him. After the setting of the sun, this creature, Oannes, went toward the sea, plunged into it, and passed the night in the water. Afterward, other similar creatures appeared: concerning whom Berosus promises to relate many things, in his history of the Kings." This history is unfortunately lost: but Oannes is thus mentioned by Apollodorus, in Syncellus. "Berosus reports," says he, "that Alorus was the first king of Babylon, native of that city, he reigned ten sari; then came Alasparus and Amelonus, of the country of Pantibiblos; then the Chaldean Ammenonus, under whose reign was seen to issue from the Red Sea that Oannes which Alexander Polyhistor, by anticipation of time, placed in the first year, and which we place after a lapse of forty sari. Abidenus places the second Oannes after a period of twenty-six sari.

Apollodorus goes on to mention other kings, as Meg Alorus; Megas Alorus? Da-onus, possibly DeAUN-us, and Evedorachus, in whose time appeared another creature, half man, half fish, named w Aaywv, o Dagon; THE Dagon.

Helladius, an author of the fourth century, cited by Photius, Biblioth. p. 194. also reports "that a person named Oan, was seen in the Red Sea: who had the body of a fish; but his head, feet, and hands, were human; he taught the use of letters and astronomy. Some said he was born of the first parent, which is the egg. This Oan was altogether a man; and he appeared like a fish, only because he was covered with the skin of a fish." I incline to read this name as with the Greek article o Aun; THE Aun.

"He was

It is clear that Oan is the same as Oannes; and that Oannes is the same as THE Dagon. a man, but clad with the appearance of a fish; he was born of the first parent, the egg." This egg once contained all mankind; omnia ex ovo; this fish once preserved not only the human race, but the races of animals: Magna Deum Mater, Materque Ferarum.

I have been thus particular in extracting the accounts of this personage, because unquestionably they contain much truth: but we are, I conceive, to regard his succeeding appearances, as denoting the introduction of his worship, or the renewal of its rites, by priests engaged in devotion to him: and it is by no means improbable that his earliest name was Oan, [Hebrew, AN] which afterward received a terminating syllable, ŎanNEs, or even OanN AUS, or OanNAOS, for the last syllable is long, and accented; so that the pronunciation easily slides into this difference. This would denote, the nes, naus, i.e. the ship, or vessel, of An; and as we read that Oan retired every night to the sea, it must have been to a vessel, where he abode during night, and from whence he returned in the morning. This it is our principal intention to establish: which leads us to observe, that the compound name Dag-aun, by which this

deity is called, is precisely of the same meaning as O-AUN-nes: dag signifying a ship, or vessel, q. "the ship of Aun." So far these titles agree in their import; both of them are thought by Scaliger to have suffered in what we now esteem their true spelling; though perhaps it represents their pronunciation in ancient ages. ancient ages. Our own pronunciation is notoriously incorrect; for we ought to say, Dagoon, or Dagoun; and Quannes, or Ouaunnees, q. o aunnees: which would be literally "the Aun vessel;" the vessel or ship of aun.

We proceed to observe, that we cannot expect to find the allegorical deity Dag-aun represented both in the allegorical state of a fish, or included in a fish, and in a ship, at the same time; because, the fish signifying a ship, when the ship is used as implying Dagaun, there is no need of the fish; and when the fish is used, there is no need of the ship. This interchangeableness of these subjects, the fish and the ship, must be insisted on: and indeed, is implied in the histories extracted above: for the egg which contained all mankind within it, is said to have floated on the Red Sea, and to have come on shore in the Euphrates, in Babylonia, says Berosus. Hyginus has this historical fable, 197. "An egg of a wonderful magnitude, is said to have fallen from heaven into the river Euphrates, which was conducted to the shore by fishes: over this brooded a dove, whose warmth hatched it, and produced Venus, who afterward was called "The Syrian goddess:" after which, as rectitude and probity directed, and as was appointed by Jupiter, the fishes were inserted among the heavenly constellations. For this reason, the Syrians, though they have numbers of doves and fishes, do not eat them. A story to the same effect is told in different words by Lucius Ampelius, in his work addressed to Macrinus. [See Bayer, additions to Selden.] It is said, that in the river Euphrates the egg of a fish was brooded over by a dove during many days, from which issued the goddess benign and propitious to men, leading them to the most excellent life." This is clearly the Venus of the foregoing fable. It is evident that the egg of these histories is a vessel. We have seen in considering Baal and Moloch, that Moloch was a goddess, the same as Ashtoreth of the Zidonians, i.e. Venus, the same also as Nebo, who was a female deity, as appears by her pregnancy, i.e. Venus, and we observe, that instead of Nebo, the LXX substitute Dagaun; which shews that those translators considered these divinities as the same: In perfect coincidence with our extract from Helladius, who says that Oan or Aun, was born of an egg, i.e. a vessel; since, as we learn from the fabulist, this egg floated, vessel like, on the Euphrates.

But there is also another, a direct, proof that the word Dag-aun signifies "the ship of Aun;" for Philo Biblius says expressly, "Dagaun is Sidon:"

and this is universally received among the learned. Now, if we analyze this word, it divides into Sid-aun, or rather, as it is spelled in the Hebrew, tzidé-aun : this is the name of the ancient city Sidon, which has preserved its true name, and is called at this day Seidé; and so we read of Beth-saida, Matth. xi. 21. i.e. the temple of Seidé: which shews the true pronunciation of this word. Agreeably to this the Hebrew of Sidon would be at full length, TY tsidé aun; melted by common speech into tsid'-aun : Sidon: what then is this ytsi? All our dictionaries and lexicons answer, una voce, "tzi is a decked ship or vessel, which carries men and goods dry, as distinguished from an open boat." Why then, this is the very same as Dag, for we consider that also as a vessel, which preserves in security what has been committed to it, by keeping its contents from the water; i.e. dry. Thus we find that these two appellations illustrate each other: Dag and tsi are the same, in nature and application: but the dé ought properly to be retained in pronunciation, as in saida, being the Chaldaic da; "THE tsi." I infer this also, from the Greek name of the deity, Poseidon, which is written Пloridaov, that is, at length, po-Seidaon, or aun; now Po-seida-aun is addressed in the Orphic hymns as "father of gods and men; the author of peace and rest; the cause of affluence ;" i.e. the second father of mankind, who taught them husbandry, &c. By the later Greek writers, this name is given to Neptune, the god of the sea, and of ships. It is clear, therefore, that this deity is the Seida-aun of Syria and were I to indulge conjecture, I should think that his compound name expresses, "the opening of the ship of Aun." The relation of this to O-AUN-nes and Dag-aun needs no enlargement.

On the whole: our reasonings in pooof that the Hebrew word Dag means a ship, [as the Chaldee word Dag unquestionably does, as proved in FRAGMENTS, Nos. 146, 214, 215, 470, 471, 472, to which these remarks are in a great degree supplementary] may be thus arranged:

1. o AN, or o AUN, is the great patriarch himself, who was saved in a ship, or ark, from the deluge. 2. O AUN-NES, is "the ship of Aun, or Noah." 3. o DAG-AUN, is the ship of Aun,or Noah, it being the same as o AUN-NES.

4. . TZIDE-AUN, is the ship of Aun.

5.. DAG-AUN, is the ship of Aun, it being the same as tzidé-aun.

6. . DAG-oon, is referred to "a BOAT's picture" in Asia.

7.. DAG-aun, is by the LXX substituted for Nebo, who is the productive power, revived from a ship. 8.. DAG-AUN, is the "Aun in a fish" but the fish was no real part of him :" it was only allegorical.

We must now consider separately the meaning of the word Aun, in order to shew, that precisely the

same idea is conveyed by that, as by the issuing of Venus, &c. from the egg. The Hebrew import of this word is exactly, "prolific power;" for so we find it used, Gen. xlix. 3. "Reuben, thou art my firstborn, my might, and the beginning of my prolific power.' Also, Deut. xxi. 17. "He shall acknowledge the firstborn, for he is the beginning of his strength," prolific power. See also Job xl. 16. If we take this appellation then, as signifying a person, we may say, o Aun, the great patriarch, taught men husbandry, astronomy, &c. which we have every reason to believe was fact: we may say, the ship of the great patriarch was venerated; whether we express that sentiment by the term, o-Aun-nes, or by Seidé-aun, or by Dag-aun. Or, if we prefer to take this appellation impersonally, we may say, in perfect coincidence with the Gentile mode of expression, o Aun, the prolific power, was worshipped at Babylon; the ship of the prolific power was commemorated, as well under the compound emblem o Aun-nes, as under those of tsidé-aun, Sidon, Potzidé-aun, and Dag-aun. These inferences are undeniable, on the usual and customary reception of the terms as they stand in the Hebrew language; and in reference only to Hebrew learning; but, as we know that the Hebrew nation is, in the person of its chief ancestor Abraham, a colony from very far East, even from the eastern extremity of the Persian empire, adjacent to India, we may further, without impropriety, inquire what information India also affords on this subject; and this the rather, as we know too, that those from whom we desire this information, the Bramins, are themselves a colony from the countries adjacent to the eastern extremity of the Persian empire. On this article let us hear sir William Jones.

"The triple divinity, Vishnuh, Siva, Brahma; for that is the order, in which they are expressed by the letters A, U, M, which coalesce, and form the mystical word O'M; a word, which never escapes the lips of a pious Hindoo, who meditates on it in silence. Whether the Egyptian ON, which is commonly supposed to mean the sun, be the Sanscrit monosyllable, I leave others to determine," Asiatic Researches, Calcutta edit. p. 242.

We must add to sir William's hint, that the Hebrew letters м and N are often interchanged in Scripture, as they are closely allied in sound; and I think we may fairly state the Hebrew A, U, N, as parallel to the Sanscrit A, U, M; which equally with the Hebrew word implies the great progenitor, or progenerative power. Nor can I but remark, that, Gen. xli. so early as the days of Joseph, we read of his marrying a daughter of Potipherah, priest of AN, verse 45. which is the very mode of spelling adopted by Helladius, who reads ó AN; while in verse 50. this name is spelled at full length A, U, N: these variations shew that we might safely overlook slight differences in spelling it among Greek writers, when even in Scripture this name is thus varied in the compass of a few verses.

It is also in composition: as, Sidon, Dagon: varied by omitting the A, which, no doubt, was slurred over in pronunciation; Sid'-un instead of Sidé-aun; Dag'-un instead of Dagé-aun. It appears then, that the great progenerative power [or person] is called AUM, in India; AN, or AUN, in Egypt; AN, by the Greek writers; yet nevertheless, under this variety of pronunciation the appellation is the same, and refers to the same personage: which personage was the most venerable second father of mankind, who had been miraculously preserved from a deluge of waters, by enclosure in an ark, or vessel, or ship, a floating habitation.

There were several temples dedicated to AUN in the land of Canaan: as, to Dag-AUN, Josh. xv. 41; xix. 27; 1 Sam. v. Sidé-aun, Gen. x. 19; Josh. xi. 8. Chol-aun, Dib-aun, and Nebo: so we have in CALMET, Beth o-An-naba: the temple of o AN-nebo, or Naba, "the celestial," says major Wilford. Me-aun, Jer. xlviii. 22, 23. this last is taken by the learned bishop Cumberland for "Meon, or Menes, with a Greek termination," rather, Me-aun-NEs, the nes, or naus, ship, of AUN, [the Manus, M'aun-nus, of the Germans mentioned by Tacitus.] Beth-Baal-Meon, Josh. xiii. 17. where we have Baal connected with M'aun: Heshbon, or Chesheb-aun, ibid. and perhaps many others, as in Josh. xii. Chebir-aun, Ogel-aun, Leshur-aun, Madàun, Shemir-aun Mar-aun, verses 10, 20. not forgetting Beth-aun, or Beth-el, where the calves were erected, changed sarcastically, by the Jews, in pronunciation to Beth-aven.

Our Plate represents, first, the allegorical figure of the deity Vishnuh, copied from M. Le Gentil. Mem. of French Academy, 1782, who received it on the coast of Coromandel, and who observes on it, "In my opinion, it is to be wished, that in the times of the early historians, as Berosus, &c. it had been customary to unite figures to historical narration. It is, I say, desirable, that Berosus had given the figure of Oannes, which he says was preserved at Babylon, and was not lost: perhaps we should find in it a resemblance and conformity to that of the Vishnuh of the Bramins. At least it seems to me very probable, that one is traced off from the other, for, if we compare what they relate of the incarnations of Vishnuh, with the narration of Berosus and Helladius, every body, I think, must believe that he sees in this figure the image of Oannes, whose representation was preserved at Babylon. The Indians gave me this, with The Indians gave me this, with others of their divinities, as being the chief of them; it has none of the attributes which appear in those published by father Kircher, and in this I think it original, and much more ancient than they are: and likewise more conformable to that which Berosus describes as being extant at Babylon, in his time: for all those attributes seen in the others, such as the book, the Vedam, and the ring, in the right hands,

VOL. IV.

34

the shell in which Vishnuh found the book, and the sabre, in the two left hands; are doubtless added afterward. We ought to remark here, that the Vedam, that book so precious, and sacred, to the Indians, teaches them almost all which Berosus says Oannes taught the Chaldeans."

The second figure in our Plate is traced from Baldeus's Voyage to India, reprinted in Churchill's Voyages, vol. iii. p. 745. [where those of a like nature published by Mr. Maurice in his History of Indostan, may be seen, with some slight variations.] It represents the same allegory as that of No. 1. and is the figure referred to by M. Le Gentil as having the book, i.e. the Vedam, or system of laws, moral and political, &c. and the ring, or regulated connubial intercourse of the sexes; these are in his right hands: in his left hands are the sword, of magistracy and of war, and the shell, or place of security, from punishment and devastation. This figure is evidently a young man, without a beard, and is given here to correct an error in FRAGMENT, No. 140, &c. where it is considered as female. But though this figure is not female, yet No. 3. is clearly of that sex: and indeed the forms of sex in the figures of antiquity, are very freely interchangeable, and not seldom are monstrously combined into union.

Observe that No. 1. in our Plate has two legs, covered rather with the skins of fishes, than being properly a fish, for we see, that one of them has scales, like those of a fish; the other has a kind of stripes, marking indeed the places of scales, in some degree, but very ill consorting with the fellow leg. It is clear therefore, that these two legs could never be taken for one fish: the body of a fish we know would be single, not duplicate. [Is this difference significative of male and female?] Observe what is said by Berosus, "he had human feet, which came out from each of the two sides of the tail:" the Babylonish figure then, had two sides, like this of M. Le Gentil, not one body of a fish like that of Nos. 2, 3. Moreover, in order to render the allegorical fish still more evidently allegorical, the Babylonian Oannes had human feet below the tail of the fish; a circumstance which I have not yet discovered in any Indian delineation.

Our third figure is copied from an ancient Egyptian zodiac: it may be seen in Mr. Maurice's History of Hindostan, vol. i. from the Barberini Museum. Under it is written, Ichthon, seu Dagon. I do not know precisely the authority for these inscriptions; but I agree with Mr. Maurice that this "exhibits too exact a resemblance of the Dagon of Chaldea, and the Indian Vishnuh, in the Matsya, fish, Avatar, to leave a doubt in my mind of the identity of the persons, as well as the mythology... the great Cannes."

We have seen the relation of a dove and fishes to the parent egg; our next, No. 4. is from the Philosophical Transactions, vol. Ixiii. p. 346. Mr. Swin