Of idolatry a discourse, in which is endeavoured a declaration of, its distinction from superstition, its notion, cause, commencement, and progress, its practice charged on Gentiles, Jews, Mahometans, Gnosticks, Manichees Arians, Socinians, Romanists : as also, of the means which God hath vouchsafed towards the cure of it by the Shechinah of His Son / by Tho. Tenison ...

PART 4. Of the Idol Apis.

APis the living Ox, was an Idol of ancient stan∣ding; for the Grecians who lived before the times of Alexander f 1.1 make mention of it. Herodotus is one of them; and he recordeth the Slaughter of Apis by Cambyses, who was the second Monarch of Persia. He likewise introduceth the Egyptians alledging the Festivity of the Appearance of Apis as an ancient Holiday g 1.2. They professed it to be a custom, that they might appease that vehement passion which a mi∣stake had raised in him. For when he found them re∣joycing

at the Appearance of Apis, he imagined them triumphing at that defeat of his Forces which he had newly sustained. By this it is plain, that the Idol Apis was ancient, but to me it seemeth not to have existed at all as such before the death of Moses.

And this I here design to shew by reasons allowable in Philological matters, though I have not the vanity to call them infallible Proofs. If this can be done, the Controversie will of it self fall to the ground, seeing the very subject of it will be removed.

There are few stories more uncertain than the Anti∣quities of Chaldea and Egypt, of which Kingdoms the former seemeth to be the more ancient a 1.3 by about forty years: And all that is said of either of them be∣yond the days of Phaleg, is vanity and imposture. Their vain and ignorant Priests, and men not much unlike them, the Mythologers of Grece, have set the Accounts of time backward and forward, and given feigned Pe∣digrees both to their Gods and their Princes. And they have so confounded Fable and History, that both have been swallowed by many without distinction. This confusion hath hapned in nothing more than in their Historical Theology; and I think the story of the Idol Apis may serve as a considerable example of it. Herodotus, Pliny, Strabo, Ammianus Marcellinus, all make different descriptions of it: And the Image of that Idol in the Table of Isis does still differ from each Character in those Writers b 1.4. In all things I shall not be able at this distance of time, to separate falshood from Truth. But in the point of its Antiquity I do not despair of proving its common date to be ficti∣tious.

Before the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, Oxen were very sacred among the Egyptians c 1.5. But they were then, if I mistake not, no otherwise sacred than

many Creatures were afterward among the Pythagore∣ans a 1.6, and are at this day among the Brachmans of India. That is, they were not touched with violent hand, or weapon: They were not used for Food, or offered in Sacrifice. Hence Strabo speaking of Apis at Memphis b 1.7, and Mnevis at Heliopolis [in times much nigher to us], does say of those Idols that they were reputed Deities, whilst the Oxen in other places were held as sacred Creatures, but not as gods c 1.8. Whether they were esteemed sacred Animals in memory of Jo∣seph, or from their use in Tillage d 1.9, or for some deeper reason, I pretend not to tell: for, it seems, themselves could not agree about the original of their Superstitions e 1.10. Sacred then they were in some sense, before Moses became a Law-giver to Israel. But that there was any one Ox selected so early as an object of Religious worship, is an opinion taken up without ground from History. My eyes at least have not been able to espie so much as an imperfect footstep of it. Had such an Idol existed, and been imitated also by the Israelites in the Wilderness, St. Stephen in his Epitome of their History, and particularly in that part of it wherein he remembreth their Idolatry with the Calf, could as easily have upbraided them with the false Deity Apis, as he did with those f 1.11 of Moloch and Remphan.

The Learned Mr. Selden, who referreth the Golden Calf to the Egyptian Pattern, does two ways endea∣vour to obviate this Objection against the Antiquity of Apis g 1.12.

First, He contendeth that this Worship of Apis or Osiris is sufficiently ancient, because it terminateth in the Sun, which was reputed a Divine Power at the very birth of Idolatry. Now this reason, if it proveth any thing, it proveth too much; much more than Mr.

Selden himself will own as truth. For from hence it will follow, both that the Idolatry of Egypt was as ancient as that of Babylon, and that the whole almost of the Egyptian Idolatry, which was exceeding various, com∣menced at the same time. There was scarce any Idol set up there, but in one respect or other it was referred to that glorious body. It scarce shined upon any thing, which was not at some time or other consecrated to it. The Lion, the Hart, the Hare, the Eagle, the Hawk, the Crow, the Cock, the Goose, the Upupa; the Pine-Tree, the Nile; all these, and many others were sacred to the Sun, as may to those, who care not to turn the leaves of many Authors, appear compendiously in the Harpocrates of Cuperus a 1.13. Yet these Idols were erected upon divers occasions, and as the humor at di∣vers times possessed fanciful and superstitious men.

Secondly, Mr. Selden b 1.14 produceth in favour of the Antiquity of the Idol Apis, the Testimony of Eusebius. Eusebius (he says) affirmeth of Apis, that in the days of King Aseth, a Calf was deified and called by that name. And for King Aseth, Mr. Selden supposeth him to have reign'd in Egypt in the days of Isaac.

But he hath gained little strength to his Cause, by producing a witness who contradicteth himself. For Euseb. elsewhere c 1.15 relates that Apis and Mnevis were deified under Choos, who is said to have reigned in the 2d. Dynastie after the Flood. For this he citeth Manetho a Grecising Fabler, who disagreeth with Herodotus, and Diodorus, and fetcheth his Relation from pretended Pillars, uncertain both for the place, and the Inscripti∣ons of them. Little credit is given by the Judicious to his Dynasties. He maketh in them contemporary per∣sons to succeed each other; he maketh many Kings out of the several deputies of one. He maketh Egypt no an∣cient Monarchy, as the Scripture doth. For at the same

time that Menis reigned at Thebes, he setteth up Saïtes as a King over other parts of Egypt a 1.16. It must indeed be granted, that though Eusebius contradicteth himself in assigning the particular time; yet it serveth the pur∣pose of Mr. Selden, that in both instances he referreth to time ancient enough. He doth so in those Places. But in others which Mr. Selden hath not cited, he set∣teth a more modern date to the Apotheôsis of Apis. In his Book of Evangelical Preparation b 1.17, he ascribeth to Chenephren King of Egypt, both the Deification of their Ox, and the imposition of the name of Apis. He addeth, that thenceforth the people erected a Temple to that Idol. Now he maketh this King Kenephren Contemporary with Moses, and one who reverenced his person, and received from him the rite of Circum∣cision. All this Eusebius has taken from Artapanus in his History of the Jews. For Artapanus I cannot say much in confirmation of his fidelity. Yet I think him of weight enough to be put into the scale against Ma∣netho the Sebennite, a writer so absurdly confident in his Fictions, that he maketh Menis equal to Adam c 1.18. The same Eusebius in his Cronicon, sets down Epaphus, or Apis as born in the Reign of Chencres, that is, of the abovesaid Chenephren, as may be conjectured both from the affinity of the names, and the agreement of the time. For he reporteth of Chencres (called also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or the Rebel against Almighty God) that he perished in the Red Sea. He was therefore Contemporary with Moses, and no other than that Pharoah who bade defi∣ance to the God of Israel, and fell as a Sacrifice to his Omnipotent Justice. That he was born in the Reign of Chencres, if it respecteth the Natural birth of Moses, is a mistake, yet such a one as is common in ancient Chro∣nology, which is not exact to a day or a year; for he was about fourscore years old at his going forth from

Egypt: but the time of his Civil birth may be then ac∣counted when he began to head the Israelites, and to say to Pharoah, Let the people go that they may serve their God. Then God said to him in effect, Thou art my Son, a Prince and Lieutenant under me; this day have I begotten thee, or created thee a Ruler.

If then the person represented by an Ox was not more ancient than the deliverance by Moses, much less was the Golden Apis extant in Egypt at that time of his departure. Yet Mr. Selden will have this Golden Ox a 1.19 to be the Pattern of the Idolatrous Israelites, and not the living Beast. It is true, that Plutarch b 1.20 mentioneth a Golden Ox, and telleth how for four days together it was exposed with great solemnity, during the disappearance of Apis, or, as he expoundeth it, at the decrease of Osiris, or the Nile. And in Pliny we read of a Golden Cat c 1.21 worshipped by the Citizens of Rhadata in Egypt. I doubt not but that such a Golden Image was extant, many years before Plutarch wrote of Isis and Osiris. He is a grave Author, and a man of singular skill in the more modern affairs of Egypt. But it is not shewn by him, or by any other Historian, that such a Statue was framed at the beginning of the wor∣ship of that Idol. Of this Herodotus, the Father of Se∣cular History, taketh no notice, though he had just oc∣casion so to do in his Discourse of the disappearance of Apis, if any such thing had been then in being d 1.22. Also in his description of the Palace said to be built for Apis by Psammitichus e 1.23, he drops not a word concerning any such Golden Calf, though he mention∣eth divers Types [Hieroglyphical, or Ornamental Fi∣gures] with which that Palace abounded. Nay Lucian denieth that any Figures or Statues had place in the ancient Temples of Egypt f 1.24.

Notes

• f 1.1

  Herod. in Thal. p. 195, 196.
• g 1.2

  Herod. ibid.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• a 1.3

  See Is. Voss. de AEt. Mundi. p. 41.
• b 1.4

  See Pignor. de mens•…•… Isiac•…•…. p. 36, 37.
• c 1.5

  Exod. 8. 25, 26.
• a 1.6

  Hence the Symbol of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is inter∣preted of not killing or not sacrificing Animals.
• b 1.7

  Strabo l. 17. Geogr. p. 803.
• c 1.8

  See Vattier's Pref. to Mu∣ctadi's Prod. of Egypt, p. 25, 26.
• d 1.9

  Ovid. l. 4. Fast. Bos aret, ignavam sacri∣ficate suem.
• e 1.10

  Strab. l. 17. Geogr. p. 813.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• f 1.11

  Act. 7. 41, 43.
• g 1.12

  Seld. de Diis Syris. Synt. 1. c. 4. de vit. Aur. p. 150.
• a 1.13

  Cuperi Harp•…•…∣cr. p. 14, 16, 21, 27, 43, 44, 45, 55, 60, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95.
• b 1.14

  Seld. Ibid- de Aur. vit. p. 153:
• c 1.15

  Seld. Ibid. p. 154. Imò in Sec. post Cata∣clys. Dyn. sub Choo Rege, Api•…•… & Mnevin & Mendesium Ca∣prum, in Deos relatos, ex Ma∣nethone Sacer∣dote tradit [Eusebius].
• a 1.16

  Scalig. ap. Voss. l. 1. de Idol. c. 28. p. 109. Ex hâc Dyn. patet, di∣versos Reges, eod. temp. in AEg. divers. partib. Imperi∣um obtinuisse. Nam quando Saïtes primus Dyn. 15. ex La∣trunc. Pastor. circa Bucolia AEg. jam dec. Ann. regnabat 〈◊〉〈◊〉 part. Theb. Regn. inivit Menes Theba∣•…•…us.
• b 1.17

  Eus. de praep. Evang. l. 9. ch. 27. p. 433.
• c 1.18

  See Is. Voss. de AEt. mundi. p. 36.
• a 1.19

  Seld. de vit. Aur•…•…o, in Synt. 1. c. 4. p. 141.
• b 1.20

  Plutarc. de Is. & Osyr. p. 366, D.
• c 1.21

  Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 29. p. 144. 22.
• d 1.22

  Herod. in Thaliâ. p. 195.
• e 1.23

  Id. in Eu∣terpe. p. 169.
• f 1.24

  Lucian. de D•…•…â Syr. p. 1057.