Greek mythology. No spectacle
can be presented to the thoughtful mind more solemn,
more mournful, than that of the dying of an ancient
religion, which in its day has given consolation to
many generations of men.
Four centuries before the birth of
Christ, Greece was fast outgrowing her ancient faith.
Her philosophers, in their studies of the world, had
been profoundly impressed with the contrast between
the majesty of the operations of Nature and the worthlessness
of the divinities of Olympus. Her historians,
considering the orderly course of political affairs,
the manifest uniformity in the acts of men, and that
there was no event occurring before their eyes for
which they could not find an obvious cause in some
preceding event, began to suspect that the miracles
and celestial interventions, with which the old annals
were filled, were only fictions. They demanded,
when the age of the supernatural had ceased, why oracles
had become mute, and why there were now no more prodigies
in the world.
Traditions, descending from immemorial
antiquity, and formerly accepted by pious men as unquestionable
truths, had filled the islands of the Mediterranean
and the conterminous countries with supernatural wonders enchantresses,
sorcerers, giants, ogres, harpies, gorgons,
centaurs, cyclops. The azure vault was the floor
of heaven; there Zeus, surrounded by the gods with
their wives and mistresses, held his court, engaged
in pursuits like those of men, and not refraining from
acts of human passion and crime.
A sea-coast broken by numerous indentations,
an archipelago with some of the most lovely islands
in the world, inspired the Greeks with a taste for
maritime life, for geographical discovery, and colonization.
Their ships wandered all over the Black and Mediterranean
Seas. The time-honored wonders that had been
glorified in the “Odyssey,” and sacred
in public faith, were found to have no existence.
As a better knowledge of Nature was obtained, the
sky was shown to be an illusion; it was discovered
that there is no Olympus, nothing above but space and
stars. With the vanishing of their habitation,
the gods disappeared, both those of the Ionian type
of Homer and those of the Doric of Hesiod.
Effects of discovery
and criticism. But this did not take
place without resistance. At first, the public,
and particularly its religious portion, denounced
the rising doubts as atheism. They despoiled some
of the offenders of their goods, exiled others; some
they put to death. They asserted that what had
been believed by pious men in the old times, and had
stood the test of ages, must necessarily be true.
Then, as the opposing evidence became irresistible,
they were content to admit that these marvels were
allegories under which the wisdom of the ancients had
concealed many sacred and mysterious things. They
tried to reconcile, what now in their misgivings they
feared might be myths, with their advancing intellectual
state. But their efforts were in vain, for there
are predestined phases through which on such an occasion
public opinion must pass. What it has received
with veneration it begins to doubt, then it offers
new interpretations, then subsides into dissent, and
ends with a rejection of the whole as a mere fable.
In their secession the philosophers
and historians were followed by the poets. Euripides
incurred the odium of heresy. Aeschylus narrowly
escaped being stoned to death for blasphemy. But
the frantic efforts of those who are interested in
supporting delusions must always end in defeat.
The demoralization resistlessly extended through every
branch of literature, until at length it reached the
common people.
The Persian empire.
Greek philosophical criticism had lent its aid to
Greek philosophical discovery in this destruction of
the national faith. It sustained by many arguments
the wide-spreading unbelief. It compared the
doctrines of the different schools with each other,
and showed from their contradictions that man has
no criterion of truth; that, since his ideas of what
is good and what is evil differ according to the country
in which he lives, they can have no foundation in Nature,
but must be altogether the result of education; that
right and wrong are nothing more than fictions created
by society for its own purposes. In Athens, some
of the more advanced classes had reached such a pass
that they not only denied the unseen, the supernatural,
they even affirmed that the world is only a day-dream,
a phantasm, and that nothing at all exists.
The topographical configuration of
Greece gave an impress to her political condition.
It divided her people into distinct communities having
conflicting interests, and made them incapable of centralization.
Incessant domestic wars between the rival states checked
her advancement. She was poor, her leading men
had become corrupt. They were ever ready to barter
patriotic considerations for foreign gold, to sell
themselves for Persian bribes. Possessing a perception
of the beautiful as manifested in sculpture and architecture
to a degree never attained elsewhere either before
or since, Greece had lost a practical appreciation
of the Good and the True.
While European Greece, full of ideas
of liberty and independence, rejected the sovereignty
of Persia, Asiatic Greece acknowledged it without
reluctance. At that time the Persian Empire in
territorial extent was equal to half of modern Europe.
It touched the waters of the Mediterranean, the Aegean,
the Black, the Caspian, the Indian, the Persian, the
Red Seas. Through its territories there flowed
six of the grandest rivers in the world the
Euphrates, the Tigris, the Indus, the Jaxartes, the
Oxus, the Nile, each more than a thousand miles in
length. Its surface reached from thirteen hundred
feet below the sea-level to twenty thousand feet above.
It yielded, therefore, every agricultural product.
Its mineral wealth was boundless. It inherited
the prestige of the Median, the Babylonian, the Assyrian,
the Chaldean Empires, whose annals reached back through
more than twenty centuries.
The Persian empire.
Persia had always looked upon European Greece as politically
insignificant, for it had scarcely half the territorial
extent of one of her satrapies. Her expeditions
for compelling its obedience had, however, taught
her the military qualities of its people. In
her forces were incorporated Greek mercenaries, esteemed
the very best of her troops. She did not hesitate
sometimes to give the command of her armies to Greek
generals, of her fleets to Greek captains. In
the political convulsions through which she had passed,
Greek soldiers had often been used by her contending
chiefs. These military operations were attended
by a momentous result. They revealed, to the quick
eye of these warlike mercenaries, the political weakness
of the empire and the possibility of reaching its
centre. After the death of Cyrus on the battle-field
of Cunaxa, it was demonstrated, by the immortal retreat
of the ten thousand under Xenophon, that a Greek army
could force its way to and from the heart of Persia.
That reverence for the military abilities
of Asiatic generals, so profoundly impressed on the
Greeks by such engineering exploits as the bridging
of the Hellespont, and the cutting of the isthmus at
Mount Athos by Xerxes, had been obliterated at Salamis,
Platea, Mycale. To plunder rich Persian provinces
had become an irresistible temptation. Such was
the expedition of Agesilaus, the Spartan king, whose
brilliant successes were, however, checked by the
Persian government resorting to its time-proved policy
of bribing the neighbors of Sparta to attack her.
“I have been conquered by thirty thousand Persian
archers,” bitterly exclaimed Agesilaus, as he
re-embarked, alluding to the Persian coin, the Daric,
which was stamped with the image of an archer.
The invasion of Persia
by Greece. At length Philip, the King
of Macedon, projected a renewal of these attempts,
under a far more formidable organization, and with
a grander object. He managed to have himself
appointed captain-general of all Greece not for the
purpose of a mere foray into the Asiatic satrapies,
but for the overthrow of the Persian dynasty in the
very centre of its power. Assassinated while his
preparations were incomplete, he was succeeded by his
son Alexander, then a youth. A general assembly
of Greeks at Corinth had unanimously elected him in
his father’s stead. There were some disturbances
in Illyria; Alexander had to march his army as far
north as the Danube to quell them. During his
absence the Thebans with some others conspired against
him. On his return he took Thebes by assault.
He massacred six thousand of its inhabitants, sold
thirty thousand for slaves, and utterly demolished
the city. The military wisdom of this severity
was apparent in his Asiatic campaign. He was
not troubled by any revolt in his rear.
The Macedonian campaign.
In the spring B.C. 334 Alexander crossed the Hellespont
into Asia. His army consisted of thirty-four thousand
foot and four thousand horse. He had with him
only seventy talents in money. He marched directly
on the Persian army, which, vastly exceeding him in
strength, was holding the line of the Granicus.
He forced the passage of the river, routed the enemy,
and the possession of all Asia Minor, with its treasures,
was the fruit of the victory. The remainder of
that year he spent in the military organization of
the conquered provinces. Meantime Darius, the
Persian king, had advanced an army of six hundred
thousand men to prevent the passage of the Macedonians
into Syria. In a battle that ensued among the
mountain-defiles at Issus, the Persians were again
overthrown. So great was the slaughter that Alexander,
and Ptolemy, one of his generals, crossed over a ravine
choked with dead bodies. It was estimated that
the Persian loss was not less than ninety thousand
foot and ten thousand horse. The royal pavilion
fell into the conqueror’s hands, and with it
the wife and several of the children of Darius.
Syria was thus added to the Greek conquests. In
Damascus were found many of the concubines of Darius
and his chief officers, together with a vast treasure.
Before venturing into the plains of
Mesopotamia for the final struggle, Alexander, to
secure his rear and preserve his communications with
the sea, marched southward down the Mediterranean
coast, reducing the cities in his way. In his
speech before the council of war after Issus, he told
his generals that they must not pursue Darius with
Tyre unsubdued, and Persia in possession of Egypt
and Cyprus, for, if Persia should regain her seaports,
she would transfer the war into Greece, and that it
was absolutely necessary for him to be sovereign at
sea. With Cyprus and Egypt in his possession
he felt no solicitude about Greece. The siege
of Tyre cost him more than half a year. In revenge
for this delay, he crucified, it is said, two thousand
of his prisoners. Jerusalem voluntarily surrendered,
and therefore was treated leniently: but the
passage of the Macedonian army into Egypt being obstructed
at Gaza, the Persian governor of which, Betis,
made a most obstinate defense, that place, after a
siege of two months, was carried by assault, ten thousand
of its men were massacred, and the rest, with their
wives and children, sold into slavery. Betis
himself was dragged alive round the city at the chariot-wheels
of the conqueror. There was now no further obstacle.
The Egyptians, who detested the Persian rule, received
their invader with open arms. He organized the
country in his own interest, intrusting all its military
commands to Macedonian officers, and leaving the civil
government in the hands of native Egyptians.
Conquest of Egypt.
While preparations for the final campaign were being
made, he undertook a journey to the temple of Jupiter
Ammon, which was situated in an oasis of the Libyan
Desert, at a distance of two hundred miles. The
oracle declared him to be a son of that god who, under
the form of a serpent, had beguiled Olympias, his mother.
Immaculate conceptions and celestial descents were
so currently received in those days, that whoever
had greatly distinguished himself in the affairs of
men was thought to be of supernatural lineage.
Even in Rome, centuries later, no one could with safety
have denied that the city owed its founder, Romulus,
to an accidental meeting of the god Mars with the
virgin Rhea Sylvia, as she went with her pitcher for
water to the spring. The Egyptian disciples of
Plato would have looked with anger on those who rejected
the legend that Perictione, the mother of that great
philosopher, a pure virgin, had suffered an immaculate
conception through the influences of Apollo, and that
the god had declared to Ariston, to whom she was betrothed,
the parentage of the child. When Alexander issued
his letters, orders, and decrees, styling himself “King
Alexander, the son of Jupiter Ammon,” they came
to the inhabitants of Egypt and Syria with an authority
that now can hardly be realized. The free-thinking
Greeks, however, put on such a supernatural pedigree
its proper value. Olympias, who, of course, better
than all others knew the facts of the case, used jestingly
to say, that “she wished Alexander would cease
from incessantly embroiling her with Jupiter’s
wife.” Arrian, the historian of the Macedonian
expedition, observes, “I cannot condemn him
for endeavoring to draw his subjects into the belief
of his divine origin, nor can I be induced to think
it any great crime, for it is very reasonable to imagine
that he intended no more by it than merely to procure
the greater authority among his soldiers.”
Greek conquest of Persia.
All things being thus secured in his rear, Alexander,
having returned into Syria, directed the march of his
army, now consisting of fifty thousand veterans, eastward.
After crossing the Euphrates, he kept close to the
Masian hills, to avoid the intense heat of the more
southerly Mesopotamian plains; more abundant forage
could also thus be procured for the cavalry.
On the left bank of the Tigris, near Arbela, he encountered
the great army of eleven hundred thousand men brought
up by Darius from Babylon. The death of the Persian
monarch, which soon followed the defeat he suffered,
left the Macedonian general master of all the countries
from the Danube to the Indus. Eventually he extended
his conquest to the Ganges. The treasures he seized
are almost beyond belief. At Susa alone he found so
Arrian says fifty thousand talents in money.
Events of the campaigns.
The modern military student cannot look upon these
wonderful campaigns without admiration. The passage
of the Hellespont; the forcing of the Granicus; the
winter spent in a political organization of conquered
Asia Minor; the march of the right wing and centre
of the army along the Syrian Mediterranean coast; the
engineering difficulties overcome at the siege of
Tyre; the storming of Gaza; the isolation of Persia
from Greece; the absolute exclusion of her navy from
the Mediterranean; the check on all her attempts at
intriguing with or bribing Athenians or Spartans,
heretofore so often resorted to with success; the
submission of Egypt; another winter spent in the political
organization of that venerable country; the convergence
of the whole army from the Black and Red Seas toward
the nitre-covered plains of Mesopotamia in the ensuing
spring; the passage of the Euphrates fringed with
its weeping-willows at the broken bridge of Thapsacus;
the crossing of the Tigris; the nocturnal reconnaissance
before the great and memorable battle of Arbela; the
oblique movement on the field; the piercing of the
enemy’s centre a manoeuvre destined
to be repeated many centuries subsequently at Austerlitz;
the energetic pursuit of the Persian monarch; these
are exploits not surpassed by any soldier of later
times.
A prodigious stimulus was thus given
to Greek intellectual activity. There were men
who had marched with the Macedonian army from the Danube
to the Nile, from the Nile to the Ganges. They
had felt the hyperborean blasts of the countries beyond
the Black Sea, the simooms and sand-tempests of the
Egyptian deserts. They had seen the Pyramids which
had already stood for twenty centuries, the hieroglyph-covered
obelisks of Luxor, avenues of silent and mysterious
sphinxes, colossi of monarchs who reigned in the morning
of the world. In the halls of Esar-haddon they
had stood before the thrones of grim old Assyrian kings,
guarded by winged bulls. In Babylon there still
remained its walls, once more than sixty miles in
compass, and, after the ravages of three centuries
and three conquerors, still more than eighty feet
in height; there were still the ruins of the temple
of cloud encompassed Bel, on its top was planted the
observatory wherein the weird Chaldean astronomers
had held nocturnal communion with the stars; still
there were vestiges of the two palaces with their
hanging gardens in which were great trees growing in
mid-air, and the wreck of the hydraulic machinery that
had supplied them with water from the river.
Into the artificial lake with its vast apparatus of
aqueducts and sluices the melted snows of the Armenian
mountains found their way, and were confined in their
course through the city by the embankments of the
Euphrates. Most wonderful of all, perhaps, was
the tunnel under the river-bed.
Effect on the Greek
army. If Chaldea, Assyria, Babylon, presented
stupendous and venerable antiquities reaching far back
into the night of time, Persia was not without her
wonders of a later date. The pillared halls of
Persepolis were filled with miracles of art carvings,
sculptures, enamels, alabaster libraries, obelisks,
sphinxes, colossal bulls. Ecbatana, the cool
summer retreat of the Persian kings, was defended
by seven encircling walls of hewn and polished blocks,
the interior ones in succession of increasing height,
and of different colors, in astrological accordance
with the seven planets. The palace was roofed
with silver tiles, its beams were plated with gold.
At midnight, in its halls the sunlight was rivaled
by many a row of naphtha cressets. A paradise that
luxury of the monarchs of the East was
planted in the midst of the city. The Persian
Empire, from the Hellespont to the Indus, was truly
the garden of the world.
Effects on the Greek
army. I have devoted a few pages to the story
of these marvelous campaigns, for the military talent
they fostered led to the establishment of the mathematical
and practical schools of Alexandria, the true origin
of science. We trace back all our exact knowledge
to the Macedonian campaigns. Humboldt has well
observed that an introduction to new and grand objects
of Nature enlarges the human mind. The soldiers
of Alexander and the hosts of his camp-followers encountered
at every march unexpected and picturesque scenery.
Of all men, the Greeks were the most observant, the
most readily and profoundly impressed. Here there
were interminable sandy plains, there mountains whose
peaks were lost above the clouds. In the deserts
were mirages, on the hill-sides shadows of fleeting
clouds sweeping over the forests. They were in
a land of amber-colored date-palms and cypresses, of
tamarisks, green myrtles, and oleanders. At Arbela
they had fought against Indian elephants; in the thickets
of the Caspian they had roused from his lair the lurking
royal tiger. They had seen animals which, compared
with those of Europe, were not only strange, but colossal the
rhinoceros, the hippopotamus, the camel, the crocodiles
of the Nile and the Ganges. They had encountered
men of many complexions and many costumes:
the swarthy Syrian, the olive-colored Persian, the
black African. Even of Alexander himself it is
related that on his death-bed he caused his admiral,
Nearchus, to sit by his side, and found consolation
in listening to the adventures of that sailor the
story of his voyage from the Indus up the Persian
Gulf. The conqueror had seen with astonishment
the ebbing and flowing of the tides. He had built
ships for the exploration of the Caspian, supposing
that it and the Black Sea might be gulfs of a great
ocean, such as Nearchus had discovered the Persian
and Red Seas to be. He had formed a resolution
that his fleet should attempt the circumnavigation
of Africa, and come into the Mediterranean through
the Pillars of Hercules a feat which, it
was affirmed, had once been accomplished by the Pharaohs.
Intellectual condition of
Persia. Not only her greatest soldiers, but
also her greatest philosophers, found in the conquered
empire much that might excite the admiration of Greece.
Callisthenes obtained in Babylon a series of Chaldean
astronomical observations ranging back through 1,903
years; these he sent to Aristotle. Perhaps, since
they were on burnt bricks, duplicates of them may
be recovered by modern research in the clay libraries
of the Assyrian kings. Ptolemy, the Egyptian
astronomer, possessed a Babylonian record of eclipses,
going back 747 years before our era. Long-continued
and close observations were necessary, before some
of these astronomical results that have reached our
times could have been ascertained. Thus the Babylonians
had fixed the length of a tropical year within twenty-five
seconds of the truth; their estimate of the sidereal
year was barely two minutes in excess. They had
detected the precession of the équinoxes.
They knew the causes of eclipses, and, by the aid
of their cycle called Saros, could predict them.
Their estimate of the value of that cycle, which is
more than 6,585 days, was within nineteen and a half
minutes of the truth.
Intellectual condition of
Persia. Such facts furnish incontrovertible
proof of the patience and skill with which astronomy
had been cultivated in Mesopotamia, and that, with
very inadequate instrumental means, it had reached
no inconsiderable perfection. These old observers
had made a catalogue of the stars, had divided the
zodiac into twelve signs; they had parted the day
into twelve hours, the night into twelve. They
had, as Alistotle says, for a long time devoted themselves
to observations of star-occultations by the moon.
They had correct views of the structure of the solar
system, and knew the order of the emplacement of the
planets. They constructed sundials, clepsydras,
astrolabes, gnomons.
Not without interest do we still look
on specimens of their method of printing. Upon
a revolving roller they engraved, in cuneiform letters,
their records, and, running this over plastic clay
formed into blocks, produced ineffaceable proofs.
From their tile-libraries we are still to reap a literary
and historical harvest. They were not without
some knowledge of optics. The convex lens found
at Nimroud shows that they were not unacquainted with
magnifying instruments. In arithmetic they had
detected the value of position in the digits, though
they missed the grand Indian invention of the cipher.
What a spectacle for the conquering
Greeks, who, up to this time, had neither experimented
nor observed! They had contented themselves with
mere meditation and useless speculation.
Its religious condition.
But Greek intellectual development, due thus in part
to a more extended view of Nature, was powerfully aided
by the knowledge then acquired of the religion of
the conquered country. The idolatry of Greece
had always been a horror to Persia, who, in her invasions,
had never failed to destroy the temples and insult
the fanes of the bestial gods. The impunity with
which these sacrilèges had been perpetrated had
made a profound impression, and did no little to undermine
Hellenic faith. But now the worshiper of the vile
Olympian divinities, whose obscene lives must have
been shocking to every pious man, was brought in contact
with a grand, a solemn, a consistent religious system
having its foundation on a philosophical basis.
Persia, as is the case with all empires of long duration,
had passed through many changes of religion.
She had followed the Monotheism of Zoroaster; had
then accepted Dualism, and exchanged that for Magianism.
At the time of the Macedonian expedition, she recognized
one universal Intelligence, the Creator, Preserver,
and Governor of all things, the most holy essence
of truth, the giver of all good. He was not to
be represented by any image, or any graven form.
And, since, in every thing here below, we see the
resultant of two opposing forces, under him were two
coequal and coeternal principles, represented by the
imagery of Light and Darkness. These principles
are in never-ending conflict. The world is their
battle-ground, man is their prize.
In the old legends of Dualism, the
Evil Spirit was said to have sent a serpent to ruin
the paradise which the Good Spirit had made. These
legends became known to the Jews during their Babylonian
captivity.
The existence of a principle of evil
is the necessary incident of the existence of a principle
of good, as a shadow is the necessary incident of
the presence of light. In this manner could be
explained the occurrence of evil in a world, the maker
and ruler of which is supremely good. Each of
the personified principles of light and darkness, Ormuzd
and Ahriman, had his subordinate angels, his counselors,
his armies. It is the duty of a good man to cultivate
truth, purity, and industry. He may look forward,
when this life is over, to a life in another world,
and trust to a resurrection of the body, the immortality
of the soul, and a conscious future existence.
In the later years of the empire,
the principles of Magianism had gradually prevailed
more and more over those of Zoroaster. Magianism
was essentially a worship of the elements. Of
these, fire was considered as the most worthy representative
of the Supreme Being. On altars erected, not
in temples, but under the blue canopy of the sky, perpetual
fires were kept burning, and the rising sun was regarded
as the noblest object of human adoration. In
the society of Asia, nothing is visible but the monarch;
in the expanse of heaven, all objects vanish in presence
of the sun.
Death of Alexander.
Prematurely cut off in the midst of many great projects
Alexander died at Babylon before he had completed his
thirty-third year (B.C. 323). There was a suspicion
that he had been poisoned. His temper had become
so unbridled, his passion so ferocious, that his generals
and even his intimate friends lived in continual dread.
Clitus, one of the latter, he in a moment of fury had
stabbed to the heart. Callisthenes, the intermedium
between himself and Aristotle, he had caused to be
hanged, or, as was positively asserted by some who
knew the facts, had had him put upon the rack and then
crucified. It may have been in self-defense that
the conspirators resolved on his assassination.
But surely it was a calumny to associate the name of
Aristotle with this transaction. He would have
rather borne the worst that Alexander could inflict,
than have joined in the perpetration of so great a
crime.
A scene of confusion and bloodshed
lasting many years ensued, nor did it cease even after
the Macedonian generals had divided the empire.
Among its vicissitudes one incident mainly claims
our attention. Ptolemy, who was a son of King
Philip by Arsinoe, a beautiful concubine, and who
in his boyhood had been driven into exile with Alexander,
when they incurred their father’s displeasure,
who had been Alexander’s comrade in many of
his battles and all his campaigns, became governor
and eventually king of Egypt.
Foundation of Alexander.
At the siege of Rhodes, Ptolemy had been of such signal
service to its citizens that in gratitude they paid
divine honors to him, and saluted him with the title
of Soter (the Savior). By that designation Ptolemy
Soter he is distinguished from succeeding
kings of the Macedonian dynasty in Egypt.
He established his seat of government
not in any of the old capitals of the country, but
in Alexandria. At the time of the expedition to
the temple of Jupiter Ammon, the Macedonian conqueror
had caused the foundations of that city to be laid,
foreseeing that it might be made the commercial entrepôt
between Asia and Europe. It is to be particularly
remarked that not only did Alexander himself deport
many Jews from Palestine to people the city, and not
only did Ptolemy Soter bring one hundred thousand
more after his siege of Jerusalem, but Philadelphus,
his successor, redeemed from slavery one hundred and
ninety-eight thousand of that people, paying their
Egyptian owners a just money equivalent for each.
To all these Jews the same privileges were accorded
as to the Macedonians. In consequence of this
considerate treatment, vast numbers of their compatriots
and many Syrians voluntarily came into Egypt.
To them the designation of Hellenistical Jews was
given. In like manner, tempted by the benign government
of Soter, multitudes of Greeks sought refuge in the
country, and the invasions of Perdiccas and Antigonus
showed that Greek soldiers would desert from other
Macedonian generals to join is armies.
The population of Alexandria was therefore
of three distinct nationalities: 1. Native
Egyptians 2. Greeks; 3. Jews a
fact that has left an impress on the religious faith
of modern Europe.
Greek architects and Greek engineers
had made Alexandria the most beautiful city of the
ancient world. They had filled it with magnificent
palaces, temples, theatres. In its centre, at
the intersection of its two grand avenues, which crossed
each other at right angles, and in the midst of gardens,
fountains, obelisks, stood the mausoleum, in which,
embalmed after the manner of the Egyptians, rested
the body of Alexander. In a funereal journey
of two years it had been brought with great pomp from
Babylon. At first the coffin was of pure gold,
but this having led to a violation of the tomb, it
was replaced by one of alabaster. But not these,
not even the great light-house, Pharos, built of blocks
of white marble and so high that the fire continually
burning on its top could be seen many miles off at
sea the Pharos counted as one of the seven
wonders of the world it is not these magnificent
achievements of architecture that arrest our attention;
the true, the most glorious monument of the Macedonian
kings of Egypt is the Museum. Its influences
will last when even the Pyramids have passed away.
The Alexandrian museum.
The Alexandrian Museum was commenced by Ptolemy Soter,
and was completed by his son Ptolemy Philadelphus.
It was situated in the Brüchion, the aristocratic
quarter of the city, adjoining the king’s palace.
Built of marble, it was surrounded with a piazza,
in which the residents might walk and converse together.
Its sculptured apartments contained the Philadelphian
library, and were crowded with the choicest statues
and pictures. This library eventually comprised
four hundred thousand volumes. In the course of
time, probably on account of inadequate accommodation
for so many books, an additional library was established
in the adjacent quarter Rhacotis, and placed in the
Serapion or temple of Serapis. The number of volumes
in this library, which was called the Daughter of
that in the Museum, was eventually three hundred thousand.
There were, therefore, seven hundred thousand volumes
in these royal collections.
Alexandria was not merely the capital
of Egypt, it was the intellectual metropolis of the
world. Here it was truly said the Genius of the
East met the Genius of the West, and this Paris of
antiquity became a focus of fashionable dissipation
and universal skepticism. In the allurements
of its bewitching society even the Jews forgot their
patriotism. They abandoned the language of their
forefathers, and adopted Greek.
In the establishment of the Museum,
Ptolemy Soter and his son Philadelphus had three objects
in view: 1. The perpetuation of such knowledge
as was then in the world; 2. Its increase; 3.
Its diffusion.
1. For the perpetuation of knowledge.
Orders were given to the chief librarian to buy at
the king’s expense whatever books he could.
A body of transcribers was maintained in the Museum,
whose duty it was to make correct copies of such works
as their owners were not disposed to sell. Any
books brought by foreigners into Egypt were taken at
once to the Museum, and, when correct copies had been
made, the transcript was given to the owner, and the
original placed in the library. Often a very large
pecuniary indemnity was paid. Thus it is said
of Ptolemy Euergetes that, having obtained from Athens
the works of Euripides, Sophocles, and Aeschylus,
he sent to their owners transcripts, together with
about fifteen thousand dollars, as an indemnity.
On his return from the Syrian expedition he carried
back in triumph all the Egyptian monuments from Ecbatana
and Susa, which Cambyses and other invaders had removed
from Egypt. These he replaced in their original
seats, or added as adornments to his museums.
When works were translated as well as transcribed,
sums which we should consider as almost incredible
were paid, as was the case with the Septuagint translation
of the Bible, ordered by Ptolemy Philadelphus.
2. For the increase of knowledge.
One of the chief objects of the Museum was that of
serving as the home of a body of men who devoted themselves
to study, and were lodged and maintained at the king’s
expense. Occasionally he himself sat at their
table. Anecdotes connected with those festive
occasions have descended to our times. In the
original organization of the Museum the residents
were divided into four faculties literature;
mathematics, astronomy, medicine. Minor branches
were appropriately classified under one of these general
heads; thus natural history was considered to be a
branch of medicine. An officer of very great
distinction presided over the establishment, and had
general charge of its interests. Demetrius Phalareus,
perhaps the most learned man of his age, who had been
governor of Athens for many years, was the first so
appointed. Under him was the librarian, an office
sometimes held by men whose names have descended to
our times, as Eratosthenes, and Apollonius Rhodius.
Organization of the
museum. In connection with the Museum were
a botanical and a zoological garden. These gardens,
as their names import, were for the purpose of facilitating
the study of plants and animals. There was also
an astronomical observatory containing armillary spheres,
globes, solstitial and equatorial armils, astrolabes,
parallactic rules, and other apparatus then in use,
the graduation on the divided instruments being into
degrees and sixths. On the floor of this observatory
a meridian line was drawn. The want of correct
means of measuring time and temperature was severely
felt; the clepsydra of Ctesibius answered very imperfectly
for the former, the hydrometer floating in a cup of
water for the latter; it measured variations of temperature
by variations of density. Philadelphus, who toward
the close of his life was haunted with an intolerable
dread of death, devoted much of his time to the discovery
of an elixir. For such pursuits the Museum was
provided with a chemical laboratory. In spite
of the prejudices of the age, and especially in spite
of Egyptian prejudices, there was in connection with
the medical department an anatomical room for the
dissection, not only of the dead, but actually of the
living, who for crimes had been condemned.
3. For the diffusion of knowledge.
In the Museum was given, by lectures, conversation,
or other appropriate methods instruction in all the
various departments of human knowledge. There
flocked to this great intellectual centre, students
from all countries. It is said that at one time
not fewer than fourteen thousand were in attendance.
Subsequently even the Christian church received from
it some of the most eminent of its Fathers, as Clemens
Alexandrinus, Origen, Athanasius.
The library in the Museum was burnt
during the siege of Alexandria by Julius Cæsar.
To make amends for this great loss, that collected
by Eumenes, King of Pergamus, was presented by Mark
Antony to Queen Cleopatra. Originally it was
founded as a rival to that of the Ptolemies.
It was added to the collection in the Serapion.
Scientific school of
the museum. It remains now to describe
briefly the philosophical basis of the Museum, and
some of its contributions to the stock of human knowledge.
In memory of the illustrious founder
of this most noble institution an institution
which antiquity delighted to call “The divine
school of Alexandria” we must mention
in the first rank his “History of the Campaigns
of Alexander.” Great as a soldier and as
a sovereign, Ptolemy Soter added to his glory by being
an author. Time, which has not been able to destroy
the memory of our obligations to him, has dealt unjustly
by his work. It is not now extant.
As might be expected from the friendship
that existed between Alexander, Ptolemy, and Aristotle,
the Aristotelian philosophy was the intellectual corner-stone
on which the Museum rested. King Philip had committed
the education of Alexander to Aristotle, and during
the Persian campaigns the conqueror contributed materially,
not only in money, but otherwise, toward the “Natural
History” then in preparation.
The essential principle of the Aristotelian
philosophy was, to rise from the study of particulars
to a knowledge of general principles or universals,
advancing to them by induction. The induction
is the more certain as the facts on which it is based
are more numerous; its correctness is established
if it should enable us to predict other facts until
then unknown. This system implies endless toil
in the collection of facts, both by experiment and
observation; it implies also a close meditation on
them. It is, therefore, essentially a method of
labor and of reason, not a method of imagination.
The failures that Aristotle himself so often exhibits
are no proof of its unreliability, but rather of its
trustworthiness. They are failures arising from
want of a sufficiency of facts.
Ethical school of the
museum. Some of the general results at which
Aristotle arrived are very grand. Thus, he concluded
that every thing is ready to burst into life, and
that the various organic forms presented to us by
Nature are those which existing conditions permit.
Should the conditions change, the forms will also
change. Hence there is an unbroken chain from
the simple element through plants and animals up to
man, the different groups merging by insensible shades
into each other.
The inductive philosophy thus established
by Aristotle is a method of great power. To it
all the modern advances in science are due. In
its most improved form it rises by inductions from
phenomena to their causes, and then, imitating the
method of the Academy, it descends by deductions from
those causes to the detail of phenomena.
While thus the Scientific School of
Alexandria was founded on the maxims of one great
Athenian philosopher, the Ethical School was founded
on the maxims of another, for Zeno, though a Cypriote
or Phoenician, had for many years been established
at Athens. His disciples took the name of Stoics.
His doctrines long survived him, and, in times when
there was no other consolation for man, offered a
support in the hour of trial, and an unwavering guide
in the vicissitudes of life, not only to illustrious
Greeks, but also to many of the great philosophers,
statesmen, generals, and emperors of Rome.
The principles of stoicism.
The aim of Zeno was, to furnish a guide for the daily
practice of life, to make men virtuous. He insisted
that education is the true foundation of virtue, for,
if we know what is good, we shall incline to do it.
We must trust to sense, to furnish the data of knowledge,
and reason will suitably combine them. In this
the affinity of Zeno to Aristotle is plainly seen.
Every appetite, lust, desire, springs from imperfect
knowledge. Our nature is imposed upon us by Fate,
but we must learn to control our passions, and live
free, intelligent, virtuous, in all things in accordance
with reason. Our existence should be intellectual,
we should survey with equanimity all pleasures and
all pains. We should never forget that we are
freemen, not the slaves of society. “I
possess,” said the Stoic, “a treasure which
not all the world can rob me of no one can
deprive me of death.” We should remember
that Nature in her operations aims at the universal,
and never spares individuals, but uses them as means
for the accomplishment of her ends. It is, therefore,
for us to submit to Destiny, cultivating, as the things
necessary to virtue, knowledge, temperance, fortitude,
justice. We must remember that every thing around
us is in mutation; decay follows reproduction, and
reproduction decay, and that it is useless to repine
at death in a world where every thing is dying.
As a cataract shows from year to year an invariable
shape, though the water composing it is perpetually
changing, so the aspect of Nature is nothing more
than a flow of matter presenting an impermanent form.
The universe, considered as a whole, is unchangeable.
Nothing is eternal but space, atoms, force. The
forms of Nature that we see are essentially transitory,
they must all pass away.
Stoicism in the museum.
We must bear in mind that the majority of men are
imperfectly educated, and hence we must not needlessly
offend the religious ideas of our age. It is
enough for us ourselves to know that, though there
is a Supreme Power, there is no Supreme Being.
There is an invisible principle, but not a personal
God, to whom it would be not so much blasphemy as
absurdity to impute the form, the sentiments, the
passions of man. All revelation is, necessarily,
a mere fiction. That which men call chance is
only the effect of an unknown cause. Even of
chances there is a law. There is no such thing
as Providence, for Nature proceeds under irresistible
laws, and in this respect the universe is only a vast
automatic engine. The vital force which pervades
the world is what the illiterate call God. The
modifications through which all things are running
take place in an irresistible way, and hence it may
be said that the progress of the world is, under Destiny,
like a seed, it can evolve only in a predetermined
mode.
The soul of man is a spark of the
vital flame, the general vital principle. Like
heat, it passes from one to another, and is finally
reabsorbed or reunited in the universal principle from
which it came. Hence we must not expect annihilation,
but reunion; and, as the tired man looks forward to
the insensibility of sleep, so the philosopher, weary
of the world, should look forward to the tranquillity
of extinction. Of these things, however, we should
think doubtingly, since the mind can produce no certain
knowledge from its internal resources alone.
It is unphilosophical to inquire into first causes;
we must deal only with phenomena. Above all,
we must never forget that man cannot ascertain absolute
truth, and that the final result of human inquiry
into the matter is, that we are incapable of perfect
knowledge; that, even if the truth be in our possession,
we cannot be sure of it.
What, then, remains for us? Is
it not this the acquisition of knowledge,
the cultivation of virtue and of friendship, the observance
of faith and truth, an unrepining submission to whatever
befalls us, a life led in accordance with reason?
Platonism in the museum.
But, though the Alexandrian Museum was especially
intended for the cultivation of the Aristotelian philosophy,
it must not be supposed that other systems were excluded.
Platonism was not only carried to its full development,
but in the end it supplanted Peripateticism, and through
the New Academy left a permanent impress on Christianity.
The philosophical method of Plato was the inverse of
that of Aristotle. Its starting-point was universals,
the very existence of which was a matter of faith,
and from these it descended to particulars, or details.
Aristotle, on the contrary, rose from particulars to
universals, advancing to them by inductions.
Plato, therefore, trusted to the imagination,
Aristotle to reason. The former descended from
the decomposition of a primitive idea into particulars,
the latter united particulars into a general conception.
Hence the method of Plato was capable of quickly producing
what seemed to be splendid, though in reality unsubstantial
results; that of Aristotle was more tardy in its operation,
but much more solid. It implied endless labor
in the collection of facts, a tedious resort to experiment
and observation, the application of demonstration.
The philosophy of Plato is a gorgeous castle in the
air; that of Aristotle a solid structure, laboriously,
and with many failures, founded on the solid rock.
An appeal to the imagination is much
more alluring than the employment of reason.
In the intellectual decline of Alexandria, indolent
methods were preferred to laborious observation and
severe mental exercise. The schools of Neo-Platonism
were crowded with speculative mystics, such as Ammonius
Saccas and Plotinus. These took the place of the
severe geometers of the old Museum.
Physical science in
the museum. The Alexandrian school offers
the first example of that system which, in the hands
of modern physicists, has led to such wonderful results.
It rejected imagination, and made its theories the
expression of facts obtained by experiment and observation,
aided by mathematical discussion. It enforced
the principle that the true method of studying Nature
is by experimental interrogation. The researches
of Archimedes in specific gravity, and the works of
Ptolemy on optics, resemble our present investigations
in experimental philosophy, and stand in striking
contrast with the speculative vagaries of the older
writers. Laplace says that the only observation
which the history of astronomy offers us, made by
the Greeks before the school of Alexandria, is that
of the summer solstice of the year B.C. 432. by Meton
and Euctemon. We have, for the first time, in
that school, a combined system of observations made
with instruments for the measurement of angles, and
calculated by trigonometrical methods. Astronomy
then took a form which subsequent ages could only perfect.
It does not accord with the compass
or the intention of this work to give a detailed account
of the contributions of the Alexandrian Museum to
the stock of human knowledge. It is sufficient
that the reader should obtain a general impression
of their character. For particulars, I may refer
him to the sixth chapter of my “History of the
Intellectual Development of Europe.”
Euclid Archimedes.
It has just been remarked that the Stoical philosophy
doubted whether the mind can ascertain absolute truth.
While Zeno was indulging in such doubts, Euclid was
preparing his great work, destined to challenge contradiction
from the whole human race. After more than twenty-two
centuries it still survives, a model of accuracy,
perspicuity, and a standard of exact demonstration.
This great geometer not only wrote on other mathematical
topics, such as Conic Sections and Porisms, but there
are imputed to him treatises on Harmonics and Optics,
the latter subject being discussed on the hypothesis
of rays issuing from the eye to the object.
With the Alexandrian mathematicians
and physicists must be classed Archimedes, though
he eventually resided in Sicily. Among his mathematical
works were two books on the Sphere and Cylinder, in
which he gave the demonstration that the solid content
of a sphere is two-thirds that of its circumscribing
cylinder. So highly did he esteem this, that
he directed the diagram to be engraved on his tombstone.
He also treated of the quadrature of the circle and
of the parabola; he wrote on Conoids and Spheroids,
and on the spiral that bears his name, the genesis
of which was suggested to him by his friend Conon the
Alexandrian. As a mathematician, Europe produced
no equal to him for nearly two thousand years.
In physical science he laid the foundation of hydrostatics;
invented a method for the determination of specific
gravities; discussed the equilibrium of floating bodies;
discovered the true theory of the lever, and invented
a screw, which still bears his name, for raising the
water of the Nile. To him also are to be attributed
the endless screw, and a peculiar form of burning-mirror,
by which, at the siege of Syracuse, it is said that
he set the Roman fleet on fire.
Eratosthenes Apollonius hipparchus.
Eratosthenes, who at one time had charge of the library,
was the author of many important works. Among
them may be mentioned his determination of the interval
between the tropics, and an attempt to ascertain the
size of the earth. He considered the articulation
and expansion of continents, the position of mountain-chains,
the action of clouds, the geological submersion of
lands, the elevation of ancient sea-beds, the opening
of the Dardanelles and the straits of Gibraltar, and
the relations of the Euxine Sea. He composed
a complete system of the earth, in three books physical,
mathematical, historical accompanied by
a map of all the parts then known. It is only
of late years that the fragments remaining of his
“Chronicles of the Theban Kings” have been
justly appreciated. For many centuries they were
thrown into discredit by the authority of our existing
absurd theological chronology.
It is unnecessary to adduce the arguments
relied upon by the Alexandrians to prove the globular
form of the earth. They had correct ideas respecting
the doctrine of the sphere, its poles, axis, equator,
arctic and antarctic circles, equinoctial points, solstices,
the distribution of climates, etc. I cannot
do more than merely allude to the treatises on Conic
Sections and on Maxima and Minima by Apollonius,
who is said to have been the first to introduce the
words ellipse and hyperbola. In like manner I
must pass the astronomical observations of Alistyllus
and Timocharis. It was to those of the latter
on Spica Virginis that Hipparchus was indebted
for his great discovery of the precession of the eqninoxes.
Hipparchus also determined the first inequality of
the moon, the equation of the centre. He adopted
the theory of epicycles and eccentrics, a geometrical
conception for the purpose of resolving the apparent
motions of the heavenly bodies on the principle of
circular movement. He also undertook to make a
catalogue of the stars by the method of alineations that
is, by indicating those that are in the same apparent
straight line. The number of stars so catalogued
was 1,080. If he thus attempted to depict the
aspect of the sky, he endeavored to do the same for
the surface of the earth, by marking the position
of towns and other places by lines of latitude and
longitude. He was the first to construct tables
of the sun and moon.
The Syntaxis of Ptolemy.
In the midst of such a brilliant constellation of
geometers, astronomers, physicists, conspicuously shines
forth Ptolemy, the author of the great work, “Syntaxis,”
“a Treatise on the Mathematical Construction
of the Heavens.” It maintained its ground
for nearly fifteen hundred years, and indeed was only
displaced by the immortal “Principia”
of Newton. It commences with the doctrine that
the earth is globular and fixed in space, it describes
the construction of a table of chords, and instruments
for observing the solstices, it deduces the obliquity
of the ecliptic, it finds terrestrial latitudes by
the gnomon, describes climates, shows how ordinary
may be converted into sidereal time, gives reasons
for preferring the tropical to the sidereal year,
furnishes the solar theory on the principle of the
sun’s orbit being a simple eccentric, explains
the equation of time, advances to the discussion of
the motions of the moon, treats of the first inequality,
of her eclipses, and the motion of her nodes.
It then gives Ptolemy’s own great discovery that
which has made his name immortal the discovery
of the moon’s evection or second inequality,
reducing it to the epicyclic theory. It attempts
the determination of the distances of the sun and
moon from the earth with, however, only
partial success. It considers the precession
of the équinoxes, the discovery of Hipparchus,
the full period of which is twenty-five thousand years.
It gives a catalogue of 1,022 stars, treats of the
nature of the milky-way, and discusses in the most
masterly manner the motions of the planets. This
point constitutes another of Ptolemy’s claims
to scientific fame. His determination of the
planetary orbits was accomplished by comparing his
own observations with those of former astronomers,
among them the observations of Timocharis on the planet
Venus.
Invention of the steam-engine.
In the Museum of Alexandria, Ctesibius invented the
fire-engine. His pupil, Hero, improved it by giving
it two cylinders. There, too, the first steam-engine
worked. This also was the invention of Hero,
and was a reaction engine, on the principle of the
eolipile. The silence of the halls of Serapis
was broken by the water-clocks of Ctesibius and Apollonius,
which drop by drop measured time. When the Roman
calendar had fallen into such confusion that it had
become absolutely necessary to rectify it, Julius Cæsar
brought Sosigenes the astronomer from Alexandria.
By his advice the lunar year was abolished, the civil
year regulated entirely by the sun, and the Julian
calendar introduced.
The Macedonian rulers of Egypt have
been blamed for the manner in which they dealt with
the religious sentiment of their time. They prostituted
it to the purpose of state-craft, finding in it a means
of governing their lower classes. To the intelligent
they gave philosophy.
Policy of the Ptolemies.
But doubtless they defended this policy by the experience
gathered in those great campaigns which had made the
Greeks the foremost nation of the world. They
had seen the mythological conceptions of their ancestral
country dwindle into fables; the wonders with which
the old poets adorned the Mediterranean had been discovered
to be baseless illusions. From Olympus its divinities
had disappeared; indeed, Olympus itself had proved
to be a phantom of the imagination. Hades had
lost its terrors; no place could be found for it.
From the woods and grottoes and rivers
of Asia Minor the local gods and goddesses had departed;
even their devotees began to doubt whether they had
ever been there. If still the Syrian damsels lamented,
in their amorous ditties, the fate of Adonis, it was
only as a recollection, not as a reality. Again
and again had Persia changed her national faith.
For the revelation of Zoroaster she had substituted
Dualism; then under new political influences she had
adopted Magianism. She had worshiped fire, and
kept her altars burning on mountain-tops. She
had adored the sun. When Alexander came, she
was fast falling into pantheism.
On a country to which in its political
extremity the indigenous gods have been found unable
to give any protection, a change of faith is impending.
The venerable divinities of Egypt, to whose glory obelisks
had been raised and temples dedicated, had again and
again submitted to the sword of a foreign conqueror.
In the land of the Pyramids, the Colossi, the Sphinx,
the images of the gods had ceased to represent living
realities. They had ceased to be objects of faith.
Others of more recent birth were needful, and Serapis
confronted Osiris. In the shops and streets of
Alexandria there were thousands of Jews who had forgotten
the God that had made his habitation behind the veil
of the temple.
Tradition, revelation, time, all had
lost their influence. The traditions of European
mythology, the revelations of Asia, the time-consecrated
dogmas of Egypt, all had passed or were fast passing
away. And the Ptolemies recognized how ephemeral
are forms of faith.
But the Ptolemies also recognized
that there is something more durable than forms of
faith, which, like the organic forms of geological
ages, once gone, are clean gone forever, and have
no restoration, no return. They recognized that
within this world of transient delusions and unrealities
there is a world of eternal truth.
That world is not to be discovered
through the vain traditions that have brought down
to us the opinions of men who lived in the morning
of civilization, nor in the dreams of mystics who
thought that they were inspired. It is to be
discovered by the investigations of geometry, and
by the practical interrogation of Nature. These
confer on humanity solid, and innumerable, and inestimable
blessings.
The day will never come when any one
of the propositions of Euclid will be denied; no one
henceforth will call in question the globular shape
of the earth, as recognized by Eratosthenes; the world
will not permit the great physical inventions and
discoveries made in Alexandria and Syracuse to be
forgotten. The names of Hipparchus, of Apollonius,
of Ptolemy, of Archimedes, will be mentioned with
reverence by men of every religious profession, as
long as there are men to speak.
The museum and modern
science. The Museum of Alexandria was thus
the birthplace of modern science. It is true that,
long before its establishment, astronomical observations
had been made in China and Mesopotamia; the mathematics
also had been cultivated with a certain degree of
success in India. But in none of these countries
had investigation assumed a connected and consistent
form; in none was physical experimentation resorted
to. The characteristic feature of Alexandrian,
as of modern science, is, that it did not restrict
itself to observation, but relied on a practical interrogation
of Nature.