Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

This is a broad, catch-all category of works that fit best here and not elsewhere. If you haven't found it someplace else, you might want to look here.

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Wed Feb 23, 2022 6:27 am

Part 4 of __
 
DRAMATIS PERSONAE.

Men.


Chandragupta, also called Vrishala and Maurya. — The young king of Pataliputra.

Chanakya, or Vishnugupta. — A Brahman, chiefly instrumental to Chandragupta's accession to the throne and now his minister.

Rakshasa. — The minister of the last king, the enemy of Chandragupta, and whom it is Chanakya' s policy to win over to an alliance with his protege.

Malayaketu. — Son of the king of the Mountains, leading an army against Pataliputra.

Bhagurayana. — His supposed friend.

Nipunaka, — Agents and emissaries of Chanakya.

Siddhartha, — Agents and emissaries of Chanakya.

Jivasiddhi, — Agents and emissaries of Chanakya.

Samiddhartha, — Agents and emissaries of Chanakya.

A Man. — Agents and emissaries of Chanakya.

Sarangarava. — Chanakya's Pupil.

Chandana Das, — Friends of Rakshasa.

Sakata Das. — Friends of Rakshasa.

The son of Chandana Das.

Viradhagupta, — Servants and agents of Rakshasa.

Priyamvadaka, — Servants and agents of Rakshasa.

Courier.

Vaihinara. — An attendant on Chandragupta.

Jajali. — An attendant on Malayaketu.

Officers and attendants.

Women.

The wife of Chandana Das.

Sonottara. — An attendant on Chandragupta.

Vijaya. — An attendant on Malayaketu.

Persons spoken of.

Nanda. — King of Pataliputra, slain by Chanakya’s contrivance.

Parvataka or Parvateswara. — King of the Mountains, at first the ally of Chandragupta but afterwards slain privily by Chanakya.

Servarthasiddhi. — Placed on the throne by Rakshasa, after the death of Nanda, but retired to a life of devotion.

Vairodhaka. — The brother of Parvataka, and killed by Rakshasa’s emissaries by mistake for Chandragupta.

Various Princes, Chiefs, Bards, &c.

The Scene is laid partly at Pataliputra, or Palibothra, and partly at the capital, or subsequently at the camp of Malayaketu.

The time of each Act is that of the action — the intervals of the acts are uncertain.

PRELUDE.

Enter the Manager.


May the craft of that Siva protect you, who desirous of concealing Ganga* [As a goddess, Ganga, or the deified Ganges, is usually viewed as an object of jealousy by Durga the wife of Siva.] thus evaded the inquiries of his Goddess — what is this, so brilliant that decorates thy brows † [On her descent from heaven by the prayers of Bhagirath, Siva received the falling river upon his head.] — a digit of the moon — has it no name — you know the name, it is impossible that you should have forgotten it — I talk of a woman not of the moon — let Vijaya‡ [Vijaya is one of the attendants upon Durga.] tell you then, if the moon does not satisfy you.

Slay the dance of the victor of Tripura§ [Siva, from his destruction of the three cities of a demon, thence named Tripura or Tripurasura, the supposed origin of the modern Tippera. ] protect you — that dance to which space is wanting. Lightly treads the god lest he should overset the earth — he cramps his action lest his arms reach beyond the limits of the three worlds, and he bends his spark-emitting glances on vacuity, lest they should consume the objects on which they gaze.|| [The dance of Siva, and that of his consort, its exact counterpart, have already been fully adverted to in the Malati and Madhava.] Enough.

I am commanded by this assembly to represent the drama entitled Mudrarakshasa, the work of Visakha Datta, the son of Prithu Maharaja, and grandson of the chieftain Vateswara Datta;* [According to other authorities, however, the father of Prithu, Prithwi, or Prithivi Raja, was named Somesa or Vigraha Deva, and his grandfather Sarnga Deva or Visala Deva. The term Datta is also more appropriate to a man of the Vaisya tribe than a Rajput; but then Vateswara is called a Samanta, a term especially implying a warrior and a chief, and as in the case of the Jats, the agricultural tribes occasionally follow a military life. These considerations, however, leave the individuality of the author very doubtful. — Asiatic Researches, vol. xv, p. 407. Transactions of Royal Asiatic Society.] and it is a great satisfaction to me to perform this drama before an audience so capable of appreciating its merits. Justly is it said, the tillage of a blockhead will rear a harvest in a fertile soil; the luxuriant growth of the grain does not depend upon the talents of the sower. Having therefore gone home and summoned my wife† [He calls her the Griha Kutumbini, literally, the head of the house or of the family; but by the authority she exercises she should scarcely be less than his wife.] I shall proceed with my company to the representation. Here is my house: I will enter.

How now! what festival have we here to-day that all the domestics are so busy? One is bringing water, another grinding perfumes, a third weaves a chaplet of many colours, and a fourth is sighing over a pestle. I must call one of them and ask the meaning of all this. Here, you clever, sharp, sensible, hussy, come hither; you sum of all wishes and decorum, come hither.‡ [This is obviously imitated from the Mrichchakati.]

Enter Actress.

Here am I, Sir; what are your commands?

Mana. Tell me what is going on here; have any Brahmans been invited to do honour to my race, or have any welcome guests arrived that there is such preparation?

Act. The Brahmans have been invited. Sir, by me.

Mana. What for, pray?

Act. There is an eclipse of the moon to-day.

Mana. Who says so?

Act. The people of the city.

Mana. Stop your preparations, dame, for the Brahmans you have invited: there is no eclipse to-day. Trust to one who has laboured diligently in the sixty-four divisions of astronomy; for observe, when Ketu, the angry planet, labours to depose from his high throne the mighty Chandra —

(Behind.) Who talks of deposing the king?* [The original plays upon two words, Ketu the planet, or Malayaketu a prince, enemy of the present king, and Chandra his name, or the moon.]

Mana. The friendly Sage† [The planet Budha or Mercury, or in the text the Budha Yoga; but there is no Yoga so named, and unless a different system be alluded to, simple conjunction or propinquity must be implied. The term has a double import here: Budha, Mercury, or a wise man, referring to Chanakya.] is active in his defence.

Act. But who was that, who so readily noticed on earth the peril of the monarch?

Mana. I need not heed particularly, but we will find out. I will repeat what I said, and if he repeat his exclamation we may know his voice. Observe, "when the angry Ketu endeavours to depose Chandra —"

(Behind.) Who threats the king though I am yet alive?

Mana. Ha! I know; — it is Kautilya, as crooked in nature as in name,‡ [Kautilya, implies crookedness, both physical and moral.] the flames of whose anger have burnt up the family of Nanda. He has caught but part of my speech, and confounds it with an allusion to hostility towards his pupil.

Act. Here he comes: we had better get out of his way.

[Exeunt.

Enter Chanakya with his top-knot§ [The single lock of hair left on the shaven head of a Brahman.] untied.

Where is this babbling wretch, that idly threatens
The monarch I have raised? — lives there the man
That does not trembling pray he may behold
These tresses bound again, whose length dishevelled
Hangs an envenomed snake to Nanda’s race;
A smoky wreath, engendered by the fires
Of my consuming wrath? The fool, unwitting
Of his own weakness, would he play the moth,
And heedless plunge into the deadly flame
Of my resentment, blazing like a meteor,
Fierce o’er the prostrate forest of my foes?
What ho! Sarangarava.

Enter Pupil.

Your commands, Sir.

Chan. A seat.

Pup. It waits you in the porch, Sir.

Chan. Bring it here; affairs of weight disturb me.
It is not fit the teacher should endure
A scholar’s disobedience.

(Pupil brings him a seat — he sits.)

What should this rumour be, so general noised
Amongst the citizens? They say that Rakshasa,
In stern resentment of the total fall
Of Nanda’s race, stirs up th’aspiring son
Of Parvateswara; who would avenge
His father’s death, to join him, and has vowed
To make him lord of Nanda’s former realm.
With these designs, they have implored the aid
Of the great monarch of the Mlechcha tribes;* [Literally, by the great Mlechcha Raja. Mahata Mlechcharajena.]
And now, against the sway of Vrishala
These fierce and formidable foes combine.
It may be thus — 'Tis known to all the world,
I vowed the death of Nanda, and I slew him.
The current of a vow will work its way
And cannot be resisted. What is done
Is spread abroad, and I no more have power
To stop the tale. Why should I? Be it known.
The fires of my wrath alone expire,
Like the fierce conflagration of a forest,
From lack of fuel — not from weariness.
The flames of my just anger have consumed
The branching ornaments of Nanda’s stem,
Abandoned by the frightened priests and people.
They have enveloped in a shower of ashes
The blighted tree of his ambitious councils:
And they have overcast with sorrow’s clouds
The smiling heavens of those moon-like looks
That shed the light of love upon my foes.
Now may they triumph — they, who late beheld
With downward looks and struggling indignation.
Scarce smothered by their terrors, my dishonour,
Thrust from my seat, and banished from the presence,
Disgraced but not dejected — now they see me
Spurn Nanda and his offspring from their throne,
As from the mountain’s crest the lion hurls
Incensed the lordly elephant.
My vow is now accomplished, but I bear,
In Vrishala’s defence, the fatal arms
That have uprooted Nanda’s tyrant race,
Like fond affections from the breast of earth;
And now, in him, his fortune must implant,
Firm as the fragrant lotus in the lake.
Such is the equal fruit of love and hatred,
And friends and foes confess alike the power
That works their elevation or their fall.
Yet, what avails it, to have rooted out
The stem of Nanda; what to have allied
Fortune with Chandragupta, unsubdued
Whilst Rakshasa remains? His faith inflexible
Survives their ruin, and whilst yet exists
The most remote of kindred to their house
He is our foe. Well; be it so!
We must devise with craft to break the league
We cannot face. The sole remaining shoot
Of Nanda’s stem, the pious anchorite,  
Sarvart’ha siddhi, tranquil lies in death;
Even in the instant Rakshasa had promised
Malayaketu, that more vigorous means
Should be pursued to overturn our empire.

(Addressing vacancy.)

’Tis bravely done, thou worthy minister,
Thou saintly priest, thou human Vrihaspati.* [The regent of the planet of Jupiter, and preceptor and councillor of the gods.]
The mercenary herd obey their lords
For their own profit: should they hold their faith
In time of adverse fortune, they expect
That future days will give back power and wealth.
How few, like thee, regardless of reward,
And animated by remembered kindnesses,
Unwearied labour in the perilous service
A master no more lives to recompense?
How shall I change the enmity of such
As thou to friendship? It but little profits
To court alliance with a fool or coward;
Nor do the brave and wise claim our dependance,
Unless fidelity confirm their worth.
They, who to intellect and courage join
Devoted faith, are wedded to their lords,
In adverse ever as in prosperous fortune.
I must not sleep in this. To win the chief
Demands my utmost care. Thus far, success
Befriends our cause, and on his head revert
His hostile councils. Whilst he designed
One of the princes to destroy, and drive
Me hence, I gained his minister, directed
The shaft against Parvataka, and spread
The rumour, Rakshasa had done the deed.
So runs the general credence; but his son,
Malayaketu, knows the truth. To him
’Twas purposely revealed; and with the aid
Of Bhagurayana, he frightened fled.
Now he is leagued with Rakshasa, and may
Defy our arms whilst aided by his policy.
Yet some discredit must attend his union
With one the world conceives his father’s murderer,
A stain no skill nor craft can wipe away.
I have my spies abroad — they roam the realm,
In various garb disguised, in various tongues
And manners skilled, and prompt to wear the shew
Of zeal to either party, as need serves.
At home, my agents, versed in every shift
And quaint device, maintain assiduous quest
Amongst the people of the capital,
And instant note amidst the multitude
The covert friends of Nanda and his minister.
The chiefs, whose ready aid placed Chandragupta
Firm on his throne, are faithful to his cause,
And careful servants keep unwearied watch
To baffle those who would administer
Envenomed draughts and viands to the king.
There is a fellow of my studies, deep
In planetary influence and policy,* [Literally, "Having obtained great proficiency in the Dandaniti political system of Usanas, and the sixty-four Angas, or branches of the Jyotish Sastra, the science of astronomy or astrology.”]
The Brahman, Induserma; him I sent,
When first I vowed the death of Nanda, hither;
And here repairing as a Bauddha mendicant,† [Having the marks of a Kshapanaka, which usually designates a Bauddha mendicant; but, as hereafter shewn, the individual is a Jain not a Bauddha, and the confusion of terms is worthy of notice, as characteristic of a period subsequent to the disappearance of the Bauddhas in India.]
He speedily contrived to form acquaintance
And friendship with the royal councillors.
Above them all, does Rakshasa repose
In him implicit confidence. ’Tis well (rises).
We triumph in his aid. Then none shall dare
Deride our purposes. The kingly burthen
Unbending, Chandragupta shall sustain,
And vigilantly guard his regal prize.
Me must not hope for indolent delights
Whose daring wins a throne. The king of men
And monarch of the woods, alike must vanquish
Frequent and fierce aggression, to enjoy  
In peace the prey their prowess has achieved. [Retires.

Enter Nipunaka, a spy in the service of Chanakya, disguised, and carrying a scroll, or cloth with figures of Yama on it.* [A Yama Pata. It should seem to be a sort of raree show. The showman probably held something of a religious character; the person and his accompaniment are now unknown.]

Devotion to Yama† [The Hindu Pluto.] alone be selected,
For only by him is existence protected:
Their servants all other gods leave in the lurch,
When Yama his messengers sends in their search,
But trust we to Yama, and well are we sped,
With a friend whilst alive, and a friend when we’re dead.
I’ll enter here, show my pictures and chaunt my song.

(Entering Chanakya's house.)

Pup. Stop, stop! you must not enter here.

Nip. No! — pray, whose house is it?

Pup. It belongs to my preceptor, of well-selected name.‡ [Sugrihita namna Arya Crhanakyasya. This phrase is of constant occurrence in the preceding dramas, as well as this, and indicates the importance attached, not to well-sounding, but to lucky or propitious appellations. This superstition was common amongst the nations of antiquity; and, according to Cicero, care was taken in the lustration of the people, that those who conducted the victims, and on the formation of the army that the first soldier on the muster-roll should have auspicious names. Cum imperator exercitum, censor populum lustraret, bonis nominibus qui hostias ducerent, eligebantur, quod idem in delectu consules observant, ut primus miles fiat bono nomine. [Google translate: When the commander of the army, the censor, surveyed the people, with good names they were chosen as victims; Let the first soldier be a good name.]]

Nip. Then it belongs to a brother professor, so let me pass. I must have some talk with him, and let him see what I know.

Pup. What can you teach my master, pray?

Nip. Don’t be wroth. One man cannot know every thing; he may know some things, to be sure, and so may even such as I am.

Pup. How dare you detract from my master: he knows every thing?

Nip. Does he know, think you, by whom Chandra* [The moon, or Chandragupta.] is disliked?

Pup. What has he to do with such knowledge?

Nip. He will know what is to be known, I dare say; but you only understand thus, that the lotus cannot bear Chandra, its disposition is counter to its shape and beauty: the place abounds with such.

Chan. (overhearing). He means, the minds of men are yet averse
To Chandragupta.

Pup. What nonsense do you chatter?

Nip. I talk very good sense, if —

Pup. What?

Nip. Those who hear me understand me.

Chan, (aloud). Advance, you will find one, friend
Willing to hear and understand.

Nip. Long life to your Excellency!

Chan (apart). Amidst my many missions I forget
What was assigned Nipunaka. Oh! I remember.
He was to gather and report the state
Of public feeling. Welcome, friend; sit down.

Nip. As your honour commands. (Sits on the ground.)

Chan. Now for your news. What say the citizens —
How do they stand affected?

Nip. Your Excellency has removed all their grievances, so that they cannot choose but be well affected to the auspicious Chandragupta. There are, however, in the city three men attached personally to the minister Rakshasa, who cannot bear his Majesty’s prosperity.

Chan. They weary of their lives then — who are they?

Nip. The first is a Bauddha beggar.

Chan, (apart). A Bauddha beggar — excellent. (Aloud) His name?

Nip. Jivasiddhi.

Chan, (apart). My own true emissary. (Aloud) Well, who next?

Nip. Rakshasa’s very particular friend, the scribe Sakata Das.

Chan. (apart). A scribe — a matter of light moment; yet ’Tis well not to despise a foe though humble:
He has been noted — and Siddharthaka
Fastened upon him as a friend. (Aloud) The third?

Nip. Is also the friend of Rakshasa, an inhabitant of Pushpapur, the head of the jewellers, named Chandana Das. In his house the wife of the minister was left when he fled from the city.

Chan, (apart). This man must be, in truth, his friend:
To one, alone, he valued as himself.
Would Rakshasa commit so dear a charge.
(Aloud) How know you, that the wife of Rakshasa
Was left in trust of Chandana Das?

Nip. This seal-ring will apprize you.

Chan, (taking the ring*

[Fn. Begins:
Anguliya mudra, a finger-ring seal. Seals or signets of this kind were from the earliest periods commonly used in the East. Ahasuerus takes his signet off his hand and gives it first to Haman and again to Mordecai; and Herodotus notices that each of the Babylonians wore a seal-ring. The Greeks and Romans had their rings curiously engraved with devices, and that cast by Polycrates into the sea was the work of an engraver whose name the historian has not thought unworthy of commemoration. Thus also in the Demagogues of Aristophanes: —

"Demus. This is no ring of mine, it tallies not
With my device, or much my eyes deceive me.
"Sausage Seller. Allow me, Sir. What might be your impression?

"Dem. A roasted thrium. in thick fat enclosed.

"Saus. I see no thrium.

"Dem. What the impression then?

"Saus. A wide-mouthed gull, high seated on a rock.
In act to make a speech.”

The use of the seal amongst the ancients, as amongst the Orientals to the present day, was not, as with us, to secure an envelope, but to verify letters and documents in place of a written signature. Amongst the natives of Hindustan, both Mohammedan and Hindu, the seal is engraved with the name of the wearer, and the surface being smeared superficially only with ink, the application of the seal to the paper leaves the letters which are cut in the stone, white on a black ground. Such also was the manner in which the seals of the Greeks and Romans were applied. It might be suspected that the translator of Euripides was thinking of a seal of wax on the outside of a letter, in the following passage in Iphigenia in Aulis:

"Attendant. But how, if I speak thus, shall I find credit,
Or with your daughter, or the royal dame?

"Agamemnon. The seal which on that letter I have stamped,
Preserve ‘unbroken.’"

It is literally ‘‘Take care of the seal which you bear on that letter.” The stage direction should be probably "giving his ring to the messenger,” a mark of confidence, and a confirmation of the previously impressed signature, which would induce Clytemnestra to trust him implicitly. There could be no need to charge the messenger not to break, or not to efface a mere impression within a folded letter, as it is previously described; and if that impression alone were sufficient to inspire belief, it was unnecessary for the messenger to require of Agamemnon to grant any further token. Sphragis, the word used in all these places, is placed by Julius Pollux amongst the synonimes of finger-ring seals, Episemoi daktylioi.
Fn ends.]


and reading the name) Rakshasa —
Rakshasa is in my grasp! (Aloud) How got you this?

Nip. I will tell your Excellency. It was your pleasure that I should take note of the sentiments and conduct of the citizens. To gain free access to their habitations I assumed this disguise, and amongst other houses I entered that of Chandana Das. Exhibiting the Yama show, I commenced my ballad, when a little boy of about five years of age, of a most lovely appearance, his eyes sparkling with the curiosity common at his years, ran out from a viranda in the court. Cries of, "He is gone out — he is gone out!" uttered by female voices proceeded instantly from the apartment adjoining, and a woman coming to the door caught hold of the child and dragged him in with some little resistance. She exposed her person with evident caution, so that little more of her was distinguished than a pair of very beautiful arms. In the struggle with the child, however, this ring, which as it is a man’s ring was probably too large for her finger, slipped off, and rolling near my foot stopped there, like a modest woman stooping to make a bow. I took an opportunity of picking it up unobserved, and finding that it bore the name of Rakshasa I brought it to your honour.

Chan. Sarangarava.

Enter Pupil.

(To Nipunaka.) You may withdraw, now I have heard the story:

But before long your toils shall be rewarded.

Nip. As you command, [Exit.

Chan. Paper and ink! What shall I write? By this
Is Rakshasa to be subdued.

Enter a Female Servant.

Serv. Victory to your Excellency!

Chan. (apart). I accept the omen.* [Great importance is attached to the fortuitous expressions of individuals throughout these dramas, and a prosperous or unprosperous result anticipated from the thoughts or the words, by the person to whom they are addressed. The Greek plays are full of similar instances, and they are sufficiently abundant in every other department of classical literature. Cicero cites various curious examples in his book "De Divinatione.” That related of Lucius Paulus is very analogous to the instance in the text. "Lueius Paulus the consul had been appointed to conduct the war against Perseus. On returning to his house in the evening he found his little daughter Tertia full of grief, and on asking her what was the matter, replied ‘Persa (a puppy so named) is no more.’ Taking her up in his arms, and kissing her, the consul exclaimed, ‘I accept the omen,’ and the event corresponded with the expression.” The effect of the omen seems also with the Hindus, as well as the Greeks and Romans, to have depended in a great measure upon a person’s applying it, and signifying his acceptance of it. The phrase addressed to Chanakya is a customary one to princes and ministers, Jayatu arya, and it is rendered prophetic by Chanakya’s assent, Grihitoyam Jaya sabda. The word jaya (victory) is accepted. Oionon dekesthai, Omen arripere, and Sabdam Grihitum, are terms of similar import in the three languages.] (Aloud.) Sonottara, what news?

Son. His Majesty Sri Chandra has sent me, with his profound respects, to request your assistance in paying the final honours to Parvateswara; and it is his wish to make an offering to learned Brahmans of the jewels and valuable articles worn by that prince.

Chan, (apart). In all he meets my wishes. (Aloud) Go, Sonottara,

Inform the king his purpose is most fitting.
And should be speedily performed. As for the gems.
They are no doubt of cost, and should be given
Only to Brahmans of repute. Those I will send
When I have put their merits to the test,
To take the presents at his hands.

Son. I obey. [Exit.

Chan. Sarangarava, seek out Viswavasu,
Bid him and his two brothers from the king
Receive those gifts, and then repair to me.

[Exit Pupil.

What further purpose shall I give the letter?
My spies inform me, of the Mlechcha princes.
The chiefest five, or Chitraverma king
Of Kuluta — the king of Malaya, Nrisinha,
The lion-voiced — the monarch of Cashmir,
Brave Pushkaraksha — Sindhusena, prince
Of Saindhava, for enemies o’erthrown
Renowned; and powerful with his hordes of horse,
Meghak’hya — Parasika’s sovereign;* [The position of Kuluta is not known; that of Malaya, the western Ghats, is very oddly introduced as a kingdom other than Hindu. Saindhava, is Sindh and Balochisthan; and Parasika, Persia.] these
Are friends of Rakshasa. 1 write their names;
Let Chitragupta† [The registrar of Yama, or the recorder of the dead.] wipe them from the record. —
No, not their names. It were as well to leave
Some indistinctness. Ho, Sarangarava.

Enter Pupil.

I have bethought me — learned Brahmans write
Not always clearly. To Siddharthaka
Convey these my instructions. (Whispers.) I myself
Will tell him for what purpose, and for whom
The note is meant, and who the writer is.
Let it be copied by Sakata Das, and folded
In fashion of a letter, but not addressed;* [Literally, "without any name being seen externally.”]
Nor let the writer know he writes for me.

Pup. As you direct. [Exit.

Chan. Malayaketu is o’erthrown!

Enter Siddharthaka.† [In the conduct of the business this piece is inferior to its immediate predecessors, and bears most resemblance to the Mrichchakati.]

Sid. Victory to your Excellency! the letter is prepared.

Chan. Let me peruse it — Right,
Now sign it with this seal. (Gives Rakshasa’s seal-ring)

Sid. It is done. What else?

Chan. I would assign you
A business of great import.

Sid. I hold myself much honoured by the trust.

Chan. Go to the place of execution, give
The executioner a signal privily,
And then put on a most ungoverned fury.
Attack the officers, and they, prepared,
Will fly in seeming terror. They dispersed,
Untie the bonds that fasten Sakata Das,
And with him shape your flight to Rakshasa.
He, for the preservation of his friend,
Will give you ample recompense, which you
Accept, and for a time remain his follower,
Until the foes approach the city, when
This end must be contrived. (Whispers.)

Sid. As you command.

Chan. Sarangarava!

Enter Pupil.

Bear the chief officers of justice* [The Kalapasika and Dandapasika, the bearers of the noose of death and of punishment.] these,
The king’s commands: — Arrest the Bauddha mendicant
Named Jivasiddhi; let it be proclaimed
He was commissioned here by Rakshasa,
And by the poisoned maiden has destroyed
The prince Parvataka. Be this duly cried,
And then he must be banished with each mark
Of contumely from the capital.
The scribe, too, Sakata Das, whom Rakshasa
Stirs up to plot against the royal person,
Let him be seized! his crime proclaimed abroad;
Then bear him to the stake, and into bonds
Conduct his family.

Pup. It shall be done. [Exit.

Chan. Now shall Rakshasa be taken.

Sid. (advancing ). I have taken—

Chan, (apart). Rakshasa; most true. (Aloud) Whom?

Sid. — Your highness’s commands, and now depart
To give them action.

Chan. It is well. (Giving him the letter and the ring.)
Success attend you!

Sid. Such are your commands. [Exit.

Enter Pupil.

Pup. The officers obey the orders of the king.

Chan. Now, child, go call the provost of the jewellers,
Chandana Das his name.

Pup. I shall obey. (Exit and returns with him.) This way,
Provost,

Chand. (apart). Chanakya’s cruel nature gives alarm
To those who are not conscious of offending: —
I have offended — what can I expect!
I have desired my friends, lest that my house
Be seized on by this tyrant, to remove
The family of Rakshasa, and now
I am prepared — what may befall me, may be.

Pup. Here, sir, is Chandana Das.

Chand. Glory to your Excellency!

Chan. Provost, you are welcome: sit.

Chand. Excuse me, sir,
This ceremony suits not with the sorrow
In which the sufferings of my friends
Have left me. I will sit me down,
So please you, on the ground.

Chan. It must not be;
This distance needs not when with such as I am.
Here, take this seat.

Chand. If you will have it so.
(Apart.) What does he purpose?

Chan. Now, Provost, does your trade
Yield you due profit?

Chand. With your honour’s patronage,
All trade must flourish, so of course must mine.

Chan. And do the people still recall to mind
The many virtues of their former lords,
When they comment on Chandragupta’s vices?

Chand. I cannot hear such words. (Stops his ears.)
The virtues of his majesty afford
The soothing pleasures that autumnal moons
Diffuse.

Chan. It may be; but all kings expect
To meet from those they cherish some requital.

Chand. You need but speak it, sir, and any sums —
What monies may be needed?

Chan. You forget;
This is the reign of Chandragupta, not
Of Nanda. To his avaricious soul
Your treasures were acceptable; but now,
Your king esteems your happiness his wealth.

Chand. I joy to hear it.

Chan. You should rather ask
How best such happiness may be evinced.

Chand. Command.

Chan. ’Tis easy — let no man presume
To offer opposition to his sovereign.

Chand. What luckless wretch exists, who would pretend
To think of opposition! Does your grace
Know such a man?

Chan. Thou art the man.

Chand. Alas!
How should a blade of straw encounter flame?

Chan. Yet thus it is. Why, even now your house
Gives shelter to the family of Rakshasa,
The open enemy of Chandragupta.

Chand. This is untrue. Some base and secret foe
To me has brought this story to your ears.

Chan. You need not be alarmed. The miscreant servants
Of the late sovereign, when they fled the state,
Compelled by force the honest citizens
To give unwilling shelter to their families.
In this they are unblamed — the only act
That makes it an offence is its concealment.

Chand. I do admit that formerly, indeed,
The family of Rakshasa was thus
Lodged in my house.

Chan. This is again untrue:
Your former declaration would imply
They never found asylum in your mansion.

Chand. I own I was in this not quite sincere.

Chan. Such insincerity will now obtain
Its proper estimation — but deliver
The family of Rakshasa, and you may yet
Be held excused.

Chand. I have already said —
They were in my abode.

Chan. Where are they gone?

Chand. I do not know.

Chan. You do not know! Beware:
The hooded snake hangs over you, and far
Your hope of safety lies. As Vishnugupta
Will Nanda — (checking himself). What! merchant, can you be
So idle, as to cherish hopes that Rakshasa
Will triumph over Vrishala? Have you forgotten,
Fortune deserted Nanda in his life,
With all his power and warlike friends to back him?
Now she is steadily affianced — bound
To Chandra, as is moonlight to the moon;
And who shall think to sunder them? who so rash,
To thrust his arm into the lion’s jaws.
And seek to tear away his pointed fangs,
Red as the twilight moon, stained with the blood
Of the fresh-slaughtered elephant?

Chand. (apart). These words,
Alas! too well events have justified.

(A noise behind.)

Chan. How now, Sarangarava, what has chanced?

Pup. The Bauddha beggar. Sir, named Jivasiddi, is banished from the city by order of the king.

Chan. A holy man — I mourn his fate: yet such
The treatment that the prince’s foes deserve.
You mark, good Provost, — Vrishala resolves
To treat his enemies with just severity.
Take a friend’s counsel, and give up the family
Of Rakshasa, then Chandragupta’s favour
Will long be your’s.

Chand. They are not in my dwelling.

(A noise behind.)

Chan. Again! — Sarangarava, what is this?

Pup. The scribe, Sir, Sakata Das, is led forth to be impaled.

Chan. So let him reap the fruit of disobedience. —
You see the king is stern. Believe me, Provost,
He will not brook your giving an asylum
To those who are his enemies. Resign them —
So you and yours shall yet escape with life.

Chand. What signs of fear do you behold in me.
To think I should be moved to sacrifice
Those I had sheltered, by the dread of death?
But I have said it — those you seek of me
I have not in my power. What more remains?

Chan. You hold to this?

Chand. I do.

Chan. (apart). ’Tis bravely spoken.
Who in this selfish world would lose the hope
Of affluence, and like Sivi,* [Sivi was a prince who, to save a dove from the pursuit of a hawk without prejudice to the latter, gave it a piece of his own flesh.] thus discharge
The arduous task of generous self-devotion!
(Aloud.) This is your last resolve?

Chand. It is.

Chan. Expect the king’s displeasure.

Chand. I am prepared — do with me as you please.

Chan. Sarangarava, bid the officers
Secure this miscreant. Hold! let them seize† [This duty is assigned to the Durga palaka and Vijaya palaka, who should be military officers, if not proper names.]
His house and family, and keep them close,
Till I impart this matter to the king:
He will, I know, command the forfeiture
Both of his wealth and life.

Pup. I shall obey — this way Provost.

Chand. I attend. (Apart.) Happy that friendship’s claim.
Not mortal frailty, terminates my life.

[Exit.

Chan. Now Rakshasa is safe; for when he learns
The faith and imminent danger of his friend.
Imperilled in his cause, he will, I know.
Be eager to prevent the sacrifice;
And ere he suffer that this merchant lose
His life for him, will offer up his own,
As much less precious than so dear a friend. (Noise)
How now!

Enter Pupil.

Pup. Siddhart’haka has rescued Sakata Das, Sir, as he was about to suffer death, and they are fled together.

Chan. (apart). Our work is well begun. (Aloud.) Fled, say you?
Quick! boy, and order Bhagurayana
To overtake and seize them.

(Pupil goes out and returns.)

Pup. Alas! Sir, he too has disappeared.

Chan. (apart). For our advantage. (Aloud.) Let him be pursued.
Where are the officers?* [In the original, Chanakya names them: Bhadrabhata, Purushadatta, Dingirata, Balagupta, Rajasena, Rohitaksha, Vijayaverma; and it may be observed, that they are names not of present currency, although Sanscrit. Chanakya also sends out to dispatch them after Bhagurayana as before, a ceremony dispensed with in the translation.]

Pup. They are overcome with terror; and Bhadrabhata and many other chiefs, I learn. Sir, were off this morning long before daylight.

Chan. (apart). They will promote our triumph. (Aloud.)
Let them go.
We shall not miss them. Those who now have fled,
Had in their hearts deserted us. Let all
Who would abandon us be free to go:
I heed them not, whilst yet the mind is firm
That plucked down Nanda, and in which I feel
More powerful far than in a hundred hosts.
Let not my spirit fail, though left alone.
And we shall conquer. As for the fugitives,
They shall be seized and meet with their reward.
(Apart) Now, Rakshasa, I have you — I shall see you
Tame and submissive to my sovereign’s will,
Caught by superior craft, though now you roam
Unshackled like the elephant, whilst yet
He ranges, high in blood, amidst the shades
And cooling torrents of his native woods.

[Exeunt.

END OF THE FIRST ACT.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Thu Feb 24, 2022 5:44 am

Part 5 of __

ACT II. Street before Rakshasa’s House.

Enter Viradhagupta, an agent of Rakshasa, disguised as a Snake-catcher.

Those who are skilled in charms and potent signs may handle fearlessly the fiercest snakes.

Passenger. Hola! what and who are you?

Vir. A snake-catcher, your honour — my name is Jirnavisha. What say you, you would touch my snakes? What may your profession be, pray? Oh! I see, a servant of the Prince — you had better not meddle with snakes — A snake-catcher unskilled in charms and antidotes, a man mounted on a furious elephant without a goad, and a servant of the king appointed to a high station and proud of his success, these three are on the eve of destruction. Oh! he is off.

2d Pass. What have you got in your basket, fellow?

Vir. Tame snakes, your honour, by which I get my living. Would you wish to see them? I will exhibit them here, in the court of this house, as this is not a convenient spot.

2d Pass. This, you blockhead, is the house of Rakshasa, the prince’s minister — there is no admittance for us here.

Vir. Then go your way, Sir: by the authority of my occupation I shall make bold to enter. So — I have got rid of him. * [In the original he changes his style from a low and difficult Prakrit to Sanscrit.] ’Tis very strange — and what will be the end?
The efforts of my master, Rakshasa,
To shake the power of Chandragupta, fail,
Defeated by Chanakya’s foresight: yet, methinks,
When I observe Malayaketu aided
By Rakshasa’s high wisdom, I behold
The sovereign sway wrested from Chandragupta.
Fortune is bound to Maurya’s cause with cords
Fast woven by Chanakya, yet the hand
Of Rakshasa seems often on the point
To snatch her from her bands. Between such foes.
Such masters of their craft, the cause of Nanda
Hangs in suspense, and fortune wavers —
Like a young female elephant, whose love
Two lordly males dispute, between these ministers, —
Doubting on which she shall confer her favour.
Well, time determines. Now to visit Rakshasa.

[Exeunt.

Scene, — An Apartment.

Rakshasa with Attendants.

Alas! my cares are vain: my anxious days
And sleepless nights are all of no avail.
Since like the house of Yadu,* [The members of the family of Yadu, in which Krishna was born, were all destroyed upon the eve of his death or return to heaven, by intestine division and an affray amongst themselves, in which all the combatants were slain.] Nanda’s race
Has perished utterly, exterminated
By powerful foes and unrelenting fate.
Now a new master claims my zealous service.
Not for the mercenary hope of fortune,
Nor coward apprehensions for my safety;
Not for the idle love of brief authority.
Nor in forgetfulness of former faith.
I serve this Lord, the better to effect
The fall of Nanda’s enemies, and pay
The tribute of revenge his fame demands.
Oh Goddess lotus-throned!† [Lakshmi, the Goddess of Fortune, appeared at the creation seated on a lotus amidst the waters. ] dost thou so lightly
Esteem desert, that Nanda is forgotten
And all thy favour lavished on his foe, —
On Maurya’s ignominious son?* [Chandragupta is here therefore the grandson, not the son of Mura.]
Why, like the frontal juice, didst thou not perish,
That dries when falls the royal elephant.
Was there no chief of noble blood to win
Thy fickle smiles, that thou must elevate
A base-born outcast to imperial sway, —
And thus, with truly feminine caprice,
(For women are unsteady as the buds
That float in air), fly from exalted worth?
But I shall cure thee of this fleeting fancy,
By levelling the mansion of thy choice.
For this have I consigned my wife and child
To my friend’s care, and when I fled the capital
Left them behind, that men may therefore deem
I cherish confident purpose to return
To them and to my home, and thus, the zeal
Of those who yet are faithful to the cause
Of Nanda, may not slacken by despair.
To Sakata Das is ample wealth entrusted
To recompense our emissaries, sent
To work by craft the death of Chandragupta,
Or foil the secret malice of the foe;
And Jivasiddhi and some other friends,
Are nominated to convey intelligence
Of all that chances every instant to me.
What else can be devised? mine ancient lord,
Who for his own destruction kindly reared
A tiger’s cub, and his illustrious race,
Are ever in my thoughts. I yet may strike
The savage that destroyed them to the heart,
With wisdom’s shaft, if fate be not his shield.

Enter Jajali, the Chamberlain of Malayaketu.

Health to your Excellency!

Rak. Jajali, welcome: what has brought you hither?

Jaj. I come a messenger from the prince. Malayaketu grieves to see your Excellency so regardless of personal appearance; and without desiring you to be unmindful of your ancient monarch, he requests you will pay regard to his wishes. He therefore sends you these jewels, taken from his own person, and entreats your Excellency will wear them.

Rak. My worthy friend, apprise the noble prince,
The virtues of my former gracious lord
Are all forgotten in his highness’ merits;
But that I must not decorate my person
Whilst I endure the deep humiliation
Of late discomfiture — nor till his foes
Are all exterminated, and I rear
His golden throne within the regal palace.  

Jaj. This is an easy matter to your Excellency, therefore respect this first favour of the prince.

Rak. I do respect his orders, and your message:
The prince’s will in this shall be accomplished.

Jaj. I take my leave.

Rak. I bow to you.

[Exit Jajali.

Priyamvadaka, who waits to see me?

Priyamvadaka enters with Viradhagupta.

Rak. Who is this?

Priy. A snake-catcher, your Excellency.

Rak. (feeling his left eye throb).
What should this import? the sight of snakes, too — * [An equally unlucky omen as the throbbing of the left eye.]
I have no pleasure in the exhibition;
Give him a donation, and let him go.

Priy. Here is for your pains; for not seeing — not for seeing.

Vir. Inform the minister, I beg of you, that besides exhibiting snakes, I am a bit of a poet in the vulgar tongue. If I cannot have the honour of seeing him, request he will favour me by perusing this. (Gives a paper.)

Priy. He says, Sir, he is a poet as well as a snake-catcher, and requests your perusal of this paper. (Gives it.)

Rak. "The busy bee, that from each flower,
Extracts the nectary juice,
To fragrant honey all its store
Converts for others’ use.”* [Sic vos non vobis mellificatis apes. [Google translate: So you don't make honey bees.]]
(Apart) He means by this, he brings news from the capital.
The city of flowers. Who should this be — it is
Viradhagupta — such was his disguise.
(Aloud) Bid him approach — he is no vulgar bard,
And merits our encomium.
Priyamvadaka brings Viradhagupta forward.

Rak. Priyamvadaka, I will see these snakes.
In the mean time, do you and your companions
Discharge your several duties.

Priy. We obey, Sir.

[Exit with attendants.

Rak. My friend Viradhagupta, sit you down.

Vir. As you command, Sir.

Rak. It grieves me to behold you thus; — how hard
A fate pursues the friends of Nanda!

Vir. Heed it not, Sir;
Your wisdom will ere long restore us all
To former fortune.

Rak. What news from Pushpapur?

Vir. I have much to tell, Sir: where shall I commence?

Rak. With Chandragupta’s entry in the city.
Whate’er my agents since have done inform me.

Vir. You will remember. Sir, when in close league
United by Chanakya, Parvateswara
And Chandragupta in alliance, led
Their force against our city — a wild multitude
Of Sakas, Yavanas, and mountaineers;
The fierce Kambojas, with the tribes who dwell
Beyond the western streams,* [The Sakas of the Hindus cannot be other than the Saca or Sakai of classical geography. They are perpetually named in various works, and seem to have been known on the borders of India or in its western districts in the first century preceding Christianity. Vikramaditya king of Ougein being known as the Sakari or enemy of the Sacae, his era dates B.C. 56, and it should appear that about this date, some northern tribes had settled themselves along the Indus, constituting the Indoscythi of Arrian. Their attempt to penetrate further to the east, by way of Kandesh and Malwa, was not improbably arrested by Vikramaditya, whence the epithet Sakari. The term of Yavanas is in modern times applied to Mohammedans of every description, but in this instance, and in works prior to the Mohammedan era, some other people must be intended. The interpretation of the word by Sir W. Jones is, Ionians or Asiatic Greeks, and there are some considerations in its favour, although the chief argument in its behalf is the difficulty of attaching it to any other people. The mountaineers, or Kiratas may come from any part of India. They are known in classical geography as the Cirrhadae or the Cirrodes, the latter in Sogdiana, near the Oxus. The Kambojas are the people of the Arachosia, or north-eastern province of Persia. For the site of the Bahikas, as they are termed in the text, we are indebted to the Mahabharat, and the Parasikas speak for themselves.] and Persia’s hosts,
Poured on us like a deluge.

Rak. Who shall dare
Assail the city whilst I breathe? Quick! line the walls
With archers — plant the elephants at the gates:
Let those who scorn a feeble foe, who thirst
For martial glory, and who fear not death,
Attend me to the field!

Vir. Compose yourself:
I merely speak of what has some while passed.

Rak. I had forgot myself; I deemed it present.
Yes, — well I recollect the inspiring trust
That Nanda then reposed in me. On me
His every hope relied; and his affection,
Converting me to many like myself.
To every quarter threatened by the foe
His orders sent me — "Rakshasa, behold
Yon troop of elephants, like a black cloud, —
Disperse them. — Rakshasa, lead on those horse,
That bound like waves, and charge the foe’s advance. —
Rakshasa, draw up the foot in firm array,
And drive them back.” — Your pardon — pray proceed.

Vir. Beholding Pushpapura thus beleaguered,
And grieving for the sufferings of the people,
Servarthasiddhi, quitting further thought
Of opposition, private left the city,
And thence assumed the life of an ascetic.
Lorn of their lord, the warriors soon relaxed
Their efforts, and resistance ceased; and soon
The trumpets of the enemy proclaimed
Their triumph to unwilling ears. You, then,
Departed to maintain the realm of Nanda
In other provinces; devising means* [These means are designated in the text here, as well as in other places, and in other books, the Visha Kanya, the Poison-Maid, which it would be more consonant to our ideas to consider as an effigy, but it appears to mean a female whose nature was charged with venom so that her embraces should prove fatal. The Hitopadesa says, Chanakya killed Nanda by means of a fatal emissary; and the author of the Purusha Pariksha, a modern collection of tales in Bengali, taken chiefly from the Sanscrit, in giving a version of this story adds, that the damsel was so venomous that flies alighting on her person instantly perished.]
Intended Chandragupta to remove,
Which failing him, the mountain king destroyed.

Rak. So fate decreed, and turned aside the blow;
As Vishnu craftily contrived to ward
The shaft of Kama from the breast of Arjuna,
And speed it to Hirimba’s son.† [Kerna had received a lance from Indra which was fated to kill one individual, and which he kept, intending it for Arjuna. But Ghatothacha, the son of Bhima by the Rakshasi, Hirimba, having by the counsel and aid of Krishna become so formidable to the Kuru host as to threaten their destruction, Kerna was compelled to hurl the lance against him, and Arjuna thus escaped the peril. — ( Mahdbharat, Kerna Parva.)] What then?

Vir. The prince Malayaketu was alarmed
By this, his father’s death, and quickly left
The camp. His father’s brother, whom Chanakya
Persuaded that the monarch’s death was not
His deed, or Chandragupta’s, still remained
Confiding, and the entry of the foe
Of Chandragupta into Nanda’s palace
Was solemnly proclaimed.

Rak. What then befell?

Vir. Chanakya called the architects together,
And gave them orders to prepare the palace,
With all expedient haste, for the reception
Of Chandragupta at the hour of midnight,
As by the aspect of the stars determined.
To this they answered, all should be made ready,
And that anticipating his desires,
Their provost, Daruverma, had completed
The decorations of the outer gateway;
The rest would soon be done. Chanakya praised
Their ready zeal, and promised Daruverma
His promptitude should meet its due reward.

Rak. Whence was Chanakya’s satisfaction?
I deem that Daruverma’s project failed
To work its end, or wrought an end unwished.
For such simplicity, such hasty service,
That would not wait the orders of Chanakya,
Could not have failed to rouse his strong suspicion.

Vir. At the hour of midnight
All was prepared; and at the moment fixed,
Vairodhaka and Chandragupta, seated
On the same throne, installed as equal kings,
Divided Nanda’s empire.

Rak. Then to Vairodhaka the like partition
That bought the aid of Parvateswara
Was pledged?

Vir. It was.

Rak. A shrewd contrivance, truly!
To banish all suspicion, they had wrought
The death of Parvateswara, to quit
An ill-judged contract: other means were found,
No doubt, to rid them of this second dupe.

Vir. At the appointed hour,
Vairodhaka, as first inaugurated,
Entered the city. He was clothed in mail,
O’er which were thrown robes of rich dye, and strewn
With snow-white pearls* [Hima vimala muktaguna, "a string of pearls as pure as snow.” This comparison is of too rare an occurrence to be looked upon as common-place, and it is an idea not likely to have occurred to a native of the South of India.] profuse; his brow was radiant
With the imperial fillet; the fragrant wreath
Flowed o’er his breast, and costly ornaments,
Cumbrous adorned at once and masked his person.
All thought him Chandragupta. He was mounted
On Chandragupta’s elephant, and attended
By Chandragupta’s guards to do him honour.
As he approached the gateway, Daruverma,
True to his faith and sharing in the error
That fancied Chandragupta present, stood
Prepared to let the temporary arch,
Contrived for such a purpose, fall upon him.
The princes who composed his train now reined
Their steeds and chariots, and alone Vairodhaka
Advanced upon his elephant. The driver,
Alike your servant, poor Berberaka,
Attempted then to draw from it’s concealment
Within his golden stick the hidden dagger,
Provided for his need, and with the weapon
To stab him he supposed was Chandragupta.

Rak. Alas, untimely efforts both!

Vir. As forth
He stretched his hand to grasp the staff that hung
Suspended by a chain of gold, the elephant,
Who marked his arm extended, and imagined
The blow was meant for her, sprang quickly forward.
Her entrance in the gateway gave the signal
To loose the spring that stayed the impending arch —
It fell! — but crushed Berberaka, in act
To strike the blow, which shaken, missed his aim.
When Daruverma saw the driver slain,
The prince unharmed, and all the fraud revealed,
Despairing of his own escape, he seized
The iron bolt that had secured the arch,
And with it dashed Vairodhaka to earth.

Rak. Fruitless despair! — what was his fate?

Vir. He fell
Beneath a shower of stones the prince’s followers
O’erwhelmed him with, incensed.

Rak. We lose in him
A faithful friend — and what of our physician,
Abhayadatta?

Vir. His tasks are all accomplished.

Rak. Is Chandragupta dead?

Vir. No, Fate has saved him.

Rak. What meant your words?

Vir. I will apprise your Excellency —
The poisoned draught had duly been concocted.
And would have been administered, but Chanakya,
In pouring it into a golden goblet,
Observed the colour change, and thus detected
The venomous admixture — then forbidding
The prince to taste it, ordered the physician
To swallow his own dose — and thus he died.

Rak. A learned man has perished. What has chanced
The chamberlain, Pramodaka?

Vir. The same —
The sums you had entrusted to his charge
He lavished with unbounded prodigality,
Till such expenditure drew observation.
He answered incoherently the questions
Put to him as to his immense possessions.
And thus suspicion gaining confidence,
He was condemned, by order of Chanakya,
To suffer cruel death.

Rak. Fortune still balks our schemes.
What news of the brave men who were concealed
In the subterrene avenue that led
To Chandragupta’s sleeping chamber — thence
To steal by night, and kill him as he slept?

Vir. They have sustained the fortune of the rest.

Rak. How so: were they discovered by Chanakya?

Vir. Even so — before the king retired to rest.
The watchful minister was wont to enter
The chamber, and with diligent scrutiny
Inspect it — thus he saw a line of ants
Come through a crevice in the wall, and noticed
They bore the fragments of a recent meal;
Thence he inferred the presence of the feeders
In some adjoining passage, and commanded
That the pavilion should be set on fire
That moment. Soon his orders were obeyed,
And our brave friends, in flame and smoke enveloped,
Unable to escape, were all destroyed.

Rak. ’Tis ever thus. — Fortune in all befriends
The cruel Chandragupta. When I send
A messenger of certain death to slay him,
She wields the instrument against his rival,
Who should have spoiled him of one-half his kingdom
And arms, and drugs, and stratagems, are turned
In his behalf, against my friends and servants,
So that whate’er I plot against his power,
Serves but to yield him unexpected profit.

Vir. Yet let us on, Sir. What is once begun,
Is not to be abandoned. Obstacles foreseen
Deter the poor of spirit from an enterprize —
Some, more adventurous but not all resolved.
Commence, and stop midway; but noble minds
Like thine, by difficulties warmed, defy
Repeated checks, and in the end prevail.
A weary burden is the cumbrous earth
On Sesha’s* [The many-headed snake on which the Earth is supposed to rest.] head, but still he bears the load.
Day after day the same fatiguing course
The sun pursues, yet still he travels on.
Shame mocks the man of elevated rank,
Who holds his promise light, like meaner creatures:
To him a law inflexible proclaims,
His faith once pledged, he can no more recede.† [It may be doubted if perseverance is any where recommended in a more manly and spirited tone.]

Rak. You speak the truth — that which is once begun
Should never be relinquished. Well, what else?

Vir. Chanakya’s vigilance was now increased
A thousand-fold, and every one suspected
Of enmity to Chandragupta, all
Your friends and kindred, found in Pushpapur,
Have been arrested.

Rak. Whom has he seized?

Vir. First, Jivasiddhi, the religious mendicant.
Him he has banished.

Rak. (apart). This is a slight affliction; one who owns
No children nor dependants. (Aloud) But what plea
Was urged for such a sentence?

Vir. That he supplied.
Employed by you, the poisoned emissary
That killed Parvataka.

Rak. (apart). Well done, Kautilya,
One seed bears double fruit with you — you lose
A sharer of your spoil, and heap on us
The infamy of his death. (Aloud) What more?

Vir. He then
Proclaimed, that Daruverma and the rest
Were bribed by Sakata Das to kill the king,
And he was sentenced therefore to the stake.

Rak. Alas, how little fitting to my friend
So vile a death! Yet less art thou, who perishest
In a loved master’s cause, to be lamented,
Than I, who still in vain survive the fall
Of Nanda’s race — Go on, I am prepared
To hear the worst — what other friends have suffered?

Vir. In dread of what might happen, was your family
Removed to a more safe asylum.

Rak. Why were they not delivered to Chanakya?
Chandana Das in this is much to blame.

Vir. He had been more to blame, had he betrayed
His friend.

Rak. Go on —

Vir. He faithfully refused
To yield his charge: Chanakya, then, incensed —

Rak. — Put him to death?

Vir. Not so; he had him seized,
With all his family, and thrown in prison.

Rak. Why then rejoicing tell me, that my family
Is in a safe asylum — rather say.
That I and mine are held in captive bonds.

Enter Attendant.

Victory to your Excellency! — Sakata Das is at the gate.

Rak. Is it possible?

Att. It is not possible for your Excellency’s servants to imagine an untruth.

Rak. Viradhagupta, what is this?

Vir. Fortune relents, and has preserved our friend.

Rak. Why do you hesitate — admit him quick.

[Exit Attendant, and returns with Sakata Das followed by Siddharthaka,

Sak. Victory to the minister!

Rak. Welcome, my friend. I little hoped to see you.
Since you were honoured with Kautilya’s notice.

(Embraces him.

How chanced this happiness — inform me?

Sak. This,
My friend Siddharthaka dispersed my guard,
And bore me off in safety from the stake.

Rak. ’Twas bravely done. These ill repay such merit,
But favour us, and take them.

(Gives him the jewels and ornaments off his person.)

Sid. (apart). I must obey my lord Chanakya’s orders. (Falls at the feet of Rakshasa.) Sir, I am grateful; but I am here a stranger, and know not what I shall do with these valuables. If your Excellency will allow it, I should wish to leave them in your treasury — they can be sealed with my seal.

Rak. Let it be so.

Sak. (taking the seal). What is this — your name, appears
Engraved upon the seal (to Rakshasa).

Rak. (apart). Alas! what’s this I hear!
When I departed from the capital,
I left my wife this seal, to comfort her
Under my absence — how should it now have fallen
Into this man’s possession! (Aloud) Say, Siddharthaka,
How got you this?

Sid. I found it at the door of one Chandana Das, a jeweller of Kusumapur.

Rak. 'Tis probable —

Sid. What, Sir?

Rak. — That seals like this are found
At rich men’s doors.

Sak. My friend Siddharthaka,
The name of Rakshasa appears engraved
Upon this ring; present it to the minister,
And be assured the gift will be rewarded.

Sid. Its acceptance is all the reward that I desire.

(Gives.)

Rak. My friend, this ring must be employed
In our affairs.

Sak. It shall be as you wish it.

Sid. May I presume?

Rak. Speak boldly.

Sid. I have deserved, as your Excellency knows, the enmity of Chanakya; I dare not return to Pataliputra, and I should therefore hope to be allowed to remain at the feet of your Excellency.

Rak. I am well pleased you have forerun my purpose.

Sid. I am highly favoured.

Rak. Withdraw my friend (to Sakata Das). Go, taste repose awhile,
With this your fellow traveller. [Exeunt.

Rak. Now then, Viradhagupta, to the rest
Of thine intelligence. How thrive the schemes
That we have set on foot to sow dissension
’Twixt Chandragupta and his followers?

Vir. Well — the chief accomplished, all the rest succeeds.

Rak. How so; what mean you?

Vir. This especially, —  
That since Malayaketu was removed,
Chanakya has been slighted by the prince:
Whilst haughty with his triumphs, and disdaining
Superior rule, he frequent disobeys
The will of Chandragupta, who thence cherishes,
I much suspect, deep and augmenting anger.

Rak. Return, my friend, in this disguise. There dwells
At Pushpapur, the minstrel Stanakalasa;
He is with us — tell him, that Chandragupta
Should be informed, by stanzas well designed
To rouse his wrath, yet covert in expression,
Chanakya contravenes his high commands.
And spurns the king’s authority. Should aught
Ensue, despatch a courier straight.
To bring me tidings here,

Vir. It shall be done. [Exit.

Enter Attendant.

Att. Victory to your Excellency! Sakata Das sends word, these three sets of jewels are arrived for sale. Will your Excellency examine them?

Rak. (looking at them). They are jewels of great price,
Tell him to make the purchase, at what cost
The seller may demand. [Exit Attendant.
I will send a courier to Kusumapur.
Chanakya and his prince will surely sever,
And then we reach our aim. Full well I know
That Maurya, in his pride, conceives himself
Supreme o’er all the monarchs of the world.
With equal arrogance, Chanakya vaunts.
This is my deed. — I made this man a king.
The one has gratified his vowed resentment,
The other reaped the fruit of his ambition.
No mutual interest now cements their council;
No acts of friendship bind them now together;
And once a breach, however slight, be made
In their alliance, ’tis dissolved for ever.

END OF THE SECOND ACT.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Sat Feb 26, 2022 7:25 am

xxx
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Sat Feb 26, 2022 7:25 am

xxx
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Sat Feb 26, 2022 7:26 am

xxx
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Sat Feb 26, 2022 7:26 am

Geographia Nubiensis
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 2/26/22

Maurya ... it seems that Chandragupta went by that name, particularly in the west; for he is known to Arabian writers by the name of Mur, according to the Nubian geographer, who says that he was defeated and killed by Alexander; for these authors supposed that this conqueror crossed the Ganges; and it is also the opinion of some ancient historians in the west.

-- Essay III. Of the Kings of Magadha; their Chronology, by Captain Wilford, Asiatic Researches, Volume 9, 1809. pgs. 94-100.


Author: Idrīsī, Muḥammad Ibn-Muḥammad al-, Sionita, Gabriel, Hesronita, Johannes
Full title: Geographia Nubiensis, id est accuratissima totius orbis in septem climata divisi descriptio continens praesertim exactam universae Asiae et Africae rerumque in iis hactenus incognitarum explicationem. Recens ex Arabico in Latinum versa a Gabriele Simonita, Syriacarum et Arabicarum litterarum professore atque interprete regio, et Ioanne Hesronita earundem regio interprete, Maronitis
Year: 1619
Place: Paris
Publisher/Printer: Blageart, Jérôme
Era: 17th century
Form/Genre: Translation, Encyclopedic work
Discipline/Content: Geography/Cartography
Digital copies
Original: Geographia Nubiensis (MDZ)
Digital sourcebook: 726766

Description:

Around the middle of the 12th century, Muḥammad Ibn-Muḥammad al-Idrīsī, a geographer, cartographer and polymath from Ceuta near Gibraltar, composed – or rather adapted from an older work, as he declares in his preface (p. 1) – an Arabic geography which contains much information about regions hardly known to Europeans such as the inland parts of Africa and central and eastern Asia. His Book for the Pleasure of a Curious Soul (as the original title may be translated) is a companion piece to his great world map, the so-called Tabula Rogeriana. It starts from a cosmological and geographical overview and procedes to describe the surface of the earth as far as it is known to the well-travelled author. The description covers the northern hemisphere (the only part of the world which is inhabited according to al-Idrīsī) and is divided into seven bands, called climata in the Latin translation, each of which comprises regions of approximately the same latitude and is subdivided into ten parts arranged from west to east. Topics discussed include physical geography, climate, flora and fauna, cities, populace, customs, and commerce. For countries well-known to the author, the description tends to degenerate into an itinerary, as numerous settlements and the distances between them are listed, leaving little room for anything else (e.g. clima 4, part 7).

In 1592, the Arabic text was printed in Rome (modern edition: Bombaci et al. 1970–1984). A quarter of a century later, the two learned Maronites Gabriel Sionita and Johannes Hesronita, the first of which was professor of Syrian and Arabic at the Sorbonne, made the work known to the Western. At the instigation of the historian and polymath Jacques du Thou, they elaborated a Latin translation, which was published, with the help of Nicolas-Claude Fabri de Peiresc (Miller 2013, 146), in 1619 at Paris. The book's dedication to Guillaume du Vair, an educated lawyer and statesman, informs about the development history of the translation (fol. Aijv) and praises al-Idrīsī's facilis methodus (perhaps "intuitive structure", fol. Aiijv) and his style full of lepor ("charm", fol. Aiv r). The letter to the reader complains that the Arabic manuscript and the print based on it are corrupt in many places. Where emendation and translation proved impossible, the translators chose to retain the original expression in Arabic script (fol. Br; this happens above all in the European portions, e.g. clima 5, part 4). Some information on measurements of length is given and the reader is warned that Arabic has no word for "peninsula", wherefore such topographic features are rendered as insula (fol. Bv). Finally, the translators speculate about the lifetime (mid-12th century), religion (Christian) and homeland (Nubia) of al-Idrīsī, whose name they ignore (fols. Bv–Bijv). The latter two guesses are erroneous, but the philological argument made for the author’s being a Christian is interesting, while his alleged homeland earned the translation its title. Finally, the translation is introduced by a separately paginated essay about some cities and customs of the Near East and followed by an index.

The translation proper fills 278 quarto pages. Its Latin is simple and characterized by a high proportion of paratactic phrases linked by et, atque and -que. Given the predilection for hypotactic constructions in educated Latin and for parataxis in Semitic languages, this feature in all probability reflects the syntax of the original. The contrast with the elaborate periods of the dedication and the preface is telling in this respect. Some other features may be Arabisms too, for example the substitution of cum terra for terrae and of de for the expected in as well as the unconcerned word repetition in the following passage (p. 53):

Cum terra Mahra iunguntur a septentrione regiones Oman, et de regionibus Oman sunt duae urbes Tsur et Cqelhat, atque haec sita est ad oras maris salsi Persici, distantque abinvicem hae duae urbes longa statione itinere terrestri, maritimo vero minus.

"On the country of Mahra, the regions of Oman boarder at the north side, and in the regions of Oman, there are the two cities Tsur and Cqelhat, and the latter is situated at the coast of the salty Persian Gulf, and these two cities are separated from one another by a long day's journey by land, but by sea, the distance is less."


Occasionally, the translators add short explanatory marginalia. A little further on in the description of the Arabic peninsula (p. 54), for instance, the toponym Aardh is glossed as flumen ("river"), and the meaning of the place name Dhat-aliamin is explained as locus iuramenti ("place of taking an oath").

Cited in: Idrīsī, Muḥammad Ibn-Muḥammad al-; Sionita, Gabriel; Hesronita, Johannes ‎

How to cite this entry: Idrīsī, Muḥammad Ibn-Muḥammad al-; Sionita, Gabriel; Hesronita, Johannes: Geographia Nubiensis, in: Noscemus Wiki, URL: http://wiki.uibk.ac.at/noscemus/Geographia_Nubiensis (last revision: 14.07.2021).

*****************

Idrisi: Geographia Nubiensis
Paris; Hieronymus Blageart, 1619
by The Berlin Collection
Accessed: 2/26/22

Prior to the early fifteenth century, one of the few works available to Europeans which described distant lands such as Africa and the Atlantic islands was the treatise compiled by the noted Arab geographer Idrisi (ca. 1099-1154). Employed by Roger II of Sicily (1101-1154) as court geographer, Idrisi sent emissaries to observe and describe various countries and regions, including Scandinavia, Germany, France, Italy, Syria, and Egypt. Idrisi organized this material into his geography which he entitled Al Rojari (1154) in memory of his patron. The title Geographia Nubiensis comes from a misreading of a passage relating to Nubia and the river Nile by the two Maronite scholars who issued this first Latin edition in 1619. In composing his treatise, Idrisi relied heavily upon Arabic versions of Ptolemy's Geography, not generally available in Europe until Greek and Latin manuscript versions began to circulate in the fifteenth century.

************************

Idrisi
by Marina A. Tolmacheva
World History.Biz
Accessed: 2/26/22

Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Idris al-‘Ala bi-Amr Allah (ca. AH 493-560/1100-1165 CE) was the greatest medieval geographer. As a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad, this Muslim Arab scholar was titled al-Sharif al-Idrisi, but in the west he was known for a long time as Geographus Nubiensis, the Nubian Geographer. Born in Morocco and educated in Cordoba, he worked in Palermo at the court of the Norman king Roger II. The most important book he produced is a world geography in 1154, Nuzhat al-mushtaq fi ikhtiraq al-afaq (Entertainment for One Desiring to Travel Far); it is also called Kitab Rujjar (Book of Roger). He later wrote a shorter geography, known under a variety of Arabic titles and usually referred to as ‘‘The Little Idrisi.’’ Both are extensively illustrated with maps; the maps in Nuzhat al-mushtaq are oriented to the South, the maps in the latter book are smaller and often oriented to the east.

Al-Idrisi traveled in Asia Minor, Europe, and North Africa, and in Sicily he was able to consult both European and Islamic sources procured from books and travel reports. Thus his Geography is a synthesis of information and cartographic traditions from both Islamic and European cultures; it is unsurpassed in narrative geography and maps of the Middle Ages. Because the work is a compilation and the data occasionally anachronistic, al-Idrisi’s work sometimes has been judged unoriginal. However, he introduced a new type of map that strongly impacted later cosmographers and thinkers, such as Ibn Khaldun, and used a projection that remains unexplained. Al-Idrisi produced more regional maps of the world than any other medieval cartographer, and his description of certain regions, such as the Balkans or northern Europe, is remarkably precise. The parts dealing with Africa remained an important source for Islamic and European cosmographers into the seventeenth century. Al-Idrisi’s distinctive cartography and narrative method make it possible to identify later imitations as works in ‘‘The Idrisi School.’’ Medieval European Mediterranean cartographers may have had some knowledge of his maps. The book Nuzhat al-mushtaq became the first secular Arabic work printed in Europe (Rome, 1592); a Latin translation was published in Paris in 1619.

Al-Idrisi credited his patron Roger with the construction of a large world map, but the work was done by al-Idrisi. The text is a detailed description of the map, engraved on a silver disk and based on the Arabic version of Marinus’s map reportedly created under the caliph al-Ma’mun (813-833). The silver prototype was lost, but the book contains a round, schematic map of the world and seventy rectangular maps of the seventy parts into which al-Idrisi had divided the world. Ten manuscripts of Nuzhat al-mushtaq survive, eight of them with maps; there is no complete good translation.

The system developed by al-Idrisi used the Ptolemaic foundation adopted by the early Islamic scholars, whereby the round earth is divided into quarters and only the Inhabited Quarter is described. It is astronomically divided into seven latitudinal belts (“climates”), leaving off the extreme north and equatorial south. Although familiar with coordinates, al-Idrisi did not use them; in addition to the parallel boundaries of the climates, he introduced, instead of meridians, ten longitudinal divisions. Thus the map and the narrative became divided into seventy sections. The numbering of climates is from south to north, the numbers of sections go west to east, again showing Greek influence. The text follows this arrangement after a brief general introduction, describing important geographical features of each section: cities, mountains, rivers, seas, islands, and so on, progressing eastward. Al-Idrisi names the most toponyms since Ptolemy, expanding and updating the medieval Arabic geographical inventory. He is academically unbiased, and all locations get more or less equal attention; he describes many identifiable locations for the first time in the geographical literature. Only ten of al-Idrisi’s sources are named, and contemporary information gets indiscriminately mixed with data compiled from the Greek, Latin, and earlier Islamic sources.

The narrative follows itineraries, connected by travel distances expressed in miles (mil), units (far-sakh) (three miles), caravan stages (marhala), day marches, or days of sailing. The earth is depicted as surrounded by the Encircling Sea, al-Bahr al-Muhit (the Greek Ocean). Africa is extended eastward to form the southern coast of the Indian ocean, which, however, remains open in the Far East. The southern limit of the inhabited world is north of the equator in Nuzhat al-mushtaq, but south of the equator in The Little Idrisi. The southern portion of the round world map is filled with the African landmass, not shown on sectional maps. The western limit is the prime meridian drawn through the westernmost part of Africa, but the Fortunate Isles in the Atlantic are included. The easternmost country is Sila (Korea), supposedly at 180°E. The northern limit is at the Polar Circle (64°N.). The color-coded maps demonstrate a thoughtful and somewhat artistic approach, but neither the degrees nor itineraries are drawn on them, and their practical value is doubtful. A pieced-together Latin version of this map was produced in Paris by Petrus Bertius in the 1620s.

Image
Al-Idrisi (twelfth century). Geographic Atlas of the Indian Ocean. Eleventh to twelfth century. Credit: Bridgeman-Giraudon/ Art Resource, NY. National Library (Dar-al-Kutub), Cairo, Egypt.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:39 am

Kingdom of Commagene
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/2/22

Image
Commagene
Κομμαγηνή
163 BC – 72 AD
Map showing Commagene (light pink on the left) in 50 AD; nearby are Armenia, Sophene, Osrhoene, and the Roman and Parthian Empires
Capital: Samosata
Common languages: Greek (official)[1]; Persian (ruling dynasty)[2]; Local Aramaic language
Religion: Greco-Iranian religious syncretism[3]
Government: Monarchy
King
• 163–130 BC: Ptolemaeus
• 38–72 AD: Antiochus IV
Historical era: Hellenistic Age
• Established: 163 BC
• Disestablished: 72 AD
Preceded by: Kingdom of Sophene
Succeeded by: Roman Empire
Today part of: Turkey

Image
Anatolia in the early 1st century AD with Commagene as a Roman client state

Commagene (Greek: Κομμαγηνή) was an ancient Greco-Iranian kingdom ruled by a Hellenized branch of the Iranian Orontid dynasty that had ruled over Armenia.[4] The kingdom was located in and around the ancient city of Samosata, which served as its capital. The Iron Age name of Samosata, Kummuh, probably gives its name to Commagene.[5]

Image
Coin of Hadrian [Reign: 11 August 117–10 July 138] from Samosata

Commagene has been characterized as a "buffer state" between Armenia, Parthia, Syria, and Rome;[6] culturally, it was correspondingly mixed.[7][8] The kings of the Kingdom of Commagene claimed descent from Orontes with Darius I of Persia as their ancestor, by his marriage to Rhodogune, daughter of Artaxerxes II who had a family descent from king Darius I.[9][10] The territory of Commagene corresponded roughly to the modern Turkish provinces of Adıyaman and northern Antep.[11]

Little is known of the region of Commagene prior to the beginning of the 2nd century BC. However, it seems that, from what little evidence remains, Commagene formed part of a larger state that also included the Kingdom of Sophene. This situation lasted until c. 163 BC, when the local satrap, Ptolemaeus of Commagene, established himself as an independent ruler following the death of the Seleucid king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes.[12]

The Kingdom of Commagene maintained its independence until 17 AD, when it was made a Roman province by Emperor Tiberius. It re-emerged as an independent kingdom when Antiochus IV of Commagene was reinstated to the throne by order of Caligula, then deprived of it by that same emperor, then restored to it a couple of years later by his successor, Claudius. The re-emergent state lasted until 72 AD, when the Emperor Vespasian finally and definitively made it part of the Roman Empire.[13]

One of the kingdom's most lasting visible remains is the archaeological site on Mount Nemrut, a sanctuary dedicated by King Antiochus Theos to a number of syncretistic Graeco-Iranian deities as well as to himself and the deified land of Commagene.
[14] It is now a World Heritage Site.[15]

Image
West Terrace of Mount Nemrut

Image
West Terrace on Mount Nemrut

Image
Mount Nemrut

Image
West Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the head of King Antiochus

Image
West Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the heads of głowy Heracles and an Eagle

Image
East Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the head of the goddess of Commagene

Image
East Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the head of King Antiochus

Image
The view from Mount Nemrut in the direction of Euphrates

Image
East Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the location of the monumental statues

Image
East Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the head of an Eagle

Image
West Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the goddess of Commagene still has her head on the shoulders - from Humann, Carl i Puchstein, Otto, "Reisen in Kleinasien und Nordsyrien: ausgeführt im Auftrage der Königlichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften", Public Domain

Image
East Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the head of Apollo

Image
East Terrace on Mount Nemrut, Altar/Stepped Piramid

Image
West Terrace on Mount Nemrut, the head of Zeus

Image
Reliefs of dexiosis - Antiochus shaking hands with Zeus and Heracles, West Terrace on Mount Nemrut - from Humann, Carl i Puchstein, Otto, "Reisen in Kleinasien und Nordsyrien: ausgeführt im Auftrage der Königlichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften", Public Domain

Image
Reliefs of dexiosis - Antiochus shaking hands with Zeus and Heracles, West Terrace on Mount Nemrut - from Humann, Carl i Puchstein, Otto, "Reisen in Kleinasien und Nordsyrien: ausgeführt im Auftrage der Königlichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften", Public Domain

Image
West Terrace on Mount Nemrut, ancestor stele of King Antiochus

Image
Relief of the "Lion Horoscope" from West Terrace on Mount Nemrut - from Humann, Carl i Puchstein, Otto, "Reisen in Kleinasien und Nordsyrien: ausgeführt im Auftrage der Königlichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften", Public Domain

Image
North Terrace on Mount Nemrut


Cultural identity

Image
Monumental head of the goddess Commagene (Tyche-Bakht) from Mount Nemrut

Image
Antiochus I of Commagene [70–31 BC], shaking hands with Herakles.

The cultural identity of the Kingdom of Commagene has been variously characterized. Pierre Merlat suggests that the Commagenian city of Doliche, like others in its vicinity, was "half Iranianized and half Hellenized".[8] David M. Lang describes Commagene as "a former Armenian satellite kingdom",[7] while Blömer and Winter call it a "Hellenistic kingdom".[16] Millar suggests that a local dialect of Aramaic might have been spoken there,[17] Fergus Millar considers that, "in some parts of the Euphrates region, such as Commagene, nothing approaching an answer to questions about local culture is possible."[18]

While the language used on public monuments was typically Greek, Commagene's rulers made no secret of their Persian affinities. The kings of Commagene claimed descent from the Orontid Dynasty and would therefore have been related to the family that founded the Kingdom of Armenia;[19] while Sartre states the accuracy of these claims is uncertain.[12] At Antiochus Theos' sanctuary at Mount Nemrut, the king erected monumental statues of deities with mixed Greek and Iranian names, such as Zeus-Oromasdes, while celebrating his own descent from the royal families of Persia and Armenia in a Greek-language inscription.[7]

The Commagenean rulers had Iranian and Greek names (Antiochus, Samos, Mithridates).
[20][21] The various Iranian onomasticons located in Commagene demonstrate the extensive Iranization in the region.[22] Over the course of the first centuries BC and AD, the names given on a tomb at Sofraz Köy show a mix of "typical Hellenistic dynastic names with an early introduction of Latin personal names."[23] Lang notes the vitality of Graeco-Roman culture in Commagene.[6]

While few things about his origins are known with certainty, 2nd-century Attic Greek poet Lucian of Samosata claimed to have been born in Samosata in the former kingdom of Commagene, and described himself in one satirical work as "an Assyrian".[17] Despite writing well after the Roman conquest of Commagene, Lucian claimed to be "still barbarous in speech and almost wearing a jacket (kandys) in the Assyrian style". This has been taken as a possible, but not definitive, allusion to the possibility that his native language was an Aramaic dialect.[24]

History

See also: Royal Family of Commagene

Image
Mithras-Helios, in Phrygian cap with solar rays, with Antiochus I of Commagene [70–31 BC]. (Mt Nemrut, 1st century BC)

Commagene was originally a small Syro-Hittite kingdom,[25] located in modern south-central Turkey, with its capital at Samosata (modern Samsat, near the Euphrates). It was first mentioned in Assyrian texts as Kummuhu, which was normally an ally of Assyria, but eventually annexed as a province in 708 BC under Sargon II. The Achaemenid Empire then conquered Commagene in the 6th century BC and Alexander the Great conquered the territory in the 4th century BC. After the breakup of the Empire of Alexander the Great, the region became part of the Hellenistic Seleucids, and Commagene emerged in about 163 BC as a state and province in the Greco-Syrian Seleucid Empire. Perhaps Commagene was part of the kingdom of Armenia in the early Hellenistic period, and was possibly annexed to the Seleucid kingdom soon after Armenia's conquest[26]

The Hellenistic kingdom of Commagene, bounded by Cilicia on the west and Cappadocia on the north, arose in 162 BC when its governor, Ptolemy, a satrap of the disintegrating Seleucid Empire, declared himself independent. Ptolemy's dynasty was related to the Parthian kings, but his descendant Mithridates I Callinicus (109 BC–70 BC) embraced Hellenistic culture and married the Syrian Greek Princess Laodice VII Thea. His dynasty could thus claim ties with both Alexander the Great and the Persian kings. This marriage may also have been part of a peace treaty between Commagene and the Seleucid Empire. From this point on, the kingdom of Commagene became more Greek than Persian. With Sophene, it was to serve as an important centre for the transmission of Hellenistic and Roman culture in the region.[6] Details are sketchy, but Mithridates Callinicus is thought have accepted Armenian suzerainty during the reign of Tigranes II the Great.[27]

Mithridates and Laodice's son was King Antiochus I Theos of Commagene (reigned 70 –38 BC). Antiochus was an ally of the Roman general Pompey during the latter's campaigns against Mithridates VI of Pontus in 64 BC. Thanks to his diplomatic skills, Antiochus was able to keep Commagene independent from the Romans. In 17 when Antiochus III of Commagene died, Emperor Tiberius annexed Commagene to the province of Syria. According to Josephus, this move was supported by the local nobility but opposed by the mass of the common people, who preferred to remain under their kings as before;[18] Tacitus, on the other hand, states that "most preferred Roman, but others royal rule".[28]

In 38 AD, Caligula reinstated Antiochus III's son Antiochus IV[28] and also gave him the wild areas of Cilicia to govern.[29] Antiochus IV was the only client king of Commagene under the Roman Empire. Deposed by Caligula and restored again upon Claudius' accession in 41, Antiochus reigned until 72, when Emperor Vespasian deposed the dynasty and definitively re-annexed the territory to Syria, acting on allegations "that Antiochus was about to revolt from the Romans... reported by the Governor Caesennius Paetus".[30] The Legio VI Ferrata, which Paetus led into Commagene, was not resisted by the populace; a day-long battle with Antiochus' sons Epiphanes and Callinicus ended in a draw, and Antiochus surrendered.[31] The Legio III Gallica would occupy the area by 73 AD.[31] A 1st-century letter in Syriac by Mara Bar Serapion describes refugees fleeing the Romans across the Euphrates and bemoans the Romans' refusal to let the refugees return;[32] this might describe the Roman takeover of either 18 or 72.[33] The descendants of Antiochus IV lived prosperously and in distinction in Anatolia, Greece, Italy, and the Middle East. As a testament to the descendants of Antiochus IV, the citizens of Athens erected a funeral monument in honor of his grandson Philopappos, who was a benefactor of the city, upon his death in 116. Another descendant of Antiochus IV was the historian Gaius Asinius Quadratus, who lived in the 3rd century.

Geography

Commagene extended from the right bank of the Euphrates to the Taurus[34] and Amanus Mountains. Strabo, who counts Commagene as part of Syria,[35] notes the kingdom's fertility.[36] Its capital and chief city was Samosata (now submerged under Atatürk Reservoir).

The boundaries of Commagene fluctuated over time. Under Antiochus Theos, the Kingdom of Commagene controlled a particularly large area.[16] Doliche was under Commagenian rule "for about 35 years";[16] after being governed by Antiochus Theos, it might have been incorporated into the Roman province of Syria as early as 31 BC.[23] Germanicea declared itself a Commagenian city in Roman times, although originally it was not.[16] On the other hand, Zeugma, while ruled for a time by Commagene, was popularly and traditionally considered to belong to the region of Cyrrhestica;[16] Strabo says it had been assigned to Commagene by Pompey.[37]

Archaeological remains

Image
Eagle-topped column from the royal burial mound at Karakuş

The limestone propaganda-like statues and reliefs built during Antiochus Theos' reign reflect the Parthian influence in their sculpture.[38]

When the Romans conquered Commagene, the great royal sanctuary at Mount Nemrut was abandoned. The Romans looted the burial tumuli of their goods and the Legio XVI Flavia Firma built and dedicated a bridge. The surrounding thick forests were cut down and cleared by the Romans for wood, timber and charcoal, causing much erosion to the area.

Another important archaeological site dating to the Kingdom of Commagene is the sanctuary of Zeus Soter at Damlıca, dedicated in the time of Mithridates II.[39]

In Commagene, there is a column topped by an eagle, which has earned the mound the name Karakuş, or Black Bird. An inscription there indicates the presence of a royal tomb[40] that housed three women. The vault of that tomb, however, has also been looted. The main excavations on the site were carried out by Friedrich Karl Dörner of the University of Münster. Another royal burial site is at Arsameia, which also served as a residence of the kings of Commagene.[41]

Many of the ancient artifacts from the Kingdom of Commagene are on display at the Adıyaman Museum.[42]

Image
Votive relief of Jupiter Dolichenus in the Adıyaman Archaeological Museum

Image
Stele of the Hittite weather god. Adiyaman Archaeological Museum.


Image
Mount Nemrut National Park

Image
Pirin Ruins (Pirin Ruins is an extensive area of rock tombs with a deep well with access via a set of steep steps that takes you right down to the tombs.)

Image
Kahta Village at the foot of Mount Nemrut.

Image
Perrhe was an ancient city in the kingdom of Commagene.

Image
Necropolis of Perrhe

Image
Catacombs with burial chambers and pilasters

Image
Adıyaman Archaeological Museum

Image
Arsemia Ören Ruins (The summer capital of the Commagene Kingdom. Built by King Antiochus I in honor of his father King Mithridates I, its mountain location became an important military stronghold. A relief dating back to 50 B.C. depicts a handshake between King Mithradates and Hercules.)

Image
Kraalcus Tumulus. (The final resting place of the Commagene Royal Family, the four Doric columns surrounding the site still stand, but some of the tops of the columns are missing.)


References

1. Shayegan 2016, p. 13.
2. Ball 2002, p. 436.
3. Shayegan 2016, p. 13; Ball 2002, p. 436; Strootman 2020, p. 214
4. Canepa 2010, p. 13; Garsoian 2005; Erskine, Llewellyn-Jones & Wallace 2017, p. 75; Canepa 2015, p. 80; Sartre 2005, p. 23; Widengren 1986, pp. 135–136; Merz & Tieleman 2012, p. 68; Ball 2002, p. 436; Shayegan 2016, pp. 8, 13; Strootman 2020, p. 205; Facella 2021; Michels 2021, p. 485; Toumanoff 1963, p. 278; Gaggero 2016, p. 79; Allsen 2011, p. 37; Olbrycht 2021, p. 38; Drower et al. 2021; Ferguson 2021, p. 170; Boyce & Grenet 1991, p. 309; Vlassopoulos 2013, p. 312; Crone 2012, p. 351; Graf 2019, p. III; Jacobs & Rollinger 2021, p. 1660; Russell 1986, pp. 438–444; Spawforth 2016; Sherwin-White & Kuhrt 1993, p. 193; Campbell 2015, p. 27
5. Blömer & Winter (2011), p. 142.
6. Lang 1983, p. 510.
7. Lang 1983, p. 535.
8. Pierre Merlat (1960). "Le site de Doliché". Jupiter Dolichenus : Essai d'interprétation et de synthèse. Presses Universitaires de France. p. 3. une de ces nombreuses localités mi-iranisées, mi-hellénisées d'Asie Mineure et de Syrie du Nord.
9. Cook, J.M. (1993). The Persian Empire (Repr. ed.). New York: Barns & Noble Books. pp. 170, 173, 193, 212, 213, 216, 217, 221–223, 257, 263. ISBN 978-1-56619-115-9.
10. Hovannisian, Richard G. (1997). The Armenian People from Ancient to Modern Times - 2 Vols. St. Martin's Press, New York.
11. Blömer & Winter (2011), p. 13.
12. Sartre, M., The Middle East under Rome (2007), p. 23
13. Hazel, J. (2002). Who's Who in the Roman World. Psychology Press. p. 13. ISBN 9780415291620. Retrieved 20 February 2014.
14. Blömer & Winter (2011), pp. 10–11.
15. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. "Nemrut Dağ". Retrieved 12 October 2017.
16. Blömer & Winter (2011), p. 19.
17. Millar (1993), p. 454.
18. Millar (1993), p. 452.
19. Canepa 2010, p. 13; Garsoian 2005; Erskine, Llewellyn-Jones & Wallace 2017, p. 75; Canepa 2015, p. 80; Sartre 2005, p. 23; Widengren 1986, pp. 135–136; Merz & Tieleman 2012, p. 68; Ball 2002, p. 436; Shayegan 2016, pp. 8, 13; Strootman 2020, p. 205
20. Curtis & Stewart 2007, p. 15.
21. Cameron 2018, pp. 16–17.
22. Jacobs & Rollinger 2021, p. 739.
23. Millar (1993), p. 453.
24. Millar (1993), pp. 453, 456.
25. Trevor Bryce (2012). The World of the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 110–114, 304. ISBN 978-0-19-921872-1.
26. Butcher, Kevin (2004). Coinage in Roman Syria: Northern Syria, 64 BC-AD 253. Royal Numismatic Society. p. 454. ISBN 0901405582.
Commagene was a district separate from Seleucis (Strabo 16.2.2), bordering on Cilicia and Cappadocia. Its natural borders were the Taurus on the north and the Euphrates to the east. It occurs in Assyrian and Hittite records as Kummuhu. It was perhaps part of the kingdom of Armenia in the early Hellenistic period, and was possibly annexed to the Seleucid kingdom soon after Armenia's conquest and partition into the kingdoms of Armenia and Sophene under Antiochus III
27. Blömer & Winter (2011), pp. 24–25.
28. Millar (1993), p. 53.
29. Millar (1993), p. 59.
30. Ewald, Heinrich (1886). The history of Israel, Volume 8. Longmans, Green, & Co. p. 23.
31. Millar (1993), p. 82.
32. Millar (1993), pp. 460–462.
33. Anna F. C. Collar (2012). "Commagene, Communication and the Cult of Jupiter Dolichenus". In Michael Blömer; Engelbert Winter (eds.). Iuppiter Dolichenus: Vom Lokalkult zur Reichsreligion. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. pp. 102–103. ISBN 978-3-16-151797-6.
34. Blömer & Winter (2011), p. 20.
35. Strabo XVI.2.2
36. Strabo XVI.2, cited in Millar (1993), p. 53
37. Strabo XVI.2.3
38. Colledge 1979, p. 229.
39. Blömer & Winter (2011), p. 150-155.
40. Blömer & Winter (2011), pp. 96–97.
41. "Yeni Kale / Eski Kâhta - Türkei" (in German). 2011. Archived from the original on 23 September 2015. Retrieved 25 July 2015.
42. Blömer & Winter (2011), p. 124.

Sources

• Allsen, Thomas T. (2011). The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History. University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 37. ISBN 978-0812201079.
• Ball, Warwick (2002). Rome in the East: The Transformation of an Empire. Routledge. ISBN 9781134823871.
• Blömer, Michael; Winter, Engelbert (2011). Commagene: The Land of the Gods between the Taurus and the Euphrates. Homer Kitabevi. ISBN 978-9944-483-35-3.
• Boyce, Mary; Grenet, Frantz (1991). Beck, Roger (ed.). A History of Zoroastrianism, Zoroastrianism under Macedonian and Roman Rule. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 978-9004293915.
• Cameron, Hamish (2018). Making Mesopotamia: Geography and Empire in a Romano-Iranian Borderland. Brill. ISBN 978-9004388628.
• Canepa, Matthew (2010). "Achaemenid and Seleukid Royal Funerary Practices and Middle Iranian Kingship". In Börm, H.; Wiesehöfer, J. (eds.). Commutatio et Contentio. Studies in the Late Roman, Sasanian, and Early Islamic Near East in Memory of Zeev Rubin. Düsseldorf. pp. 1–21.
• Canepa, Matthew P. (2015). "Dynastic Sanctuaries and the Transformation of Iranian Kingship between Alexander and Islam". In Babaie, Sussan; Grigor, Talinn (eds.). Persian Kingship and Architecture: Strategies of Power in Iran from the Achaemenids to the Pahlavis. I.B.Tauris. pp. 1–288. ISBN 9780857734778.
• Canepa, Matthew (2021). "Commagene Before and Beyond Antiochos I". Common Dwelling Place of all the Gods: Commagene in its Local, Regional, and Global Context. Franz Steiner Verlag. pp. 71–103. ISBN 978-3515129251.
• Colledge, Malcolm A.R. (1979). "Sculptors' Stone-Carving Techniques in Seleucid and Parthian Iran, and Their Place in the "Parthian" Cultural Milieu: Some Preliminary Observations". East and West. Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO). 29, No. 1/4 (December): 221-240.
• Drower, M; Grey, E.; Sherwin-White, S.; Wiesehöfer, J. (2021). "Armenia". Oxford Classical Dictionary. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.777. ISBN 978-0-19-938113-5.
• Campbell, Leroy A. (2015). Mithraic iconography and ideology. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-29617-6.
• Crone, Patricia (2012). The Nativist Prophets of Early Islamic Iran: Rural Revolt and Local Zoroastrianism. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1107642386.
• Curtis, Vesta Sarkhosh; Stewart, Sarah, eds. (2007), The Age of the Parthians, Ideas of Iran, vol. 2, London: I. B. Tauris
• Erskine, Andrew; Llewellyn-Jones, Lloyd; Wallace, Shane (2017). The Hellenistic Court: Monarchic Power and Elite Society from Alexander to Cleopatra. The Classical Press of Wales. ISBN 978-1910589625. Another self-designated descendant from a member of one of the seven great house, Hydarnes, was the Orontid Dynasty of Armenia
• Facella, Margherita (2021). "Orontids". In Yarshater, Ehsan (ed.). Encyclopædia Iranica, Online Edition. New York: Encyclopædia Iranica Foundation.
• Ferguson, John (2021). Among the Gods: An Archaeological Exploration of Ancient Greek Religion. Routledge. ISBN 978-0367750633.
• Gaggero, Gianfranco (2016). "Armenians in Xenophon". Greek Texts and Armenian Traditions: An Interdisciplinary Approach. De Gruyter. The above mentioned Orontids..[..]..but also because the two satraps who were contemporaries of Xenophon's are explicitly stated to be Persian.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Thu Mar 03, 2022 5:18 am

Berossus
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/2/22

Highlights:

Versions of two excerpts of his writings survive, at several removes from the original. Using ancient Babylonian records and texts that are now lost, Berossus published the Babyloniaca (hereafter, History of Babylonia) in three books some time around 290–278 BC, by the patronage of the Macedonian/Seleucid king Antiochus I Soter (during the third year of his reign, according to Diodorus Siculus [Failed verification]). Certain astrological fragments recorded by Pliny the Elder, Censorinus, Flavius Josephus, and Marcus Vitruvius Pollio are also attributed to Berossus, but are of unknown provenance, or indeed are uncertain as to where they might fit into his History. Vitruvius credits him with the invention of the semi-circular sundial hollowed out of a cubical block....

A separate work, Procreatio, is attributed to him by the Latin commentaries on Aratus, Commentariorium in Aratum Reliquiae, but there is no proof of this connection....

According to Vitruvius's work de Architectura, he relocated eventually to the island of Kos off the coast of Asia Minor and established a school of astrology there by the patronage of the king of Egypt. However, scholars have questioned whether it would have been possible to work under the Seleucids and then relocate to a region experiencing Ptolemaic control late in life. It is not known when he died.

Versions at several removes of the remains of Berossos' lost Babyloniaca are given by two later Greek epitomes that were used by the Christian Eusebius of Caesarea for his Chronological Canons, the Greek manuscripts of which have been lost, but which can be largely recovered by the Latin translation and continuation of Jerome and a surviving Armenian translation.... Pure history writing per se was not a Babylonian concern, and Josephus testifies to Berossus' reputation as an astrologer. The excerpts quoted recount mythology and history that relate to Old Testament concerns.... Lambert finds some statements in the Latin writers so clearly erroneous that it renders doubtful whether the writers had first-hand knowledge of Berossus' text.

Berossus' work was not popular during the Hellenistic period. The usual account of Mesopotamian history was Ctesias of Cnidus's Persica, while most of the value of Berossus was considered to be his astrological writings. Most pagan writers probably never read the History directly, and seem to have been dependent on Posidonius of Apamea (135–50 BC), who cited Berossos in his works....

Jewish and Christian references to Berossus probably had a different source, either Alexander Polyhistor (c. 65 BC) or Juba II of Mauretania (c. 50 BC–20 AD).... Josephus' records of Berossus include some of the only extant narrative material, but he is probably dependent on Alexander Polyhistor, even if he did give the impression that he had direct access to Berossus....

Like Poseidonius', neither Alexander's nor Juba's works have survived. However, the material in Berossus was recorded by Abydenus (c. 200 BC) and Sextus Julius Africanus (early 3rd century AD). Both their works are also lost...

The Greek text of the Chronicon is also now lost to us but there is an ancient Armenian translation (500–800 AD) of it, and portions are quoted in Georgius Syncellus's Ecloga Chronographica (c. 800–810 AD). Nothing of Berossus survives in Jerome's Latin translation of Eusebius. Eusebius' other mentions of Berossus in Praeparatio Evangelica are derived from Josephus, Tatianus, and another inconsequential source... what little of Berossus remains is very fragmentary and indirect. The most direct source of material on Berossus is Josephus, received from Alexander Polyhistor. Most of the names in his king-lists and most of the potential narrative content have been lost or completely mangled as a result. Only Eusebius and Josephus preserve narrative material, and both had agendas. Eusebius was looking to construct a consistent chronology across different cultures, while Josephus was attempting to refute the charges that there was a civilization older than that of the Jews. However, the ten ante-diluvian kings were preserved by Christian apologists interested in how the long lifespans of the kings were similar to the long lifespans of the ante-diluvian ancestors in the story of Genesis....

What is clear is that the form of writing he used was dissimilar to actual Babylonian literature, writing as he did in Greek.

Book 1 fragments are preserved in Eusebius and Syncellus above, and describe the Babylonian creation account and establishment of order, including the defeat of Thalatth (Tiamat) by Bel (Marduk). According to him, all knowledge was revealed to humans by the sea monster Oannes after the Creation...

Book 2 describes the history of the Babylonian kings from Alulim down to Nabonassar (747–734 BC). Eusebius reports that Apollodorus reports that Berossus recounts 432,000 years from the first king Aloros (Alulim) to the tenth king Xisouthros and the Babylonian Flood. From Berossus' genealogy, it is clear he had access to king-lists in compiling this section of History, particularly in the kings before the Flood, and from the 7th century BC with Senakheirimos (Sennacherib, who ruled both Assyria and Babylon). His account of the Flood (preserved in Syncellus) is extremely similar to versions of the Epic of Gilgamesh that we have presently. However, in Gilgamesh, the main protagonist is Utnapishtim, while for Berossus, Xisouthros is probably a Greek transliteration of Ziusudra, the protagonist of the Sumerian version of the Flood.

Perhaps what Berossus omits to mention is also noteworthy. Much information on Sargon (c. 2300 BC) would have been available during his time (e.g., a birth legend preserved at El-Amarna and in an Assyrian fragment from 8th century BC, and two Neo-Babylonian fragments), but these were not mentioned. Similarly, the great Babylonian king Hammurabi (ca. 1750 BC) merits only passing mention. He did, however, mention that the queen Semiramis (probably Sammuramat, wife of Samshi-Adad V, 824–811 BC) was Assyrian....

Book 3 relates the history of Babylon from Nabonassar to Antiochus I (presumably). Again, it is likely that he used king-lists, though it is not known which ones he used.... A large part of his history around the time of Naboukhodonosoros (Nebuchadnezzar II, 604–562 BC) and Nabonnedos (Nabonidus, 556–539 BC) survives. Here we see his interpretation of history for the first time, moralising about the success and failure of kings based on their moral conduct.... and differs from the rationalistic accounts of other Greek historians like Thucydides.....

he furnished details of his own life within his histories, which contrasted with the Mesopotamian tradition of anonymous scribes. Elsewhere, he included a geographical description of Babylonia, similar to that found in Herodotus (on Egypt), and used Greek classifications....

he constructed a narrative from Creation to his present, again similar to Herodotus or the Hebrew Bible. Within this construction, the sacred myths blended with history....

During his own time and later, however, the History of Babylonia was not distributed widely.... his material did not include as much narrative, especially of periods with which he was not familiar, even when potential sources for stories were available.

What is left of Berossus' writings is useless for the reconstruction of Mesopotamian history. Of greater interest to scholars is his historiography, using as it did both Greek and Mesopotamian methods. The affinities between it and Hesiod, Herodotus, Manethon, and the Hebrew Bible (specifically, the Torah and Deuteronomistic History)...

Each begins with a fantastic creation story, followed by a mythical ancestral period, and then finally accounts of recent kings who seem to be historical, with no demarcations in between....

In 1498, Annius of Viterbo (an official of Pope Alexander VI) claimed to have discovered lost books of Berossus. These were in fact an elaborate forgery. However, they greatly influenced Renaissance ways of thinking about population and migration, because Annius provided a list of kings from Japhet onwards, filling a historical gap following the Biblical account of the Flood. Annius also introduced characters from classical sources into the biblical framework, publishing his account as Commentaria super opera diversorum auctorum de antiquitatibus loquentium (Commentaries on the Works of Various Authors Discussing Antiquity). One consequence was sophisticated theories about Celtic races with Druid priests in Western Europe.


-- Berossus, by Wikipedia


Josephus, who seems to have been a person of extensive knowledge, and versed in the histories of nations, says that this great occurrence [The Great Flood] was to be met with in the writings of all persons who treated of the first ages. He mentions Berosus of Chaldea, Hieronymus of Egypt, who wrote concerning the antiquities of Phenicia; also Mnaseas, Abydenus, Melon, and Nicolaus Damascenus, as writers by whom it was recorded: and adds that it was taken notice of by many others....

Most of the authors, who have transmitted to us these accounts, at the same time inform us, that the remains of the ark were in their days to be seen upon one of the mountains of Armenia. Abydenus particularly says in confirmation of this opinion, that the people of the country used to get some small pieces of the wood, which they carried about by way of amulet. And Berosus mentions, that they scraped off the asphaltus, with which it had been covered, and used it in like manner for a charm. And this is so far consonant to truth, as there was originally about the ark some ingredient of this nature. For when it was completed by Noah, he was ordered finally to secure it both within and without with pitch or bitumen....

Noah was represented, as we may infer from Berosus, under the semblance of a fish by the Babylonians: and those representations of fishes in the sphere probably related to him, and his sons.
The reasons given for their being placed there were, that Venus, when she fled from Typhon, took the form of a fish; and that the fish, styled Notius, saved Isis in some great extremity: for which reason Venus placed the fish Notius and his sons among the stars....

The place where mankind first resided, was undoubtedly the region of the Minyae, at the bottom of Mount Baris, or Luban, which was the Ararat of Moses. Here I imagine, that the Patriarch resided; and Berosus mentions, that in this place he gave instructions to his children, and vanished from the sight of men. But the sacred writings are upon this head silent: they only mention his planting the vine, and seemingly taking up his abode for a long time upon the spot. Indeed, they do not afford us any reason to infer that he ever departed from it. The very plantation of the vine seems to imply a purpose of residence. Not a word is said of the Patriarch's ever quitting the place; nor of any of his sons departing from it, till the general migration. Many of the fathers were of opinion, that they did not for some ages quit this region, According to Epiphanius, they remained in the vicinity of Ararat for five generations, during the space of six hundred and fifty-nine years....

During the residence of mankind in these parts, we may imagine, that there was a season of great happiness. They for a long time lived under the mild rule of the great Patriarch, before laws were enacted or penalties known. When they multiplied, and were become very numerous, it pleased God to allot to the various families different regions, to which they were to retire: and they accordingly, in the days of Peleg, did remove, and betake themselves to their different departments. But the sons of Chus would not obey. They went off under the conduct of the archrebel Nimrod; and seem to have been for a long time in a roving state; but at last they arrived at the plains of Shinar. These they found occupied by Assur and his sons: for he had been placed there by divine appointment. But they ejected him, and seized upon his dominions; which they immediately fortified with cities, and laid the foundation of a great monarchy. Their leader is often mentioned by the Gentile writers, who call him Belus. He was a person of great impiety; who finding, that the earth had been divided among the sons of men by a divine decree, thought proper to counteract the ordinance of God, and to make a different distribution...

In the beginning of this history it is said, that they journeyed from the east, when they came to the land of Shinar. This was the latter part of their rout: and the reason of their coming in this direction may, I think, be plainly shewn. The Ark, according to the best accounts, both sacred and profane, rested upon a mountain of Armenia, called Minyas, Baris, Lubar, and Ararat. Many families of the emigrants went probably directly east or west, in consequence of the situation to which they were appointed. But those who were destined to the southern parts of the great continents, which they were to inhabit, could not so easily and uniformly proceed; there being but few outlets to their place of destination. For the high Tauric ridge and the Gordyean mountains came between, and intercepted their due course. How difficult these mountains were, even in later times, to be passed may be known from the retreat of the ten thousand Greeks, who had served under Cyrus the younger. They came from these very plains of Shinar; and passing to the east of the Tigris, they arrived at these mountains, which with great peril they got over. But in the times of which we are treating, they must have been still more difficult to be surmounted: for after the deluge, the hollows and valleys between these hills, and all other mountainous places, must have been full of slime and mud; and for a great while have abounded with stagnant waters. We know from ancient history, that it was a long time before passages were opened, and roads made through places of this nature. I should therefore think, that mankind must necessarily for some ages have remained near the place of descent, from which they did not depart till the time of the general migration. Armenia is in great measure bounded either by the Pontic sea, or by mountains: and it seems to have been the purpose of Providence to confine the sons of men to this particular region, to prevent their roving too soon. Otherwise they might have gone off in small parties, before the great families were constituted, among whom the world was to be divided. The economy and distribution assigned by Providence, would by these means have been defeated. It was upon this account, that at the migration, many families were obliged to travel more or less eastward, who wanted to come down to the remoter parts of Asia. And in respect to the Cuthites, who seem to have been a good while in a roving state, they might possibly travel to the Pylae Caspiae, before they found an outlet to descend to the country specified. In consequence of this, the latter part of their rout must have been in the direction mentioned in the Scriptures; which is very properly styled a journeying from the east. I was surprised, after I had formed this opinion from the natural history of the country, to find it verified by that ancient historian Berosus. He mentions the rout of his countrymen from Ararat after the deluge; and says, that it was not in a strait line: but people had been instructed to take a circuit, and so to descend to the regions of Babylonia. In this manner, the sons of Chus came to the plains of Shinar, of which Babylonia was a part; and from hence they ejected Assur: and afterwards trespassed upon Elam in the region beyond the Tigris....

And we may well imagine, that many of the branches of Ham were associated in the same manner, and in confederacy with the rebels; and some perhaps of every great division into which mankind was separated. To this Berosus bears witness, who says, that in the first age Babylon was inhabited by people of different families and nations, who resided there in great numbers. "In those times Babylon was full of people of different nations and families, who resided in Chaldea."

And as all these tribes are said to have been of one lip, and of the same words, that is, of the same uniform pronunciation, and the same express language, it seemed good to divine wisdom, to cause a confusion of the lip, and a change in pronunciation, that these various tribes might no longer understand each other....


I cannot proceed without taking notice of some extracts of Babylonish history, which time has happily spared us. From what has been already said, it is evident, that the history of nations must commence from the aera of Babylon: as here the first kingdom was founded; and here was the great scene of action among the firstborn of the sons of men. The history therefore of the Babylonians and Chaldeans should be the first in order to be considered. Not that I purpose to engage in a full account of this people; but intend only to consider those extracts, of which I have made mention above. The memorials are very curious; but have been greatly mistaken, and misapplied. The person, to whom we are beholden for them, was Berosus, a priest of Belus. He was a native of Babylonia; and lived in the time of Alexander, the son of Philip. The Grecians held him in great esteem: and he is particularly quoted by the oriental fathers, as well as by Josephus of Judea.

He treated, it seems, of the origin of things, and of the formation of the earth out of chaos. He afterwards speaks of the flood; and of all mankind being destroyed, except one family, which was providentially preserved. By these was the world renewed. There is a large extract from this author, taken from the Greek of Alexander Polyhistor, and transmitted to us by Eusebius; which contains an account of these first occurrences in the world. But it seems to be taken by a person, who was not well acquainted with the language, in which it is supposed to be written; and has made an irregular and partial extract, rather than a genuine translation. And as Berosus lived at a time, when Babylon had been repeatedly conquered; and the inhabitants had received a mixture of many different nations: there is reason to think, that the original records, of whatever nature they may have been, were much impaired; and that the natives in the time of Berosus did not perfectly understand them. I will soon present the reader with a transcript from Polyhistor of this valuable fragment; in which he will perceive many curious traces of original truth; but at the same time will find it mixed with fable, and obscured with allegory. It has likewise suffered greatly by interpreters: and there are some mistakes in the disposition of the transcript; of which I shall hereafter take notice; and which could not be in the original.

Other authors, as well as Alexander Polyhistor, have copied from Berosus: among these is Abydenus. I will therefore begin with his account; as it is placed first in Eusebius: the tenor of it is in this manner.
1 [Eusebii Chronicon. p. 5.] So much concerning the wisdom of the Chaldeans. It is said, that the first king of this country was Alorus; who gave out a report, that he was appointed by God to be the shepherd of his people. He reigned ten fari [36,000 years]. Now a farus is esteemed to be three thousand six hundred years. A nereus is reckoned six hundred: and a sosus sixty. After him Alaparus reigned three fari: to him succeeded Amillarus from the city of 2 [Sometimes Pantibiblus, at other times Pantibiblon occurs for the name of the place. See Syncellus. p. 38.] Pantibiblus, who reigned thirteen fari. In his time a semidaemon called Annedotus, in appearance very like to Oannes, shewed himself a second time from the sea. After him Amenon reigned twelve fari; who was of the city Pantibiblon. Then Megalanus of the same 3 [It is in the original Pansibiblon: but the true name was byPantibiblon; as may be seen by comparing this account with that of Apollodorus, which succeeds; and with the same in Syncellus.] place, eighteen fari. Then Daus the shepherd governed for the space of ten fari: he was of Pantibiblon. In his time four double-shaped personages came out of the sea to land; whose names were Euedocus, Eneugamus, Enaboulus, and Anementus. After Daus succeeded Anodaphus, the son of Aedoreschus. There were afterwards other kings; and last of all Sisuthrus: so that, in the whole, the number of kings amounted to ten; and the term of their reigns to an hundred and twenty fari [432,000 years]."

This last [Sisuthrus] was the person who was warned to provide against the deluge. He accordingly built a vessel, by which means he was preserved. The history of this great event, together with the account of birds sent out by Sisouthros, in order to know, if the waters were quite abated; and of their returning with their feet soiled with mud; and of the ark's finally resting in Armenia, is circumstantially related by 4 [Syncellus. p. 38. He styles him Abydenus: but by Eusebius the name is expressed Abidenus.] Abydenus, but borrowed from Berosus.

A similar account of the first kings of Babylonia is given by Apollodorus; and is taken from the same author, who begins thus.
"This is the history, which Berosus has transmitted to us. He tells us, that Alorus of Babylon was the first king, that reigned; who was by nation a Chaldean. He reigned ten fari [36,000 years]: and after him Alaparus, and then Amelon, who came from Pantibiblon. To him succeeded Amenon of Chaldea: in whose time they say, that the Musarus Oannes, the Annedotus, made his appearance from the Eruthrean sea."

***

Both these writers are supposed to copy from Berosus: yet there appears a manifest difference between them: and this not in respect to numbers only, which are easily corrupted; but in regard to events, and disposition of circumstances. Of this strange variation in two short fragments, I shall hereafter take further notice.

I come now to the chief extract from Berosus; as it has been transmitted to us by 9 [Eusebii Chronicon. p. 5.] Eusebius, who copied it from Alexander Polyhistor. It is likewise to be found in 10 [Syncelli Chronograph, p. 28.] Syncellus. It begins in this wise....

-- A New System, Or, An Analysis of Ancient Mythology: Wherein an Attempt is Made to Divest Tradition of Fable; and to Reduce the Truth to its Original Purity, by Jacob Bryant, 1775


This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. (May 2020)

Berossus[a] was a Hellenistic-era Babylonian writer, a priest of Bel Marduk[2] and astronomer who wrote in the Koine Greek language, and who was active at the beginning of the 3rd century BC. Versions of two excerpts of his writings survive, at several removes from the original.

Life and work

Using ancient Babylonian records and texts that are now lost, Berossus published the Babyloniaca (hereafter, History of Babylonia) in three books some time around 290–278 BC, by the patronage[3] of the Macedonian/Seleucid king Antiochus I Soter (during the third year of his reign, according to Diodorus Siculus[4][5][failed verification]). Certain astrological fragments recorded by Pliny the Elder, Censorinus, Flavius Josephus, and Marcus Vitruvius Pollio are also attributed to Berossus, but are of unknown provenance, or indeed are uncertain as to where they might fit into his History. Vitruvius credits him with the invention of the semi-circular sundial hollowed out of a cubical block.[6] A statue of him was erected in Athens, perhaps attesting to his fame and scholarship as historian and astronomer-astrologer.

A separate work, Procreatio, is attributed to him by the Latin commentaries on Aratus, Commentariorium in Aratum Reliquiae, but there is no proof of this connection. However, a direct citation (name and title) is rare in antiquity, and it may have referred to Book 1 of his History.

He was born during or before Alexander the Great's reign over Babylon (330–323 BC), with the earliest date suggested as 340 BC. According to Vitruvius's work de Architectura, he relocated eventually to the island of Kos off the coast of Asia Minor and established a school of astrology there[7] by the patronage of the king of Egypt. However, scholars have questioned whether it would have been possible to work under the Seleucids and then relocate to a region experiencing Ptolemaic control late in life. It is not known when he died.

History of Babylonia

Versions at several removes of the remains of Berossos' lost Babyloniaca are given by two later Greek epitomes that were used by the Christian Eusebius of Caesarea for his Chronological Canons, the Greek manuscripts of which have been lost, but which can be largely recovered by the Latin translation and continuation of Jerome and a surviving Armenian translation.[8][9] The reasons why Berossus wrote the History have not survived, though contemporaneous Greek historians generally did give reasons for the publication of their own histories. It is suggested that it was commissioned by Antiochus I, perhaps desiring a history of one of his newly acquired lands, or by the Great Temple priests, seeking justification for the worship of Marduk in Seleucid lands. Pure history writing per se was not a Babylonian concern, and Josephus testifies to Berossus' reputation as an astrologer.[10] The excerpts quoted recount mythology and history that relate to Old Testament concerns. As historian and archaeologist W.G. Lambert observes: "Of course Berossus may have written other works which are not quoted by Josephus and Eusebius because they lacked any Biblical interest".[10] Lambert finds some statements in the Latin writers so clearly erroneous that it renders doubtful whether the writers had first-hand knowledge of Berossus' text.

Transmission and reception

Berossus' work was not popular during the Hellenistic period. The usual account of Mesopotamian history was Ctesias of Cnidus's Persica, while most of the value of Berossus was considered to be his astrological writings. Most pagan writers probably never read the History directly, and seem to have been dependent on Posidonius of Apamea (135–50 BC), who cited Berossos in his works. While Poseidonius's accounts have not survived, the writings of these tertiary sources do: Vitruvius Pollio (a contemporary of Caesar Augustus), Pliny the Elder (d. 79 AD), and Seneca the Younger (d. 65 AD). Seven later pagan writers probably transmitted Berossus via Poseidonius through an additional intermediary. They were Aetius (1st or 2nd century AD), Cleomedes (second half of 2nd century AD), Pausanias (c. 150 AD), Athenaeus (c. 200 AD), Censorinus (3rd century AD), and an anonymous Latin commentator on the Greek poem Phaenomena by Aratus of Soloi (ca. 315–240/39 BC).

Jewish and Christian references to Berossus probably had a different source, either Alexander Polyhistor (c. 65 BC) or Juba II of Mauretania (c. 50 BC–20 AD). Polyhistor's numerous works included a history of Assyria and Babylonia, while Juba wrote On the Assyrians, both using Berossus as their primary sources. Josephus' records of Berossus include some of the only extant narrative material, but he is probably dependent on Alexander Polyhistor,[citation needed] even if he did give the impression that he had direct access to Berossus. The fragments of the Babylonaica found in three Christian writers' works are probably dependent on Alexander or Juba (or both). They are Tatianus of Syria (2nd century AD), Theophilus Bishop of Antioch (180 AD), and Titus Flavius Clemens (c. 200 AD).

Like Poseidonius', neither Alexander's nor Juba's works have survived. However, the material in Berossus was recorded by Abydenus (c. 200 BC) and Sextus Julius Africanus (early 3rd century AD). Both their works are also lost, possibly considered too long, but Eusebius Bishop of Caesaria (c. 260–340 AD), in his work the Chronicon, preserved some of their accounts.

Abydenus was a Greek historian, and the author of a History of the Chaldeans and Assyrians, of which some fragments are preserved by Eusebius [c. 260/265 – 30 May 339] in his Praeparatio Evangelica, and by Cyril of Alexandria in his work against Julian. Several other fragments are preserved by Syncellus. These were particularly valuable for chronology. An important fragment, which clears up some difficulties in Assyrian history, has been discovered in the Armenian translation of the Chronicon of Eusebius.

It is uncertain when he lived, but he is to be distinguished from Palaephatus Abydenus, who lived in the time of Alexander the Great; for this Abydenus mentions Berosus, who lived at a later period.

-- Abydenus, by Wikipedia

The Greek text of the Chronicon is also now lost to us but there is an ancient Armenian translation (500–800 AD) of it,[11] and portions are quoted in Georgius Syncellus's Ecloga Chronographica (c. 800–810 AD). Nothing of Berossus survives in Jerome's Latin translation of Eusebius. Eusebius' other mentions of Berossus in Praeparatio Evangelica are derived from Josephus, Tatianus, and another inconsequential source (the last cite contains only, "Berossus the Babylonian recorded Naboukhodonosoros in his history").

Christian writers after Eusebius are probably reliant on him, but include Pseudo-Justinus (3rd–5th century), Hesychius of Alexandria (5th century), Agathias (536–582), Moses of Chorene (8th century), an unknown geographer of unknown date, and the Suda (Byzantine dictionary from the 10th century). Thus, what little of Berossus remains is very fragmentary and indirect. The most direct source of material on Berossus is Josephus, received from Alexander Polyhistor. Most of the names in his king-lists and most of the potential narrative content have been lost or completely mangled as a result. Only Eusebius and Josephus preserve narrative material, and both had agendas. Eusebius was looking to construct a consistent chronology across different cultures,[11][non-primary source needed] while Josephus was attempting to refute the charges that there was a civilization older than that of the Jews.[citation needed] However, the ten ante-diluvian kings were preserved by Christian apologists interested in how the long lifespans of the kings were similar to the long lifespans of the ante-diluvian ancestors in the story of Genesis.

Sources and content

The Armenian translations of Eusebius and Syncellus' transmissions (Chronicon and Ecloga Chronographica, respectively) both record Berossus' use of "public records" and it is possible that Berossus catalogued his sources. This did not make him reliable, only that he was careful with the sources and his access to priestly and sacred records allowed him to do what other Babylonians could not. What we have of ancient Mesopotamian myth is somewhat comparable with Berossus, though the exact integrity with which he transmitted his sources is unknown because much of the literature of Mesopotamia has not survived. What is clear is that the form of writing he used was dissimilar to actual Babylonian literature, writing as he did in Greek.

Book 1 fragments are preserved in Eusebius and Syncellus above, and describe the Babylonian creation account and establishment of order, including the defeat of Thalatth (Tiamat) by Bel (Marduk). According to him, all knowledge was revealed to humans by the sea monster Oannes after the Creation, and so Verbrugghe and Wickersham (2000:17) have suggested that this is where the astrological fragments discussed above would fit, if at all.

Book 2 describes the history of the Babylonian kings from Alulim down to Nabonassar (747–734 BC). Eusebius reports that Apollodorus reports that Berossus recounts 432,000 years from the first king Aloros (Alulim) to the tenth king Xisouthros and the Babylonian Flood. From Berossus' genealogy, it is clear he had access to king-lists in compiling this section of History, particularly in the kings before the Flood, and from the 7th century BC with Senakheirimos (Sennacherib, who ruled both Assyria and Babylon). His account of the Flood (preserved in Syncellus) is extremely similar to versions of the Epic of Gilgamesh that we have presently. However, in Gilgamesh, the main protagonist is Utnapishtim, while for Berossus, Xisouthros is probably a Greek transliteration of Ziusudra, the protagonist of the Sumerian version of the Flood.

Perhaps what Berossus omits to mention is also noteworthy. Much information on Sargon (c. 2300 BC) would have been available during his time (e.g., a birth legend preserved at El-Amarna and in an Assyrian fragment from 8th century BC, and two Neo-Babylonian fragments), but these were not mentioned. Similarly, the great Babylonian king Hammurabi (ca. 1750 BC) merits only passing mention. He did, however, mention that the queen Semiramis (probably Sammuramat, wife of Samshi-Adad V, 824–811 BC) was Assyrian. Perhaps it was in response to Greek writers mythologising her to the point where she was described as the founder of Babylon, daughter of the Syrian goddess Derketo, and married to Ninus (the legendary founder of Nineveh, according to Greek authors).

Book 3 relates the history of Babylon from Nabonassar to Antiochus I (presumably). Again, it is likely that he used king-lists, though it is not known which ones he used. The Mesopotamian documents known as King-List A (one copy from the 6th or 5th centuries BC) and Chronicle 1 (3 copies with one confidently dated to 500 BC) are usually suggested as the ones he used, due to the synchronicity between those and his History (though there are some differences). A large part of his history around the time of Naboukhodonosoros (Nebuchadnezzar II, 604–562 BC) and Nabonnedos (Nabonidus, 556–539 BC) survives. Here we see his interpretation of history for the first time, moralising about the success and failure of kings based on their moral conduct. This is similar to another Babylonian history, Chronicle of Nabonidus (as well as to the Hebrew Bible), and differs from the rationalistic accounts of other Greek historians like Thucydides.

At the time of the Jewish historian Josephus (1st-century CE), the historical records contained in the third book of Berossus were still extant and which Josephus used to cite the regnal years of 6 Babylonian kings:[12]

Nabopolassar = reigned 21 years.

Nebuchadnezzar b. Nabuchodonosor = reigned 43 years.

Evil Merodach (also called Amel-Marduk) = reigned 2 years. (Josephus, elsewhere, contradicts himself, saying that Evil Merodach reigned 18 years).[13]

Neglissar (Neriglissoor) = reigned 4 years (Josephus, elsewhere, contradicts himself, saying that Neglissar reigned 40 years).[14]

Laborosoarchod (Labosordacus) = reigned 9 months.

Nabonnedus (also known as Baltasar) = reigned 17 years, in which year, Cyrus king of Persia and Darius king of Media took Babel (Borsippus) from the Chaldaeans.


The achievements of the History of Babylonia

Berossus' achievement may be seen in terms of how he combined the Hellenistic methods of historiography and Mesopotamian accounts to form a unique composite. Like Herodotus and Thucydides, he probably autographed his work for the benefit of later writers. Certainly he furnished details of his own life within his histories, which contrasted with the Mesopotamian tradition of anonymous scribes. Elsewhere, he included a geographical description of Babylonia,similar to that found in Herodotus (on Egypt), and used Greek classifications. There is some evidence that he resisted adding information to his research, especially for the earlier periods with which he was not familiar. Only in Book 3 do we see his opinions begin to enter the picture.

Secondly, he constructed a narrative from Creation to his present, again similar to Herodotus or the Hebrew Bible. Within this construction, the sacred myths blended with history. Whether he shared Hellenistic skepticism about the existence of the gods and their tales is unknown, though it is likely he believed them more than the satirist Ovid, for example. The naturalistic attitude found in Syncellus' transmission is probably more representative of the later Greek authors who transmitted the work than of Berossus himself.

During his own time and later, however, the History of Babylonia was not distributed widely. Verbrugghe and Wickersham argue that the lack of relation between the material in History and the Hellenistic world was not relevant, since Diodorus' equally bizarre book on Egyptian mythology was preserved. Instead, the reduced association between Mesopotamia and the Greco-Roman lands during Parthian rule was partially responsible. Secondly, his material did not include as much narrative, especially of periods with which he was not familiar, even when potential sources for stories were available. They suggest:[15]

Perhaps Berossos was a prisoner of his own methodology and purpose. He used ancient records that he refused to flesh out, and his account of more recent history, to judge by what remains, contained nothing more than a bare narrative. If Berossos believed in the continuity of history with patterns that repeated themselves (i.e., cycles of events as there were cycles of the stars and planets), a bare narrative would suffice. Indeed, this was more than one would suspect a Babylonian would or could do. Those already steeped in Babylonian historical lore would recognize the pattern and understand the interpretation of history Berossos was making. If this, indeed, is what Berossos presumed, he made a mistake that would cost him interested Greek readers who were accustomed to a much more varied and lively historical narrative where there could be no doubt who was an evil ruler and who was not.


What is left of Berossus' writings is useless for the reconstruction of Mesopotamian history. Of greater interest to scholars is his historiography, using as it did both Greek and Mesopotamian methods. The affinities between it and Hesiod, Herodotus, Manethon, and the Hebrew Bible (specifically, the Torah and Deuteronomistic History) as histories of the ancient world give us an idea about how ancient people viewed their world.
We learn from Manetho [Manethon], that the Egyptian chronology enumerated fourteen dynasties, the particulars of which he omitted as unworthy of notice.

In the same manner the Hindu chronology presents us with a series of fourteen Dynasties, equally repugnant to nature and reason; six of these are elapsed, we are in the seventh, which began with the Flood, and seven more we are taught to expect. These fourteen Dynasties are hardly ever noticed by the Hindus in their legendary tales, or historical poems. The rulers of these Dynasties are called MENUS [Manus]: and from them their respective Dynasty, antara, or period, is called a Manwantara. Every Dynasty ends with a total destruction of the human race, except the Menu or ruler of the next period, who makes his escape in a boat, with the seven Rishis. The same events take place; the same persons, though sometimes under different names, re-appear.

Thus the history of one Dynasty serves for all the rest. In reality, history, according to the Hindus themselves, begins with the Flood, or the seventh Menu.

-- On the Chronology of the Hindus, by Captain Francis Wilford, Asiatic Researches, Vol. V, P. 241, 1799


Similarities with Berossos

Most of the ancient witnesses group Manetho together with Berossos, and treat the pair as similar in intent, and it is not a coincidence that those who preserved the bulk of their writing are largely the same (Josephus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Syncellus). Certainly, both wrote about the same time, and both adopted the historiographical approach of the Greek historians Herodotus and Hesiod, who preceded them. While the subjects of their history are different, the form is similar, using chronological royal genealogies as the structure for the narratives. Both extend their histories far into the mythic past, to give the deities rule over the earliest ancestral histories.

Syncellus goes so far as to insinuate that the two copied each other:
If one carefully examines the underlying chronological lists of events, one will have full confidence that the design of both is false, as both Berossos and Manetho, as I have said before, want to glorify each his own nation, Berossos the Chaldean, Manetho the Egyptian. One can only stand in amazement that they were not ashamed to place the beginning of their incredible story in each in one and the same year.

While this does seem an incredible coincidence, the reliability of the report is unclear. The reasoning for presuming they started their histories in the same year involved some considerable contortions. Berossos dated the period before the Flood to 120 saroi (3,600 year periods), giving an estimate of 432,000 years before the Flood. This was unacceptable to later Christian commentators, so it was presumed he meant solar days. 432,000 divided by 365 days gives a rough figure of 1,183½ years before the Flood. For Manetho, even more numeric contortions ensued. With no flood mentioned, they presumed that Manetho's first era describing the deities represented the ante-diluvian age. Secondly, they took the spurious Book of Sothis for a chronological count. Six dynasties of deities totalled 11,985 years, while the nine dynasties with demigods came to 858 years. Again, this was too long for the Biblical account, so two different units of conversion were used. The 11,985 years were considered to be months of 29½ days each (a conversion used in antiquity, for example by Diodorus Siculus), which comes out to 969 years. The latter period, however, was divided into seasons, or quarters of a year, and reduces to 214½ years (another conversion attested to by Diodorus). The sum of these comes out to 1,183½ years, equal to that of Berossos.
[L]ong before the ninth century the chronological system of the Hindus was as complete, or rather, perfectly the same as it is now; for Albumazar, who was contemporary with the famous Almamun, and lived at his court at Balac or Balkh, had made the Hindu antiquities his particular study. He was also a famous astronomer and astrologer, and had made enquiries respecting the conjunctions of the planets, the time of the creation of the world, and its duration, for astrological purposes; and he says, that the Hindus reckoned from the Flood to the Hejira [Muhammad's departure from Mecca to Medina in AD 622.] 720,634,442,715 days, or 3725 years.

Here is a mistake, which probably originates with the transcriber or translator, but it may be easily rectified. The first number, though somewhat corrupted, is obviously meant for the number of days from the creation to the Hejira; and the 3725 years are reckoned from the beginning of the Cali-yug to the Hejira. It was then the opinion of Albumazar, about the middle of the ninth century, that the aera of the Cali-yug coincided with that of the Flood. He had, perhaps, data which no longer exist...


Each period consists of 12,000 years, which the Hindus call divine. The Persians are not unacquainted with these renovations of the world, and periods of 12,000 years; for the bird Simurgh is introduced, telling Caherman that she had lived to see the earth seven times filled with creatures, and seven times a perfect void, (it should be six times a perfect void, for we are in the seventh period,) and that she had already seen twelve great periods of 7000 years. This is obviously wrong; it should be seven great periods of 12,000 years.

-- On the Chronology of the Hindus, by Captain Francis Wilford, Asiatic Researches, Vol. V, P. 241, 1799

Syncellus rejected both Manetho's and Berossos' incredible time-spans, as well as the efforts of other commentators to harmonise their numbers with the Bible. Ironically as we see, he also blamed them for the synchronicity concocted by later writers.

-- Manetho, by Wikipedia

In his system of chronology, accordingly, we have a series of rulers, Hebrew, Hindu, Chaldean, Persian, Chinese, and Egyptian, who reigned before the flood; in other words, the antediluvian patriarchs, in the two lines of descent from Seth and Cain, are represented as the first sovereigns of those several divisions of the east: and in this way, it will be granted that he contrives to dispose of the fourteen dynasties of ancient kings, mentioned in the Old Chronicle, by Manethon and by Berosus, which have so grievously perplexed all modern settlers of dates. From Syncellus downwards, all the compilers of chronological tables have been thrown out of their reckoning by the length of Manethon's catalogue; and we believe they have all adopted the same methods for combating the difficulties thereby presented, namely, either to reject the first fourteen dynasties, or reigns, as altogether fabulous, or, admitting them to have some ground in historical fact, to set them down as contemporary governments. Now, as Noah was the eighth from Adam, it is very plausibly inferred in the work before us, that there were six chiefs or rulers in each of the two lines of Adam's sons, making between them, including our first parent and Noah, the very fourteen reigns in question (for reign and dynasty here are admitted to be synonymous), and thereby giving an intelligible import to the otherwise unmeaning list of aboriginal kings found in the most ancient records. There may perhaps be a little imagination in the matter; but it is astonishing how successfully the author contrives to make the Hindu, Chaldean, Chinese, and Egyptian annals coincide, in their earliest details of names and sovereignties: and it is still more remarkable that both the Hindu and Chaldean historians mention in regard to the eighth king in their list, that he with his family was miraculously saved from the general destruction of the deluge by means of a ship or ark.

-- ART. V. [Book Review of:] A Key to the Chronology of the Hindus; in a Series of Letters, in which an Attempt is made to facilitate the Progress of Christianity in Hindustan, by proving that the protracted Numbers of all Oriental Nations, when reduced, agree with the Dates given in the Hebrew Text of the Bible. 2 vols. 8vo. Rivingtons. 1820. [by Anonymous, 1820], by F. and C. Rivington (Firm), The British Critic, Volumes 13-14, Editors: 1793-1813, Robert Nares, William Beloe; 1814-1825, T.F. Middleton, W.R. Lyall, and others. 1820, originally published 1792

Each begins with a fantastic creation story, followed by a mythical ancestral period, and then finally accounts of recent kings who seem to be historical, with no demarcations in between. Blenkinsopp (1992:41) notes:

In composing his history, Berossus drew on the mythic-historiographical tradition of Mesopotamia, and specifically on such well known texts as the creation myth Enuma Elish, Atrahasis, and the king lists, which provided the point of departure and conceptual framework for a universal history. But the mythic and archaic element was combined with the chronicles of rulers which can lay claim to being in some degree genuinely historical.


This early approach to historiography, though preceded by Hesiod, Herodotus, and the Hebrew Bible, demonstrates its own unique approach. Though one must be careful about how much can be described of the original work, his apparent resistance to adding to his sources is noteworthy, as is the lack of moralising he introduces to those materials he is not familiar with.

Derivative works

Regarding the flood, Josephus in Antiquities Bk 1, Ch 3§6 quotes several sources including Berosus

Now all the writers of barbarian histories make mention of this flood, and of this ark; among whom is Berosus the Chaldean. For when he is describing the circumstances of the flood, he goes on thus: "It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordyaeans; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets for the averting of mischiefs."


Pseudo-Berossus

In 1498, Annius of Viterbo (an official of Pope Alexander VI) claimed to have discovered lost books of Berossus. These were in fact an elaborate forgery. However, they greatly[16] influenced Renaissance ways of thinking about population and migration, because Annius provided a list of kings from Japhet onwards, filling a historical gap following the Biblical account of the Flood. Annius also introduced characters from classical sources into the biblical framework, publishing his account as Commentaria super opera diversorum auctorum de antiquitatibus loquentium (Commentaries on the Works of Various Authors Discussing Antiquity). One consequence was sophisticated theories about Celtic races with Druid priests in Western Europe.[17]

Notes

1. /bəˈrɒsəs/ or Berosus (/bəˈroʊsəs/; name possibly derived from Akkadian: Bēl-rē'u-šu, "Bel is his shepherd"; Greek: Βηρωσσός)[1]

References

1. The suggestion was made by Heinrich Zimmern; cf. Lehmann-Haupt, "Neue Studien zu Berossos" Klio 22 (1929:29)
2. Seneca Nat. Questiones III.29: "Berosus, qui Belum interpretatus est...", "Berossus, who expounded the doctrine of Bel/Marduk" (interpretatus) as rendered by W. G. Lambert, "Berossus and Babylonian Eschatology" Iraq, 38.2 (Autumn 1976:171-173) p. 172.
3. A. Kuhrt, "Berossus's Babyloniaca and Seleucid Rule in Babylonia," in A. Kuhrt and S. Sherwin-White (eds.), Hellenism in the East (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press) 1987:55f.
4. "Digital Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum (DFHG)".
5. Diodorus Siculus, Library 3.42.1.
6. Vitruvius, De architectura, viii.8.1; in ix.2.1 he notes Berossus teaching that the moon was a ball one half luminous, the rest of a blue color.
7. Vitruvius, ix.6.2.
8. Robin Lane Fox, Travelling Heroes in the Epic Age of Homer, 2008:81, who gives his sources in note 49.
9. The authority on Eusebius' Chronicle is Alden Mosshammer The Chronicle of Eusebius and Greek Chronographic Tradition, 1979.
10. Lambert 1976:171.
11. "Eusebius' Chronicle (or Chronography), Translated from Classical Armenian, Public Domain Work. Eusebius, Chronicle, Table of Contents". Rbedrosian.com. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
12. Josephus, Against Apion 1:19–20
13. See Parker, R.A.; Dubberstein, Waldo H. (1956). Babylonian Chronology, 626 B.C.–A.D. 75. Providence: Brown University Press. p. 28. OCLC 460027103., who put down only two regnal years for this king.
14. See Parker, R.A.; Dubberstein, Waldo H. (1956). Babylonian Chronology, 626 B.C.–A.D. 75. Providence: Brown University Press. p. 29. OCLC 460027103., who put down only four regnal years for this king, and who is called by them Nergal-Shar-Usur.
15. Verbrugghe and Wickersham (2000:32)
16. Krebs, C. B. 2011. A Most Dangerous Book. Tacitus's Germania from the Roman Empire to the Third Reich. New York: W. W. Norton, pp. 103f.
17. Morse, Michael A. How the Celts Came to Britain. Tempus Publishing, Stroud, 2005. page 15.

Bibliography

• Blenkinsopp, J. 1992. The Pentateuch: An Introduction to the First Five Books of the Bible. New York: Anchor Doubleday.
• Verbrugghe, G.P. & Wickersham, J.M. 2000. Berossos and Manetho Introduced and Translated: Native Traditions in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
• K. Müller, Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum (FHG) 2. Paris: Didot, 1841 1870, frr. 1 25.
• Burstein, S.M. 1978 [19802]. The Babyloniaca of Berossus. Malibu: Undena Publications.
• Krebs, C. B. 2011. A Most Dangerous Book. Tacitus's Germania from the Roman Empire to the Third Reich. New York: W. W. Norton, pp. 98–104.
• Haubold, Johannes; Lanfranchi, Giovanni B.; Rollinger, Robert; Steele, John, eds. (2013). The World of Berossos. Proceedings of the 4th International Colloquium on "The Ancient Near East between Classical and Ancient Oriental Traditions", Hatfield College, Durham 7th-9th July 2010. Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz. ISBN 978-3-447-06728-7.
• Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Berossus" . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 3 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.

External links

• Fragments of Chaldæan History, by Berossus
• An Historical Treatise of the Travels of Noah Into Europe, Translated by Richard Lynche in 1601
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Fri Mar 11, 2022 7:10 am

Alexander Polyhistor
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/11/22

Lucius Cornelius Alexander Polyhistor (Ancient Greek: Ἀλέξανδρος ὁ Πολυΐστωρ; flourished in the first half of the 1st century BC; also called Alexander of Miletus) was a Greek scholar who was enslaved by the Romans during the Mithridatic War and taken to Rome as a tutor. After his release, he continued to live in Italy as a Roman citizen. He was so productive as a writer that he earned the surname Polyhistor (very learned). The majority of his writings are now lost, but the fragments that remain shed valuable light on antiquarian and eastern Mediterranean subjects.[1] Among his works were historical and geographical accounts of nearly all the countries of the ancient world, and the book Upon the Jews (Ancient Greek: Περὶ Ἰουδαίων) which excerpted many works which might otherwise be unknown.

Life

Alexander flourished in the first half of the 1st century BC. According to the Suda he was a pupil of Crates of Mallus and a Milesian, whereas Stephanus of Byzantium claims he was a native of Cotiaeum in Lesser Phrygia and a son of Asklepiades, while the Etymologicum Magnum agrees in calling him Kotiaeus.[1] It is possible that two different Alexandroi have been merged or confused. He became a Roman prisoner of war, was sold into slavery to a Cornelius Lentulus as his teacher (paedagogus) and was later freed. As a Roman freedman his name was Cornelius Alexander. The nomen may come from the Cornelii Lentuli or from Sulla Felix, as he received the citizenship from Sulla.[2] He died at Laurentum in a fire which consumed his house, and his wife Helene is said by the Suda to have responded to the news of his loss by hanging herself.

Works

The 10th-century Suda makes no attempt to list his works, asserting that he composed books "beyond number."[3]

Alexander's most important treatise consisted of forty-two books of historical and geographical accounts of nearly all the countries of the ancient world. These included five books On Rome, the Aigyptiaca (at least three books), On Bithynia, On the Euxine Sea, On Illyria, Indica and a Chaldæan History. Another notable work is about the Jews: this reproduces in paraphrase relevant excerpts from Jewish writers, of whom nothing otherwise would be known (see below). As a philosopher, Alexander wrote Successions of Philosophers, mentioned several times by Diogenes Laërtius in his Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers.[4] None of Alexander's works survive as such: only quotations and paraphrases are to be found, largely in the works of Diogenes Laertius. Eusebius extracted a large portion in his Chaldean Chronicle.[5]

One of Alexander's students was Gaius Julius Hyginus, Latin author, scholar and friend of Ovid, who was appointed by Augustus to be superintendent of the Palatine library. From what Laërtius describes or paraphrases in his work, Alexander recorded various thoughts on contradictions, fate, life, soul and its parts, perfect figures, and different curiosities, such as advice not to eat beans.
In the fragments of his now lost two-book treatise on the Pythagoreans, Aristotle does discuss Pythagoras himself, but the references are all to Pythagoras as a founder of a way of life, who forbade the eating of beans (Fr. 195), and to Pythagoras as a wonder-worker, who had a golden thigh and bit a snake to death (Fr. 191). If this is the only type of material that Aristotle is willing to ascribe to Pythagoras himself, it becomes clear why he never mentions Pythagoras in his account of his philosophical predecessors and why he uses the expression “so-called Pythagoreans” to refer to the Pythagoreanism of the fifth-century.

-- Pythagoras, by Carl Huffman

Upon the Jews

Louis Ginzberg wrote of Alexander's work: “Although these excerpts reveal their author as nothing but a compiler without taste or judgment, and bereft of all literary ability, they possess, even in their meagerness, a certain value.” In his compilation Jewish and non-Jewish sources are cited indiscriminately side by side; and to Alexander, therefore, the world is indebted for information on the oldest Jewish, Hellenic, and Samaritan elaboration of Biblical history in prose or poetry. The epic poet Philo, the tragic writer Ezekiel, the historian Eupolemus, the chronicler Demetrius, the so-called Artapanus, the historian Aristeas, and Theodotus the Samaritan, as well as an unnamed fellow countryman of the latter often confused with Eupolemus, the rhetorician Apollonius Molon (an anti-Jewish writer)—all of these authors are known to posterity only through extracts from their works which Alexander embodied verbatim in his. Of some interest for the ancient history of the Jews is his account of Assyria-Babylonia, frequently drawn upon by Jewish and Christian authors; in it extracts are given, especially from Berossus, and also from the Chronicles of Apollodoros and the Third Book of the Sibyllines. Josephus made use of the work,[6] and likewise Eusebius in his Chronicles. Probably only Alexander's account of the Flood is taken from Berossus, who is confirmed by the newest Assyrian discoveries, while his account of the Confusion of Tongues is probably of Jewish-Hellenic origin. Another work of his seems to have contained considerable information concerning the Jews. What Eusebius quotes[7] would seem to have been taken from this work, which is no longer extant, except indirectly through Josephus. It may be noted that Alexander twice mentions the Bible, which, however, he knew only superficially, as appears from his curious statement that the Law of the Jews was given to them by a woman named Moso, and that Judea received its name from Judah and Idumea, children of Semiramis.

The text of the fragments preserved is in very unsatisfactory shape, owing to insufficient collation of the manuscripts. How much of his originals Alexander himself omitted is difficult to say, in view of the corrupt state of the text of Eusebius, where most of his fragments are to be found. Abydenus—the Christian editor of Alexander's works—evidently had a different text before him from that which Eusebius possessed.

Text of the fragments Περὶ Ἰουδαίων is to be found in Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica, ix. 17; Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromata i. 21, 130, and Müller, Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, iii. 211–230; prose extracts, from a new collation of the manuscripts, in Freudenthal, “Alexander Polyhistor,” pp. 219–236.

Notes

1. Schmitz, Leonhard (1867). "Alexander Cornelius". In William Smith (ed.). Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. Vol. 1. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. p. 115.
2. Servius, ad Aen.X 388 = Jacoby 273 T2
3. Suda α 1129
4. Diogenes Laërtius, i. 116, ii. 19, 106, iii. 4, 5, iv. 62, vii. 179, viii. 24; ix. 61
5. Translation here.
6. See Freudenthal, "Alexander Polyhistor" 25.
7. Praeparatio Evangelica, ix. 20, 3.

References

Wikisource has the text of the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article "Alexander Cornelius".

• This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Ginzburg, Louis (1901–1906). "Alexander of Miletus". In Singer, Isidore; et al. (eds.). The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk & Wagnalls. citing:
o Freudenthal, Alexander Polyhistor, Breslau, 1875 (Hellenistische Studien, i. and ii.);
o Unger, "Wann Schrieb Alexander Polyhistor?" in Philologus, xliii. 28-531, ib.xlvii. 177–183;
o Susemihl, Gesch. der Griechischen Literatur, ii. 356–364;
o Schürer, Gesch. 3d ed., iii. 346–349.
o An English translation of the fragments is to be found in Cory's Ancient Fragments, London, 1876;
o a French translation in Reinach, Textes d'Auteurs Grecs et Romains Relatifs au Judaisme, 1895, pp. 65–68.

Further reading

• W. Adler, "Alexander Polyhistor’s Peri Ioudaiôn and Literary Culture in Republican Rome," in Sabrina Inowlocki & Claudio Zamagni (eds), Reconsidering Eusebius: Collected papers on literary, historical, and theological issues (Leiden, Brill, 2011) (Vigiliae Christianae, Supplements, 107),

External links

• "Alexander Polyhistor". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• Life and Works
• Example of Alexander's Work
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Tue Mar 15, 2022 3:46 am

Scythian art
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/14/22

Monsieur Pezron ...seems to have been the founder of a new system; in which he has had many followers: and all that science, which I suppose to have been derived to the western world from Babylonia, and Egypt, they bring from the Sacae, and Scythians of the north: making it take its rise beyond Media and Mount Imaus, in the upper regions of Asia. We are particularly informed by Pezron, that there was a people in these parts, who in the first ages spread themselves over Bactria, and Margiana; and proceeding by Armenia and Cappadocia, at last passed over into Europe. The whole of this continent they conquered, and held, under the names of Gomarians, Cimmerians, Celts, and Scythae. From hence he takes upon him to shew, that the Gaulish and Celtic nations were from the upper regions of Asia; and particularly from those countries, which lay beyond the Bactrians and Medes. He takes notice, that there was in these parts a city named Comara, mentioned by Ptolemy, and others; and from the similitude, which subsists between Comarians and Gomarians, the learned writer is induced to bring the sons of Gomer, by whom Europe is supposed in part to have been peopled, from the regions about Thebet and Tartary....

An ingenious writer, and antiquary of our own nation has followed the steps of Pezron... He supposes, that all science centered of old in Bactria ...See the History and Chronology of the Fabulous Ages, by Wise.... he says: Pezron proves, that Uranus, Caelus, Saturn, and Jupiter, were no imaginary beings; but the true names of Celtic emperors, who were more generally known by the name of Titans.... Uranus, Saturn, and Jupiter, were powerful princes; sovereigns over a vast empire, comprehending all Europe, and a great part of Asia...The learned Salmasius also deduces every thing from Scythia....

The true Scuthai, or Scythians, were undoubtedly a very learned and intelligent people: but their origin is not to be looked for in the north of Asia, and the desarts of Tartary. Their history was from another quarter, as I purpose to shew. How can we suppose one uniform language to have been propagated from a part of the world, where there was such variety? And how could this language be so widely extended, as to reach from Bactria to Thrace, and from thence to the extremities of Europe? What adds to the difficulty is, that all this was effected, if we may believe our author, six hundred years before Moses. Then it was, that Jupiter subdued all Europe from Thracia to Gades. As to the learning supposed to be derived from these Scythians, it is certainly a groundless surmise. The greater part of these nations commonly styled Scythic, were barbarous to the last degree. There are no monuments, nor writings, remaining, nor any upon record, which can afford us the least idea of their being liberal, or learned.

The Huns and Avares were of these parts; who overran the empire in the fourth century: but their character had nothing in it favourable. They were so rude in feature and figure, and such barbarians that they were not thought human. It was a common notion, that they were begotten by devils upon the bodies of some savage hags, who were found wild in the woods. Procopius says, that they neither had letters, nor would hear of them: so that their children had no instruction.... and averse to all science. In short, all the Tartarian nations of old seem to have been remarkably rude. But it may be said, that the people spoken of by Pezron and Wise were of Bactria and Margiana. They may place them as they please: still they are no other than the Sacae Nomades; a Tartarian clan, who from Strabo appear to have been in a continual roving state, till they were cut off. But after all, who in their senses would think of looking for the Titans among the Tartars, or deduce all science from the wilds of Margiana? But if these countries had all the learning, that ever Egypt or Greece boasted, how was it transmitted to Europe? How could it be derived to us, when so many, and such mighty, nations intervened?. ..Pezron... and Wise ... have certainly lowered themselves by giving into these idle reveries. What can be more fallacious than the notion adopted by Wise, of the antiquity of the Scythians from the height of their ground?
Which height, (he says), the Scythians urged in their dispute with the Egyptians, as a chief argument of the antiquity of their nation: and the Egyptians, at least other good judges, acquiesced in the proof.

The notion was, according to Justin, from whom it is borrowed, that, as the earth was once overflowed, the higher grounds emerged first, and consequently were first inhabited. And that Scythia was the higher ground, they proved from this; because all the rivers of Scythia descended from the north to the south, and ran towards Egypt. What a strange proof is this? and what an argument to be laid before the Egyptians? They lived upon the Nile; and from the same principles might draw a different conclusion. As their river ran in a contrary direction, from south to north, they had the same reason to insist, that Upper Egypt, and Ethiopia were the higher grounds, and the more ancient countries. And they would be so far in the right, as the earth is certainly higher, as we advance towards the equator, than it is towards the poles.

As to the Tanais running from north to south, and so entering the Palus Maeotis, and Pontus Euxinus; it is well known, that there are many rivers upon the coast of the Black Sea, which run in various and contrary directions: consequently different countries must be equally supereminent, and have the same title to be the most ancient; which is absurd and a contradiction.

The learned Pezron argues no better, when he tries to shew the similitude, which subsisted between the Sacae, and the ancient Gauls. He takes notice from Herodotus, that the Amyrgian Sacae wore breeches like the Gauls: and having observed, that they were an enterprising people, and given an account of their dress, and arms; he concludes by saying,
We may upon the whole find in these Gomarians of Margiana the language, arms, habit, with the restless and warlike spirit of our ancient Celtae. Will any body take upon him to deny, that they came originally from this Asiatic nation?

Yet after all, I cannot assent; for I do not see the resemblance... Herodotus... says, that the Bactrians were archers, and used bows made of their country reed, or cane; and had short darts. In other respects, they were accoutered like the Medes, who wore tiaras, tunics, and breeches, with a dagger at their girdle. The Sacae, or Amyrgians, had caps upon their heads, which terminated above in a point: they had also breeches. Their chief arms were bows and arrows with a dagger; also battle-axes, and sagars.... the Celtae chief weapons, according to Polybius, Livy, and Caesar, were a long dart, or sramea; and a long cutting sword, but pointless: and they used an immense shield, which covered the whole body. They had helmets upon their heads, which were ornamented with the wings of a bird for a crest; or else with the horns of some wild animal. To bows and arrows they were strangers, or did but seldom use them. From hence we may see, that they were in nothing similar, but breeches and bravery: and of the former they were diverted, when they fought; for they went into battle naked.

Great respect is certainly due to men of learning; and a proper regard should be paid to their memory. But they forfeit much of this esteem, when they misapply their talents; and put themselves to these shifts to support an hypothesis. They may smile at their reveries, and plume themselves upon their ingenuity in finding out such expedients: but no good can possibly arise from it; for the whole is a fallacy, and imposition. And a person who gets out of his depth, and tries to save himself by such feeble supports, is like an idiot drowning, without knowing his danger: who laughs, and plunges, and catches at every straw. What I have said in respect to these two learned men, will, I hope, be an argument to all those, who follow their system.

-- Pezron, From A New System, Or, An Analysis of Ancient Mythology: Wherein an Attempt is Made to Divest Tradition of Fable; and to Reduce the Truth to its Original Purity, by Jacob Bryant



Scythian art is the art associated with Scythian cultures, primarily decorative objects, such as jewellery, produced by the nomadic tribes of the area known as Scythia, which encompassed Central Asia, parts of Eastern Europe east of the Vistula River, and parts of South Asia, with the eastern edges of the region vaguely defined by ancient Greeks. The identities of the nomadic peoples of the steppes is often uncertain, and the term "Scythian" should often be taken loosely; the art of nomads much further east than the core Scythian territory exhibits close similarities as well as differences, and terms such as the "Scytho-Siberian world" are often used. Other Eurasian nomad peoples recognised by ancient writers, notably Herodotus, include the Massagetae, Sarmatians, and Saka, the last a name from Persian sources, while ancient Chinese sources speak of the Xiongnu or Hsiung-nu. Modern archaeologists recognise, among others, the Pazyryk, Tagar, and Aldy-Bel cultures, with the furthest east of all, the later Ordos culture a little west of Beijing.[7] The art of these peoples is collectively known as steppes art.

In the case of the Scythians the characteristic art was produced in a period from the 7th to 3rd centuries BC, after which the Scythians were gradually displaced from most of their territory by the Sarmatians, and rich grave deposits cease among the remaining Scythian populations on the Black Sea coast. Over this period many Scythians became sedentary, and involved in trade with neighbouring peoples such as the Greeks.

In the earlier period Scythian art included very vigorously modelled stylised animal figures, shown singly or in combat, that had a long-lasting and very wide influence on other Eurasian cultures as far apart as China and the European Celts. As the Scythians came in contact with the Greeks at the Western end of their area, their artwork influenced Greek art, and was influenced by it; also many pieces were made by Greek craftsmen for Scythian customers. Although we know that goldsmith work was an important area of Ancient Greek art, very little has survived from the core of the Greek world, and finds from Scythian burials represent the largest group of pieces we now have. The mixture of the two cultures in terms of the background of the artists, the origin of the forms and styles, and the possible history of the objects, gives rise to complex questions.[8] Many art historians feel that the Greek and Scythian styles were too far apart for works in a hybrid style to be as successful as those firmly in one style or the other.[9] Other influences from urbanized civilizations such as those of Persia and China, and the mountain cultures of the Caucasus, also affected the art of their nomadic neighbours.[10]

Scythian art, especially Scythian gold jewellery, is highly valued by museums; many of the most valuable artefacts are in the Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg. Their Eastern neighbours, the Pazyryk culture in Siberia, produced similar art, although they related to the Chinese in a way comparable to that of the Scythians with the Greek and Iranian cultures. In recent years, archeologists have made valuable finds in various places within the area.

Types of objects

The Scythians worked in a wide variety of materials such as gold, wood, leather, bone, bronze, iron, silver and electrum. Clothes and horse-trappings were sewn with small plaques in metal and other materials, and larger ones, including some of the most famous, probably decorated shields or wagons. Wool felt was used for highly decorated clothes, tents and horse-trappings, and an important nomad mounted on his horse in his best outfit must have presented a very colourful and exotic sight. As nomads, the Scythians produced entirely portable objects, to decorate their horses, clothes, tents and wagons, with the exception in some areas of kurgan stelae, stone stelae carved somewhat crudely to depict a human figure, which were probably intended as memorials. Bronze-casting of very high quality is the main metal technique used across the Eurasian steppe, but the Scythians are distinguished by their frequent use of gold at many sites,[11] though large hoards of gold objects have also been found further east, as in the hoard of over 20,000 pieces of "Bactrian Gold" in partly nomadic styles from Tillya Tepe in Afghanistan.

Earlier pieces reflected animal style traditions; in the later period many pieces, especially in metal, were produced by Greek craftsmen who had adapted Greek styles to the tastes and subject-matter of the wealthy Scythian market, and probably often worked in Scythian territory. Other pieces are thought to be imports from Greece.[12]

As the Scythians prospered through trade with the Greeks, they settled down and started farming. They also established permanent settlements such as a site in Belsk, Ukraine believed to be the Scythian capital Gelonus with craft workshops and Greek pottery prominent in the ruins. The Pazyryk burials (east of Scythia proper) are especially important because the frozen conditions have preserved a wide variety of objects in perishable materials that have not survived in most ancient burials, on the steppes or elsewhere. These include wood carvings, textiles including clothes and felt appliqué wall hangings, and even elaborate tattoos on the body of the so-called Siberian Ice Maiden. These make it clear that important ancient nomads and their horses, tents, and wagons were very elaborately fitted out in a variety of materials, many brightly coloured. Their iconography includes animals, monsters and anthropomorphic beasts, and probably some deities including a "Great Goddess", as well as energetic geometric motifs. Archaeologists have uncovered felt rugs as well as well-crafted tools and domestic utensils. Clothing uncovered by archaeologists has also been well made many trimmed by embroidery and appliqué designs. Wealthy people wore clothes covered by gold embossed plaques, but small gold pieces are often found in what seem to be relatively ordinary burials. Imported goods include a famous carpet, the oldest to survive, that was probably made in or around Persia.[13]

Steppes jewellery features various animals including stags, cats, birds, horses, bears, wolves and mythical beasts. The gold figures of stags in a crouching position with legs tucked beneath its body, head upright and muscles tight to give the impression of speed, are particularly impressive. The "looped" antlers of most figures are a distinctive feature, not found in Chinese images of deer. The species represented has seemed to many scholars to be the reindeer, which was not found in the regions inhabited by the steppes peoples at this period. The largest of these were the central ornaments for shields, while others were smaller plaques probably attached to clothing. The stag appears to have had a special significance for the steppes peoples, perhaps as a clan totem. The most notable of these figures include the examples from:

• the burial site of Kostromskaya in the Kuban dating from the 6th century BC (Hermitage)
• Tápiószentmárton in Hungary dating from the 5th century BC, now National Museum of Hungary, Budapest
• Kul Oba in the Crimea dating from the 4th century BC (Hermitage).[14]

Another characteristic form is the openwork plaque including a stylized tree over the scene at one side, of which two examples are illustrated here. Later large Greek-made pieces often include a zone showing Scythian men apparently going about their daily business, in scenes more typical of Greek art than nomad-made pieces. Some scholars have attempted to attach narrative meanings to such scenes, but this remains speculative.[15]

Although gold was widely used by the ruling elite of the various Scythian tribes, the predominant material for the various animal forms was bronze. The bulk of these items were used to decorate horse harness, leather belts & personal clothing. In some cases these bronze animal figures when sewn onto stiff leather jerkins & belts, helped to act as armour.

The use of the animal form went further than just ornament, these seemingly imbuing the owner of the item with similar prowess & powers of the animal which was depicted. Thus the use of these forms extended onto the accoutrements of warfare, be they swords, daggers, scabbards, or axes.

The primary weapon of this horse riding culture was the bow, & a special case had been developed to carry the delicate but very powerful composite bow. This case, "the gorytus", had a separate container on the outside which acted as a quiver, & the whole was often decorated with animal scenes or scenes depicting daily life on the steppes. There was a marked following of Grecian elements after the 4th century BC, when Greek craftsmen were commissioned to decorate many of the daily use articles.

Scythian art has become well known in the West thanks to a series of touring loan exhibitions from Ukrainian and Russian museums, especially in the 1990s and 2000s.

Archaeology

Kurgans are large mounds that are obvious in the landscape and a high proportion have been plundered at various times; many may never have had a permanent population nearby to guard them. To counter this, treasures were sometimes deposited in secret chambers below the floor and elsewhere, which have sometimes avoided detection until the arrival of modern archaeologists, and many of the most outstanding finds come from such chambers in kurgans that had already been partly robbed.

Elsewhere the desertification of the steppe has brought once-buried small objects to lie on the surface of the eroded land, and many Ordos bronzes seem to have been found in this way.

Russian explorers first brought Scythian artworks recovered from Scythian burial mounds to Peter the Great in the early 18th century. These works formed the basis of the collection held by the Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg. Catherine the Great was so impressed from the material recovered from the kurgans or burial mounds that she ordered a systematic study be made of the works. However, this was well before the development of modern archaeological techniques.

Nikolai Veselovsky (1848-1918) was a Russian archaeologist specializing in Central Asia who led many of the most important excavations of kurgans in his day.[18] One of the first sites discovered by modern archaeologists were the kurgans Pazyryk, Ulagan district of the Altay Republic, south of Novosibirsk. The name Pazyryk culture was attached to the finds, five large burial mounds and several smaller ones between 1925 and 1949 opened in 1947 by a Russian archeologist, Sergei Rudenko; Pazyryk is in the Altay Mountains of southern Siberia. The kurgans contained items for use in the afterlife. The famous Pazyryk carpet discovered is the oldest surviving wool pile oriental rug.

The enormous hoard of "Bactrian gold" discovered at Tillya Tepe in northern Afghanistan in 1978 comes from the fringes of the nomadic world, and the objects reflect the influence of many cultures to the south of the steppes as well as steppes art. The six burials come from the early 1st century AD (a coin of Tiberius is among the finds) and though their cultural context is unfamiliar, it may relate to the Indo-Scythians who had created an empire in north India.

Recent digs in Belsk, Ukraine uncovered a vast city believed to be the Scythian capital Gelonus described by Herodotus. Numerous craft workshops and works of pottery have been found. A kurgan or burial mound near the village of Ryzhanovka in Ukraine, 75 mi (121 km) south of Kyiv, found in the 1990s has revealed one of the few unlooted tombs of a Scythian chieftain, who was ruling in the forest-steppe area of the western fringe of Scythian lands. There at a late date in Scythian culture (c. 250 - 225 BC), a recently nomadic aristocratic class was gradually adopting the agricultural life-style of their subjects. Many items of jewellery were also found in the kurgan.

A discovery made by Russian and German archaeologists in 2001 near Kyzyl, the capital of the Russian republic of Tuva in Siberia is the earliest of its kind and predates the influence of Greek civilisation. Archaeologists discovered almost 5,000 decorative gold pieces including earrings, pendants and beads. The pieces contain representations of many local animals from the period including panthers, lions, bears and deer.

Earlier rich kurgan burials always include a male, with or without a female consort, but from the 4th and 3rd centuries there are number of important burials with only a female.[19]

Museums

The finds from the most important nomad burials remain in the countries where they were found, or at least the capitals of the states in which they were located when found, so that many finds from Ukraine and other countries of the former Soviet Union are in Russia. Western European and American museums have relatively small collections, though there have been exhibitions touring internationally. The Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg has the longest standing and the best collection of Scythian art. Other museums including several local ones in Russia, in Budapest and Miskolc in Hungary, Kyiv in Ukraine, the National Museum of Afghanistan and elsewhere have important holdings.[citation needed]

The Scythian Gold exhibition came from a number of Ukrainian exhibitions including the Museum of Historical Treasures of Ukraine, the Institute of Archaeology in Kyiv and the State Historical Archaeological Preserve at Pereiaslav.[citation needed] The Melitopol Museum of Local History also has an important collection, excavated from a nearby kurgan.[20]

Image
Horseman hunting, with characteristic Xiongnu horse trappings, Southern Siberia, 280-180 BCE. Hermitage Museum.[1][2][3][4]

Image
Scythian golden comb, made by Greeks probably to Scythian taste, from Solokha, early 4th century BCE, Hermitage Museum[5]

Image
Gold plaque with panther, probably for a shield or breast-plate, 13 in/33 cm long, end 7th-century BC.[6]

Image
Gold Scythian pectoral, or neckpiece, from a royal kurgan in Tolstaya Mogila, Pokrov, Ukraine, dated to the second half of the 4th century BC.

Image
The influence of Scythian art: Stag Plaque, 400-500 BC, Scythian, western Asia, gold

Image
The influence of Scythian art: Fibula in the Form of a Recumbent Stag, about 400 AD, Northeastern Europe,

Image
Granite kurgan stela, Romania

Image
The treasure of Kul-Oba, Crimea, 400 to 350 BC.

Image
The treasure of Kul-Oba, Crimea, 400 to 350 BC.

Image
The treasure of Kul-Oba, Crimea, 400 to 350 BC.

Image
The treasure of Kul-Oba, Crimea, 400 to 350 BC.

Image
The treasure of Kul-Oba, Crimea, 400 to 350 BC.

Image
The treasure of Kul-Oba, Crimea, 400 to 350 BC.

Image
Bronze Ordos culture plaque, 4th century BC; a deer attacked by a wolf

Image
Statuette from the Saka culture in Xinjiang, from a 3rd-century BC burial site north of the Tian Shan, Xinjiang Region Museum, Ürümqi.[16][17]

Image
The Pazyryk carpet

Image
Golden crown. Treasure of Tillia tepe, Afghanistan.

Image
Golden plaques representing the resurrection of a dead hero (Saka culture, 5th century BC, Hermitage Museum).

See also

• Scythian metallurgy
• History of jewellery in Ukraine
• Persian-Sassanid art patterns
• Thracian gold
• Thraco-Cimmerian
• Vettersfelde Treasure

Notes

1. Pankova, Svetlana; Simpson, St John (21 January 2021). Masters of the Steppe: The Impact of the Scythians and Later Nomad Societies of Eurasia: Proceedings of a conference held at the British Museum, 27-29 October 2017. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd. pp. 218–219. ISBN 978-1-78969-648-6. Inv. nr.Si. 1727- 1/69, 1/70
2. Francfort, Henri-Paul (1 January 2020). "Sur quelques vestiges et indices nouveaux de l'hellénisme dans les arts entre la Bactriane et le Gandhāra (130 av. J.-C.-100 apr. J.-C. environ)". Journal des Savants: 37.
3. Ollermann, Hans (22 August 2019). "Belt Plaque with a Bear Hunt. From Russia (Siberia). Gold. 220-180 B.C. The State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia".
4. Kim, Moon-Ja (2006). "A Study on the Scythian Buckle" (PDF). Journal of Fashion Business. 10 (6): 49.
5. Boardman, 131-133
6. So, Jenny F.; Bunker, Emma C. (1995). Traders and raiders on China's northern frontier. Seattle : Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, in association with University of Washington Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-295-97473-6.
7. Jacobson, 2-3, 22-23; Bunker, 3-4, 23; for more peoples in Herodotus see here Andreeva, 48-56
8. Jacobson, 1, 4-12
9. Boardman, 355
10. Jacobson, 3-4
11. Jacobson, 1
12. Jacobson, 4-10
13. Jacobson, 13
14. Loehr, Max, "The Stag Image in Scythia and the Far East", Archives of the Chinese Art Society of America, Vol. 9, (1955), pp. 63-76, JSTOR
15. Farkas, Ann, "Interpreting Scythian Art: East vs. West", Artibus Asiae, Vol. 39, No. 2 (1977), pp. 124-138, DOI 10.2307/3250196, JSTOR
16. "Metropolitan Museum of Art". http://www.metmuseum.org.
17. Figure 13.5. Statuette of warrior (a), and bronze cauldron (b), Saka...
18. Piotrovsky, 28-30
19. Jacobson, 14-16
20. "Мелитопольский городской краеведческий музей - MGK Мелитополь". http://www.mgk.zp.ua. Retrieved 2022-03-10.

References

• Andreeva, Petya, "Animal Style at the Penn Museum: Conceptualizing Portable Steppe Art and Its Visual Rhetoric", Orientations 52.3 (2020), pp. 48–56
• Boardman, John ed., The Oxford History of Classical Art, 1993, OUP, ISBN 0198143869
• Bunker, Emma C. (2002). Nomadic art of the eastern Eurasian steppes: the Eugene V. Thaw and other New York collections (fully available online)]. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
• Jacobson, Esther, The Art of the Scythians, 1995, BRILL, ISBN 9004098569, 9789004098565, google books
• Piotrovsky, Boris, et al. "Excavations and Discoveries in Scythian Lands", in From the Lands of the Scythians: Ancient Treasures from the Museums of the U.S.S.R., 3000 B.C.–100 B.C. The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, v. 32, no. 5 (1974), available online as a series of PDFs (bottom of the page).

Further reading

• Andreeva, P. "Fantastic Beasts of the Eurasian Steppes: Toward a Revisionist Approach to Animal Style Art". University of Pennsylvania (Diss), 2018. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2963/
• Borovka G. Scythian Art Paragon New York 1967
• Charrière G. Scythian Art: Crafts of the Early Eurasian Nomads Alpine Fine Arts Collections Ltd, New York 1979.
• Reeder E. D. (ed.) Scythian Gold: Treasures from Ancient Ukraine Abrams Inc, New York 1999
• Piotrovsky, B., L. Galanina, and N. Grach Scythian Art Phaidon, Oxford, and Aurora, Leningrad 1987
• Rice, T. T. The Scythians Frederick A. Praeger, Inc. New York 1957
• Rolle R. Die Welt der Skythen Bucher, Luzern und Frankfurt, 1980
• Sher, Yakov A.; "On the Sources of the Scythic Animal Style", Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 25, No. 2 (1988), pp. 47–60, University of Wisconsin Press, JSTOR
• Stoddert, K. (ed.) From the Lands of the Scythians The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York 1985
• Williams, Dyfri; Ogden, Jack, Greek gold: jewellery of the classical world, Metropolitan Museum of Art/British Museum, 1994, ISBN 0714122025, 9780714122021 (many pieces from Scythian tombs)

External links

• New York Times article on 2001 Siberian discovery
• Article on Scythian culture and art
• Scythian artifacts collection
Ryzhanovka
• Archaeology abstract of 1997 article
• the Ryzhanovka Kurgan in Ukraine
• Ryzhanovka
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36175
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to Articles & Essays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 67 guests

cron