A New System; or, an Analysis of Ancient Mythology. Volume II
By Jacob Bryant
SESOSTRIS.
Among the writers who have written concerning this extraordinary personage, Diodorus Siculus is the most uniform and full; and with his evidence I will begin my account. He[877] informs us, that, when this prince was a youth, he was entrusted by his father with a great army. He upon this invaded Arabia: and though he was obliged to encounter hunger and thirst in the wilds, which he traversed; yet he subdued the whole of that large tract of country. He was afterwards sent far into the west; where he conquered all the legions of Lybia, and annexed great part of that country to the kingdom of Egypt. After the death of his father he formed a resolution to subdue all the nations upon earth. Accordingly, having settled everything at home, and appointed governors to each province, he set out with an army of six hundred thousand foot, and twenty-four thousand horse, and twenty-seven thousand armed chariots. With these he invaded the Ethiopians to the south; whom he defeated, and made tributaries to Egypt. He then built a fleet of ships upon the Red sea: and he is recorded as the first person who constructed vessels fit for distant navigation. With these, by means of his generals, he subdued all the sea-coast of Arabia, and all the coast upon the ocean as far as India. In the mean time he marched in person, with a puissant army, by land, and conquered the whole continent of Asia. He not only overran the countries, which Alexander afterwards invaded; but crossed both the Indus and the Ganges; and from thence penetrated to the eastern ocean. He then turned to the north, and attacked the nations of Scythia; till he at last arrived at the Tanäis, which divides Europe and Asia. Here he founded a colony; leaving behind him some of his people, as he had just before done at [878]Colchis. These nations are said to the last to have retained memorials of their original from Egypt. About the same time Asia Minor, and most of the islands near it, fell into his hands. He at last passed into [879]Thrace, where he is said to have been brought into some difficulties. He however persisted, and subdued all the regions of Europe. In most of these countries he erected pillars with hieroglyphical inscriptions; denoting that these parts of the world had been subdued by the great Sesostris, or, as [880]Diodorus expresses his name, Sesoosis. He likewise erected statues of himself, formed of stone, with a bow and a lance: which statues were in length four cubits and four palms, according to the dimensions of his own height and stature. Having thus finished his career of [881]victory, he returned laden with spoils to Egypt, after an absence of [882]nine years; which is one year less than was attributed to the expeditions of Hercules.
The detail given by this historian is very plain and precise: and we proceed very regularly and minutely in a geographical series from one conquest to another: so that the story is rendered in some degree plausible. But we may learn from Diodorus himself, that little credit is to be paid to this narration, after all the pains he may have taken to win upon our credulity. He ingenuously owns, that not only the Grecian writers, but even the priests of Egypt, and the bards of the same country varied in the accounts which they gave of this hero; and were guilty of great inconsistence. It was therefore his chief labour to collect what he thought most credible, and what appeared most consonant to the memorials in Egypt, which time had spared: [883]Τα πιθανωτατα, και τοις υπαρχουσιν ετι κατα την χωραν σημειοις τα μαλιστα συμφωνουντα διελθειν. But, as these memorials consisted chiefly in hieroglyphics, I do not see how it was possible for Diodorus to understand what the bards and priests could not decypher. The adjustment of this history, had it been practicable, should have been the work of a native Egyptian, and not of a person either from Greece or Sicily. This writer afterwards mentions the mighty [884]works of Sesostris upon his return into Egypt: the temples which he built, and the great entrenchments which he made to the east, to guard the country from the Arabians: and having enumerated the whole of his actions, he concludes with an ingenuous confession, that [885]little could be obtained that was precisely true. He has, without doubt, culled the most probable achievements of this hero; and coloured and arranged them to the best advantage: yet they still exceed belief. And if, after this care and disposition, they seem incredible, how would they appear in the garb, in which he found them? Yet the history of this personage has been admitted as credible by the most learned [886]writers and chronologists: though, as I before mentioned, they cannot determine the æra of his reign within a thousand years. Sir John Marsham and Sir Isaac Newton suppose him to have been the Sesac of the scriptures; and consequently bring his reign down to the time of Rehoboam king of Judah. But the only reason for this, as far as I can perceive, seems to be, that Sesostris is represented as a great conqueror; and Sesac is presumed, from his large [887]army, to have been so likewise. But there is nothing more said of Sesac, than that he formed a plan of conquering the king of Judah; and accordingly came with the army before mentioned, to put his design in execution. But the [888]capital being delivered into his hands without the least resistance, and the king intirely submitting himself to his will; he contented himself with the rich plunder, which he found, and which he carried away at his departure. We may also infer from the servitude, to which the people of Judah were reduced, that he imposed upon them some future contributions.
This is the whole of the history of Sesac, or Shishak; by whom no other expedition was undertaken that we know of: nor is there mention made upon record of a single battle which he fought. Yet from a notion that Sesac was a great warrior, he is made the same as Sesostris: and the age of the latter is brought down very many centuries beneath the æra, to which the best writers have adjudged it. When we differ from received tradition, we should not pass over in silence what is said on the contrary part; but give it at large, and then shew our reasons for our departure from it. I have taken notice of the supposed conquerors of the earth: and among them of the reputed deities of Egypt, who came under the names of Osiris, Perseus, Thoules, &c. These are supposed, if they ever existed, to have lived in the first ages of the world, when Egypt was in its infant state; and Sesostris is made one of their number. He is by some placed after Orus; by others after Thoules; but still referred to the first ages. He is represented under the name of Sethos, [889]Sethosis, Sesoosis, Sesonchosis, Sesostris; but the history, with which these names are accompanied, shews plainly the identity of the personage. Eusebius in reckoning up the dynasty of kings, who reigned after Hephaistus or Vulcan, mentions them in the following order: [890]Then succeeded his son Helius; after him Sosis, then Osiris, then Orus, then Thoules, who conquered the whole earth to the ocean; and last of all Sesostris. The [891]Scholiast upon Apollonius Rhodius calls him Sesonchosis; and places him immediately after Orus, and the third in succession from Osiris: giving at the same time an account of his conquests. He adds that he was the person whom Theopompus called Sesostris. The same Scholiast quotes a curious passage from Dicæarchus, in which Sesonchosis maintains the same rank, and was consequently of the highest antiquity. [892]Dicæarchus in the first book of his history mentions, that immediately after the reign of Orus, the son of Isis and Osiris, in Egypt, the government devolved to Sesonchosis: so that from the time of Sesonchosis to Nilus were two thousand years. Cedrenus [893]calls him Sesostris; and mentions him after Osiris, and Orus, and Thoules; which last was by the above writer omitted. Οσιρις. Ωρος. Θουλης. μετα δε τουτον Σεσωστρις. The author of the Chronicon Paschale makes Orus to have been succeeded by the same personage, as is mentioned above, whom he calls Thoulis; and next to him introduces Sesostris. He relates all his great conquests; and gives us this farther information, that this prince was the first of the line of Ham, who reigned in Egypt; in other words, he was the first king of the country. [894]Εν τουτοις μετα ταυτα χρονοις εβασιλευε των Αιγυπτιων πρωτος εκ τες φυλης ΤΟΥ ΧΑΜ [895]Σεσωστρις. Aristotle speaks of Sesostris; but does not determine the time of his reign on account of its great antiquity. He only says that it was long before the age of [896]Minos, who was supposed to have reigned in Crete. Apollonius Rhodius, who is thought to have been a native of Egypt, speaks of the great actions of this prince; but mentions no name: not knowing, I imagine, by which properly to distinguish him, as he was represented under so many. He however attributes to him every thing which is said of [897]Sesostris; particularly the settling a Colony at Colchis, and building innumerable cities in the countries which he traversed:
μυρια δ' αστη
Νασσατ' εποιχομενος.
He represents him as conquering all Asia and Europe; and this in times so remote, that many of the cities which he built, were in ruins before the æra of the Argonauts.
From what has been said, we may perceive that if such a person as Sesostris had existed, his reign must have been of the earliest date. He is by some represented as succeeding Thoules: according to others he comes one degree higher, being introduced after [898]Orus, who in the catalogue of Panodorus is placed first of the Demigods, that reigned in Egypt; but by [899]Herodotus is ranked among the deities. According to Dicæarchus the reign of Sesostris was two thousand five hundred years before Nilus: and the reign of the latter was four hundred and thirty-six years before the first Olympiad. I do not place the least confidence in these computations; but would only shew from them that the person spoken of must be referred to the mythic age, to the æra of the Demigods of Egypt. Some of these evidences are taken notice of by Sir John [900]Marsham; who cannot extricate himself from the difficulties with which his system is attended. He has taken for granted, that Sesostris and Sesonchosis are the Sesac of the Scriptures; though every circumstance of their history is repugnant to that notion. [901]I know not, says he, what to make of this Sesonchosis; who is represented as five thousand years before Menes, and who is referred to the time of the Demigods. In another place: Sesostris, who is in the twelfth Dynasty of Africanus, and whose æra extends higher, than the Canon of Eusebius reaches, reigned according to Scaliger's computation in the 1392d year of the Julian Period. By this calculation Sesostris is made prior to Sesostris; and this too by no less than 2355 years: for it is manifest, as I will shew from Scripture, that Sesostris undertook his expedition into Asia, and got possession of Jerusalem in the 3747th year of the Period abovementioned. What is said in the sacred writings, I have taken notice of before. Not a word occurs about Sesostris, nor of any such Asiatic expedition. I am obliged to say, that through the whole of this learned writer's process, instead of a proof, we find nothing else but the question begged, and some inferences of his own in consequence of this assumption. He indeed quotes the authority of Manethon from Josephus to prove that the great actions of Sesostris were the same as were performed by Sesac. But Manethon says no such thing: nor does Josephus attribute any such exploits to Sesac: but expressly says more than once, that Sesac, and Sesostris were two different [902]persons. It is no where said of Sesac, that he made an expedition into Asia; much less that he conquered it, as is supposed of Sesostris. Sesac went up against Jerusalem, and took it, αμαχητι, without meeting with any opposition. Upon this he departed, and carried with him the treasures which he had there seized: in other words, he went home again. There is not the least mention made of his invading [903]Samaria, or the country about Libanus, and Sidon; or of his marching to Syria: all which made but a small part of the great Continent, called in aftertimes Asia: much less did he visit the countries of the Assyrians, and Babylonians; or the regions of Elam and the Medes. All this, and much more he must have done, to have come up to the character, to which they would fain entitle him.
I will not enter into any farther discussion of the great conquests attributed to this supposed monarch Sesostris. They are as ideal as those of Sesac, and sufficiently confute themselves. First Osiris is said to have conquered the whole earth: then Zeus, then Perseus, then [904]Hercules, all nearly of the same degree of antiquity, if we may believe the best Mythologists. Myrina comes in for a share of conquest in the time of Orus. After her Thoules subdues the whole from the Eastern Ocean, to the great Atlantic: and as if nothing had been performed before, Sesostris immediately succeeds, and conquers it over again. [905]Herodotus informs us, as a token of these victories, that Sesostris erected pillars and obelisks with emblematical inscriptions: and that he saw some of them in Phrygia, and in other countries, which had been conquered. He without doubt saw pillars: but how did he know for certain, by whom they were erected? and who taught him to interpret the symbols? Pausanias takes [906]notice of a colossal statue in the Thebäis, and says that the history given of it was not satisfactory. He tells us, that it stood near the Syringes, in upper Egypt; and he viewed it with great admiration. It was the figure of a man in a sitting posture; which some said was the representation of Memnon the Ethiopian: others maintained, that it was the statue of Phamenophis: and others again, that it related to Sesostris. There were here emblems, and symbols; yet a diversity of opinions. I want therefore to know, how Herodotus could interpret in Phrygia, what a native could not decypher in Egypt. The same question may be asked about the people of Syria, among whom were obelisks attributed to the same person. How came they to be so determinate about an Egyptian work; when people of that country in the same circumstances were so utterly at a loss? the whole undoubtedly was matter of surmise. I shall not therefore say any thing more of Sesostris; as I must again speak of him, when I come to the kings of Egypt.
If we compare the above histories, we may perceive that they bear a manifest similitude to one another; though they are attributed to different persons. They contain accounts of great achievements in the first ages: in effecting which these antient heroes are represented as traversing immense regions, and carrying their arms to the very limits of the known world: the great Tartarian ocean to the east, and the Atlantic westward, being the boundaries of their travel. Some of them seem to have been of the same age; and to have carried on these conquests at nearly the same time: and those, whose æra may possibly differ, have this in common with the others; that they visit the same countries, march for the most part by the same rout; and are often joined by the same allies, and are followed by the like attendants. They are in general esteemed benefactors, wherever they go: and carry the sciences with them, as well as their religious rites; in which they instruct the natives in different parts of the world. These are to be sure noble occurrences; which however could not possibly have happened, as they are represented above. It is not to be supposed, that any person in those early ages, or in any age, could go over such a tract of country; much less that he should subdue it. It is still more improbable, that such extensive conquests should be so immediately repeated: and that they should in some instances be carried on by different people at nearly the same time. They, who speak of mighty empires being founded in those early days, know little of true history; and have formed a very wrong judgment of the politics, which then universally prevailed. The whole earth, as far as we can learn, was divided into little coördinate states: every city seems to have been subservient to its own Judge and Ruler, and independent of all others. In the land of [907]Canaan thirty-one kings were subdued by Joshua, between Jordan and the sea: and some were still left by him unconquered. In those days, says the learned Marsham, quot urbes, tot regna. The like was for many ages after observable in Greece, as well as in Latham, Samnium, and Hetruria. A powerful enemy made Egypt unite under one head: and the necessities of the people in a time of dearth served to complete that system. The Israelites too, when settled in Canaan, formed a large kingdom. Excepting these two nations we know of none of any considerable extent, that were thus united. The [908]Syrians and the Philistim were in separate states, and under different governors. The kingdoms of Nineve and Babylonia consisted each of one mighty city, with its environs; in which were perhaps included some subordinate villages. They were properly walled [909]Provinces; and the inhabitants were in a state of rest for ages. The Assyrian did not till about seven hundred years before Christ, begin to contend for dominion, and make acquisition of territory: and we may form a judgment, from what he then [910]gained, of what he was possessed before. The cities Hala, Habor, Haran in Mesopotamia, with Carchemish upon the Euphrates, were his first conquests: to these he added the puny states Ina, Iva, and Sepharvaim upon the same river. He then proceeded to Hamath, Damascus, and other cities of Syria; and at last came to Samaria. The line of conquest points out the route, which he took; and shews that there were in Mesopotamia numberless little states, independent of Babylon and Nineve, though in their immediate vicinity. Consequently the notion of the extent, dominion, and antiquity of those Monarchies, as delivered by Ctesias and others, is entirely void of truth. The conquests likewise of those Heroes and Demigods, who are made coeval with the supposed foundations of those Monarchies, must be equally groundless. To say the truth, the very personages are ideal, and have been formed out of the titles of the Deity: and the history, with which they are attended, related not to conquest, but to peregrinations of another nature; to Colonies which went abroad, and settled in the countries mentioned. The antients, as I have repeatedly said, have given to a person, what related to a people: and if we make this small allowance, the history will be found in great measure true.
[877] Diodorus Sicul. l. 1. p. 49.
[878] See Apollon. Argonaut. l. 4. v. 277. and Herodot. l. 2. c. 102.
Syncellus. p. 59, 60
[879] Diodorus Sic. above. He was near losing his whole army.
[880] Την δε χωραν ὁπλοις κατεστρεψατο τοις ἑαυτου Βασιλευς Βασιλεων, και Δεσποτης Δεσποτων Σεσοωσις. Diodor. Sicul. ibid.
[881] He passed through all Ethiopia to the Cinnamon country. Strabo. l. 17. p. 1138. This must be Indica Ethiopia, and the island Seran-Dive. Hence came Cinnamon: here were στηλαι και επιγραφαι.
Venit ad occasum, mundique extrema Sesostris. Lucan. l. 10. v. 276
[882] Σεσωστρις ετη μη, ὁς ἁπασαν εχειρωσατο την Ασιαν εν ενιαυτοις εννεα. Syncellus. p. 59.
Some make him advance farther, and conquer all Europe: ὁμοιως ὑπεταξε και την Ασιαν πασαν, και ΤΗΝ ΕΥΡΟΠΗΝ, και την Σκυθιαν, και την Μυσιαν. Chron. Pasch. p. 47. Herodotus thinks he did not proceed farther than Thrace. l. 2. c. 103.
[883] Diodorus Sicul. l. 1. p. 49.
[884] Of all the great actions of Sesostris, see Marsham. Can. Chron. sec. 14. p. 354.
[885] Περι δε τουτων το μεν αληθες εκθεσθαι μετ' ακριβειας ου ῥαδιον. Diodorus Sicul. L. 1. p. 52.
[886] Sir John Marsham's Can. Chron. sec. 14. p. 354.
Sir Isaac Newton's Chronology, p. 217.
[887] 1 Kings. c. 14. v. 25, 26. And it came to pass, that in the fifth year of king Rehoboam Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem (because they had transgressed against the Lord); with twelve hundred chariots, and threescore thousand horsemen; and the people were without number, that came with him out of Egypt; the Lubims, the Sukkiims, and the Ethiopians. 2 Chron. c. 12. v. 2, 3.
[888] Παραλαβῳν δε Σουσακος αμαχητι την πολιν. Joseph. Antiq. l. 8. c. 10.
[889] Sethosis of Josephus contra Apion. l. 1. p. 447.
[890] Euseb. Chron. p. 7. l. 43. Θουλης· μετα δε τουτον Σεσωστρις.
[891] Σεσογχωσις, Αιγυπτου πασης βασιλευς μετα Ωρον της Ισιδος και Οσιριδος παιδα, την μεν Ασιαν ὁρμησας πασαν κατεστρεψατο, ὁμοιως δε τα πλειστα της Ευρωπης. Θεοπομπος δε εν τριτῳ Σεσωστριν αυτον καλει. Schol. in Apollon. Argonaut. l. 4. v. 272.
[892] Δικαιαρχος εν πρωτῳ, μετα τον Ισιδος και Οσιριδος Ωρον, βασιλεα γεγονεναι Σεσογχωσιν λεγει· ὡστε γενεσθαι απο της Σεσογχωσιδος βασιλειας μεχρι της Νειλου ετη δισχιλια. Schol. in Apollon. Argonaut. ibid.
[893] Cedrenus. v. 1. p. 20. Osiris, Orus, Thoules, Sesostris.
[894] Succeeded by Φαραω. Chron. Pasch. p. 48.
[895] Joannes Antiochenus has borrowed the same history, and calls this king Sostris. Εβασιλευσεν Αιγυπτιων πρωτος εκ της φυλης του Χαμ Σωστρις. p. 23. He adds, that Sostris, or Sesostris, lived in the time of Hermes, Ἑρμης ὁ τρισμεγιστος Αιγυπτιος. He was succeeded by Pharaoh, πρωτος, the first of the name. Ibid. Herodotus calls him Pheron, and Pherona. l. 2. c. 111.
[896] Πολυ ὑπερτεινει τοις χρονοις την Μινω βασιλειαν ἡ Σεσωστριος. Politic. l. 7. c. 10.
[897] Apollon. Argonaut. l. 4. v. 272. Ενθεν δη τινα φασι—Σεσογχωσις, Αιγυπτου πασης βασιλευς—Θεοπομπος δε εν τριτῳ Σεσωστριν αυτον καλει. Schol. ibid.
Περι δε των χρονων, καθ' ὁυς εγενετο Σεσογχωσις, ὁ μεν Απολλωνιος τουτο μονον φησι, πολυς γαρ αδην απενηνοθεν αιων. Schol. ibid.
Lycophron speaks of Apollo Ζωστηριος, and a promontory Ζωστηριον, εν ᾡ ἱερον Ζοστηριου Απολλωνος. Schol. ad v. 1278.
[898] Schol. Apollon. l. 4. v. 272. Syncellus joins him with Serapis. p. 91.
[899] Herodotus. l. 2. c. 144.
Ουπω τειρεα παντα κ. τ. λ. Apollon. Argonaut. l. 4. v. 261. See the whole, and Schol. ibid.
[900] Canon. Chronic. Sec. 10. p. 238, 239.
[901] Quis igitur Sesonchosis ille, qui, Menen antevertens annis amplius 5000, inter Semideos locum habere videatur? Marsham. Canon Chronic. Sec. 10. p. 238.
Sesostris in XII. Africani Dynastiâ (quæ Eusobiani Canonis epocham antevertit) ex Scaligeri calculis regnavit anno Per. Jul. 1392: quo ratiocinio Sesostris factus est annos 2355 ipso Sesostre senior. Nam ex S. literis (suo loco) apparebit, Sesostrim expeditionem suscepisse in Asiam, et Hierosolyma cepisse Anno Per. Jul. 3747. Ibid. p. 239.
[902] Antiq. l. 8. c. 10. p. 449. and 450.
[903] He came merely as a confederate to Jeroboam, in favour of the kingdom of Israel; and his intention was to ruin Judah: but his cruel purpose was averted by the voluntary submission both of the king and people; and by the treasures they gave up to him, which were the purchase of their security.
[904] Hercules is said to have commanded the armies of Osiris. Diodorus. Sicul. l. 1. p. 15.
[905] L. 2. c. 106. Concerning the interpretation of these emblems, see Joan Pierii Hieroglyph. l. 34. c. 20.
[906] Pausan. l. 1. p. 101. The Statue remains to this day. In like manner it was reported that Dionusus raised Pillars. Strabo. l. 3. p. 260.
Ενθα τε και Στηλαι Θηβαιγενεος Διονυσου. Dionys. Perieg. v. 623.
Hercules erected the like. All which was done by people styled Dionysians and Herculeans.
[907] Joshua. c. 12. v. 24. Adonibezek had threescore and ten vassal princes at his feet; if the headman of every village may be so called. Judges. c. 1. v. 7.
[908] Benhadad of Damascus was attended with thirty-two kings, when he invaded Samaria. 1 Kings. c. 20. v. 1.
[909] The people plowed, and sowed, and had fruits, and pastures, within their walls.
[910] 2 Kings. c. 17. v. 6. and c. 18. v. 11. and v. 34. Isaiah. c. 10. v. 9. c. 37. v. 13.
Index | Next: Ninus and Semiramis