Philosophy of History

EXCEPT THOSE fables that are plainly allegorical, like that of the Muses, of Venus, of the Graces, of Love, of Zephyrus, and Flora, and a few more of this kind; all the rest are a jumble of tales that can have no other merit than that of having furnished Ovid and Quinaut with good verses, and of having exercised the pencils of our best painters: but there is one that seems to deserve the attention of those who admire researches into antiquity; this is the fable of Bacchus.

Was this Bacchus, or Back, or Backos, or Dionysos, son of God, a real personage? Many nations mention him as well as Hercules; so many different Herculeses and Bacchuses have been celebrated, that it may be supposed that there was, in fact, one Bacchus, as well as one Hercules.

It is certain, that in Egypt, Asia, and Greece, Bacchus as well as Hercules was acknowledged for a demi-god; that their feasts were celebrated; that miracles were attributed to them; and that mysteries were instituted in the name of Bacchus before the Jewish books were known.

We know that the Jews did not communicate their books to foreigners, till the time of Ptolomy Philadelphus, about two hundred and thirty years before our era. Now, before that time, the East and West re-echoed with the orgies of Bacchus. The verses that are attributed to the ancient Orpheus celebrated the conquests and good actions of this supposed demi-god. His history is so ancient, that the fathers of the church suppose Bacchus to have been Noah, because Bacchus and Noah are both reckoned to have cultivated the vine.

Herodotus in relating the ancient opinions says, that Bacchus was an Egyptian, brought up in Arabia Felix. The Orphic verses say, that he was saved from the waters in a small box, which was called Misem, in remembrance of this adventure; that he was instructed in the secrets of the gods; that he had a wand, which he changed into a serpent at will; that he passed the Red Sea dry-footed, as Hercules did afterwards the straits of Callipolis and Abila in his juggler’s box; that when he went into India, he and his army enjoyed the sun-shine during the night; that he touched with his enchanting wand, the waters of the rivers Orontes and Hydaspes; and that these waters separated, and left him a free passage. It is even said, that he stopped the course of the sun and moon. He wrote his laws upon two stone tables. He was anciently represented with horns, or rays, which issued from his head.

After this, it is not surprising, that several learned men, and particularly Bochart, and Huet latterly, should suppose that Bacchus was a copy of Moses and Joshua. Everything concurs to favor the resemblance; for Bacchus was, amongst the Egyptians, called Arsaph, and amongst the names which the fathers have given to Moses, we find that of Osasirph.

Between these two histories, which appear similar in so many respects, it is not to be doubted that the history of Moses is the real one, and that of Bacchus only the fable. But it appears that this fable was known to several nations long before the history of Moses had reached them. No Greek author before Longinus, who lived under the emperor Aurelian, quoted Moses; and all had celebrated Bacchus.

It appears incontestable, that the Greeks could not take the idea of Bacchus from the book of the Jewish laws, which they did not understand, and of which they had not the least knowledge; a book, that was moreover so scarce, even amongst the Jews, that in the reign of King Josias, there was only one copy to be found; a book that was almost entirely lost during the slavery of the Jews, who were transported into Chaldea, and the other parts of Asia; a book that was afterwards restored by Esdras in the flourishing times of Athens, and the other Grecian republics; times when the mysteries of Bacchus were already instituted.

God then allowed that the spirit of untruth should reveal the absurdities of the life of Bacchus to a hundred nations, before the spirit of truth divulged the life of Moses to any other people but the Jews.

The learned bishop of Avranche, struck with this surprising semblance, did not hesitate pronouncing, that Moses was not only Bacchus, but the Thaut, the Osiris of the Egyptians. He even adds, to remove any contradiction, that Moses was also their Typhon,2 that is to say, that he was at the same time, the good and bad principle, the protector and the enemy, the God and Devil of the Egyptians.

Moses, according to this learned man, is the same as Zoroaster. He is Esculapius, Amphion, Apollo, Faunus, Janus, Perseus, Romulus, Vertumnus, and, at last, Adonis and Priapus. The proof of his being Adonis, is that Virgil says,

Et formosus oves ad flumina pavit Adonis,

And the sheep were guarded by the fair Adonis.

Now Moses watched the sheep towards Arabia. The proof of his being Priapus is still better. Priapus was sometimes represented with an ass, and the Jews were supposed to adore an ass. Huet adds, to complete the confirmation, that Moses’s rod might very well be compared to the scepter of Priapus:

Sceptrum Priapo tribuitur, virga Masi.

This is what he calls demonstration. It is not, indeed, very geometrical. There is reason to believe that he blushed at it in the latter part of his life; and that he recollected his demonstration, when he wrote his Treatise upon the Weakness of the Human Mind and of the Uncertainty of its Knowledge.