Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

greatest possible latitude, and supposing Cush to have been born the year after the deluge, still, according to Sir W. Jones, these eighty-six generations were born, reigned, and died 756 years before the birth of their progenitor. And, if we add, the twenty-eight princes, said to have ruled during the beginning of the fourth age, we have 114 reigns in succession of eldest sons, lineally descended from Cush, (whom we will suppose to have been born the year after the deluge) until the period when the Solar and Lunar dynasties became extinct in the year B. c. 2100. This gives us the most prolonged period that can be admitted, or 756 years for 114 generations; which allows only six years and two hundred and twenty-seven days, not for the reign only of each prince, but for his birth, marriage, birth of his son, reign and death. We may defy the Hindus to produce an absurdity more monstrous than this, which is given for the purpose of elucidating their chronology: whilst that given by themselves is deemed "an absurdity so monstrous as to overthrow their whole system." Whence does our author produce 114 generations? If we reckon from Noah to the year B.C. 2100, we find but ten of the eldest sons inclusive of the patriarch and his son, who was born in the antediluvian world. For Haran the eldest son of Terah was not born until A. M. 1949, nearly half

a century after: which evinces, that the names of the princes ought not to have been placed in succession. For, if we take the greatest possible latitude, or from the commencement of the world to A. M. 1902, only nineteen generations of eldest sons in succession are recorded in the race of Seth during that period. That the Hindus should represent the dynasties, as princes in succession, may seem to Europeans very possible. For although their Puranas prove that there were only ten generations of patriarchs, seven of whom were considered supreme sovereigns before the deluge ; yet, contending that the second and third age contained 2160000 years, they might deem it expedient to represent the princes who ruled over provinces as kings in succession; that the number of the princes might bear some proportion to the number of suppositious years, which they are said to have ruled. And these rulers over districts probably were termed kings, like those who served twelve years under Chedorlaomer in the time of Abraham, or Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrha, and so forth. It is said that the children of the Sun were no other than the children of Cush, the grandson of Noah. Yet, when this dynasty, which is said to have consisted of 114 princes in succession, ended in A. M. 1900, Noah was still alive; and Cush, so far from being

the founder of so extensive a dynasty, was removing, with part of his family, from his first habitation, to the south of Babylon; to a place called Chaduca but formerly Chusca. So says the sacred writ of the Hebrews. Yet thence it has been inferred, that the children of the Sun were the children of Cush; and this name has been produced as a collateral proof of the truth of the remarks made on the derivation of names given in p. 147. The Hindus, in treating of the earliest times, place the residence of the first Menu in the province of Cueshedea; naming the holy land Casi: the fifth Menu is designated in their sacred writings Cha'eshusha, or beaming with glory.' In the Puranas, the return of the race of Atri at the beginning of the fifth century of the world, or between four and five hundred years after the Padma creation is said to have been to the city of Casi, or the splendid, in the province of Cueshedea, by the Egyptians called Crusi, and Cussidea, probably the same name differently spelt. May we not then presume, that Vicucshi and Cucutst'ha were rather derived from the Hindu Cha'eshusha than the Hebrew Cush? Maurice enlarges on the subject. In the 259th page of his second volume, he comments on the account of Sir W. Jones, or rather endeavours to enforce the truth of his statements, by saying, "Vaivaswat or

Menu we have seen as the fountain of both dynasties, who were Icshwacu, Vicucshi, Cucutst'ha and their descendants; amounting to fifty-five princes down to Rama in the solar line. Their names and history, under the title Cush, and Cushites, given as far as was practicable in the preceding pages, have, I trust, satisfactorily evinced, that they were the more immediate and noble descendants male, of the great Satyavrata: they were the first colonizers of the world, though their exploits are detailed in the Puranas, in a style the most exaggerated, and in a manner the most romantic. It is those of the Lunar dynasty with whom we are now principally cencerned, those who were the offspring of Buddha, the planet Mercury, by Ila the daughter of the personage who was saved in the Bahitron, or ark, Noah, called Ilus by Sanchoniatho. Of the third in this dynasty Nuhusha (if indeed he were not the same as Rama himself*) the exploits have been amply detailed."

Here our commentator seems lost in a labyrinth of learning. For, following Mr. Bryant, he makes Vicucshi the son of Cush (who certainly

* M. Maurice places Nuhusha the third in the dynasty of the Moon, and Rama the fifty-fifth in the dynasty of the Sun; although he here supposes them to be the same person.

was the third in descent from Noah) and following Sir William Jones, admits that fifty-five generations passed between the son of Cush and Rama ; who he tells us, was likewise a son of Cush, for he could be no other than the Raamah of Scripture. "For the mother of the second Rama was named Caushalya, which is a derivative of Cush' Ala, and the name of Cush, as the Cashmirians pronounce it, is preserved intire in that of his ancestor Vicucshi." It sounds as harsh to a Christian, as to an Hindu ear, that the race of Ham, the accursed of his father, should be represented as the most noble descendants male of the great patriarch, the reformer of religion, the opposer of idolatry; the favoured of the lord Heri, the Eternal Spirit. And, lest we should suppose the Hindus to be ignorant of the character of this most noble and favoured son of Noah, the same author further informs us, "that according to the Hindu record, Noah assigned to his son Jyapeti or Japheth, the regions to the north of Caucasus; to Sherma, or Shem, that to the south; but to Charma, or Ham, no portion of the world was allotted: he, in consequence of his vicious conduct, was doomed to be the slave of his brothers." His dereliction of virtue is then detailed. We are told that he found his father in an unseemly posture in a state of inebriety; a tale evidently borrowed VOL. I. L

« PredošláPokračovať »