The Syrian Goddess
Lucian
This translation by Herbert A. Strong and John Garstang was originally published in 1913.
This online edition was created and published by Global Grey on the 5th August 2023.
Table of Contents
Editor’s Preface
To the student of oriental religions the Dea Syria is brimful of interest. It describes the cult and worship of the goddess of Northern Syria, Atargatis, at her sacred city, Hierapolis, now Mumbij. The time when Lucian wrote would be the middle of the second century B.C. We do not see any reason to reject the traditional authorship of the treatise: on the contrary, the work seems to reveal the famous satirist at home, taking a natural interest in local memories and institutions, while making, doubtless, mental notes that were to prove of use in the works for which he is best known.
Of the many writers who refer to the Dea Syria, no one dwells upon the fundamental character of the cult at Hierapolis, nor deals with the problem of its historical origins. It is this aspect of inquiry, therefore, with which we chiefly deal in the Introduction and the foot notes. Lucian’s description, amplified by the later account of Macrobius, and further illustrated by the local coinage of Hierapolis, reveals the central cult as that of a divine pair. The male god, a form of Hadad, is symbolised by the bull, and is hence both “Lord of Heaven” and “Creator.” The female deity is shown by her very name, “Atargatis,” to be a form of Ishtar or Astarte. Being mated with the god, whom Lucian calls “Zeus,” she is called by him “Hera”: but she wears a mural crown, and is symbolised by the lion; and Lucian recognises in her traces of Kybele, Aphrodite, Artemis, and other aspects of the Mother Goddess. An examination of the materials which modern research has made available, shows this cult to be attributable historically to the Hittites, the earliest known masters of the soil. The argument is developed in our Introduction.
If some of our notes to Lucian’s narrative appear elementary and superfluous—they were originally prepared for lecture purposes—it may be urged as an excuse for retaining them, that the eastern horizon of many of the classical students in our universities is still bounded, like that of Homer, by the Halys River. The life-work of Ramsay, Sayce, Winckler and others, in developing our knowledge of the interior of Asia Minor, is passed over in a casual or cursory fashion; and their results are relegated with vague mistrust and misgiving to the orientalist. If anyone should be tempted, however, to pursue his studies in this wider field, he will find in these notes many references to the writings and discussions of authorities like the late Robertson-Smith, Ed. Meyer, Professor Frazer, Mr. Farnell, Messieurs Cumont, Dussaud and others, that will at once introduce him to a fuller bibliography of the various aspects of Anthropology and Comparative Religions towards which this treatise naturally leads. He would do well, however, to prepare for such a study, by making himself familiar with the broad principles of these subjects, explained in Tylor’s Primitive Culture and his Anthropology, and Jevon’s Introduction to the History of Religion. Otherwise he will be likely to have his mind perplexed by seemingly irreconcilable differences of opinion and interpretation.
We are indebted for assistance, suggestion and facilities, freely and generously given, to Mr. Hill and Mr. King, of the British Museum; Mr. Hogarth, Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum; M. Babélon, of the Bibliothèque Nationale; Professor Kubilschek, of Vienna; and to our colleagues, Professor Lehmann-Haupt, Professor Bosanquet, Professor Newberry and Dr. Pinches.
J. G.
INSTITUTE OF ARCHÆOLOGY,
UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL,
November, 1912.
Introduction
THE SYRIAN GODDESS IN HISTORY AND ART.
THE dawn of history in all parts of Western Asia discloses the established worship of a nature-goddess in whom the productive powers of the earth were personified. She is our Mother Earth, known otherwise as the Mother Goddess or Great Mother. Among the Babylonians and northern Semites she was called Ishtar: she is the Ashtoreth of the Bible, and the Astarte of Phœnicia. In Syria her name was ‘Athar, and in Cilicia it had the form of ‘Ate (‘Atheh). At Hierapolis, with which we are primarily concerned, it appears in later Aramaic as Atargatis, a compound of the Syrian and Cilician forms. In Asia Minor, where the influence of the Semitic language did not prevail, her various names have not survived, though it is recorded by a later Greek writer as “Ma” at one of her mountain shrines, and as Agdistis amongst one tribe of the Phrygians and probably at Pessinus. These differences, however, are partly questions of local tongue; for in one way and another there was still a prevailing similarity between the essential attributes and worship of the nature-goddess throughout Western Asia.
The “origins” of this worship and its ultimate development are not directly relevant to our present enquiry; but we must make passing allusion to a point of special interest and wide significance. As regards Asia Minor, at least, a theory that explains certain abnormal tendencies in worship and in legend would attribute to the goddess, in the primitive conception of her, the power of self-reproduction, complete in herself, a hypothesis justified by the analogy of beliefs current among certain states of primitive society. However that may be, a male companion is none the less generally associated with her in mythology, even from the earliest historical vision of Ishtar in Babylonia, where he was known as Tammuz. While evidence is wanting to define clearly the original position of this deity in relation to the goddess, the general tendency of myth and legend in the lands of Syria and Asia Minor, with which we are specially concerned, reveals him as her offspring, the fruits of the earth. The basis of the myth was human experience of nature, particularly the death of plant life with the approach of winter and its revival with the spring. In one version accordingly “Adonis” descends for the six winter months to the underworld, until brought back to life through the divine influence of the goddess. The idea that the youth was the favoured lover of the goddess belongs to a different strain of thought, if indeed it was current in these lands at all in early times. In Asia Minor at any rate the sanctity of the goddess’s traditional powers was safeguarded in popular legend by the emasculation of “Attis,” and in worship by the actual emasculation of her priesthood, perhaps the most striking feature of her cult. The abnormal and impassioned tendencies of her developed worship would be derived, according to this theory, from the efforts of her worshippers to assist her to bring forth notwithstanding her singleness. However that may be, the mourning for the death of the youthful god, and rejoicing at his return, were invariable features of this worship of nature. It is reasonable to believe that long before the curtain of history was raised over Asia Minor the worship of this goddess and her son had become deep-rooted.
There then appeared the Hittites. In relation with Babylonia and Egypt, these peoples had already become known at the close of the third millennium B.C.; and, to judge from the Biblical accounts, numbers of them had settled here and there throughout Syria and Palestine as early as the days of the patriarchs. Nothing is known of their constitution and organization in these days, however; it is not until their own archives speak that we find them in the fourteenth century B.C. an already established constitutional power, with their capital at Boghaz-Keui. Their sway extended southward into Syria as far as the Lebanon, eastward to the Euphrates, and at times into Mesopotamia, westward as far as Lydia, and probably to the sea coast.
Their chief deity was a God omnipotent, the “Lord of Heaven,” with lightning in his hand, the controller of storms ruling in the skies, and, hence identified with the sun. At Senjerli, in the north of Syria, he was represented simply with trident and hammer, the emblems of the lightning and the thunder.
But a sculpture at Malâtia, on their eastern frontier, shows him standing on the back of a bull, the emblem of creative powers, and bearing upon his shoulder a bow, identifying him with a God of Arms, as was natural amongst warlike tribes, His enshrined image is found carved upon a rocky peak of the Kizil Dagh, a ridge that rises from the southern plains on the central plateau of Asia Minor.
In the sanctuary near Boghaz-Keui, clad like their other deities in the Hittite warrior garb, he has assumed a conventional and majestic appearance, bearded, with the lightning emblem in one hand and his sceptre in the other, a prototype of Zeus. The scene of which this sculpture is a part represents the ceremonial marriage of the god with the Great Mother, with the rites and festivities that accompanied the celebration, so far as mural decoration permits of treatment of such a theme.
From these sculptures we learn that which is fundamental in the Hittite religion, namely, the recognition of a chief god and goddess, and though doubtless the outcome of the political conditions, the mating of these two deities at the proper season would seem to have been peculiarly natural and appropriate to the old established religion of the land. In this union, moreover, each god preserved its dignity and individuality, each cult maintained its proper ceremonies, yet the pair could be worshipped in common as the divine Father and Mother, the source of all life, human, animal, and vegetable.
With the goddess there is in these sculptures the image of the youth who, in the original tradition, was her necessary companion, representing clearly, in this instance, her offspring, the fruits of the earth. Indeed a later sculpture at Ivrîz seems to show this god, changed in form but still recognizable, as the patron of agriculture, with bunches of grapes in one hand and ears of corn in the other. Even at Boghaz-Keui, this youthful deity is already accorded a smaller adjacent sanctuary, devoted to his cult alone. Following the great deities are many other figures, forming, as it were, two groups. Accompanying the god are the minor gods of the Hittite States, who, for the most part, are similar to himself in general appearance. They are followed by priests and men who are taking part in the celebration, in which it would appear revelry and dancing were not omitted.
In the train of the goddess, who like her son stands upon the back of a lioness, there follow two other goddesses of smaller size, but similar to herself in appearance, grouped together on a double-headed eagle. These are followed by a number of figures of priestesses clad like the goddess; and, surveying all, the noble figure of the King-Priest clad in a toga-like garment, and holding a curving lituus, the emblem of his sacred office.
That which seems to us in our present enquiry the chief feature of these sculptures is that the worship is clearly common to the god and the goddess, who occupy the leading positions in equal prominence. This interpretation is supported substantially by sculptures which decorate the main entrance of the neighbouring Hittite city of Eyuk. The corner stone on the right represents the goddess seated, receiving the worship of her priests; while the corresponding corner stone on the left shows a Bull-God on a pedestal, with the High Priest and Priestess ministering at his altar. The Bull we have seen to be identified with the chief Hittite deity, which he seems here to replace.
This conclusion is of importance in our present subject, for Lucian describes the chief sanctuary of the great Syrian temple at Hierapolis as containing the common shrine of “Zeus” and “Hera.” His very use of these names suggests the wedded character of the deities. Had the shrine been that of the Great Mother alone, the god would not have been accorded an equal prominence near the common altar; he would have been an “Attis,” not a “Zeus.” The goddess herself would have been in the Greek mind a Rhea or Aphrodite, not a Hera; and Lucian was sufficiently familiar with his subject to be able to discriminate. As it is, he is perplexed in his identification of the goddess by her very comprehensive attributes, which included the many virtues and powers to which the Greek mind assigned separate personifications, known by different names. Speaking generally,” he says, “she is undoubtedly Hera, but she has something of the attributes of Athene and of Aphrodite, and of Selene and of Rhea and of Artemis and of Nemesis and of the Fates.”
To sum up this stage of our argument, the chief Hittite deity is a god of the skies, identified with the sun; he is all powerful, and in symbolism is identified with the Bull. In formal sculpture he resembles Zeus. The chief Hittite goddess is of comprehensive character: the emblems in her hand and her youthful companion reveal the nature-goddess; while the mural crown, the lion, and double axe are special symbols of the Great Mother surviving with the Phrygian Kybele (or Rhea). The central Hittite cult is that of this mated pair, the Bull-god Zeus and the Lion nature-goddess. The central cult-images of Hierapolis, as described by Lucian, are exactly similar. There are the mated pair of deities: the god is indistinguishable from Zeus, and he is seated on bulls; while the goddess, who is called for brevity “Hera,” as the consort of “Zeus,” embodies attributes of the nature-goddess or Great Mother, and she is seated on lions.
The central cult at Hierapolis is thus apparently identical with that which the Hittites had established in the land 1500 years before Lucian wrote. It remains to examine such independent evidences as are available from literary and archaeological sources, to see whether they bear out the argument. We shall find our main conclusion remarkably substantiated. But before passing from the evidence of the Hittite monuments, inasmuch as Lucian’s narrative is chiefly descriptive of the developed cult of the nature-goddess (with the god submerged), it is of special interest to notice how widespread are the evidences of her worship in the Hittite period. We have spoken of two of her shrines in the interior, at Boghaz-Keui and Eyuk. There is a third at Fraktin, in the mountainous country south of Cæsarea. Here the sculptures are carved on the living rock overlooking a stream. The goddess is represented seated behind an altar on which appears her bird. She seems in this case uniquely to wear the Hittite hat, but the carving is not carried out in detail. Before the altar her priestess is pouring an oblation. The counterpart to this group is a Hittite god and worshipper, while between them is a draped altar of special character. One of the earliest of her images, according to Pausanias, is that which may still be seen on Mount Sipylus, near to Smyrna on the western coast a gigantic figure of the goddess seated, carved in the living rock, and distinguished as Hittite handiwork by certain hieroglyphs carved in the niche. Further east, in Phrygia, one of different character has been found at Yarre. In this sculpture, which is on a movable stone, we have one of a series of representations in which the goddess, seated as always, is worshipped in a ceremonial feast or communion. The funerary character of this class of monument is attested by a similar sculpture from Karaburshlu, near Senjerli, in the north of Syria, and other illustrations are found at Marash, where the cup, mirror, and girdle are instructive details of the scene. The conception of the Great Mother as goddess of the dead is by no means strained or unnatural, for the resurrection and future life is a dominant theme in the universal myth associated with her. And just as the dead year revived in springtime through her mediation, so she may have been entreated on behalf of the dead for their well-being or their return to life. Thus a second class of similar monument represents the goddess enshrined, with a votary in the act of worship or adoration. Such are the two sculptures at Eyuk, one from Sakje-Geuzi, and three from Marash, in the north of Syria. In one of these, from the last-named place, the goddess is distinguished by the child upon her knee, and a mirror and bird accompany the group, which is further remarkable for the lyre before her upon the altar. In others from this place, a bow appears, held in one case in the hand of the worshipper, who proffers it towards her above the altar as though dedicating it to her service and entreating her blessing. A further sculpture in which the goddess plays a part has been found at Carchemish, but details of the scene are not yet available. Other sculptures, resembling these in general appearance, at Senjerli, Malâtia, and possibly at Boghaz-Keui itself, in which the personages taking part in this ceremonial feast are male and female, may possibly be modifications representing the local king and queen as High Priest and Priestess, or impersonating the god and goddess in the communion rite.
In Glyptic art two varieties of goddess are apparent; the one is robed and seated, and for the most part resembles the deity in her distinctively Hittite character; the other is naked, and she has been supposed to have had her origin in this aspect in Syria, whence she penetrated further east. This latter form of goddess has its counterpart in numerous small clay and bronze images, of votive character, which may be found in many places of Northern Syria. In these the goddess is represented as naked, with her hands proffering her breasts. A similar deity, though winged, is represented on a sculptured but undated monument from Carchemish. This is not, however, the Hittite goddess as she is known in Asia Minor, where she is uniformly represented as seated and robed, and commonly wearing a veil which is thrown back from the face. Nor is she the Dea Syria described by Lucian, though commonly identified with her by modern writers. The reason for this identification is probably to be found in the general tendency towards the development of human passions in connection with the Syrian cults, and emphasized in the special characteristics of Astarte of Phœnicia as the goddess presiding over human birth.
The Hittites came and went; their dominion over Asia Minor was subject to repeated onslaughts on every side, from the Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Vannic tribes, the Cimmerians, the Muski and the Phrygians. Their empire, moreover, was held together only insecurely by a system of confederation and alliance which was not apparently of mutual seeking, but imposed by the Hatti during the period of their supremacy at Boghaz-Keui; and from the 12th century B.C. it began rapidly to disintegrate. There is little record of the subsequent events: the Assyrian annals reveal only a series of sporadic coalitions in Syria, to resist their oncoming, and a temporary revival of the Hittite States in that region during the 10th and 9th centuries B.C. Before 700 B.C. the fall of Carchemish, followed by the submission of the region of Taurus and Marash, brought all semblance of Hittite power to an end. What had happened meanwhile in Asia Minor in the struggles between the Phrygians and the Hittites can only be imagined, but in any case by the year 550 B.C., when Crœsus of Lydia crossed the Halys and took possession of Pteria (Boghaz-Keui), he found it still in the hands of a Syro-Cappadocian population: thereafter the political history of Asia Minor becomes largely that of Persia and Macedonia, of Greece and Rome.
With the Hittites fell their chief god from his predominant place in the religion of the interior. Whether, indeed, he did not survive elsewhere than at Hierapolis, in various local guises or legends, noticeably at Doliche, is a problem into which it would be irrelevant to enter. But the Great Mother lived on, being the goddess of the land. Her cult, modified, in some cases profoundly, by time and changed political circumstances, was found surviving at the dawn of Greek history in several places in the interior. Prominent among these sites is Pessinus in Phrygia, a sacred city, with which the legend of Kybele and Attis is chiefly associated. Other districts developed remarkable and even abnormal tendencies in myth and worship. At Comana, in the Taurus, where the Assyrian armies were resisted to the last, and the ancient martial spirit still survives, she became, like Isthar, a goddess of war, identified by the Romans with Bellona: In Syria, again, a different temper and climate emphasized the sensuous tendency of human passions. In all these cases, however, there survived some uniformity of ceremonial and custom. At each shrine numerous priests, called Galli, numbering at Comana as many as 5,000, took part in the worship. Women dedicated their persons as an honourable custom, which in some cases was not even optional, to the service of the goddess. The great festivals were celebrated at regular seasons with revelry, music, and dancing, as they had been of old, coupled with customs which tended to become, in the course of time, more and more orgiastic. These are, however, matters of common knowledge and may be studied in the classical writings. Lucian himself adds considerably to our understanding of these institutions; indeed his tract has been long one of the standard sources of information, supplying details which have been applied, perhaps too freely, to the character of the general cult. Religion in the East is a real part of life, not tending so much as in the West to become stereotyped or conventionalized, but changing with changes of conditions, adapted to the circumstances and needs of the community. So, wherever the goddess was worshipped there would be variety of detail. It is, however, remarkable in this case, that throughout the Hittite period, though wedded and in a sense subordinate to a dominant male deity, and subsequently down to the age at which Lucian wrote, she maintained, none the less, her individuality and comprehensive character. Thus, while Lucian is concerned in his treatise with the cult of an apparently local goddess of northern Syria, we recognize her as a localised aspect of the Mother-goddess, whose worship in remoter times had already been spread wide, and so explain at once the points of clear resemblance in character and in worship to other nature-goddesses of Syria and Asia Minor.
From this general enquiry among the most ancient monuments of the country into the historical origins of the dual cult at Hierapolis, and the character of the goddess, we pass in conclusion to the particular local evidences, more nearly of Lucian’s age, that serve to illustrate and amplify his descriptions. There are two chief sources: firstly, the local coins, ranging in date from the time of Alexander down to the 3rd century A.D.; and secondly, the literary allusions of Macrobius, who lived and wrote about A.D. 400. The feature of these branches of evidence that first strikes the enquirer is their obvious reference to a cult and worship which did not change in its essential features throughout the seven centuries of political turmoil which they cover. This enables us to realize how the cult might have been originally established during the remoter days of Hittite supremacy in the land.
The coins are not numerous, but they are profoundly instructive: in particular, one of these, which we shall presently describe, furnishes a direct illustration of Lucian’s description of the sanctuary; while two others, which are among the earliest, corroborate in certain details the main point of our argument. In general also, these coins, even those of the later dates, uniformly reveal the goddess as a lion deity; for wherever her full form is shown, she is seated on a lion or on a lion-borne throne. Commonly, however, only her head or bust is given, e.g., in one case, the full face with dishevelled or possibly “radiate” hair; in another, the profile, showing upon her head a mural crown with her veil thrown back. Her name, Atargatis, is recognizable on these coins, though it takes several forms. On this point, therefore, the local evidence confirms the records of Strabo, Pliny, and Macrobius. The male deity has almost disappeared in the later coins, surviving chiefly in his symbol, the bull, which in some cases occurs singly as a counterpart to the lion or lion-goddess on the opposite side of the coin, and in other cases is shown in the grip of the lion as though reminiscent of the ultimate triumph of the cult of the goddess over that of the god. In similar fashion, the coins of the Roman Empire show an imperial eagle triumphing above the lion in several examples.
In two cases, however, the figure of the god does survive. One of these coins of the period of Alexander, shows upon the obverse the figure of the god seated upon a throne, holding in his left hand a long sceptre, and in the right hand something which is not distinct. On the reverse side of the coin, the goddess is represented clad in long robes, with girdle, seated upon a lion; she holds in her left hand, it would seem, the lightning trident.
Instructive as this coin is, it yields in interest to another of the 3rd century A.D., in which the two deities are shown seated on their thrones, on either side of a central object, surmounted by a bird, exactly like the picture of the sanctuary, which Lucian describes in § 32. The reverse of the coin bears the legend ΘΕΩΙ CϒΡΙΑC (ΙΕΡΟΠ)ΟΛΙΤΩΝ. The object in the centre is an ædicula, surmounted by a dove, and enclosing apparently a Roman standard. To the right is the god, bearded, clad in a long tunic, with a tall calathos on his head, a sceptre in his right hand; he is seated, as it were, upon bulls, but actually upon a throne to which the head and forepart of bulls form the side-piece. On the right-hand side, Atargatis, the Syrian Goddess, is seated similarly upon a throne which two lions support; she is clothed and girdled, and wears a broad calathos or crown upon her head. In the field of the coin, below these representations, there appears a lion. The subject of this coin, is, as we have said, an actual illustration of Lucian’s description of the sanctuary: his words are as follows:—”In this shrine are placed the statues, one of which is Hera, the other Zeus, though they call him by another name. Both are sitting; Hera is supported by lions, Zeus is sitting on bulls. . . . Between the two there stands another image of gold, no part of it resembling the others: this possesses no special form of its own, but recalls the characteristics of the other gods. The Syrians speak of it as Semeïon [σημήϊον], its summit is crowned by a golden pigeon.” It is only in reference to this central object that the description fails, though, in both cases, a bird is perched upon the top; and doubtless therefore, the design upon the coin is intended to illustrate something similar to that which Lucian describes. The object upon he coin is formal, architectural, and Roman in character; while Lucian tells us particularly that the object between the deities “recalled characteristics of the other gods.”
We are reminded by this reference of a feature in Hittite sculptures, notably those at Fraktin. Here the pillars of the altars of the goddess and of the god take the form of a human body from the waist downwards, swathed in many folds of a fringed garment or robe; and upon the altar of the goddess appears a bird, doubtless a pigeon or dove, which was in all tradition her peculiar emblem. Lucian’s description is more aptly explained by this symbolism: the object as seen upon the coin had clearly become conventionalized in Roman times. However that may be, the dual character of the cult, the god identified with the bull, the goddess with the lion, is remarkably substantiated.
Further instructive details with regard to these deities are given by Macrobius, and we may appropriately quote from him the following significant passage:—”The Syrians give the name Adad to the god, which they revere as first and greatest of all; his name signifies The One.’ They honour this god as all powerful, but they associate with him the goddess named Adargatis, and assign to these two divinities supreme power over everything, recognizing in them the sun and the earth. Without expressing by numerous names the different aspects of their power, their predominance is implied by the different attributes assigned to the two divinities. For the statue of Adad is encircled by descending rays, which indicate that the force of heaven resides in the rays which the sun sends down to earth: the rays of the statue of Adargatis rise upwards, a sign that the power of the ascending rays brings to life everything which the earth produces. Below this statue are the figures of lions, emblematic of the earth; for the same reason that the Phrygians so represent the Mother of the gods, that is to say, the earth, borne by lions.” The character, then, of the god and goddess in the sanctuary of the temple, the heart of the cult, remained still the same in the fourth century A.D. as it had been in the beginning. The words which Macrobius uses would be equally descriptive of the special attributes of the Hittite Sun-God and the Hittite Earth-Goddess, which we have described, and the reference to Cybele of Phrygia is also significant. There is indeed a faint memory in tradition of a son to Atargatis, corresponding to the youthful companion of the Hittite goddess at Boghaz-Keui, and hence doubtless to the “Tammuz” and “Attis” of the various legends; and in one of the effigies at Hierapolis it is possible to see a later aspect of this deity corresponding to the Hittite Sandan-Hercules of Ivrîz.
If any doubt remained as to the historical origins of the cult at Hierapolis, it would be dispelled by another coin, one of the earliest of the site, on the face of which is the picture and name of the goddess, Atargatis. On the reverse of the coin is seen the priest-dynast of the age (about 332 B.C.): his name is Abd-Hadad, the “servant of Hadad.” He is represented at full length, but owing to the wearing of the coin, some of the details are lost. The robe upon him, however, recalls that of the Hittite priest; and the hat which he wears is unmistakably the time-honoured conical hat distinctive of the Hittite peoples. Except in such local religious survival as is here illustrated, this hat must have long fallen into disuse.
In short, the words of Macrobius, which corroborate and amplify Lucian’s description of the central cult at Hierapolis, are strictly apposite to the chief Hittite god and goddess.
The coins of the site illustrate the same motive; and on one of the earliest of them, features of Hittite costume are found still surviving four hundred years after the final overthrow of the Hittite States in Northern Syria.
J. G.
Life Of Lucian
THERE is no ancient biography of Lucian extant excepting an unsatisfactory sketch by Suidas; but we can gather many facts as to his life from his own writings. He expressly tells us that he was a Syrian or Assyrian, and that Samosata was his native place, the capital of Commagene, situated on the right or western bank of the Euphrates. He was probably born about the year 125 A.D., and his career extends over the greater part of the second century after the Christian era. He was of humble extraction; he tells us that his mother’s family were hereditary sculptors (λιθοξόοι). This fact is interesting as enabling us to suppose that he would examine with an accurate and critical eye the different statues which he saw and described in his various travels, and especially those in the great temple at Hierapolis. He tells us, however, that he proved but a sorry sculptor, and nothing was left him but to apply himself to the study of literature and to adopt the profession of a sophist. He could not even, according to his own account, speak pure Greek, and with the view of purifying his language he visited successively the rhetorical schools of Ionia and Greece proper, where he made the acquaintance of the Platonic philosopher Nigrinus, and no doubt contracted much of the admiration for Plato which reveals itself in his writings. We see him next at Antioch practising as a lawyer in the Courts; he enjoyed in this capacity such a reputation for oratory that he felt entitled to gratify his spirit of restlessness and intellectual curiosity by travel, and adopting the career of a travelling sophist. In this capacity he visited Syria, Phœnicia and Egypt, probably in the years 148 and 149 A.D. He tells us in the De Dea Syria that he had been at Hierapolis, Byblus, Libanus, and Sidon; and we know from his own description how carefully he inspected these great seats of Oriental beliefs.
He likewise tells us that he visited Egypt, but that he went to no other part of Libya. He arrived at Rome about 150 A.D., suffering from bad eyesight and anxious to consult a good oculist. After a sojourn of two years in Italy he passed into Gaul, where he had heard that there was a good opening for a public lecturer, and here he stayed for some ten years. He learned so much while among the Gauls that he was able to retire from the profession of lecturer and to devote himself to the study of philosophy. He returned to the East .through Macedonia, staying to lecture at Thessalonica, and travelling through Asia Minor reached Samosata in 164 A.D. There he found his father still living, and removed him and his family to Greece, whither he followed them in the following year. On his way he visited Abonoteichos, afterwards Ionopolis, in Cappadocia, where he visited the false prophet Alexander, and nearly met his end owing to a trick played upon him by that impostor. He passed by Aegialos and proceeded to Amastris, whence he travelled into Greece with Peregrinus Proteus, and he says that he was present when that most marvellous of charlatans burnt himself alive at Olympia. He then settled down at Athens, devoting himself to the study of philosophy, and he seems to have passed a happy and prosperous life of learned leisure. At the end of the century he found his resources failing and once more betook himself to the employment of his youth; and he was glad to be relieved from this drudgery by a good and lucrative appointment conferred on him by the Emperor Severus in connexion with the Law Courts of Alexandria. Of the date of his death we know nothing.
The tract on “The Syrian Goddess” is thought to have been one of his earliest works, written when he was fresh from the East, as appears among other things from his calling Deucalion by his Syrian name, Σκύθης, meaning Σικύδης, i.e., Xisuthrus. It has been doubted by some scholars whether this tract was really by Lucian, on the ground that it is written in the Ionic dialect, the employment of which Lucian derides in Quomodo Historiam, § 18. But the scholiast on the Nubes of Aristophanes certainly ascribes it to Lucian, and it is quite in keeping with the versatility of his genius to adopt a style at an early period of his literary career, and, at a later period to mock at the affectations of his early productions. In any case, whether the tract is by Lucian or not, it gives a singular picture of the beliefs and practices in Hierapolis, and is worthy of the attention of archæologists and students of comparative religions.
“Lucian was at one time secretary to the prefect of Egypt, and he boasts that he had a large share in writing the laws and ordering the justice of that province. Here this laughing philosopher found a broad mark for his humour in the religion of the Egyptians, their worship of animals and water-jars, their love of magic, the general mourning through the land on the death of the bull Apis, their funeral ceremonies, their placing their mummies round the dinner table as so many guests, and pawning a father or a brother when in want of money.”—Sharpe’s History of Egypt, Chap. xv., § 51.
It is especially noteworthy that he wrote this treatise in the Ionic dialect in imitation of Herodotus, who adopted that form of Greek for his great work, and it speaks much for the powers of Lucian as a linguist and as a stylist that he was able to pass from the Ionic dialect to the pure Attic Greek in which the rest of his works are composed.
It is no part of our aim to criticise Lucian fully as an author; it will be plain from the short sketch of his life that he was singularly attracted by the spirit of curiosity to obtain all possible information about the strange Oriental cults among which he had been brought up. He gives us information at first hand on the religion of the Assyrians, and much of this is of extreme interest as tallying with what we read in the Old Testament. The flood which destroyed all mankind for their wickedness; the salvation of one man and his family; the animals which went into the ark in pairs; the special sanctity ascribed to pigeons among the Syrians, all recall memories of Jewish traditions. Stratonice’s guilty love for Combabus and his rejection of her advances recall other passages of the Old Testament; and the consecration of their first beard and their locks by the young men and maidens respectively recalls passages in Catullus and Vergil, and seems to show that this custom was an importation from the East. The tract on the Dea Syria differs from Lucian’s other works by its simplicity and freedom from persiflage. It is the work of an intelligent traveller conversant with architecture and with the technique of statuary, and anxious to record the facts that he had been able to ascertain as to the strange Oriental cults practised in his native country. His attitude is that of an interested sceptic, but he confesses himself unable to explain all the miracles which he witnessed at Hierapolis, though he probably deemed that they owed their existence to some tricks of the priests such as he had seen performed on other occasions.
The following passage from one of a series of lectures to clergy at Cambridge may be added to this brief account:—
“It is the peculiar distinction of Lucian in the history of letters that he was the first to employ the form of dialogue, not on grave themes, but as a vehicle of comedy and satire. He intimates this claim in the piece entitled The Twice Accused, which is so called because Lucian is there arraigned by personified Rhetoric on the one part and by Dialogue on the other. Rhetoric upbraids him with having forsaken her for the bearded Dialogus, the henchman of philosophy: while Dialogus complained that the Syrian has dragged him from his philosophical heaven to earth, and given him a comic instead of a tragic mask. Lucian’s dialogues blend an irony in which Plato had been his master with an Aristophanic mirth and fancy. His satire ranges over the whole life of his time, and he has been an originating source in literature. His true history is the prototype of such works as Gulliver’s Travels: his Dialogues of the Dead were the precursors of Landor’s Imaginary Conversations.”
Müller and Donaldson quote Sir Walter Scott as affirming that “from the True History of Lucian Cyrano de Bergerac took his idea of a Journey to the Moon, and Rabelais derived his yet more famous Voyage of Pantagruel.”
As the tract De Dea Syria is mainly descriptive it is unnecessary here to enter fully into Lucian’s views of religion and philosophy. It may, however, be remarked that the belief in religion, whether as represented by the ancient and national gods of Rome and Greece, or by the Oriental deities, had lost its hold on both the educated and uneducated classes. The disappearance of religion was succeeded by superstition in various forms, which was exploited to their own advantage by such charlatans and adventurers as Alexander and Peregrinus Proteus. Lucian’s attitude is that of a detached and scornful observer, who, however, in spite of his contempt for the silliness of his fellow men, sees the pathos of human affairs, and would fain make them regard conduct as the standard of life. Professor Dill has remarked that the worldly age in which Lucian’s lot was cast was ennobled by a powerful protest against worldliness. This protest was none other than the lives of the best of the philosophers who waged unceasing war against selfishness and superstition in a selfish and superstitious age. Lucian mocks indeed at these philosophers without, however, apparently having thought it worth his while to study any system of philosophy very deeply. “Yet the man who was utterly sceptical as to the value of all philosophic effort, in the last resort approaches very nearly to the view of human life which was preached by the men whom he derides. . . . There are many indications in the dialogues that if Lucian had turned Cynic preacher he would have waged the same war on the pleasures and illusory ambitions of man, he would have outdone the Cynics in brutal frankness of exposure and denunciation, as he would have surpassed them in rhetorical and imaginative charm of style.”
Lucian has heard of Christianity, but seems to have regarded it as an ordinary Oriental cult. He refers to it twice; the first passage is in the memoirs of Alexander, in which the false prophet is alleged to have proclaimed: “If any atheist, Christian, or Epicurean has come to spy out the sacred rites, let him flee”; and in the same tract (§ 25) he couples Christians and atheists. The second passage is in the treatise on the death of Peregrinus the impostor, who, according to Lucian, was a renegade from Christianity and indeed had occupied an important post among that community. The translation is Sir Richard Jebb’s.
“He had thoroughly learnt,” says Lucian, “the wondrous philosophy of the Christians, having consorted in Palestine with their priests and scribes. What would you expect? He speedily showed that they were mere children in his hands: he was their prophet, the chief of their religious fraternity (θιασιάρχης), the convener of their meetings (συναγωγεύς) —in short, everything to them. Some of their books he interpreted and elucidated; many of them he wrote himself. They regarded him as a god, made him their law-giver, and adopted him as their champion (προστάτην ἐπεγράφοντο).”
Concerning their tenets he says, “They still reverence that great one (τὸν μέγαν ἐκεῖνον), the man who was crucified in Palestine because he brought this new mystery into the world. The poor creatures have persuaded themselves that they will be altogether immortal and live for ever; wherefore they despise death and in many cases give themselves to it voluntarily. Then their first Law-giver (i.e., Christ) persuaded them that they were all brethren, when they should have taken the step of renouncing all the Hellenic gods, and worshipping that crucified one, their sophist, and living after his laws. So they despise all things alike (i.e., all dangers and sufferings) and hold their goods in common: though they have received such traditions without any certain warrant. If then an artful impostor comes among them, an adroit man of the world, he very soon enriches himself by making these simple folk his dupes.”
It is fair to say that by some writers of repute Peregrinus is regarded as a conscientious mystic, and Lucian as unqualified to understand mysticism and religious enthusiasm. In any case it is clear that Lucian for all the scorn with which he regards the various religions and philosophies of his age, showed considerable interest in collecting facts about them, and those which he gives us in the tract on The Syrian Goddess are as instructive as any.
The tract on The Syrian Goddess has been translated at the instance of the Liverpool Institute of Archæology. The text followed is that of Dindorf (Paris, 1884). The memoir on Lucian is mainly based upon the History of the Literature of Ancient Greece (Müller and Donaldson), Sir Richard Jebb’s “Lucian” in his Essays and Addresses (Cambridge University Press), Sir Samuel Dill’s Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius, and Glover’s Conflict of Religions in the Early Roman Empire.
H. A. S.
Translation And Notes
1. There is in Syria a city not far from the river Euphrates: it is called “the Sacred City,” and is sacred to the Assyrian Hera. As far as I can judge this name was not conferred upon the city when it was first settled, but originally it bore another name. In course of time the great sacrifices were held therein, and then this title was bestowed upon it. I will speak of this city, and of what it contains. I will speak also of the laws which govern its holy rites, of its popular assemblies and of the sacrifices offered by its citizens. I will speak also of all the traditions attaching to the founders of this holy place: and of the manner of the founding of its temple. I write as an Assyrian born who have witnessed with mine own eyes some of the facts which I am about to narrate: some, again, I learnt from the priests: they occurred before my time, but I narrate them as they were told to me.
2. The first men on earth to receive knowledge of the gods, and to build temples and shrines and to summon meetings for religious observances are said to have been the Egyptians. They were the first, too, to take cognizance of holy names, and to repeat sacred traditions. Not long after them the Assyrians heard from the Egyptians their doctrines as to the gods, and they reared temples and shrines: in these they placed statues and images.
3. Originally the temples of the Egyptians possessed no images. And there exist in Syria temples of a date not much later than those of Egypt, many of which I have seen myself, for instance, the temple of Hercules in Tyre. This is not the Hercules of Greek legend; but a Tyrian hero of much greater antiquity than he.
4. There is likewise in Phœnicia a temple of great size owned by the Sidonians. They call it the temple of Astarte. I hold this Astarte to be no other than the moon-goddess. But according to the story of one of the priests this temple is sacred to Europa, the sister of Cadmus. She was the daughter of Agenor, and on her disappearance from Earth the Phœnicians honoured her with a temple and told a sacred legend about her; how that Zeus was enamoured of her for her beauty, and changing his form into that of a bull carried her off into Crete. This legend I heard from other Phœnicians as well; and the coinage current among the Sidonians bears upon it the effigy of Europa sitting upon a bull, none other than Zeus. Thus they do not agree that the temple in question is sacred to Europa.
5. The Phœnicians have also another sacred custom, derived from Egypt, not from Assyria: it came, they say, from Heliopolis into Phœnicia. I never witnessed this myself, but it is important, and of great antiquity.
6. I saw too at Byblos a large temple, sacred to the Byblian Aphrodite : this is the scene of the secret rites of Adonis: I mastered these. They assert that the legend about Adonis and the wild boar is true, and that the facts occurred in their country, and in memory of this calamity they beat their breasts and wail every year, and perform their secret ritual amid signs of mourning through the whole countryside. When they have finished their mourning and wailing, they sacrifice in the first place to Adonis, as to one who has departed this life: after this they allege that he is alive again, and exhibit his effigy to the sky. They proceed to shave their heads, too, like the Egyptians on the loss of their Apis. The women who refuse to be shaved have to submit to the following penalty, viz., to stand for the space of an entire day in readiness to expose their persons for hire. The place of hire is open to none but foreigners, and out of the proceeds of the traffic of these women a sacrifice to Aphrodite is paid.
7. Some of the inhabitants of Byblos maintain that the Egyptian Osiris is buried in their town, and that the public mourning and secret rites are performed in memory not of Adonis, but of Osiris. I will tell you why this story seems worthy of credence. A human head comes every year from Egypt to Byblos, floating on its seven days’ journey thence: the winds, by some divine instinct, waft it on its way: it never varies from its course but goes straight to Byblos. The whole occurrence is miraculous. It occurs every year, and it came to pass while I was myself in Byblos, and I saw the head in that city.
8. There is, too, another marvellous portent in the region of the Byblians. A river, flowing from Mount Libanus, discharges itself into the sea: this river bears the name of Adonis. Every year regularly it is tinged with blood, and loses its proper colour before it falls into the sea: it dyes the sea, to a large space, red: and thus announces their time of mourning to the Byblians. Their story is that during these days Adonis is wounded, and that the river’s nature is changed by the blood which flows into its waters; and that it takes its name from this blood. Such is the legend vulgarly accepted: but a man of Byblos, who seemed to me to be telling the truth, told me another reason for this marvellous change. He spoke as follows: “This river, my friend and guest, passes through the Libanus: now this Libanus abounds in red earth. The violent winds which blow regularly on those days bring down into the river a quantity of earth resembling vermilion. It is this earth that turns the river to red. And thus the change in the river’s colour is due, not to blood as they affirm, but to the nature of the soil.” This was the story of the Byblian. But even assuming that he spoke the truth, yet there certainly seems to me something supernatural in the regular coincidence of the wind and the colouring of the river.
9. I went up also from Byblos into the Libanus, a single day’s journey, as I had heard that there was an ancient temple of Aphrodite there founded by Cinyras. I saw the temple, and it was indeed old. These then are the ancient great temples of Syria.
10. Of all these temples, and they are numerous indeed, none seems to me greater than those found in the sacred city; no shrine seems to me more holy, no region more hallowed. They possess some splendid masterpieces, some venerable offerings, many rare sights, many striking statues, and the gods make their presence felt in no doubtful way. The statues sweat, and move, and utter oracles, and a shout has often been raised when the temple was closed; it has been heard by many. And more: this temple is the principal source of their wealth, as I can vouch. For much money comes to them from Arabia, and from the Phœnicians and the Babylonians: the Cilicians, too, and the Assyrians bring their tribute. And I saw with my own eyes treasures stored away privately in the temple; many garments, and other valuables, which are exchanged for silver or gold. Nowhere among mankind are so many festivals and sacred assemblies instituted as among them.
11. On enquiring the number of years since the temple was founded, and whom they deemed the goddess to be, many tales were told to me, some of which were sacred, and some public property; some, again, were absolutely fabulous; others were mere barbarians’ tales; others again tallied with the Greek accounts. All these I am ready to narrate, though I withhold my acceptance of some.
12. The people, then, allege that it was Deukalion or Sisythus who founded the temple; I mean the Deukalion in whose time the great flood occurred. I have heard the story about Deukalion as the Greeks narrate it from the Greeks themselves. The story runs as follows: The present race of men was not the first to be created. The first generation perished to a man; the present is a second creation. This generation became a vast multitude, owing to Deukalion. Of the men of the original creation they tell this tale: they were rebellious, and wilful, and performed unholy deeds, disregarding the sanctity of oaths and hospitality, and behaving cruelly to suppliants; and it was for these misdeeds that the great destruction fell upon them. Straightway the earth discharged a vast volume of water, and the rivers of heaven came down in streams and the sea mounted high. Thus everything became water, and all men perished; Deukalion alone was saved for another generation, on the score of his wisdom and piety. The manner of his salvation was as follows: He placed his children and his wives in an ark of vast size, and he himself also entered in. Now, when he had embarked, there came to him wild boars and horses, and generations of lions and serpents, and all the other beasts which roam the earth, all in couples. He welcomed them all. Nor did they harm him; and friendship remained amongst them as Zeus himself ordained. These, one and all, floated in this ark as long as the flood remained. This is the legend of Deukalion as told by the Greeks.
13. But a further story is told by the men of Hierapolis, and a wonderful one it is; they say that in their country a mighty chasm appeared which received all the water, and that Deukalion on this occurrence reared altars and founded a temple to Juno above this chasm. I have actually seen this chasm, it lies beneath the temple and is of very small dimensions. If it was once of large size, and was afterwards reduced to its present small dimensions, I know not: but the chasm which I saw is certainly very small. They maintain that their tale is proved by the following occurrence; twice in every year the water comes from the sea to the temple. This water is brought by the priests; but besides them, all Syria and Arabia and many from beyond the Euphrates go down to the sea; one and all bring its water which they first pour out in the temple; then this water passes down into the chasm which, small though it be, holds a vast quantity of water. Thus then they act, and they declare that the following law was passed by Deukalion in that temple, in order that it might be an everlasting remembrance at once of the visitation and of its alleviation.
14. Others again maintain that Semiramis of Babylon, who has left many mighty works in Asia, founded this edifice as well; nor did she dedicate it to Hera, but to her own mother, whose name was Derceto. Now, I have seen the semblance of Derceto in Phœnicia, and a wonderful sight it is; one half is a woman, but the part which extends from the thighs to the feet ends in a fish’s tail. The effigy, however, which is at Hierapolis is a complete woman. The reasons for this story are plain to understand; they deem fishes holy objects, and never touch them, while of birds they use all but pigeons for food; the pigeon is in their eyes sacred. It appears to them then that what we have described was done in honour of Derceto and Semiramis. The former, because Derceto has the form of a fish; the latter, because the lower half of Semiramis takes the form of a pigeon. I, however, should probably conclude that the temple in question belongs to Semiramis; that the shrine is Derceto’s I can in no wise believe, since even amongst the Egyptians there are some who will not touch fish as food, and they certainly do not observe this restriction in favour of Derceto.
15. There is, however, another sacred story which I had from the lips of a wise man—that the goddess was Rhea, and the shrine the work of Attes. Now this Attes was by nation a Lydian, and he first taught the sacred mysteries of Rhea. The ritual of the Phrygians and the Lydians and the Samothracians was entirely learnt from Attes. For when Rhea deprived him of his powers, he put off his manly garb and assumed the appearance of a woman and her dress, and roaming over the whole earth he performed his mysterious rites, narrating his sufferings and chanting the praises of Rhea. In the course of his wanderings he passed also into Syria. Now, when the men from beyond Euphrates would neither receive him nor his mysteries, he reared a temple to himself on this very spot. The tokens of this fact are as follows: She is drawn by lions, she holds a drum in her hand and carries a tower on her head, just as the Lydians make Rhea to do. He also affirmed that the Galli who are in the temple in no case castrate themselves in honour of Juno, but of Rhea, and this in imitation of Attes. All this seems to me more specious than true, for I have heard a different and more credible reason given for their castration.
16. I approve of the remarks about the temple made by those who in the main accept the theories of the Greeks: according to these the goddess is Hera, but the work was carried out by Dionysus, the son of Semele: Dionysus visited Syria on his journey to Aethiopia. There are in the temple many tokens that Dionysus was its actual founder: for instance, barbaric raiment, Indian precious stones, and elephants’ tusks brought by Dionysus from the Aethiopians. Further, a pair of phalli of great size are seen standing in the vestibule, bearing the inscription, “I, Dionysus, dedicated these phalli to Hera my stepmother.” This proof satisfies me. And I will describe another curiosity to be found in this temple, a sacred symbol of Dionysus. The Greeks erect phalli in honour of Dionysus, and on these they carry, singular to say, mannikins made of wood, with enormous pudenda; they call these puppets. There is this further curiosity in the temple: as you enter, on the right hand, a small brazen statue meets your eye of a man in a sitting posture, with parts of monstrous size.
17. These are the legends concerning the founders of the temple. I will proceed to speak of the edifice itself and its position: how it was built and who built it. They affirm that the temple as it exists now is not that which was built originally: the primitive temple fell to pieces in the course of time: the present one they say was the work of Stratonice, the wife of the king of the Assyrians. This I take to be the Stratonice of whom her stepson was enamoured, and the skill of a doctor detected the intrigue: for the lover, overpowered by the malady of his passion, bewildered by the thought of his shameful caprice, lay sick in silence. He lay sick, and though no ache was in any limb, yet his colour was gone, and his frame was growing frailer day by day. The doctor, seeing that he was suffering from no definite disease, perceived that his malady was none other than love. Many are the symptoms of secret love: languor of vision, change in the voice and complexion, and frequent tears. The doctor, aware of this, acted as follows: he laid his hand on the heart of the young man, and summoned all the domestics in the household. The patient remained tranquil and unmoved on the entrance of the rest, but when his stepmother carne in he grew pale and fell to sweating and trembling, and his heart beat violently. These symptoms betrayed his passion to the doctor.
18. The doctor proceeded to adopt the following cure: Summoning the young man’s father, who was racked by anxiety, he explained to him that the young man’s malady was no normal malady, but a wrongful action: “he has no painful symptoms; he is possessed by love and madness. He longs to possess what he will never obtain; he loves my wife, whom I will never give up.” This was the trick of the wise physician. The father straightway begged the doctor by his prudence and professional skill not to let his son perish. “His malady depended not on his will; it was involuntary. Pray then do not you let your jealousy bring grief on the whole realm, and do not, dear doctor, draw unpopularity on your profession.” Such was the unwitting father’s request. The doctor replied: “Your request is scandalous. You would deprive me of my wife and outrage the honour of a medical man. I put it to you, what would be your conduct, since you are deprecating mine, if your wife were the object of his guilty love?” He replied that he would not spare his own wife nor would he begrudge his son his life, even though that son were enamoured of his own stepmother: losing one’s wife was a less misfortune than losing one’s son. The doctor on hearing this said: “Why then offer me these entreaties? In good truth, your wife is the object of his love. What I said to you was all a made-up story.” The father followed this advice, and handed over his wife and his kingdom to his son, and he himself departed into the region of Babylonia and founded a city on the Euphrates which bore his name: and there he died. Thus it was that our wise doctor detected and cured the malady.
19. Now this Stratonice, when still married to her former husband, saw in a vision Hera exhorting her to rear a temple to this goddess at Hierapolis. Should she neglect to obey, she was menaced by the goddess with manifold evils. The queen began by disregarding the dream, but later, when seized by a dangerous illness, she told the vision to her husband, and appeased Hera, and undertook to raise the temple. Hardly had she recovered when she was despatched by her husband to Hierapolis, and a large sum of money with her, and a large army too, partly to aid in the building operations and partly to ensure her safety. He summoned one of her friends called Combabus, a young man of handsome presence, and said, “Combabus, I know thee for an honest man, and of all my friends I love thee best, and I commend thee greatly alike for thy wisdom and for thy goodwill which thou hast shown to us. At the present moment I have need of all thy confidence, and thus I wish thee to accompany my wife, and to carry out my work, and to perform the sacrifices due, and to command my army. On my return great honour shall fall to thee. Combabus begged and prayed not to be despatched, and not to be entrusted with matters far above his powers—moneys, the lady, the holy work: not merely so, but he feared lest in the future some jealousy might make itself felt as to his relations with Stratonice, as he was unaccompanied should he consent to escort her.
20. The king, however, refused to be moved; so Combabus prayed as an alternative that a respite of seven days might be granted him: after that interval he was willing to be despatched after attending to his immediate needs. On obtaining this respite, which was willingly granted, he departed to his house, and throwing himself on the ground, he thus deplored his lot: “Unhappy me! Why this confidence in myself? To what end is this journey, whose results I already see? I am young and the lady whom I escort is fair. This will prove a great and mighty disaster, unless I remove entirely the cause of the evil. Thus I must even perform a mighty deed which will heal all my fears.” Saying this he unmanned himself, and he stowed away the mutilated pudenda in a little vessel together with myrrh and honey and spices of various sorts. He sealed this vessel up with a ring which lie wore; and finally he proceeded to dress his wound. As soon as he deemed himself fit to travel he made his way to the king, and before a large company reached the vessel forth and spoke as follows: “Master! This my most precious treasure was stored up in my house, and I loved it well: but now that I am entering on a long journey, I will set it in thy keeping. Do thou keep it well: for it is dearer to me than gold and more precious to me than life. On my return I shall receive it again.” The king was pleased to receive the vessel, and after sealing it with another seal he entrusted it to his treasurers to keep.
21. So Combabus from this time forth continued his journey in peace. Arrived at Hierapolis they built the temple with all diligence, and three years passed while they were at their task. Meantime the event came to pass which Combabus had feared. Stratonice began to love him who had been her companion for so long a time: her love passed into an overpowering passion. Those of Hierapolis affirm that Hera was the willing cause of this trouble: she knew full well that Combabus was an upright man, but she wished to wreak her wrath on Stratonice for her unwillingness to undertake the building of the temple.
22. The queen was at first coy and tried to hide her passion, but when her trouble left her no longer any repose, she openly displayed her irritation and wept the whole day long, and called out repeatedly for Combabus: Combabus was everything to her. At last, in despair at her impotency to master her passion, she sought a suitable occasion for supplicating his love. She was too cautious to admit her passion to a stranger, but her modesty prevented her from facing the situation. Finally she hits on this plan; that she should confront him after she should have drunk deeply of wine; for courage rises after drinking and a repulse seems then less degrading, and actions performed under the influence of wine are set down to ignorance. Thus she acted as she thought best. After supper she entered the chamber in which Combabus dwelt, and besought him, embracing his knees, and she avowed her guilty love. He heard her words with disgust and rejected her advances, reproaching her with drunkenness. She, however, threatened that she would bring on him a great calamity; on which he trembled, and he told her all his story and narrated all that he had done and finally disclosed to her the manifest proofs of his statement. When the queen witnessed this unexpected proof her passion indeed was quenched, but she never forgot her love, but in all her intercourse she cherished the solace of her unavailing affection. The memory of this love is still alive at Hierapolis and is maintained in this way; the women still are enamoured of the Galli, and the Galli again love the women with passion; but there is no jealousy at all, and this love passes among them for a holy passion.
23. The king was well informed by Stratonice as to her doings at Hierapolis, for many who came thence brought the tale of her doings. The monarch was deeply moved by the tidings, and before the work was finished summoned Combabus to his presence. Others narrate with respect to this a circumstance wholly untrue; that Stratonice finding her prayers repulsed wrote with her own hand to her husband and accused Combabus of making an attempt upon her modesty; and what the Greeks allege about their Stheneboea and about Phaedra the Cnosian the Assyrians tell in the same way about Stratonice. For my part I do not believe that either Stheneboea nor Phaedra acted thus if Phaedra really loved Hippolytus. However, let the old version remain for what it is worth.
24. When, however, the news was brought to Hierapolis, Combabus took count of the charge and departed in a spirit of full confidence, conscious that the visible proof necessary for his defence had been left in the city his home. On his arrival the king immediately put him in prison under strict guard. Then in the presence of the friends of the accused who had been present when Combabus was commissioned to depart, the king summoned him into open court and began to accuse him of adultery and evil lust; and deeply moved, recounting the confidence he had reposed in his favourite and his long friendship, he arraigned Combabus on three distinct charges: first, that he was an adulterer, secondly, that he had broken his trust, finally, that he had blasphemed the goddess by acting thus while engaged in her service. Many of the bystanders bore witness against him, saying that they had seen the guilty pair embracing. It was finally agreed that Combabus was worthy of death as his evil deeds had merited.
25. He had stood up to this point in silence, but as he was being led to his fate, he spoke out, and demanded the restoration of his pledge, affirming that he was to be killed not for rebellious conduct against his king, nor for any violation of the king’s married life, but solely because of the king’s eagerness to possess what he had deposited at the royal court at his departure. The king thereon summoned his treasurer and bade him bring forth what he had committed to his custody. On its production, Combabus removed the seal and displayed the contents of the vessel, and showed how he himself had suffered thereby; adding, “This is just what I feared, O King, when thou didst send me on that errand: I left with a heavy heart, and I did my duty, constrained by sheer necessity. I obeyed my lord and master to mine own undoing. Such as I am, I stand accused of a crime which none but a man in every sense could have committed. The king cried out in amazement at these words, embraced Combabus and said with tears, “What great ruin, Combabus, hast thou wrought upon thyself? What monstrous deed of ill hast thou, alone of men, wrought to thy sorrow? I cannot praise thee, rash spirit, for enduring to suffer this outrage; would that thou hadst never borne it; would that I had never seen its proofs! I needed not this thy defence. But since the deity bath willed it thus, I will grant thee, first and foremost, as thy revenge, the death of the informers: and next there shall follow a mighty gift, a store of silver and countless gold, and raiment of Assyria, and steeds from the royal stud. Thou shalt enter freely to us unannounced and none shall withstand thee: none shall keep thee from my sight, even were I by my wife’s side.” Thus he spake, and thus he acted; the informers were led off straightway to their execution; Combabus was laden with gifts, and the king’s attachment to him was increased. No one 6f the Assyrians was deemed equal in wisdom and in fortune to Combabus.
26. On his request that he might complete what was unfinished in the construction of the temple—for he had left it unfinished—he was despatched anew; and he completed the temple, and there he abode. To mark his sense of the virtue and good deeds of his architect, the king granted him a brazen statue of himself to stand in the temple of his construction. And even to the present day this brazen statue is seen standing in the temple, the work of Hermocles of Rhodes. Its form is that of a woman, but the garments are those of a man. It is said, too, that his most intimate friends, as a proof of their sympathy, castrated themselves like him, and chose the same manner of life. Others there are who bring gods into the story and affirm that Combabus was beloved by Hera; and that it was she who inspired many with the idea of castrating themselves, so that her lover should not be the only one to lament the loss of his virility.
27. Meantime the custom once adopted remains even to-day, and many persons every year castrate themselves and lose their virile powers: whether it be out of sympathy with Combabus, or to find favour with Hera. They certainly castrate themselves, and then cease to wear man’s garb; they don women’s raiment and perform women’s tasks. I have heard the origin of this ascribed to Combabus as well, for the following event occurred to him. A certain foreign woman who had joined a sacred assembly, beholding a human form of extreme beauty and dressed in man’s attire, became violently enamoured of him: after discovering that he was unsexed, she took away her life. Combabus accordingly in despair at his incapacity for love, donned woman’s attire, that no woman in future might be deceived in the same way. This is the reason of the female attire of the Galli. Enough of Combabus and his story: in the course of my story I shall make mention of the Galli, and of their castration, and of the methods employed to effect it, and of the burial rites wherewith they are buried, and the reasons why they have no ingress to the temple; but before this I am inclined to speak of the site of the temple and of its size: and so I will even speak.
28. The place whereon the temple is placed is a hill: it lies nearly in the centre of the city, and is surrounded by a double wall. Of the two walls the one is ancient; the other is not much older than our own times. The entrance to the temple faces the north; its size is about a hundred fathoms. In this entrance those phalli stand which Dionysus erected: they stand thirty fathoms high. Into one of these a man mounts twice every year, and he abides on the summit of the phallus for the space of seven days. The reason of this ascent is given as follows: The people believe that the man who is aloft holds converse with the gods, and prays for good fortune for the whole of Syria, and that the gods from their neighbourhood hear his prayers. Others allege that this takes place in memory of the great calamity of Deukalion’s time, when men climbed up to mountain tops and to the highest trees, in terror of the mass of waters. To me all this seems highly improbable, and I think that they observe this custom in honour of Dionysus, and I conjecture this from the following fact, that all those who rear phalli to Dionysus take care to place mannikins of wood on the phalli; the reason of this I cannot say, but it seems to me that the ascent is made in imitation of the wooden mannikin.
29. To proceed, the ascent is made in this way; the man throws round himself and the phallus a small chain; afterwards he climbs up by means of pieces of wood attached to the phallus large enough to admit the end of his foot. As he mounts he jerks the chain up his own length, as a driver his reins. Those who have not seen this process, but who have seen those who have to climb palm trees in Arabia, or in Egypt, or any other place, will understand what I mean. When he has climbed to the top, he lets down a different chain, a long one, and drags up anything that he wants, such as wood, clothing, and vases; he binds these together and sits upon them, as it were, on a nest, and he remains there for the space of time that I have mentioned. Many visitors bring him gold and silver, and some bring brass; then those who have brought these offerings leave them and depart, and each visitor gives his name. A bystander shouts the name up; and he on hearing the name utters a prayer for each donor; between the prayers he raises a sound on a brazen instrument which, on being shaken, gives forth a loud and grating noise. He never sleeps; for if at any time sleep surprises him, a scorpion creeps up and wakes him, and stings him severely; this is the penalty for wrongfully sleeping. This story about the scorpion is a sacred one, and one of the mysteries of religion; whether it is true I cannot say, but, as it seems to me, his wakefulness is in no small degree due to his fear of falling. So much then for the climbers of the phalli. As for the temple, it looks to the rising sun.
30. In appearance, and in workmanship, it is like the temples which they build in Ionia, the foundation rises from the earth to the space of two fathoms, and on this rests the temple. The ascent to the temple is built of wood and not particularly wide; as you mount, even the great hall exhibits a wonderful spectacle and it is ornamented with golden doors. The temple within is ablaze with gold and the ceiling in its entirety is golden. There falls upon you also a divine fragrance such as is attributed to the region of Arabia, which breathes on you with a refreshing influence as you mount the long steps, and even when you have departed this fragrance clings to you; nay, your very raiment retains long that sweet odour, and it will ever remain in your memory.
31. But the temple within is not uniform. A special sacred shrine is reared within it; the ascent to this likewise is not steep, nor is it fitted with doors, but is entirely open as you approach it. The great temple is open to all; the sacred shrine to the priests alone and not to all even of these, but only to those who are deemed nearest to the gods and who have the charge of the entire administration of the sacred rites. In this shrine are placed the statues, one of which is Hera, the other Zeus, though they call him by another name. Both of these are golden, both are sitting; Hera is supported by lions, Zeus is sitting on bulls. The effigy of Zeus recalls Zeus in all its details—his head, his robes, his throne; nor even if you wished it could you take him for another deity.
32. Hera, however, as you look at her will recall to you a variety of forms. Speaking generally she is undoubtedly Hera, but she has something of the attributes of Athene, and of Aphrodite, and of Selene, and of Rhea, and of Artemis, and of Nemesis, and of The Fates. In one of her hands she holds a sceptre, in the other a distaff; on her head she bears rays and a tower and she has a girdle wherewith they adorn none but Aphrodite of the sky. And without she is gilt with gold, and gems of great price adorn her, some white, some sea-green, others wine-dark, others flashing like fire. Besides these there are many onyxes from Sardinia and the jacinth and emeralds, the offerings of the Egyptians and of the Indians, Ethiopians, Medes, Armenians, and Babylonians. But the greatest wonder of all I will proceed to tell: she bears a gem on her head called a Lychnis; it takes its name from its attribute. From this stone flashes a great light in the night-time, so that the whole temple gleams brightly as by the light of myriads of candles, but in the day-time the brightness grows faint; the gem has the likeness of a bright fire. There is also another marvel in this image: if you stand over against it, it looks you in the face, and as you pass it the gaze still follows you, and if another approaching from a different quarter looks at it, he is similarly affected.
33. Between the two there stands another image of gold, no part of it resembling the others. This possesses no special form of its own, but recalls the characteristics of other gods. The Assyrians themselves speak of it as a symbol, but they have assigned to it no definite name. They have nothing to tell us about its origin, nor its form: some refer it to Dionysus; others to Deukalion; others to Semiramis; for its summit is crowned by a golden pigeon, and this is why they allege that it is the effigy of Semiramis. It is taken down to the sea twice in every year to bring up the water of which I have spoken.
34. In the body of the temple, as you enter, there stands on the left hand side, a throne for the Sun god; but there is no image upon it, for the effigies of the Sun and Moon are not exhibited. I have learnt, however, the reasons of this practice. They say that religion does not forbid making effigies of the other deities, for the outward form of these deities is known to all; but the Sun and Moon are plain for all to see, and all men behold them. What boots it, therefore, to make effigies of those deities who offer themselves for all to gaze on?
35. Behind this throne stands an effigy of Apollo of an unusual character. All other sculptors think of Apollo as a youth, and represent him in the flower of his age. These artificers alone exhibit the Apollo of their statuary as bearded. They justify their action, and criticise the Greeks and others who set up Apollo as a boy, and appease him in that guise. Their reason is that it is a mark of ignorance to assign imperfect forms to the gods, and they look on youth as imperfection. They have also introduced another strange novelty in sculpture: they, and they alone, represent Apollo as robed.
36. I have much to say about his works, and I will tell what is most worthy of admiration. First I will speak of the oracle. There are many oracles among the Greeks, and many, too, among the Egyptians, and again in Libya and in Asia there are many too. But these speak not, save by the mouth of priests and prophets: this one is moved by its own impulse, and carries out the divining process to the very end. The manner of his divination is the following: When he is desirous of uttering an oracle, he first stirs in his seat, and the priests straightway raise him up. Should they fail to raise him up, he sweats, and moves more violently than ever. When they approach him and bear him up, he drives them round in a circle, and leaps on one after another. At last the high priest confronts him, and questions him on every subject. The god, if he disapproves of any action proposed, retreats into the background; if, however, he happens to approve it, he drives his bearers forward as if they were horses. It is thus that they gather the oracles, and they undertake nothing public or private without this preliminary. This god, too, speaks about the symbol, and points out when it is the due season for the expedition of which I spoke in connexion therewith.
37. I will speak of another wonder, too, which he performed in my presence. The priests were raising him aloft, but he left them on the ground, and was born aloft himself alone.
38. Behind Apollo is the statue of Atlas; behind that, the statue of Hermes and Eilithyia.
39. Such, then, are the interior decorations of the temple; outside of it there stands a great altar of brass. It contains also countless other brazen effigies of kings and priests. I will mention those which seem most worthy of remembrance. To the left of the temple stands the image of Semiramis, pointing with her right hand to the temple. That image was erected to commemorate the following occurrence: The queen had issued a decree that all the Syrians should worship her as a deity, adding that they were to take no count of the others, not excepting even Hera; and they obeyed her decree. Afterwards, however, when disease and misfortune and grief were inflicted on her, she calmed down from her frenzied infatuation, and avowed herself a mere mortal, and ordered her subjects to turn again to Hera. This is why she stands to-day in this posture, pointing out Hera as the goddess whose grace is to be won, and confessing that she is not a goddess, but that Hera is indeed such.
40. I saw also the effigy of Helen, and of Hecuba, and of Andromache, and of Paris, and of Achilles. I saw also the statue of Nireus, the son of Aglaia, and of Philomela and Procne while yet women, and Tereus changed into a bird; and another effigy of Semiramis and one of Combabus and one of Stratonice of special beauty, and one of Alexander like to this. Sardanapalus stands by his side in a different form and in a different garb.
41. In the great court oxen of great size browsed horses, too, are there, and eagles and bears and lions, who never hurt mankind but are all sacred and all tame.
42. Many priests also are in attendance, some of whom sacrifice the victims, others bring libations, others are called fire-bearers, and others altar attendants. In my presence more than 300 of these were present at a sacrifice; all had vestments of white and wore caps on their heads. Every year a new high priest is appointed. He, and he alone, is clad in purple and crowned with a golden tiara.
43. Besides this there is another multitude of holy men, pipers, flute players, and Galli; and women frenzied and fanatic.
44. A sacrifice is offered up twice every day, and they are all present at this: To Zeus they sacrifice in silence, neither chanting nor playing, but when they sacrifice to Hera they sing, they pipe, and shake rattles. About this ceremony they could tell me nothing certain.
45. There is too a lake in the same place, not far from the temple in which many sacred fishes of different kinds are reared. Some of these grow to a great size; they are called by names, and approach when called. I saw one of these ornamented with gold, and on its back fin a golden design was dedicated to the temple. I have often seen this fish, and he certainly carried this design.
46. The depth of the lake is immense. I never tested it myself, but they say that it is in depth more than 200 fathoms. In the midst of this lake stands an altar of stone. You would think at first sight that it was floating and moving in the water, and many deem that it is so. The truth seems to me that it is supported by a column of great size, based on the bottom of the lake. It is always decked with ribbons, and spices are therein, and many every day swim in the lake with crowns on their heads performing their acts of adoration.
47. At this lake great assemblies meet, and these are called descents into the lake because all their deities go down into this lake, amongst whom Hera first advances so that Zeus may not see the fish first, for if this were to happen they say that one and all would perish. And Zeus comes indeed intending to see these fish, but she, standing before him, keeps hint at bay, and with many supplications holds him off.
48. But the greatest of these sacred assemblies are those held on the sea coast. About these, however, I have nothing certain to say. I was never present at their celebrations, nor did I undertake the journey thither; but I did see what they do on their return, and I will at once tell you. Each member of the assembly carries a vessel full of water. The vessels are sealed with wax; those who carry the water do not unseal the vessels and then pour out the water; but there is a certain holy cock who dwells hard by the lake. This bird, on receiving the vessels from the bearers, inspects the seal, and after receiving a reward for this action he breaks the thread and picks away the wax, and many minae are collected by the cock by this operation. After this the bearers carry the water into the temple and pour it forth, and they depart when the sacrifice is finished.
49. The greatest of the festivals that they celebrate is that held in the opening of spring; some call this the Pyre, others the Lamp. On this occasion the sacrifice is performed in this way. They cut down tall trees and set them up in the court; then they bring goats and sheep and cattle and hang them living to the trees; they add to these birds and garments and gold and silver work. After all is finished, they carry the gods around the trees and set fire under; in a moment all is in a blaze. To this solemn rite a great multitude flocks from Syria and all the regions around. Each brings his own god and the statues which each has of his own gods.
50. On certain days a multitude flocks into the temple, and the Galli in great numbers, sacred as they are, perform the ceremonies of the men and gash their arms and turn their backs to be lashed. Many bystanders play on the pipes the while many beat drums; others sing divine and sacred songs. All this performance takes place outside the temple, and those engaged in the ceremony enter not into the temple.
51. During these days they are made Galli. As the Galli sing and celebrate their orgies, frenzy falls on many of them and many who had come as mere spectators afterwards are found to have committed the great act. I will narrate what they do. Any young man who has resolved on this action, strips off his clothes, and with a loud shout bursts into the midst of the crowd, and picks up a sword from a number of swords which I suppose have been kept ready for many years for this purpose. He takes it and castrates himself and then runs wild through the city, bearing in his hands what he has cut off. He casts it into any house at will, and from this house he receives women’s raiment and ornaments. Thus they act during their ceremonies of castration.
52. The Galli, when dead, are not buried like other men, but when a Gallus dies his companions carry him out into the suburbs, and laying him out on the bier on which they had carried him they cover him with stones, and after this return home. They wait then for seven days, after which they enter the temple. Should they enter before this they would be guilty of blasphemy.
53. The laws which they observe are the following: Anyone who has seen a corpse may not enter the temple the same day; but afterwards, when he has purified himself, he enters. But those who are of the family of the corpse wait for thirty days, and after shaving their heads they enter the temple, but before they have done this it is forbidden.
54. They sacrifice bulls and cows alike and goats and sheep; pigs alone, which they abominate, are neither sacrificed nor eaten. Others look on swine without disgust, but as holy animals. Of birds the dove seems the most holy to them, nor do they think it right to harm these birds, and if anyone have harmed them unknowingly they are unholy for that day, and so when the pigeons dwell with the men they enter their rooms and commonly feed on the ground.
55. I will speak, too, about those who come to these sacred meetings and of what they do. As soon as a man comes to Hierapolis he shaves his head and his eyebrows; afterwards he sacrifices a sheep and cuts up its flesh and eats it; he then lays the fleece on the ground, places his knee on it, but puts the feet and head of the animal on his own head and at the same time he prays that the gods may vouchsafe to receive him, and he promises a greater victim hereafter. When this is performed he crowns his head with a garland and the heads of all those engaged in the same procession. Starting from his house he passes into the road, previously bathing himself and drinking cold water. He always sleeps on the ground, for he may not enter his bed till the completion of his journey.
56. In the city of Hierapolis a public host receives him, suspecting nothing, for there are special hosts attached to each city, and these receive each guest according to his country. These are called by the Assyrians teachers, because they teach them all the solemn rites.
57. They sacrifice victims not in the temple itself, but when the sacrificer has placed his victim at the altar and poured a libation he brings the animal home alive, and returning to his own house he slays his victim and utters prayers.
58. There is also another method of sacrifice, as follows: They adorn live victims with ribbons and throw them headlong down from the temple’s entrance, and these naturally die after their fall. Some actually throw their own children down, not as they do the cattle, but they sew them into a sack and toss them down, visiting them with curses and declaring that they are not their children, but are cows.
59. They all tattoo themselves—some on the hands and some on the neck—and so it comes that all the Assyrians bear stigmata.
60. They have another curious custom, in which they agree with the Trœzenians alone of the Greeks. I will explain this too. The Trœzenians have made a law for their maidens and youths alike never to marry till they have dedicated their locks to Hippolytus; and this they do. It is the same at Hierapolis.
The young men dedicate the first growth on their chin, then they let down the locks of the maidens, which have been sacred from their birth; they then cut these off in the temple and place them in vessels, some in silver vessels, some in gold, and after placing these in the temple and inscribing the name on the vessel they depart. I performed this act myself when a youth, and my hair remains still in the temple, with my name on the vessel.
Appendix
EXTRACT I.
From Maundrell’s Travels. Page 153 (6th ed. 1749).
AN ACCOUNT OF THE AUTHOR’S JOURNEY TO THE BANKS OF THE EUPHRATES, ETC., IN HIS “JOURNEY FROM ALEPPO TO JERUSALEM.” 1697.
Wednesday, April 19th.
WE went east and by north, and in four hours arrived at Bambych. This place has no remnants of its ancient greatness, but its walls, which may be traced all round, and cannot be less than three miles in compass. Several fragments of them remain on the east side, especially at the east gate; and another piece of eighty yards long, with towers of large square stone extremely well built. On the north side I found a stone with the busts of a man and woman, large as life; and under, two Eagles carved on it. Not far from it, on the side of a large well, was fixed a stone with three figures carved on it, in Basso Relievo. They were two Syrens, which twining their fishy tails together, made a seat, on which was placed sitting a naked woman, her arms and the Syrens on each side mutually entwined.
On the west side is a deep pit of about 100 yards diameter. It was low, and had now water in it, and seemed to have had great buildings all round it; with the pillars and ruins of which, it is now in part filled up; but not so much, but that there was still water in it. Here are a multitude of subterraneous aqueducts brought to the city; the people attested no fewer than fifty. You can ride nowhere about the city, without seeing them. We pitched by one about a quarter of a mile east of the city, which yields a fine stream; and emptying itself into a valley, waters it, and makes it extremely fruitful. Here perhaps were the pastures of the beasts designed for sacrifices. Here are now only a few poor inhabitants, tho’ anciently all the north side was well inhabited by Saracens; as may be seen by the remains of a noble Mosque and a Bagnio a little without the walls.
EXTRACT II.
POCOCK’S DESCRIPTION OF THE EAST. Vol. II., Pt. I. (1745); pp. 166 and 167..
. . . Bambouch, commonly called by the Franks Bambych, and by the ancients Hierapolis, which was the Greek name that was given it by Seleucus; it was called also Bambyce, which seems to be the Syrian name still retained; and it is very remarkable that Hierapolis in Asia Minor has much the same name, being called Pambouk Calasi (the cotton castle). The Tables make it twenty-four miles distant from Zeuma on the Euphrates and from Ceciliana: They place it also seventy-two miles from Berya, though this is not above fifty from Aleppo. One of the Syrian names of this place was Magog; which was a city of the Cyrrhestica, and is situated at the south end of a long vale, which is about a quarter of a mile broad, watered with a stream that is approached by the aqueducts of Bambych; and, to preserve the water from being wasted, it passes through this vale in an artificial channel or aqueduct which is built of stone on a level with the ground. The form of this site was irregular; some parts of the walls which remain entire, are nine feet thick, and above thirty feet high; they are cased with hewn stone both inside and out, and are about two miles in circumference; there was a walk all round on top of the walls, to which there is an ascent by a flight of stairs, which are built on arches; the wall is defined by towers on five sides, at the distance of fifty paces from each other, and there is a low fosse without the walls. The four gates of the city are about fifteen feet wide, and defended by a semi-circular tower on each side; the water that supplied the town, as I was informed, comes from a hill about twelve miles to the south, and the city being on the advanced ground, the water runs in a channel, which is near twenty feet below the surface of the earth, and in several parts of the city there are holes down to the water about five feet wide, and fifteen long, with two stones across, one about five feet, the other about ten feet from the top, in order, as may be supposed, to facilitate the descent of the water; it is probable that they had some machines to draw up the water at these holes. In the side of one of them I saw a stone about four feet long, and three wide, on which there was a relief of two winged persons holding a sheet behind a woman a little over her head; they seem to carry her on their fishy tails which join together, and were probably designed to represent the Zephyrs, carrying Venus to the sea.
At the west part of the town there is a dry bason, which seemed to have been triangular; it is close to the town wall; at one corner of it there is a round building which seems to have extended into a bason, and probably was designed in order to behold with greater conveniency some religious ceremonies or public sports. This may be the lake where they had sacred fishes that were tame.
About two hundred paces within the east gate there is a raised ground, on which probably stood a temple of the Syrian goddess Atargatis, thought to be the same as Ashteroth of the Sidonians, and Cybele of the Romans, for whose worship this place was so famous. I conjectured it to be about two hundred feet in front. It is probable that this is the high ground from which they threw people headlong in their religious ceremonies, and sometimes even their own children, though they must inevitably perish. I observed a low wall running from it to the gate, so that probably it had such a grand avenue as the temple at Gerrhae; and the enclosure of the city is irregular in this part, as if some ground had been taken in after the building of the walls to make that grand entrance; it is probable that all the space north of the temple belonged to it. A court is mentioned to the north of the temple, and a tower likewise before the temple, which was built on a terrace twelve feet high. If this tower was on the high ground I mentioned, the temple must have been west of it, of which I could see no remains; it possibly might have been where there are now some ruins of a large building, which seems to have been a church with a tower; to the west of which there are some ruinous arches, which might be part of a portico. It is said that not only Syria, Cilicia, and Cappadocia, contributed to the support of this temple, but even Arabia, and the territories of Babylon: To the west of the town there is a high ground, and some burial places; and so there are also to the north-east, where I saw inscriptions in the oriental languages, and several crosses. At a little distance from the north-east corner of the town there is a building like a church, but within it there is some Gothic work, such as is seen in antient mosques; and there is a room on each side of the south end; the whole is ruinous, but very strongly built, and they call it the house of Phila.
EXTRACT III.
THE EXPEDITION TO THE EUPHRATES AND TIGRIS.
By COLONEL CHESNEY. London, 1850. Vol. I., Ch. XVIII., pp. 420 and 421.
. . . . . . . .
[Nine miles below the mouth of the Sajur, the fine Saracenic structure of Kal-at-en-Nejm commands the remains of the great Zeugma leading to Seroug, Haran, etc., and 11 miles directly south by west from thence on four hills, are the extensive remains of the castle and town of Kara Bambuche, or Buyuk Munbedj, which contains some fine excavations near the river, and also a Zeugma, but in a more dilapidated state, being without the slopes which, when passing at Kal-at-en-Nejm, served for landing places at different heights of the river.]
Sixteen miles west by south of the latter, and 11½ miles south-west of the former passage, at about 600 feet above the river Euphrates, the ruins of the Magog of the Syrians occupy the centre of a rocky plain, where, by its isolated position, the city must not only have been deprived of running water, but likewise of every other advantage which was likely to create and preserve a place of importance. Yet we know that the Syrian city of Ninus Vetus flourished under the name of Bambyce and subsequently of Hierapolis, or the Sacred City of the Greeks, and that it contained the rich temple which was plundered by Crassus; finally it bore the name of Munbedj or Bambuche, and had a succession of sovereigns in the 5th century of the Hijrah. The ancient city was near the eastern extremity of Commagene, or Euphratensis, which had Samosat at the opposite extremity.
Some ruined mosques and square Saracenic towers, with the remains of its surrounding walls and ditch, marked the limits of the Muslim city; within which are four large cisterns, a fine sarcophagus, and, among other ancient remains the sculptured ruins of an acropolis, and those of two temples. Of the smaller, the enclosure and portions of seven columns remain; but it seems to possess little interest compared with the larger, which may have been that of the Assyrian and Phœnician Astarte, or Astroarche (queen of stars), which afterwards became the Syrian Atargatis, or Venus Decerto. Amongst the remains of the latter are some fragments of massive architecture, not unlike the Egyptian, and 11 arches from one side of a square paved court, over which are scattered the shafts of columns and capitals displaying the lotus.
A little way westward of the walls there is an extensive necropolis, which contains many Turkish, with some Pagan, Seljukian, and Syriac tombs; the last having some almost illegible inscriptions in the ancient character.
Bibliography
[We have to thank Dr. Barnett, of the British Museum, for his courtesy in presenting us with the Bibliography of the translations and editions of Lucian.]
GREEK AND LATIN.
Luciani omnia quae extant, cum latina interpretatione (of J. Micyllus, M. Bolerus, D. Erasmus, etc.). Paris, 1615. Fol.
Luciani opera omnia, J. Benedictus emendavit. Salmurii, 1619. 8vo.
Luciani Samosatensis opera, ex versione J. Benedicti. Cum notis J. Bourdelotii, etc. Amstelodami, 1687. 8vo.
Luciani opera, cum nova versione T. Hemsterhusii et J. M. Gesneri, etc. Amstelodami, Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1743-6. 4to.
Luciani opera, cum notis selectis. Curavit J. P. Schmidius. Leipzig, 1776-80. 8vo.
Luciani opera ad editionem T. Hemsterhusii et J. F. Reitzii accurate expressa cum annotationibus. Biponti, 1789-93. 8vo.
Luciani opera, castigata, edidit J. T. Lehmann. Lipsiae, 1822-31. 8vo.
Luciani opera ex recensione G. Dindorfii. Parisiis, 1840. 8vo.
Luciani opera ex recensione G. Dindorfii. Editio altera emendators. Parisiis, 1867. 8vo.
LATIN.
Luciani opera, in latinum, partim diversis autoribus, partim per J. Micyllum, translata. Francofurti, 1543. Fol.
ENGLISH.
Lucian’s works, translated from the Greek. By F. Spence. London, 1684-5. 8vo.
The works of Lucian, translated from the Greek, by several eminent hands (T. Ferne, W. Moyle, Sir H. Sheere, A. Baden, C. Blount, T. Brown, J. Drake, S. Cobb, Gildon, Cashen, Vernon, Sprag, Hill, S. Atkinson, H. Blount, Ayloffe, J. Philips, L. Eachard, C. Eachard, Savage, J. Digby, H. Hare, J. Washington, N. Tate, and Sir J. Tyrell). With the life of Lucian, a discourse on his writings, and a character of some of the present translators, by J. Dryden. London, 1711. 8vo.
The works of Lucian, from the Greek, by T. Francklin. London, 1780. 4to.
Lucian, from the Greek, with the comments and illustrations of Wieland and others. By W. Tooke. London, 1820. 4to.
The Works of Lucian of Samosata. Translated by H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler. Oxford, 1905.
FRENCH.
Les oeuvres de Lucien, traduites du grec, par F. Bretin. Paris, 1583. Fol.
Lucian, de la traduction de N. Perrot, Sr. d’Ablancourt. Paris, 1654. 4to.
Lucian, de la traduction de N. Perrot, Sr. d’Ablancourt. Paris, 1674. 8vo.
Lucian, de la traduction de N. Perrot, Sr. d’Ablancourt. Amsterdam, 1709. 8vo.
Oeuvres de Lucian, traduites du grec, avec des remarques, sur le texte, et la collation de six manuscrits de la Bibliothèque du Roi (by J. N. Belin de Ballu). Paris, 1789. 8vo.
Oeuvres complètes. Traduction de Belin de Ballu, revue corrigée et complétée, par Louis Humbert. Paris, 1896.
GERMAN.
Lucians von Samosata sämtliche Werke. Aus dem Griechischen übersetzt und mit Anmerkungen versehen von C. M. Wieland. Leipzig, 1788-9. 8vo.
ITALIAN.
Le opere di Luciano, volgarizzate da G. Manzi. Losanna, 1819. 8vo.
SPANISH.
Obras completas, traducidas, por D. C. Vidal y F. Delgado. Madrid, 1882, etc. 8vo.
GREEK AND ENGLISH.
Lucian. Literally and completely translated, from the Greek text of C. Jacobitz. (Athenian Society’s Publications). London, 1895.
THE END
