|
Thomas Stanley - History of the Chaldaick Philosophy |
|
"We are entring upon a Subject which I confess, is in it self harsh and exotick, very unproper for our Tongue..." Note on the this electronic version This version of Thomas Stanley's History of the Chaldaick Philosophy is an ongoing project. I am currently engaged in producing this text from the 1701 edition (first published in 1662), of which I am fortunate enough to possess an original copy. This substantial work has not to my knowledge been reprinted since 1701 or made available online; an omission all the more astonishing when one considers the depth and breadth of the diverse matters surveyed. I hope to have the complete text online within the next few weeks. I have retained all idiosyncrasies of Stanley's text, including capitalisation, italics and spelling. My only significant departure from the text has been to replace the ligatured s with the more comfortable modern style. Images of the 1701 edition Title Page First Book Oracles Text in Greek and Latin Contents Title Page To Sir John Marsham, Kt. Preface The First BOOK - Of the Chaldeans. THE FOURTEENTH PART. The Chaldĉan Philosophers, Institutions, and Sects. SECT.I. Of the Chaldĉan Philosophers.
H I S T O R Y O F T H E C H A L A I C K* Philosophy. B Y T H O M A S S T A N L E Y. L O N D O N, Printed for A. and J. Churchill at the Black Swan in Pater-Noster-Row, MDCCI.*(e.d. sic. read CHALDAICK) Sir John Marsham, Kt. SIR, I Send this Book to you, because you first directed me to this Design. The Learned Gassendus was my Precedent; whom nevertheless I have not follow'd in his Partiality: For he, tho' limited to a Single Person, yet giveth himself Liberty of Enlargement, and taketh occasion from his Subject to make the World acquainted with many excellent Disquisitions of his own. Our Scope being of a greater Latitude, affords less Opportunity to favour any Particular; whilst there is due to every one the Commendation of their own Deserts. This Benefit I hope to have received from the variety of the Subject; but far more are those I owe to your Encouragement, which if I could wish less, I should upon this Occasion, that there might seem to have been expressed something of Choice and Inclination in this Action, which is now but an inconsiderable Effect of the Gratitude of, Dear Uncle, Your Most Affectionate Nephew, and Humble Servant, T H O M A S S T A N D L E Y.* * e.d. sic. read STANLEY We are entring upon a Subject which I confess, is in it self harsh, and exotick, very unproper for our Tongue; yet I doubt not but they will pardon this, who shall consider, that other Philosophies and Sciences have been lately well received by several Nations Translated into their own Languages, and that this, as being the first, contributes not a little to the understanding of the rest. Another disadvantage this Subject incurs far more considerable : There is not any thing more difficult to be retrieved out of the Ruins of Antiquities than the Learning of the Eastern Nations, and particularly that of the Chaldĉans. What remains of it is chiefly transmitted to us by the Greeks, of whom, some converted it to their own use, intermixing it with their Philosophy, as Pythagoras and Plato ; others treated expresly of it, but their Writings are lost. T H E H I S T O R Y O F T H E C H A L D A I C K P H I L O S O P H E R S. Of the Chaldĉans. Philosophy is generally acknowledged even by the most Learned of the Grecians themselves, to have had its Original in the East. None of the Eastern Nations, for Antiquity of Learning, stood in Competition with the Chaldĉans and Ĉgyptians. The Ĉgyptians pretended that the Chaldĉans were a Colony of them, and had all their Learning and Institutions from them; but they who are less interessed, and and unprejudiced Judges of this Controversie, assert that a The Magi (who derived their Knowledge from the Chaldĉans) were more ancient that the Ĉgyptians, that b Astrological Learning passed from the Chaldĉans to the Ĉgyptians, and from them to the Grecians, and, in a word, that the Chaldĉans were c antiquissimus Doctorum genus, the most ancient of Teachers. Chaldĉa is a part of Babalonia in Asia, the Inhabitants termed Chasdim, (as if Chusdim) from Chus the Son of Cham. But the Philosophy of the Chaldĉans, exceeded the Bounds of their Country, and diffused it self into Persia and Arabia, that Border upon it; for which reason the Learning of the Chaldĉans, Persians and Arabians is comprehended under the general Title of C H A L D A I C K. Of these therefore we shall begin with That from which the other two were derived, and is properly termed C H A L D Ĉ A N, in respect of the Country. In treating of which )as likewise of the other two) the first part of our Discourse shall consider the Authors or Professors, and their Sects; the Second their Doctrine. a The Author of the Treatise Magikon, cited by Laertius in Proĉm. b Joseph. I. 8. c Cic.F O U R T E E N T H P A R T. The Chaldĉan Philosophers, Institutions, and Sects. Of the Chaldĉan Philosophers. The Antiquity of the Chaldaick Learning. The Antiquity of the Chaldaick Learning, though such as other Nations cannot equal, comes far short of that to which they did pretend. When Alexander, by his Victories against Darius, was possessed of Babylon, (in the 4383d year of the Julian Period) Aristotle, a curious promoter of Arts, requested his Nephew Calisthenes, who accompanied Alexander in the Expidition, to inform him of what Antiquity the Learning of the Chaldĉan might with reason be esteemed. The Chaldĉans themselves pretended, that, from the time they had first begun to observe the Stars until this Expedition of Alexander into Asia, were 470000 years. But far beneath this number were the Observations, which (as Porphyrius cited by a Simplicius relates) Calisthenes sent to Aristotle being of 1903 years, preserved to that time, which from the 4383d year of the Julian Period upwards, falls upon the 2480th. And even this may with good Rason be questioned, for there is not any thing extant in the Chaldaick Astrology more ancient than the Ĉra of Nabonassar, which began but on the 3967th of the Julian Period. By this Ĉra they compute their Astronomical Observations, of which if there have been any more ancient, Ptolomy would not have omitted them. b The first of these is the first year of Merodach, c (that King of Babylon who sent the Message to Abaz concerning the Miracle of the Dial) which was about the 27th of Nabonassar. The next was in the 28th of Nabonassar. d The third Observation is in the 127th of Nabonassar, which is the 5th year of Nabonassar. This indeed is beyond all exception; for we have them confirmed by the Authority of Ptolomy, who shews the Reasons and Rules for the Observations. What is more than this, seems to have been only hypothethetical. And if we shall imagine a canicular Cycle, which consists of 1461 years (and are 1460 natural years) to have been supposed by Porphryius to make up his Hypothesis, then there will want but 18 years of this number. a In lib. 2. de coelo, p.123. line 18. b Ptol. lib. 4. cap. 6. 7. c Ezek. d Lib. 5. p.125That there were several Zoroasters. The Invention of Arts among the Chaldĉans is generally ascribed to Zoroaster (to omit those who give it a Greek Etymology from ζῶον and ἄστρον) Dinon cited by a Laertius Interprets ἀστροθύτην, Rendred by his Translators, a Worshipper of the Stars. b Kircher finds fault with this Etymology as being compounded out of two several Languages, from the Greek ἄσρον, and the Chaldee Zor, and therefore endeavours to deduce it from c tsura, a figure, or d tsajar, to fashion, and e as and f star, hidden fire, as if it were g Zairaster, fashioning Images of hidden fire, or, h Tsuraster, the Image of secret things, with which the Persian Zarast agreeth. But it hath been observed, that Ester in the Persian Language signifieth a Star. The former Particle Zor, i Bochartus derives from the Hebrew Schur, to contemplate, and thereupon, for ἀσροθύτησ, (in Laertius) Reads ἀσροθεάτησ, a contemplator of the Stars. But we find Zor used among other words (by composition) in the name Zorobabel, which we Interpret, Born at Babylon: Zoroaster therefore properly signifies the Son of the Stars. The same name it is which some call Zabratas, others Nazaratas, others, Zares, others, Zaran, others, Zaratus, others Zaradas; all which are but several corruptions from the Chaldee or Persian Word, which the Greeks most generally render Zoroaster. That there were several Zoroasters (except Goropius who paradoxically maintains there was not any one) none deny; but in reckoning them up, there is no small disagreement amongst Writers, grounded chiefly upon k Arnobius, whom they differently interpret; his words are these, Age nunc veniat quis super igneam zonam Magus interiore ab orbe Zoroastres, Hermippo ut assentiamur Authori: Bactrianus & illi conveniat, cujus Ctesias res gestas historiarum exponit in primo; Armenius, Hostanis nepos, & familiaris Pamphilius Cyri. l Patricius, m Naudĉus, n Kircher, and others, conceive that Arnobius here mentions four Zoroasters; the first a Chaldĉan, the second a Bactrian, the third a Pamphilian (named also Erus,) the fourth an Armenian, Son (as Kircher would have it) of Hostanes. o Salmasius alters the Text thus, Age nunc veniat quĉso per igneam Zonant Magus interiore ab orbe Zoroastres, Hermippo ut assentiamur Aucthori, Bactrianus. Et ille conveniat, cujus Ctesias res gestas historiarum exponit in primo; Armenius, Hostanis nepos, & familiaris Pamphilius Cyri. Which words thus altered by himself, imply, as he pretends, but three Zoroasters, the first according to some, an Ĉtheopian, (s Country near the torrid Zone) but according to Hermippus, a Bactrian; the second, Armenius, Nephew of Hostanes, of whose Actions Cresias gives account in the first Book of his Histories; the third named Pamphilius, Friend to Cyrus. p Ursinus, from the same reading of the words, infers that Arnobius mentions only two, that he manifestly explodes the Bactrian Zoroaster of Hermippus, and that Cresias confuting the fabulus Relation of Eudoxus, proved Zoroaster to have lived in the time of Cyrus. But the words of Arnobius seem not to require such alteration; which will appear more, if we mention particularly all those on whom the name of Zoroaster was conferred. The first a Chaldean, the same whom q Suidas calls the Assyrian, adding that he died by fire from Heaven; to which Story perhaps Arnobius alludes, or to that other Relation mentioned by r Dion Crysostom, that Zoroaster the Persian (for their Stories are confounded) came to the People out of a fiery Mountain; or else by fiery Zone, he means the Seat of the zoned Deities just above the Empyreal or Corporeal Heaven, according to the Doctrine of the Chaldeans; for I find not any where that Zoroaster was esteemed an Ĉthiopian, or of interior Lybia as Salmasius expounds. Concerning this Zoroaster, Arnobius cites Hermippus: who was as s Pliny saith, wrote in explication of the Verses, and added Tables to his Volumes. The second a Bactrian; t Justin mentions Zoroastres, King of Bactria contemporary with Ninus the Assyrian, by whom he was subdued and slain; adding He was said to be the first that invented the Magical Arts, and observed the beginnings of the World, and the Motions of the Stars. Arnobius saith, u he contested with Ninus, not only by steel and strength, but likewise by the Magical and abstruse Disciplines of the Chaldeans. The Actions of this Zoroaster, Ctesias recorded in the first Book of his Persica; for so Arnobius, x Bactrianus & ille conveniat, cujus Ctesias res gesta historiam exponit in primo. The first six Book of that Work treated (as y Photius shews) only of the Assyrian History, and passages that preceded the Persian Affairs. Whereupon, I cannot assent to the conjecture of Salmasius, who applies the citation of Ctesias to the Nephew of Hostanes, since Hostanes (as z Pliny affirms) lived under Darius. but a Diodorus names the King of Bactria, who Ninus conquered, Oxyartes; and some old Mss. of Justin (attested by Ligerius) Oxyartes, other Zeorastres: perhaps the nearness of the Names and Times (the Chaldean living also under Ninus, as (b) Suidas relates) gave occasion to some to confound them, and to ascribe to the Bactrian what was proper to the Chaldean; since it cannot be imagined, that the Bactrian was Inventor of those Arts, in which the Chaldean, who lived contemporary with him, was so well skilled. Elichmannus, a Persian Writer, affirms the Arabians and Persians to hold, that Zoroaster was not King of the Bactirans, but a Magus or Prophet; who by perswasions having wrought upon their King, first introduced a new Form of Superstition amongst them, whereof there are some remainders at this day. The third a Persian, so termed by c Laertius and others; the same whom Clemens Alexandrianus styles a Mede; Suidas a Perso-Mede; Institutor of the Magi, and Introducer of the Chaldaick Sciences amongst the Persians. Some confound this Zoroaster with the Chaldean, and both of them ( as d Kircher doth) with Cham Son of Noah, not without a very great Anachronism: for we find the word Persian no where mentioned before the Prophet Ezekiel, neither did it come to be of note till the time of Cyrus. The occasion of which mistake seems to have been for that Zoroaster the Persian, is by Pliny, Laertius, and others, styled Institutor of Magick, and of the Magi, which is to be understood no otherwise than that he first introduced them into Persia. For e Plutarch acknowedgeth, Zoroaster instituted Magi amongst the Chaldeans, in imitation of whom the Persians had theirs also: And f Arabick History that Zaradussit not first instituted, but reformed, the Religion of the Persians and Magi, being divided into many Sects. The fourth a Pamphylian, commonly called Er, or Erus Armenius. That he also had the Name of Zoroaster, g Clement witnesseth: The same Author, (saith he, meaning Plato) in the 10th of his Politicks, mentioneth Erus Armenius, by descent a Pamphylian, who is Zoroaster; now this Zoroaster writes thus, h 'This wrote I, Zoroaster Armentius, by descent a Pamphylian, dying in War, and being in Hades, I learned of the Gods." This Zoroaster, i Plato affirmeth to have been raised again to Life, after he had been dead ten days, and laid on the Funeral Pyle, repeated by k Valerius, Maximus, and l Macrobius. To this Zoroaster, doubtless the latter part of Arnobius's Words with which Interpreters are so much perplexed, ought to be preferred, Armenius Hostanis nepos & familiaris Pamphylius Cyri. Some conjecture he mentions two Zoroasters; I rather conceive the words, relate only to this one, and perhaps are corrupt, this to be restored and distinguished, Armenius Hostanis nepos & familiaris, Pamphilius Erus: Armenius, Nephew and Disciple (in which sense GREEK TEXT is usually taken) of Hostanes, Erus Pamphylius. The fifth a Proconnesian, mentioned by m Pliny; such as are more diligent (saith he) place another Zoroaster, a Proconnesian, a little before Hostanes. This Zoroaster might probably be Aristeas the Proconnesian, who, according to n Suidas, lived in the time of Cyrus and Croesus. He adds, that his Soul could go out of his Body, and return as often as he pleased. o Herodotus, relates and Instance hereof, not unlike that of Erus Armenius, that he died suddenly in a Fuller's Shop at Proconnesus, and was seen the same time at Cyzicus: his Friends coming to fetch his Body, could not find it. Seven years after he returned home, and published the Verses which were afterwards called Arimaspian, a Poem describing a happy Life, or rather an Imaginary Civil Government after such a manner as he conceived most perfect. This we may gather from p Clemens Alexandrinus, who saith that, the Hyperborean and Arimaspian Cities, and the Elizian Fields are Forms of Civil Governments of just Persons; of which kinds Plato's Common-wealth. To these may be added a sixth Zoroaster, (for so q Apuleus calls him) who lived at Babylon, at what time Pythagoras was carried Prisoner thither by Cambyses. The same Author terms him omnis Divini arcarnum Antistitem, adding, that he was the chief Person whom Pythagoras had for Master; probably, therefore, the same with Zabratus, by whom r Diongenes affirms, he was cleansed from the Pollutions of his Life past, and instructed from what things Virtuous Persons ought to be free; and learn the discourse concerning Nature (Physick) and what are the Principles of the Universe; the same which Nazaratas the Assyrian, whom Alexander in his Book of Pythagorick Symbols, affirms to have been Master to Pythagoras; the same whom Suidas calls Zares; Cyril, Zara; Plutarch, Zaratus. That there should be so many Zoroasters, and so much confusion amongst Authors that write of them, by mistaking one for another, is nothing strange; for, from extraordinary Persons, Authors of some Publick Benefit, they who afterwards were Eminent in the same kind, were usually called by the same name. Hence it is that there were so many Belus's, Saturns, Jupiters; and, consequently, so much confusion in their Stories. The like may be said of Zoroaster the Chaldean, who being the inventer of Magical and Astronomical Sciences, they who introduced the same into other Countries, as Zoroaster the Persian did, in imitation (as Plutarch saith) of the Chaldeans, and such likewise as were eminently skilful in those Sciences, as the Bactrian, the Pamphylian, and the Proconnesian, are described to have been, were called by the same Name. a In Proem. b Obelisc. Pamphil, l. I. c. 2. Sect. I. c צודא d ציוד e עש f עש g עידבםססר h ציראסהר i Geor. Sacr. l.1.c.1. k Cont. gent. l Mag. Phil. m Apol. Mag. 8 n Obelisc. Pamphil. o Plin. Exercit. p In Zor. q In Zor. r Orat. Boristih. s Lib. 36.c.1. t Lib. 1. u Cont. gent. x Loc. cit. y Biblioth. z Lib. 36.c.1. a Lib. b in Zor. c In Proem. d Obel. Pamph. lib. 1. cap. 2. sect. 1. e De Isid. & Osirid f Set forth by Erpenius. g Strom. lib. h Reading GREEK TEXT i Loc. cit. k Lib. 1. c. 8. l In somm. Scip. m Lib. 36. c. 1. n in Aristeas. o Lib. p Strom. lib. q Flor. r Porphyr. vit. Pythag.THESE CHAPTERS COMING SOON Of the Chaldean Zoroaster, Institutor of the Chaldaick Philosophy. Of Belus, another reputed Inventer of Sciences amongst the Chaldeans. Other Chaldean Philosophers. Of Berosus, who first introduced the Chaldaick Learning into Greece. SECT.II. The Chaldaick Institutions and Sects.
FIFTEENTH PART. The Chaldaick Doctrine. From the four general kinds of Professors of Learning amongst the Chaldeans, mentioned by the Prophet Daniel, (of which we a last treated) may be inferred, of what parts or Sciences the Chaldaick Doctrine did consist. The Hhartumim were employed in Divine and Natural Speculation; The Ashapham in Religious Worship, and Rites; the Mecashphim, and Chassdim, in Divination: these by Astrology, those by other Arts: which two last, Diodorus, speaking of the Learned Chaldeans, comprehends under the common name of Astrologers; the other two, under that of Natural Philosophers, and Priests: for he saith, the imitated the AEgytpian Priests, Naturalists, and Astrologers. In treating therefore of the Chaldaick Doctrine, we shall first lay down their Theology, and Physick, the proper Study of the Hhartumim; Next, their Astrology, and other Arts of Divination practiced by the Chasdim, and Mecashphim: Thirdly, their Theurgy, and Lastly, their Gods. Which Contemplation and Rites were peculiar to the Ashaphim. a Part, 1. Sect. 2. cap. 4.SECT.I. Theology and Physick The Chaldaick Doctrine, in the first place considers all Beings as well Divine, as Natural: the Contemplation of the first, is Theology; of the later, Physick. a Zoroaster divided all things into three kinds, the first Eternal; the second, had a beginning in time, but shall have no end; the third Mortal: the two first belong to Theology. The subject of Theology, (saith Eusebius, speaking doubtless of the Followers of Zoroaster) they divided into four kings; the first is God, the Father and King: next to him. there followeth a multitude of other Gods; in the fourth Heroes, or, according to others, Angels, Daemons, and Souls. The third or Mortal kind is the Subject of Physick: It comprehends all things material; which they divide into seven Worlds, one Empyreal, three AEtherial, three Corporeal. a Psell. in Orac. p. 51. a Part, 1. Sect. 2. cap. 4. Of the Eternal Being, God. THESE CHAPTERS COMING SOON The Emanations of Light or Fire from God. Of things Ĉviternal and Incorporeal. The First Order. The Second Order. The Third Order Fountains, and Principles. Unzoned Gods, and Zoned Gods. Angels and immaterial Demons. Souls. The Supramundane Light. Of Things Temporal (or Corruptible) and Corporeal. The Emyreal World. The Ĉtherial Worlds. The Material Worlds. Of Materials Dĉmons. THE SECOND SECTION. Astrology, and other Arts of Divination.
CHAP. V. Theurgick Magick. The other part of the Chaldaick Magick is Theurgicks: to which perhaps Plato more particularly alluded, when he defined a the Magick of Zoroaster, the Service of the Gods. This they called also b the Method of Rites; the works of Piety, and (as rendred by the Greeks) GGGGGGGG . the Telestick Science and Telesiurgick. It what is did consist may be gathered from what Suidas saith of the two Julians; Julian (saith he) the Chaldean, a Philosopher, Father of Julian Sirnamed the Theurgick; he wrote of Daemons four books; they treat of Preservatices of every part of Man's Body, of which kind are the Chaldaick Telesiurgicks. An again, Julian Son of the afore mentioned, lived under Marcus Antonius the Emperor; he also wrote Theurgick Initiatory Oracles in Verse; and all other Secrets of the Science. Thus the Telestick Science was conceived to procure a Conversation with Daemons by certain Rites and Ceremonies, and c to initiate or perfect the Soul by the power of Materials Theurgick Rites. Apparitions. Material Dĉmons how to be repulsed. THE FOURTH SECTION. Of the Gods, and Religious Worship of the Chaldĉans.
|
