' Now in su(^ and such a year, then the flood will come \ thou shalt therefore, construct a ship, and resort to me; ^ou sh^t embark in the ship when the flood rises,
and I shall deliver theo from it.' Having thus preeerred the fish, Manu carried him away to the sea. Then in the same year which the fish had enjoined, he couBtructed a ship, and resorted to him. When the flood rose, Manu embarked in the ship. The fish swam towards him. He festened the cable of the ship to the fish's horn. By this means he passed over this northern mountain. The fish said, * I have deli- Tered thee; fasten the ship to a tree. But lest the water should cut thee off whilst thou art on the mountain, as much as the water subsides, so much shalt thou descend after it.' He accordingly descended after it as much (as it subsided)., Wherefore also this, vis., ' Manu's descent' is (the name) of the northern mountain. Now the flood had swept away all these creatures; so Manu alone was left here. Desirous of oflspring, he lived worshipping, and toiUng in arduous religious rites. Among these he also sacrificed with the pdka offering. He cast clarified butter, thickened milk, whey and curds, as an oblation into the waters. Thence in a year a woman was produced."*
The Dame of the woman thus -produced was I(ja. *' From Manu and Ida, we are expressly told, the race, known as that of Manu, i. e. the race of men, was produced."* Manu, according to the above legend, was the progenitor of all post-diluvian men.
But the Rig Veda leads us to predicate* the same attribute of another character also. And that character was Anu, whom, as we shall presently see, the Matsia PuHma considers the progenitor of Mlecchas. The words " anava" and *' 6nava" from Anu, are in the Rig Yeda used, according to Sayanacharia, in the same sense or senses as "manava" and " mSnava" from Manu. Thus; " anavah" stands in v. 31, 4 for " manushiah," nwn, just as " manavah" does for the very same in iv. 18, 22; i. 11, 3; 43, 4, 8; 66, 13; 91,9. " A'nave" loc. sing, stands in viii. 4. 1 for a son of Anu, and " manavam" ace. sing, stands in x. 62. 1 for a son of Manu. Thus Anu and Manu are both described as kings and first parents of mankind.
We may therefore fairly conclude that in the con- ception of the Rig Veda, Anu and Manu are different names of the same representative character. But Anu was the very name which occurs frequently in the Cuneiform Inscriptions for the principal god of the Assyrians. He is constantly associated with Bel, Assur and other tutelar gods of Assyria.* And if we read the Cuneiform Inscriptiona with the allusions in the Rig Veda, Anu stood among the Assyrians in the same light as Manu among the Indo-Arians, vie. as the progenitor of mankind. Considering, then, that the Assyrians frequently used a redundant a as the initial letter of a proper name,' Anu probably was a modification of Ku or Nuh (the common Oriental transliteration of Noah) deified as the grandfather of Ashur, the founder of their nation and the original source of their national name Assur. And if Anu could thus stand for Ku or Noah among the Assyrians, ** Manu" must have been the Indo-Arian ideal of Noah. And it is a remarkably significant fact that, while the Rig Veda assimilates Anu with Manu, as the progenitor of mankind, a later Indian legend declares that Anu was the first parent of the " Mlecchas," or aliens from the Brahminical faith. The Puranaa generally associate Anu with Yadu, Turvasu, Druhu, and Pfiru as sons of king Yay&ti, and the Matsia Pur&na adds: " From Yadu were produced the Yadus. The sons of Turvasu were Yavanas. The sona of Druhu were the Bhojas, but the sons of Anu were the Mleecha or alien races. "^ Turrasu and Anu are thus described iu the Indian records themselves to have been connected with outlanders, which the Assyrian inscriptions also show. This is another conclusive proof of the coincidence between Indian and the Cuneiform records of Western Asia.
The above assimilation of Manu with Noah is further confirmed- by another consideration. In the Vedic account we have given of the Deluge, the ship is said to have passed over the " Northern mountain." The commentator of the Veda, writing perhaps some fifteen hundred years after the Vedic period, identifies the northern mountain with the "Himav&n"or Himalaya. Doubtless that was the Brahminical notion in the age of the commentary. But the earliest recollections of the Indo-Arians of such a primitive event must have been cherished while they were yet in their original home, which we have already shown to have been in Media. The " Northern mountain" must therefore have referred to the same range as " the mountains of Ararat", which the Vulgate renders, super monies Armentce. The Hebrew " Ararat" is elsewhere translated in the authorized English
Version itself the land of Armenia,'' which accords also with the Septuagint. Ararat is also mentioned in the Assyrian Inscriptions in the same sense, aud referring to the same period.' Viewing from the point of their original settlement, the Indo-Arian recorders of the Diluvian tradition must have meant that very locality by the "Northern mountain."
This will appear still more clear from the consideration of another fact noticed in the above legend from the Veda. " He accordingly descended after it as much (as it sttisided). Wherefore also this, viz. 'Manu's descent' is {the name) of the northern mountain." Now there is no peak or point in the Himalaya called *' Manu's descent." Nor does any other Indian tradition of the deluge, subsequently recorded, in the Mah&- bbitrat, the Matsia Furlina, or the Sribhagavata, make any mention of a mountain or peak called " Manu's descent." But there is an account elsewhere given of Noah^s first atage or descent. "That the scene of an
event," says Dr. Smith " so deeply interesting had even at that early age been transferred, as was natural, to the loftiest and most imposing mountain in the district, appears from the statement of Josephus, that the spot,
' " Sarduri of Ararat with me revolted," &o. " Sarduri of Ar&rftt in the city of TarupB* hia city I besieged him." " For 70 Kaspu the land of Ararat entirely from top to bottom I destroyed." Smilh't A»gf/rian Diiccvfrie*, pp. 271, 272. And in the Inscriptions of Seaoacherib we have: " Concerning the news of Ararat (Armenia) the daili I send." Mr. Smith remarks, " It (Turapsa) was the capital of Ararat or Armenia." Auf/rian JJitcevtriti, p. 309.
where Noah lefl the ark, had received a name descriptive of that event, which he renders 'Awo^r^pio*, and which seems identical with Nachdjevan, on the banks of the Araxes. To this neighbourhood all the associations connected with Noah are now assigned by the native Armenians, and their opinion has been so far endorsed by Europeans, that they have given the name Ararat exclusively to the mountain which is called Massis by the Armenians, Agn-Dagh, t. e.. Steep mountainf by the Turks, and Kuh-i-JVuh, i. e. Noah^s mountain by the Persians."^ The Vedic legend,
therefore, itself not naming any mountain, and yet recognizing the idea of a peak, nominally expressive of the surviving man's "descent" from the ship or ark, may be considered as an additional corroboration of the Biblical account of the descent "on the mountains of Ararat."
This conclusion will follow still more clearly firom a stricter examination of the above facts. The Vedic legend gives the name of " Manu's descent" to the spot where, under the advice of the Pish, he had got out of the ship, as much aa the waters had subsided, i. e., where he had ^rst got out and stopped, before the waters had wholly subsided. " Now this very idea is involved in the literal meaning of the Armenian word Nachdjevan^ or rather, phonetically, " Nah-chevan," equivalent in meaning to the Persian mamale dwel, or the first stage."
'° The anthor'a authority for the above phonetic representation
The legend of the deluge contained in the Mahabbarata introduced the fish as coming to Manu, who was engaged in devotion on the banks of the Chirai, and asking his protection, and then afterwards evincing hia gratitude by warning his benefactor of the coming deluge. " The time for the purification of the world has now arrived. I therefore inform thee what is for thy greatest good Make for thyself a strong ship, with a cable attached; embark in it with the seven Itishis, and stow lu it, carefully preserved and assorted, all the seeds which have been described of old by Brahmins." Manu did as he was advised. The flood came, and, " for many years, the fish, unwearied, drew the ship over the waters; and brought it at length to the highest peak of Himavat. He then, smiling gently, said to the Rishis, ' Bind the ship without delay to this peak.' They did so accordingly. And that highest peak of Himavat is still known by the name of Naubandhana (* the binding c^ the ship').'"^
This legend states that eight persons were saved firom the waters, that Beeds were preserved, and gives the duration of the flood as "for many years." It also points to the highest peak of " Himavat" as the and literal Hignification of Nachdjevan is the Uost Hererend the Armenian Archbiahop of Ispaban, now on a visit to Calcutta, who spoke of that place as the seat of the " Catholicue" of Armenia, showed Photographs of the church in that locality, and gave the litera meaning of the word, in Persian, " Man&ale AweU" " Mnir's Testa, Tol, I, p. 200.
place where the ship was tiedj and for which it was called Nauhandhana.
The word "Himavat," in the above extract from the Mahabharat, would, according to modern usage, doubtless stand for the Himalaya. In the Rig Veda, however, the word had a different signification. It aimply meant a mountain^ as opposed to the ocean, rivers and other earthly regions. Its literal meaning being snowy, it might be an epithet for any lofty mountain. The Rig Veda does not mention the Himdlaya at all in its pages. Himavat occurs only once in the plural ("himavantah") to signify mountains. " Whose greatness these mountains, whose (greatness) the ocean and the river declare, whose (greatness) these regions (the cardinal points) which are his arms, (declare), to him, Prajapati, do we offer oblations.'"^ It may be reasonably supposed that the. Mah^bb^rat, in recounting such a primeval event as the Deluge, uses the word " Himavat" in the same sense as the Rig Veda, and then the interpretation of the passage would be: "and brought it (the ship) at length to the highest peak of a mountain." There is nothing in the contest of the Mahabharat to require a different meaning of " Himavat," from what it has in the Rig Veda.
The Matsia Parana gives a part of Malaya or Malabar as the scene of Maim's encounter with the Fish. A small saphari comes into his hands while making offerings of water to the manes. He takes pity on it and places it in his pitcher. The fish in a single night outgrew the pitcher, when the devout Rishi removed it to a larger vessel. That proving in one day too small for the rapidly growing animal, he took it successively to a well, a lake, the river Ganga, (!) and the ocean, where it grew 200,000 yojanas (one or two millions of miles) in size! The fish, who was no other than Vishnu himself, Baid to Manu, " In a short
time the earth \rith its mountains, groves, and forests, shall be submerged in the waters. This ship has been constructed by the company of all the gods for the preservation of the vast host of living creatures. Embarking in it all living creatures,... preserve them from calamity. When driven by the blasts at the end of the Yuga, the ship is swept along, thou shalt • bind it to this horn of mine.'"* On the occurrence
of the event, Manu did as he was instructed.
The legend in the Sribh&gavata resembles the above in the Matsia Furana, with some variations. The scene is laid in the south of India, and Manu is represented in the character of Satiavrata, king of Dravi^a. A demon named Hayagriva also appears as a sacrilegious robber, having seized and carried off the Vedae as they issued from Brahma's mouth. His destruction and the recovery of the Vedas were among the results of the universal dissolution. Satiavrata and his company were saved by " a large ship,"
sent him at the time, for that purpose. The ship was fastened to the horn of tlie Vishnu-fish.
The supposed peak " Nauhandhana" is ignored by both the Matsia and BMgavata Puriinas. " Manu's Descent," as represented in the Satapatha Brakmana, probably meant the very same place in the Northern mountain which was popularly called Nachdjevan, rendered by Joaephus 'Atto^ot^piov meaning descent. The Vedic writer must have got the traditional idea of the original word, and substituted or added Manu's name to it. Had the original word been itself Sanscrit, it would have been, agreeably to the Sanscrit idiom, one compound word, instead of a phrase comprising two padas " Manoh avasarpanam." On the whole we find the Biblical account of the Deluge to be strongly confirmed by the Indo-Arian traditions, the later ones becoming, as was natural, by lapse of time more faint in truthful parts, and more extravagant in fictitious additions.
The above traditions all represent the timely warning given of the deluge, though the Sanscrit idea of a fish giving the warning may appear strange. In the first two of the above legends, the Fish advises Manu to build a ship against the approaching flood, but in the third he presents him a ready-made vessel, of divine manufacture, espressly made for that purpose, and in the fourth he promises to send a large ship.
The Indo-Arian idea of a Fish giving the warning of the Deluge may have been borrowed from the Assyrian- pantheon. Berosus mentions a tradition about a strange animal appearing in Assyria, at a remote period, out of the Erythraean, or Persian Gulph, endowed with reason, and instructing the Chaldeans in letters, and in all arts and eciences. It was called Cannes, having a body like that of a fish, hut under the head of the fish that of a man, with woman's feet added to its tail. The animal performed the office of a public teacher during the day, but plunged into the sea at night. The above conception seems to have been worked out by the Assyrians into the form of a Fish-god. " To the body of a man as far as the waist was joined the tail of a fish.""
Now this is the very form of the Mataia avatar, or the Fish-manifestation, of Vishnu, as annually exhibited to this day in the pictorial pantheon over the group of images at the Durga puja. The warning of the Deluge was, according to Assyrian legends, given, as we shall presently see, by Hea, their god of the ocean, and the Indo-Arians appear to have represented the same tradition by an aquatic animal, afterwards deified under the same form as the Assyrian Fish-god.
Our reason for holding the Assyrians as the Under, and the Arians as the borrower, of this ichthyolatry is (1) that the Arians had hardly settled in India at such a remote period. (2) Although there was a maritime tribe in Gedro'sia called Ichthyophagi, as there was another in Ethiopia, there is no record of a similar ancient tribe in India itself. (3) The oldest Indo-Arian pantheon, as represented in the Rig Veda, had no niche for a Msh-god. (4) The Satapatka Brahmana, while introducing the Fish in the Diluvian legend, does not invest it with a divine or (iformally) even a super-natural character. (5) Piscicultua in India, as far as the Matsia avatar betokened it, belonged to a later date.
With reference to the number of persons in the ark, the Satapatha names only one, all the others add the seven Rishis: while the Matsia and the Sri Bhagavata, give indefinite numbers of animals and plants. The resting of the ship was on the " Northern mountain" according to the first legend, and a Himav&n, or mountain, according to the second: the remaining two, name no locality whatever, Noah's trial of the state of things by sending out birds is not mentioned in any of these legends, but the Satapatha notices Manu's offering of sacrifice on descending from the ship.
Such are the Indo-Arian legends of the Deluge. Leaving the reader to consider for himself how curiously the Mosaic account is confirmed by them, we shall now turn to the Assyrian inscriptional legends which are too remarkable to be overlooked here. Although they are not strictly Arian records, yet we may well consider them gmisi-Arian, and so far, not entirely beyond the range of our scope. We have already shown that the Assyrian legends and traditions account in some measure for the otherwise unaccountable phenomenon of an aquatic animal warning a royal Rishi of the coming flood, and thus saving the human race from entire extinction. And the very ** flood series of legends," as Mr. Smith calls them, opens with a story, in which a goddess (Ishtar, *. «., Veuus), not a great sampler of feminioe virtue, appears with her maidens, whose names are genuine Arian words, vis., Samhati and Harimati (or in Sanscrit letters ^Tfa and Tt'^^fH), and Izdubar, the hero of the legends, whose slight of Ishtar's personal attractions appears to have given occasion for the discovery of the Diluvian facts, himself bore a ^wasi'-Arian name, which might be transliterated tl^^T or t^in: signifying rukr or lord, the sd being equivalent to the Hebrew s and therefore to our palatal sibilant v..
Mr. George Smith says: " It appears that at that remote age the Babylonians had a tradition of a flood which was a Divine punishment for the wickedness of the world; and of a holy man who built- an ark and escaped destruction; wlio was afterwards translated and dwelt with the gods."" The tradition, as is usual in such cases, is mixed up with many fabulous legends. The Inscriptions refer to a king, Izdubar by name, whose chief city was Erech. *' For the favour of Izdubar the princess Ishtar (the Assyrian Venus) Ufted her eyes, (and said) " I will take thee Izdubar as husband, thy oath to me shall be thy bond, thou shalt be husband and I will be thy wife." Izdubar did not accept her hand. Enraged by his slight, " Ishtar went to the presence of Ann her father, and to the presence of Anunit her mother she went, and said; " Father, Izdubar hates me, and Izdubar despises my beauty, and my charms." The divine father and mother sympathize with their daughter, and at her request a winged bull was formed for the destruction of the obnoxious Izdubar, who, however, succeeds in killing the bull and bafSing the efforts of the gods. But the wrath of the gods was not to be evaded. Izdubar had a sage friend, a seer, named Heabani. The rage of the gods struck him down and killed him.
Izdubar mourns disconsolately over his friend and seer, and seeks Hasisadri, alias Xisithrus, the holy man who had escaped the flood. Hasisadri, moved by his importunity, relates the story of the Deluge, of which the following is a brief summary. The gaps indicated by three dots... represent mutilated parts of tablets.
" Hea opened his mouth and spake to me bis servant... thou shalt say unto them... he has turned from me and... fised over me... like caves... above and below... closed the ship... the flood which I will send to you, into it enter and the door of the ship turn. Into the midst of it thy grain, thy furniture, and thy goods, thy wealth, thy woman servants, thy female slaves, and the young men, the beasts of the field, the animals of the field all, I will gather and I will send to thee, and they shall be enclosed in thy door."
" Its (the ship's) interior I examined on the eighth time. With planks the waters from within it I stopped. I saw rents and the wanting parts I added. 3 mea-
Bures of bitumen I poured over the outside. 3 measures of bitumen I poured over the inside."
" All I possesaed the strength of it, all I possessed the strength of it silver, all I possessed the strength of it gold, all I possessed the strength of it the seed of life, the whole I caused to go up into the ship; all my male servants and my female servants, the beast of the field, the animals of the fields the sons of the people all of them, I caused to go up. A flood Sbamas made and he spake saying in the night: " I will cause it to rain heavily, enter to the midst of the ship and shut thy door." That flood happened (of which) he spake saying in the night: *' I will cause it to rain ^or it will rain) from heaven heavily." • • •
"The surface of the earth like... it swept, it destroyed all life from the face of the earth... the strong delnge over the people, reached to heaven. Brother saw not his brother, it did not spare the people." « « •
" To the country of Nizir went the ship; the mountain of Nizir stopped the ship, and to pass over it, it was not able. The first day, the second day, the mountain of Nizir the same. The third day, and the fourth day, the mountain of Nizir the same. The fifth, and sixth, the mountain of Nizir the same. On the seventh day in the course of it I sent forth a dove and it left. The dove went and turned, and a resting-place it could not enter, and it returned. I sent forth a swallow and it left. The swallow went and turned, and a resting-place it could not enter, and it returned, I Bent forth a raven and it left. The raven went, and the drying up of the water it saw, and it did eat, it swam, and wandered away, and did not return. I Bent the animals forth to the four winds, I poured out a libation. I built an altar on the peak of the mountain, by seven herbs I cut, at the bottom of them I placed reeds', pines, and spices. The gods collected at its burning, the gods collected at its good burning; the gods like flies over the sacrifice gathered. From of old the great god in his courss the great brightness of Anu had created."
" Adrahosis a dream they sent, and the judgment of the gods he heard. Wlien his judgment of the gods he heard. When his judgment was accomplished, Elu went up to the midst of the ship. He took my hand and raised me up, he caused to raise and to bring my wife to my side; he made a bond, he established in a covenant and gave hia blessing, in the presence of Hasisadra and the people.'"*
We shall next cast a glance at the account of Berosus which has now recovered its deserved credit by the late Assyrian discoveries. It states that king Xisuthrus and his relatives and friends were the survivors that had escaped from the catastrophe of the Deluge. That king oh being warned by a vision had written an account of antediluvian events and buried it in the city of the Sun at Sippara, and had built a ship in which his friends and relatives with birds and beasts, and ample
" Smith's Assyrian Discoveries, between pp. 172-193, pi-ovisionB for all, were received. After tbe vpaters had abated he sent out forth birds vrhich, not finding any rest for their feet, returned to the ship. He made a second trial after some days when they returned with mud on their feet. On a third trial the birds returned. no more, and Xisuthrus concluded that the waters had dried off from the surface of the earth. He then made an opening in the vessel, and discovered that it was stranded upon the side of some mountain. He then came out of the vessel with his family, and having made an altar offered sacrifices to the gods. He found afterwards that the place where the vessel had rested was the land of Armenia. He had been translated to the etherial regions, whence he informed bis friends, whom he had left behind, that the land where the ship had struck, was Armenia. He exhorted them to search for the records, buried in the city of the Sun at Sippara, and pay due regard to tbe rules of religion. As an earnest of their obedience to his admonitions, they offered sacrifices to the gods and proceeded to Babylonia.
The legends of the Cuneiform Inscriptions and the account of Berosus may be considered together as the consolidated Chaldean tradition of the Deluge. Though self-inconsistent in minor points of detail, it confirms the Mosaic records in all points of importance. The previous warning to the excepted person of the forthcoming disaster; its cause, the wickedness of mankind; the instruction to build a ship, pitching it within and without, and to embark with all his home, taking on board birds, beasts and other animals; the trial of the state of things hy sending out birds for three times snccessively; the resting of the vessel on the mountains in Armenia {which country is constantly called- Ararat in the Inscriptions) all these are curiously confirmed. The Inscriptions give the name of " Nizir" to the mountain where the vessel rested. Mr. Smith says: " The indications as to the place of Nizir fix it between the 35th and 36th parallels of latitude, east of the river Tigris.'"^* Considering that *' the Babylonians, although learned in some things, had no knowledge at this time of geography,"" their indications of the place where the ark rested remarkably approximated to the " land of Armenia" in Berosus, the difference being only one or two degrees in latitude. We do not know in what sense the word " Nizir" is used in the Inscriptions, unless it be in the sense of a Protection Jrom the waters, and the term be referred to the Heb. " natsar" as it occurs in Dent, xxxii. 10; Ps. xii. 7; xxxii. 24, &c.
All the Chaldean legends confirm the Biblical account of the surviving man building an altar and offering sacrifices, while the Cuneiform Inscriptions appear to refer also (albeit somewhat obscurely) to the covenant which God made with Noah and his seed after Mm (Gen. ix. 9).
The diluvian legends from Indo-Arian records also confirai the Biblical representation of the Unity of the human race, all nations having sprung from the same human parents. It was Manu and Ida that, according to the Satapatha, were the first parents of all mankind after the Deluge. This is a remarkable testimony from the early records of a people that had afterwards inculcated, even among themselves, a tribal diversity of Caste, as coeval with the creation. That such a diversity did not exist in the beginning, that Ariana and non-Arians, Brahmanas and 8udras, Hindus and Mlecchaaj were all of the same stock, is thus acknowledged in the Veda itself. The same was the teaching of the Mah&bh&rat in a later age, and that, as the solution of a doubt propounded by an interlocuter.
Bhrigu had said that " the colour (vama) of the Brabmans was white: that of the Kshettriyas red; that of the Vasyas yellow, and that of the Siidraa black. Bharadwaja here rejoins: ' If the caste (vama) of the four classes is distinguished by their colour (vama), then a confusion of all the castes is observable; Desire, anger, fear, cupidity, grief, apprehension, hunger, fcitigue, prevail over us all: by what then is caste discriminated? Sweat, excrement, phlegm, bile, and blood (are common to all): the bodies of all decay: by what then is caste discriminated?' Bhrigu replies: " There is no difference of castes: this world, having been at first created by Brahm^ entirely Brahmanic, became (afterwards) separated into castes in consequence of works. Those Brahmans {lit. twice born men), who were fond of sensual pleasure, fiery, irascible, prone to violence, who had forsaken their duty, and were red-limbed, fell into the condition of Kshettriyas. Those Brabmans, who derived their livelihood from
kine, who were yellow, who subsisted by agriculture, and who neglected to practice their duties, entered into the state of Vaisyas. Those Brahmans who were addicted to mischief and falsehood, who were covetous, who lived by all kinds of work, who were black and had fallen from purity, sank into the condition of Siidras. Being separated from each other by these works, the Brahmans became divided into difierent
The teaching of the Mahltbhiirat on the subject of caste is not consistent throughout. It will not be
" Muit'e Texts, pp. HO, 141. The original paseage is as followB:
difScult to find out passages inculcating doctrines essentially different from the above. But it can be easily sbown that the tenets continued in the verses, just cited, have the sanction of the Vedas and are supported by numerous facts. The origin of the whole human race in the post-diluvian world from the same father, be his name Mann, Anu, or Noah, cannot be consistent with any other view of Caste.
The very etymology of the word " Brahmana," will show that the above representation of the Mah&bh&rat is correct in its main ideal. " Brahmana" comes from "Brahma," the primitive meaning of which was a mantra or prayer of the Veda, or its chants and their accompanying oblations. It stood also for food as the result of sacrifices, and for the priest who performed them, as in Rig Veda I. 10, 4, " 0 Indra, establisher of our home, do thou augment our food and sacri. fice," or, as Sayana paraphrases it, " augmenting our sacrifice increase also its fruit, food.""
The word is used in the following verses'" in the sense of prayers, hymns, oblations, or sacrificial accompaniments, i. 3. 5. '* Receive the prayers (Brahmani^ of the sacrificer." i. 24, 11. " Beseeching thee with prayersy (Brahmani) I ask it of thee." i. 34, 18. " 0
These primitive significations of Brahma are not lost sight of even in post-Vedic Sanscrit. Kalidasa, as a representative of the age of Yikramaditya, uses the word in the sense of the Veda.
" That Veda (Brahma) which we have studied according to rule, those oblations we have made to fire, and the austere devotions we have practised have ■ this day ripened into fruit,"
Amara Sinha who lived in the same age gives the signification of *' Brahma," thus:
" Brahma stands for Veda, true knowledge and austere devotion. Brahm^, (masculine) for Brahmana and Prajapati (the god Brahmd, as distinct from the Supreme spirit)."
The Medini defines the same word thus:
*' Brahma, when not in the first two genders, signifies true knowledge, austere devotion, and Veda. In the masculine gender it stands for the god Brahma, &c."
It is a remarkable fact that both of the two popular lexicons here referred to, give precedence to the primitive eignification of the word. The Srihhdgavata introduces the word in its very first verse in the sense of the Veda
"Who imparted the Veda (Brahma) to the first poet or scholar through his heart."
The etymology of the word, as given in the TTnadi Sutras (4.145) also ignores its Yedantic signification of the Supreme Spirit. Deriving it from "^f^ they recognize the meanings in the same order as the two lexicons already cited.
We may therefore safely conclude that the primitive meaning of " Brahma" was generally in the sense of accompaniments of sacrifices — standing vari- ' ously for the mantras that were chanted, the oblations that were ofiered, the food that was expected as the result of the sacrifice, and certain ceremonial instruments used on the occasion.
The term " Brahma," thus used for sacrifices and their accompaniments, was easily transferred to their recognized celebrants, when a class of men were so appointed. Originally there were no such recognized celebrants. Every householder performed sacrifices for himself and family. He was in the proper sense of the term himself the irarwiir, which literally signified a sacrificer.
That there was no separate order of priests, but that
The leading word " Brahma" is tlins explained by San karacharya —
The passage fri>m the Upanishad then means that in the beginning there was but one order — the Brahmanical. (The Creator) was not satisfied with this one order. He successively created the Kshatriya and other orders.
Construing this passage of the Upanishad about the creation of Kshatriyas and others by the light of the above citation from the Mahabhiirata, we are driven to the inference that as the celebration of sacrifices required the correct chanting of mantras wliich could not be done without some learning, and as incorrect chanting is often noticed with censure as ^^ci it was found necessary for the due perfurmsmce of sacrificial ceremonies to institute an order of priests to which the privilege of the altar service was restricted, all others being restrained from its exercise. These priests were also exclusively entitled to the appellation of " BrahmanaSj" from " Brahma," the sacrificial accompaniments they dealt with. The distinction, at first intended to be personal, afterwards became hereditary.
We need not go further into the question of Indian caste and its interminable ramifications. What wo have already cited will be ample evidence for holding that the ancient Indo-Arian records fully sustain the Biblical doctrine of the Unity of the human race. We cannot, however, omit mention of a mantra of the Rig Veda which apparently confirms the four-fold division of Caste.
In Rig Veda X. 90. 11, 12 we have the following mystical description: "When they divided Purusha, into how many parts did they turn him? his mouth, what was it? What the two arms? what were his thighs and feet called? His mouth was the Brahmin, the Kshatriya was made his arms, his thighs were the same as the Vaisia, of his two feet the Sudra was
made (lit. became)."*' These verses do not indicate the creation of diverse castes from the beginning. They only show that at the time they were composed, a fourfold distinction of offices or grades was already recognized in Indian society. There are three verbs used in the l2th mantra, viz. " asit" was, " kritah" was made, CfactusJ^ " ajayata," exactly the Greek egenetoy " was made," as the A. E. version in John i. 14. The Brahmin is therefore said to have existed from before, (say, from the beginning, if you like, since the Indo- Arian records expressly declare that all were alike Brahmins, *'. e. mcrificers at first) as his mouth, but the Kshatriya or warrior had no existence from the beginning, but was at a certain definite time 7nade, or turned into his arms. The *' vis" is also recognized in the Yedas as existing from the beginning in the sense of the people, hoi polht, those who, although entitled to the privilege of celebrating sacrificial ceremonies, yet either from lack of knowledge and learning, or being already represented, as junior members of a family, by the householder, or from any other accidental disability, could not perform the priestly office of the Brahmin, but yet served the community as workers in the field, ' The above mantra accordingly does not say that the " vis" or " vaisia" was made the two thighs of the Purusha, but the thighs were only identified as the Vaisia — '* were the same as the Vaisia." The most remarkable passage, however, is that which describes the production of the Sudra. The hymnist does not say that the Sudra was the feet of the Purusha, or that he was made his feet, as the Kshatriya " was made" his arms. Here a different verb is used, " jan," and it is connected with " padbhiam," or feet in the ablative case. Now it is a well known rule in Sanscrit th^Xwhen the verb "j'an" appears in connection with an ablative, the latter is held to be the material cause of the thing which is the subject of the former?^ The grammatical meaning of the mantra is that the Sudra was made of the Purusha' s feet, or that on the cutting up of his body in the Sacrifice his feet turned into the Sudra.
We need not stop here to speculate about the mystical meaning of the passage. Suffice it to say, that these verses do not contradict the implied dictum of the Satapatha, and the express declaration of the MahdhhArata, that there was no distinction of caaie or colour in the beginning. The hymn last cited does indeed recognize a state of society which is generally ignored in the Rig Veda. That hymn does of course so far appear to be the composition of a later age than the great bulk of that Veda, and it contains nothing in its diction peculiar to the Vedic age. This consideration only shows that the whole of the Rig Veda cannot claim the antiquity which is usually assigned to it. But this is a question foreign to the present chapter. We shall for the present only refer the reader to Dr. Muir's Sanscrit Texts, Vol, I. pp. 9 — 15 where the question is fully discussed.
Unity of race involves unity of language, for some time at least. " And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. « • • And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth." But by divine interposition their devices were frustrated, and the site of their vain attempt was called Babel fconfusionj " because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face-of all the earth."
Thus the unity of language did not continue long. Berosus the Chaldasan priest, whose historical credibi- lity has been so remarkably established by the Cuneiibrm Inscriptions, bears curious testimony to the above facts. He says: The ancient race of men were so puffed up with their strength and tallness of stature that they...laboured to erect that very lofty tower which is now called Babylon, intending thereby to scale heaven... the name of the ruin is still called Babel: because until this time all men had used the same speech, but now there was sent upon them a confusion of many and diverse tongues."**
The tradition thus recorded by Berosus is again confirmed by the discovery of a Cuneiform inscription which was deciphered by the eminent scholar Dr. Oppert. He says: " The Talmudists say that the true site of the Tower of Babel was at Borsip, the Greek Borsippa, the Birs Nimroud." " The Babylonian name of this locality is Bardp or Barsipa which we explain by Tower of Tongues, which was formerly a suburb of Babylon, whea the old Babel was merelyrestricted to the Northern ruins, before. the great extension of the city, which, according to ancient writers, was the greatest that the sun ever warmed with its beams." " Tliis building, erected by Nebuchadnezzar, is the same that Herodotus describes as the Tower of Jupiter Belus."
And this probably was the same which, as we saw in the story of Saramd and Pants, was called Valapur, and qualified by the adjective Vilu, signifying " the lofty citadel of Vala" or Bel. We are encouraged
■* Pratt's Scripture tutd Science not at Variance, p. 150.
the more to suggest this identification, because the Babylonian Barsip or " Barzipa" appears to be an Arian term, bar or var (from " vri to cover) signifying an enclosure, and " zipa" standing for our j'ihva contracted in the vernaculars into "jiv or jib" for tongue. The first word " var" with the Unadi affix ^j^ becomes " varanda," 2k portico, a vbeanda.
In the inscription above alluded to, Nebuchadnezzar informs us: " We say for the other, that is, this edifice, the house of the Seven lights of the Earth, the most ancient monument of Borsippa: A former king built it (they reckon 42 ages), but he did not complete its head. Since a remote lime people had abandoned it, without order expressing their words."^^
This confusion of tongues, this disordered utterance of words naturally led to the dispersion of mankind. From that time, probably, and in consequence of that event, it was, that disparity in language and articulation proved inevitably separating causes among mankind, just as unity of language and accent served as federative bonds. The Sanskrit " barvara" litferally meant a person whose articulation and accents were incorrect and vulgar, and that was the sense in which all nations of any polish used the term harharian as against strangers and aliens.
The events that occurred at Babel, confirmed as above by traditions preserved by Berosus and Nebuchadnezzar's Inscription, are further corroborated by history and philology. That Western Asia was the iiursery of the Arian family -we have already considered at large. The same may be said of all aations who have any records to. exhibit- The pristine unity and Babsequent confusion of languages are both proved by philology. Languages essentially different in their' grammatical formations, and therefore mutually chargeable, inter se, with disordered utterances, such as the Arian and the, Semitic, contain nevertheless many words which appear to. have been common to them. In some cases they are identically the same, and in others their features are those of remote cousins. We shall give a few examples here.
18. Assyr. " uddi" (Norria 28) sea. Sans. 3^f« " udadbi" sea, the essential word being " ud."
A list like this may be enlarged to any extent, but, as this is not a work on Gomparative Philology, what we have already adduced will suffice to prove our point. Even in such diverse tongues as the Arian and the Semitic, we find unmistakeable relics of pristine uniti/ in the midst of existing variety.
But it is in the languages of such illiterate people as are neither Arian nor Semitic that the confusion of tongues is found to be most remarkably consistent with the idea of pristine unity. We shall give a few instances from the languages spoken by the Santal and Kbassia tribes of Bengal. These denizens of our hills have no letters, no literature of their own. Learned missionaries have introduced among them (in a few cases the Bengali alphabet, but generally) the Koman character, and published Scriptural translations and tracts in their languages as they collected them from their living speech. To some extent the Reverend gentlemen may have possibly, and in fact unavoidably, introduced terms from other languages, but such importations are easily detected, and they are not found to any appreciable extent. There is internal evidence of the new books and tracts representing the actual language of the people. The jargon found therein is itself the representative of the Confusion of Tongues, but in the midst of that confusion is found a lot of particles and vocables which prominently appear like the ruins of an old edifice of uniform structure, of which the varying Arian and Semitic elements once formed harmonious parts. Let the reader judge for himself from the following examples:
I. The Santa!! language, though neither Arian nor Semitic, in its structure and in the great bulk of its
Tocablea, appears nevertheless so curiously intetvroreiif more or lees, with the rudiments of both those linguistic families, that they cannot possibly be held as latet superadd itions by contact or intercourse with their living representatives.
The Arian element is found more abundantly in the vocables, than the Semitic, though the latter appears curiously prominent in its grammatical structure. We have " disom" for couw^^, '* p^p" for sin, ** j&n" for fortune-teller from "-jna" to know, "janga" the %, "parakrit" (Prakriti) for nature, disposition, '* bahu" wife, " par^mesat" counsel, and an interminable lot of similar words. The most remarkable phenomenon hers is the currency of Sanscrit words or roots that had long become obsolete among the Brahmins themselves, and are only found in very ancient records, such as the word " panahi" (Sans, up&uah) for shoes, and. "jum" the ordinary word Sor food and the act of eating. The Sanscrit "jam" is existent among the itorfices, but it is scarcely found in book literature. The English Word " chum" probably somehow owes its origin to it, and, along with the "jum" of the Santals, Coles and other hill tribes, continues a living witness of its quondam prevalence among Arians,
The Semitic element, though more sparse than the Arian in vocables, is, however, still more curious. The prohibitive particle is " alo" donU, like the Hebrew " lo." But the Santali is declinable in number and person, which the Hebrew is not. The historical negative is " bang" which is comparable with the Hebrew "bal."
Santali nouns, when they refer to genitive personal pronouns, are, like the Hebrew, subject to terminal Variations according to the namber and person of the pronoun to which they refer, but they take the Arian toodel when they refer to genitive substantives. Thus, " Galilee of the Gentiles" is in Santali the Gentiles' Galilee, but " my father" is apu-ing from " apa" father and " ing" the affix indicative' of the first person, and making allowances for the final nasal for which the Santali appears to have a peculiar predilection, the word for " my father" is virtually " api," which is almost identical with the Hebrew " abi'* my father. Here we have one of the first terms which a child learns to lisp, and ft rule of Syntax peculiar to Semitic, still prevailing ftmong the Santals, though they belong to a class different both from Arian and Semitic. Their word for lathing is " topon," which, allowing for the confusion between / and a nasal, is similar to the Hebrew *' tdb^l," and their " river" is " nai," not very dissi- Inilar to the Semitic " nahar," and, strange to say^ they call the sacred stream of the Hindoos (Ganges) not by an Indian term but by " topon-n&i, the hath' river. Their word for song or hymn is " sereng," which, relieved of the nasal termination, is substantially the Heb. "shir."
But leaving instances of single words which can be easily multiplied, we must notice two peculiarities in the conjugations of Santali verbs which have a curious resemblance with the rules of Semitic Syntax. The object of a transitive verb, if it be pronominal, is in
Semitic languages, indicated in the verb itself by an affix corresponding to the gender, number and person of the object. Thus in Gen. ii. 15 "And He put him into the garden of Eden" — for " He put him" we have but one word in Hebrew, connected with the conjunction " and,"viz. " va-ianniche-hu" and, in verse 23, for " and He brought her" we have similarly only one word again " va-iebie-ha." The Santali verbs indicate their pronominal objects in a similar way. They have another peculiarity in the use of a particle or auxiliary in the conjugation of the present and im~ perfect, when the sense implies, ia or waa doit^ something. That auxiliary is " k^na," it is used as a particle but is not otherwise known in Santali as a substantive verb at all. Kkuk, however, is the Arabic verb substantive, signifying to he, and is frequently used as an auxiliary in the same way as the Santali particle. Thus: the Santali vocable "me-t&pe-k&nMng," though but one compound word, mewa I am saying unto you» The first expression "me" indicates the act oisayiyig, the second " tape" means to you, "k&na" (the Arabic verb) is for " am," and " ing" indicates the person of the subject — i. e. I. This one compound expression shows conspicuously the analogy of the Santali syntax with the Semitic. It is not a servile imitation of either Hebrew or Arabic, though remarkably similar to both. The objective affix in Hebrew is placed at the end of the verb, and after the subj ective indication. We have here the objective affix before the subjective. In the Arabic, again, " k&na" is not blended with the verb in one compound, but stands separate preceding it. The Santali blends it with the verb, and then declines it according to the number and person of the subject. Here then we have a curious uniformity of grammatical rule with a remarkable variety in its application. There could have been so servile imita* tion in such a case. There must have been a quondam Unity disturbed by a subsequent Confusion.
Before we pass from the Santali to the Khassia, we fiball refer to one more Santali word which seems to ferret out an old Sanscrit term in a striking way. The Santali word for heaven is "serma." This might at first sight appear to be a corruption of the Heb. " sb&ma" or the Arabic " sama," the letter r being a liquid, which unlettered, and even civilized, people are often found to insert or omit by whim or sheer accident. But the Santala can here refer to high authority. There is an old Sanscrit word " sarma" in the sense of the sky, the visible heaven (see Wilson's and "Williams' Dictionaries), the very meaning of the Semitic " 8&m^," and the Santali " serma." The Unadi Sutras refer it to the root *' Sri,"*" and impart to the word the signification of motion, of which the heavens were supposed to be the site. It now becomes a question, which probably will be difficult to decide, whether in the original word for sky or heaven, (" sama" or " sarma") the r was fitfully omitted by the Semitics or interpolated by the Arians. The long disuse of the word in Sanscrit shows that it was not natural to it. But leaving this question to be decided by learned critics, we have only to declare again that this curious vocable in the living speech of the Santals is a further confirmation of the facts of Unity and Confusiott of Tooguea.
The Khassia has but few worda referable' to Arian or Semitic rudiments. It has nevertheless eomfe rer markable espreasions which are readily traceable to one or the other of those great linguistic families* The word for the Deity is "Ble" or with the article "U Ble" o^toi. Now "Ble" is easily traceable to ^el or Baal. " Byneng" heaven appears to have for its rudiment " Vyoman" (Sans.) sky, the termination b.eing adjusted according to the peculiar nasals of the Khassia. " Pop" sin ia from the Sanscrit Papa: ^' Ktin" word from Sane. ukti. *' Hok" justice from ■Heb. hoq. " Urn" water may be referable to either Arian or Semitic. " Kylai" kidneys, from Heb. kelaioth " Aiom" ^jmff from Heb. "Yoro." day, time. " Bishar".' \o Judge, Sans, "vichar." " Jor," origin, Heb. "zera" seed. " Maian" mystery, Sans. " maya." " Niam" reli. gioua practice. Sans. " niyama." " Pyrthei" earth, world, Sans. '* Prithvi, the earth. The Assyriaii " qatu" and "kup" for ^^^^(Norris, pp. 203, 204) curiously correspond with the Khassia ' ' kta" for hand and " khup" for palm. The latter, again, is traceable to the Hebrew " kaph."
. We do not pretend to any scholarship in the lanr guages of the Santals and the. Khassias. We have only plodded over portions of translations and tracts with the help of the Introductions, Grammars, and Pictionaries of the Rev. Messrs. Phillips, Pryge, aud Roberts.
We believe we may fairly conclude this chapter by declaring that the items of Sacred history mentioned here are abundantly confirmed by Arian records. The scientific aspect of the facts is foreign to the scope of this work. We can only say for ourselves that the late Archdeacon Pratt considered them thoroughly in his Scripture and Science not at variance, and, in our humble opinion, conclasively proved the point indicated by the title of bis great work.