X
OF THE CHALDEANS
THE MOST ancient polished nations appear to me to have been the Chaldeans, the Indians, and the Chinese. We have a certain epocha of the science of the Chaldeans: it was in the year 1903 of celestial observations sent from Babylon by Callistanus to the preceptor of Alexander. These astronomical tables form an exact retrospect to the year 2234, before our vulgar era. It is true that this epoch borders upon the time, when according to the Vulgate, the deluge took place. But let us not enter here into the depths of the different chronologies of the Vulgate, the Samaritan, and the Septuagint, which we equally revere. The universal deluge is a great miracle, which has no connection with our inquiries. We are reasoning here only according to natural opinions, constantly submitting the weak feelings of our shallow understandings to the enlightenings of a superior order.
Ancient authors, quoted by George Le Sincelle, say that in the time of a Chaldean king named Xixoutron, there happened a dreadful inundation. The Tigris and the Euphrates overflowed their banks, probably more than usual. But the Chaldeans could not have known otherwise than by revelation, that such a scourge had submerged all the habitable world. Once more let it be observed, I consider here only the usual course of nature.
It is certain that the Chaldeans had not existed upon earth more than 1900 years before our era: this short space would not have been sufficient for them to discover the true system of our universe; an amazing thought, which however, the Chaldeans at length compassed. Aristadreus of Samos, tells us that the sages of Chaldea were acquainted with the impossibility of the earth’s occupying the center of the planetary world, and that they had assigned the sun this station, which belonged to him; that they made the earth, and other planets revolve round him, each in a different orb.
The progress of the mind is so slow, the illusion of our eyes so powerful, the submission to received ideas so tyrannical, that it is not possible for a people who had existed only nineteen hundred years to have arrived at that summit of philosophy, which contradicts the sight, and which requires the most profound theory. So did the Chaldeans reckon 470,000 years. Again, this knowledge of the true system of the world, was not the lot but of a small number of philosophers. This is the fate of all great truths; and the Greeks, who came afterwards, adopted nothing but the common system, which is the system of children.
Four hundred and seventy thousand years are found immense to us, who were born only yesterday; but this is a very little time for the whole universe. I know that we cannot adopt this reckoning, that Cicero made a joke of it, that it is extravagant, and moreover that we should rather give credit to the Pentateuch, than to Sanchoniaton or Berosus: but once more, it is impossible (humanly speaking) that men should in nineteen hundred years arrive at the knowledge of such astonishing truths. The first of all arts is that of providing sustenance, which formerly was more difficult for men than brutes; the second, to form a language, which certainly requires a very considerable space of time; the third, to build some huts; the fourth, to provide clothing. Then the forging of iron, or the supplying the want of it; these require so many lucky incidents, so much industry, so many ages, that it is surprising how men could any way compass them. What a leap from this state to astronomy!
The Chaldeans for a long time engraved their observations and their laws upon bricks in hieroglyphics: these were speaking characters, a custom which the Egyptians acquired after several ages had elapsed. The art of transmitting ideas by alphabetical characters, could not have been invented but very late in that part of Asia.
It may be supposed that when the Chaldeans built cities, they began to make use of the alphabet. How did they do before? Will it be answered, as we do in our village, and in twenty thousand other villages of the world, where no one can either write or read, and where, nevertheless, people understand each other very well, where all the necessary arts are cultivated, and even sometimes with genius?
Babylon was probably a very ancient hamlet, before it was formed into an immense and superb city. But who built this city? was it Semiramis? was it Belus? was it Nabonassar? There never was in Asia any woman called Semiramis, nor any man called Belus. It is like our giving to Greek cities the names of Armagnac and, Abbeville. The Greeks, who changed all the barbarous terminations into Greek words, transmogrified all the Asiatic names. Moreover, the history of Semiramis resembles in all respects an oriental tale.
Nabonassar, or rather Nabon-assor, was probably the person who embellished and fortified Babylon, and at length rendered it so superb a city. He was a real monarch, known in Asia by the era which bears his name. This incontestable era did not begin till 1747 years before our own; so that it is very modern, when compared to the number of ages necessary to have established great dominions. It appears even by the name of Babylon, that it existed long before Nabonassar. It was the city of father Bel. Bab in Chaldean signifies father, as Herbelot acknowledges; Bel is the name of the Lord. The Orientals never knew it by any other name than Babel, the city of the Lord, the city of God, or according to others the door of God.
Neither was there such a person as Ninus the founder of Ninvah, which we call Nineveh, any more than Belus the founder of Babylon. Never did the name of any Asiatic prince terminate in us.
The circumference of Babylon might have been twenty-four of our middling leagues; but that one Ninus should have erected upon the Tyger at the distance of only forty leagues from Babylon, a city named Nineveh, of so great an extent, is what does not seem credible. Three powerful empires are said to have existed at the same time; namely, that of Babylon, that of Assyria or Nineveh, and that of Syria or Damascus: this has very little the air of probability; it is like saying that there were at the same time in a part of Gaul three powerful empires, the capitals of which were Paris, Soissons, and Orleans, each being twenty-four leagues in circumference. Besides, Nineveh was not built, or at least was of very little importance at the time when it is said that the prophet Jonas was appointed to exhort the people to perform penance, and was swallowed up in his way by a fish, which kept him in his belly three nights and three days.
The imaginary empire of Assyria was not yet in existence at the time that Jonas is introduced; for he prophesied, it is said, under the Melk or Jewish viceroy Joas; and Phul, who is looked upon in the Hebrew books as the first king of Assyria, did not reign, according to them, till about fifty-two years after the death of Joas. By confronting the dates in this manner, contradictions are every where discovered, and uncertainty necessarily follows.
I acknowledge I do not comprehend anything about the two empires of Babylon and Assyria. Several sages, who were desirous of throwing some light upon these obscurities, have affirmed that Assyria and Chaldea were one and the same empire, sometimes governed by two princes, one residing at Babylon, the other at Nineveh; and this reasonable opinion may be adopted, till such time as we discover one still more reasonable.
What contributes to give great probability to the antiquity of this nation, is that famous tower erected to observe the planetary world. Almost all the commentators, unable to dispute the existence of this monument, think themselves obliged to suppose that it was the remains of the tower of Babel, which men wanted to erect unto heaven. What the commentators mean by heaven is not very evident: is it the moon? is it the planet Venus?—They are very distant from us.
Be this as it may, if Nabonassar erected this edifice to serve for an observatory, it must at least be acknowledged that the Chaldeans had an observatory upwards of 2400 years before us. Let us now consider how many centuries were necessary for the slowness of human wit, to arrive at that pitch, which the erection of such a monument to the sciences must require.
The zodiac was invented in Chaldea, and not in Egypt. There appears to me three testimonies of weight: the first is, that the Chaldeans were an enlightened people, before Egypt, ever inundated by the Nile, could have been habitable; the second that the signs of the zodiac correspond with the climate of Mesopotamia, and not with that of Egypt. The Egyptians could not have the sign of the bull in the month of April, since they do not work in this season: they could not in the month which we call August figure a sign by a maid laden with heads of corn, as their harvest is not at this time. They could not represent January by a pitcher of water, as it seldom rained in Egypt, and never in the month of January. The third reason is, that the ancient signs of the Chaldean zodiac, were one of the articles of their religion. They were governed by twelve secondary gods, twelve mediating gods; each of them presiding over a constellation, as we are told by Diodorus Siculus (lib. 2.) The religion of the ancient Chaldeans was Sabism, that is to say, the adoration of one supreme God, and the veneration of the stars, and the celestial intelligences which presided over the stars. When they prayed, they turned themselves towards the northern star: so much analogy had their worship to astronomy.
Vitruvius in his ninth book, where he treats of solar quadrants, of the elevation of the sun, of the length of shadows, of the reflected light of the moon, constantly quotes the ancient Chaldeans, and not the Egyptians. This seems to me a proof sufficiently strong, that Chaldea and not Egypt, was considered as the cradle of that science; so that nothing is truer than that old Latin proverb
Tradidit Egyptis Babylon Egyptis Achivis.