* Quintus Curtius informs us (_Life of Alexander the Great_, b. v. a ii.) that Darius had in Babylon a consecrated table, from which he used to eat; that Alexander began to be ashamed of his sacrilege in treading upon it--(it had been placed as a footstool for his imperial chair)--the sacrilege being against the G.o.ds presiding over hospitality, carved upon the table. These may be regarded as angels or otherwise, according to fancy.

Our knowledge of the angelic mythology of Babylonia is comparatively slight. The main thing which shrouds the subject in darkness is the difficulty which exists to distinguish between G.o.d, G.o.ds, and angels. If we could put any confidence in the book of Daniel, we should recognize therefrom that his "Nebuchadnezzar" most distinctly believed in the existence of angels, for in chap. iii. 25 he believes that he sees the son of G.o.d (_bar elohim_), and in verse 28 of the same chap. he remarks that "G.o.d hath sent his angel (_malachah_), and delivered his servants that trusted in him." Again, in the fourth chapter, in which he recounts a dream, he declares that he saw "a watcher and a holy one" (_geer and kadesk_) come down from heaven with a message to him. But Daniel is not an adequate authority upon ancient Babylonian beliefs. We are, in the absence of direct testimony upon this subject driven to such evidence as is drawn from sculptured or other remains in ruins and on gems, and to cuneiform and other writings. George Rawlinson sums up his account thus--(_Ancient Monarchies_, vol. I, ch. vii., pp. 138, 9): "Various deities, whom it was not considered at all necessary to trace to a single stock, divided the allegiance of the people, and even of the kings, who regarded with equal respect, and glorified with exalted epithets, some fifteen or sixteen personages. Next to these princ.i.p.al G.o.ds were a far more numerous a.s.semblage of inferior or secondary divinities, less often mentioned, and regarded as less worthy of honour, but still recognized generally through the country. Finally, the Pantheon contained a host of mere local G.o.ds or genii, every town and almost every village in Babylonia being under the protection of its own particular divinity."

The pa.s.sage above quoted, which represents very fairly our existent knowledge, suggests to the thoughtful mind a comparison with other religions. In Greece there were many great G.o.ds and G.o.ddesses, and other divinities of less renown. In Rome there were G.o.ds for almost everything. But what these nations called "G.o.ds" the Hebrews called "angels," as we shall see shortly. In Christendom angels and G.o.ds have, as a general rule, been deposed, and "saints" have taken their places. Not only has every town a cathedral which is dedicated to some particular name--said to have been borne by a holy man or woman, whose aid in heaven is thus secured by his votaries upon earth--but every church in every parish, and every chapel in every church is set apart to a particular "saint." Still farther, every trade and every position in life has its tutelary patron in heaven, and secondary G.o.ds are as common in Papal districts as they were in the land of the Chaldeans. The philosopher cannot find a valid distinction between Ishtar, Venus, and Mary, Dionysus and Denis, and a host of other G.o.ds, saints, or angels.

a.s.suming that the minor G.o.ds of Greece and Rome, and those essences generally called "angels" are substantially the same order of beings, we find that the Babylonians had a great number of celestial envoys, viceroys, or messengers who ruled over the land and sea, the sky and storms, the thunder and the rain, crops, men, war, buildings--everything, indeed, was superintended by some one on behalf of the Supreme Ruler.

We might pause here to speculate upon the question whether there is any difference in kind between such a kingdom as Babylonia or Russia and the heaven believed in by the ancient Jews and the modern Christians. In all there is an autocratic sovereign who has a prime minister and secretaries of state, who keep his books and perform his will according to his bidding; under these again there are private clerks, who superintend wind and weather, rain and hail, snow and frost; governors of provinces, mayors, or prefects of cities; police, and so large a host of subordinates, that nothing, great or small, can be done which escapes the notice of one of the imperial envoys or ministers. The inventor of heaven, such as we know it, was certainly an admirer of 'centralization'. Those who desire to see the description of the unseen world modified are those who are opposed to an absolute monarchy, and who see in everything, everybody, and in all the world a proof of the presence of a supreme, omniscient, omnipresent, Creator, Ruler, or Governor.

Without going into an account of the Chaldean mythology, we may say that there is strong reason to believe, both from the nomenclature which has survived, and from such gems as are preserved from destruction, that every Babylonian, whether bond or free, was called after some deity, who was supposed ever afterwards to be his tutelary angel In modern times Roman Catholics hold a similar belief, and each parent imagines that by making selection, for his offspring, of the name of a particular saint, the latter can be induced to take the child under its special care.

The learned in papal mythology know that every saint is depicted in such a manner that none shall be mistaken. To such an extent indeed is pictorial contrivance carried, that the art of recognising a particular saint demands a special study. It is all but certain that the same custom prevailed in Babylon; but, as all the professors which taught the means of identification have pa.s.sed away, we can only guess at the name or nature of the angel. Let us imagine, for example, what an archaeologist could make of the figure of Mary--of the bleeding or burning heart, two thousand years after all history of the mother of Jesus has pa.s.sed away, like that of Ishtar has done. A curious figure, called heart-shaped, but really not so, is found placed on the central part of a woman's breast; from it flames appear to arise and blood to drop, and through it is a dagger, and this ma.s.s of imagery is put outside the body, and the dress is held open to enable any one to see it.

Without a key to the enigma, this is a mystery; but when the key is given, and the inquirer hears the explanation, he finds it so absurd that it is difficult to believe it. In like manner, when I see upon a Babylonian gem, copied as a vignette on the t.i.tle-page of Landseer's _Sabean Researches_, a woman who has a beard, a necklace, two small b.r.e.a.s.t.s, from each of which she squeezes apparently a river of milk; over whose breastbone there is one large globe and two small ones, placed perpendicularly; who has a spider waist, and wears a skirt covered with pistol-shaped ornaments, I, not knowing whether the Chaldeans adored "our lady of the flowing bosom," cannot frame an idea as to the name of the saint, angel, virgin, or martyr which is depicted, or what may have been her peculiar duties, who she was, and what trade she patronised.

Whatever idea the Papal Church entertains respecting her canonised saints, one thing is remarkable, viz., that they are not portrayed as having wings. Each has an aureole of some sort round his or her head--a painter's contrivance for saying "This individual, who seems like a man or woman, is not a common but a divine creature." Francis of a.s.sisi is, in addition, depicted with stigmata, or marks on his hands, feet, and side, which, though they resemble those made with nails in the case of Jesus of Nazareth, were doubtless, in the case of the "saint," made with the strong caustic called "spirit of salt" or other escharotic. We might speculate upon the state of mind which sees in the a.s.sumption of "stigmata" a greater evidence of faith than would be offered by the conversion of the arms into the pinions of Michael the archangel; but, as it is so much easier for even the most potent saint to make breaches in his skin, than to persuade feathers to grow on his arms, we do not think the task worthy of our care.

The Babylonians in this respect were predecessors of papal pagans. It is a rare thing to find on any of their gems a winged angel or genius. One such is depicted on the frontispiece of Landseer's _Sabean Researches_, which is birdlike both as regards the head and pinions; and four other winged creatures are given in Lajard's _Culte de Venus_. In two the figures are human headed, and combined with the body of a quadruped.

At a later period of Babylonian mythology "grotesques" were introduced, apparently from Egypt.

It is not to be lightly pa.s.sed by, that the symbol which represented the presence of the deity--which, if we may adopt a phrase, we should call "the angel of his presence" (see Exod. x.x.xiii. 14,15; Isa, lxiii. 9), is almost identical in the Chaldean and the papal religions, viz., a circle containing a cross, an emblem as common in our churchyards as in the capital of Nebuchadnezzar.

The resemblance between papal and Chaldean emblems and doctrines have repeatedly attracted the attention of theologians; and I am not far wrong in a.s.serting that Protestants generally have identified "the woman" of Revelation xvii., spoken of as "Mystery, Babylon the Great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth," with Rome under the popes. For myself I do not care to express any opinion on the point, beyond a general dissent from the popular estimation of the dictum and its interpretation. At the same time I must declare that every year, over which my inquiries have extended, has imbued me more and more with wonder at the similarity between the ancient Babylonian and the modern papal religion. The two resemble children of the same parents, only that one is older than the other; and it requires but little penetration in an observer to trace in both, the lineaments of a grovelling superst.i.tion, united with a base priestly cunning.

In our own estimation the strongest evidence in favour of a belief in angels, of every degree, amongst the Chaldeans and Babylonians is the enormous development of angelic mythology amongst the Jews, who lived in the city of Nebuchadnezzar, and in those who migrated thence into Palestine subsequent to the period of the captivity. From indications, which are necessarily imperfect, we have formed the opinion that the Babylonians were astronomical students of great proficiency, from a very remote antiquity; that many of these professors turned their attention to what is called judicial astrology--i.e., they attempted to judge of future events by certain phenomena occurring in the heavens, and especially in the relationship between different planets and the various constellations.

As the planets wander through the sky, naturally they were regarded as the messengers of El--"the Supreme," who sent them to investigate the condition of groups of stars, many of which formed a sort of community that was unvisited by the Great King, for months together, and, in many instances, not at all.As the heliacal rising of one star seemed generally to be followed by good weather, and the corresponding rise of another intimated the reverse, it was natural that one should be regarded as an angel of happiness, the other as a harbinger of misery or death. So strongly rooted is this belief amongst some, that it even "holds its own" in educated England. The astronomer Royal is often asked to cast a nativity; and a living merchant of Liverpool does so yet, having confidence that his deductions suffice to prove their value.

The formula is "_Astra regunt homines, sed regit astra Deus_"--"The stars rule men, but G.o.d rules the stars." A guardian star, then, that is to say, the particular planet or other conspicuous celestial body which was "in the ascendant" at the period of the birth of each individual, was regarded in the same light as Christians esteem protective angels and Romanists estimate patron saints. There can be, we think, little doubt that the seven archangels are the seven planets known to the ancients, each of which had a day dedicated to it, and who thus originated the week of seven days. These amongst the Phoenicians were called the Cabeiri, or the powerful ones. In the conclusion at which we have arrived we are greatly strengthened by the discovery in Babylonian ruins of certain bowls; facsimiles and descriptions of which are given in Layard's Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 510-526. The inscriptions which have been translated appear to be forms of exorcism, or amulets, by which evil spirits are to be driven away; and reference is made in these writings to the devil, for example, under the name _shida_; and to Satan under the cognomen _Satanah_, evidently the same as the Satanas habitually used in the New Testament; also to Nirich, probably from a root like the Hebrew _narag_, "a noise maker or screamer." This creature, as I think, is the same as the "Satyr" of Isaiah xiii. 21, and x.x.xiv. 14, and represents or personifies those unseen but howling maniacs who wandered about at night (see _Lilith and Satyr_ in my second volume). Another demon is called _Zachiah_, a cognomen which I cannot satisfactorily explain unless it is allied to _Zachar,_ and indicates the power which, as the French would say, "can tie a knot in the needle"

(nouer l'aiguilette) or "a levin brand." Another of the devils is called "Abitur of the Mountain," whose name resembling, as it does, the Jewish _Abiathar_, is more likely to belong to the good than the bad angels.

Lilith is another demon still feared by the Jews, who employ charms against her to this day. She is supposed to be a sort of spiritual vampyre, and to suck the life out of infants and young people. These names of angels occur in the first inscription given by Layard; in the second we find Satan, a.s.sociated with idolatry, curses, vows, whisperings, witchcraft, and _Zevatta_--a concealer, rider, or enchanter from root like this and answering to the fairy which steals away.

"It was between the night and day When the fairy king has power, That I sank down in a sinful fray, And 'twixt life and death was s.n.a.t.c.ht away To the joyless Elfin bower."

--Lady of the Lake, canto iv., stanza xv.

Another is named _Nidra_, which I take to signify vows made by supposed sorcerers. This demon is a.s.sociated in the same line with _Zevatta_ above described. _Patiki_ is another bad influence, probably now, "a sword," for the charm has reference to freedom from captivity. Another devil is called _Isarta_, which I take to be a leader of banditti or marauders, from the a.s.syrian word (Furst's lexicon s.v. _asar_), "a leader, head or commander," and a word from a root like _ta_, "to drive," "to push forward," "to sweep away." We should call such an one "the demon of destruction."

In this same inscription two good angels are named, Batiel or Bethiail, probably a variant of Bethuel, "the residence of El," and Katuel or Kathuail, the executioner or sword of El, from _katal_, to kill; compare this with the expression, "Or if I bring a sword upon that land, and say, sword, go through that land, so that I put off man and beast from it" (Ezek. xiv. 17). In addition to these two angels another is mentioned who has eleven names, not one of which is written in full--e.g. SS. BB. CCC.

In a third inscription a devil is named "Abdi," which may be derived from the root _abad_, and be regarded as the same as the New Testament Abaddon (Rev. ix. 10)--the king of the slaughterers, bucaneers, rovers, &c. We can fancy that Negroes who are captured and sold in droves to foreigners, might imagine that Abdi was the devil which ruled the African slave drivers and Christian purchasers. This demon is a.s.sociated with Levatta,--with tribulations, the machinations of the a.s.syrians, misery, treachery, rebellion; Nidra, with sorrows generally; and _Shoq_, which I take to be from a root like _shuq, or shaqaq_--i.e., "enemies thirsting for booty, rangers, bands of robbers." Compare--"And the spoilers came out of the camp of the Philistines in three companies"

(1 Sam. xiii. 17). See also--He "delivered them into the hand of the spoilers" (Jud. ii. 14; 2 Kin. xvii. 20). Amongst the devils must, I think, also be cla.s.sed _Asdarta_, which is clearly the same as the G.o.ddess Astarte, and she is closely a.s.sociated with "the machinations of the a.s.syrians."

The good angels of this inscription are Barakiel, Ramiel, Raamiel, Nahabiel, and Sharmiel, over whose names we will not now linger, except to notice that the devils have names compounded with _jah_, whilst the good ones are derived from EL.

In the fifth inscription, amongst the bad things are mentioned evil spirits, both male and female, the evil eye, sorcery, and enchantments both from men and women, along with Nidra and Levatta. The good angels are called Babnaa, Ninikia, and Umanel, which I take to be intended for Wu, _banahel_=El builds, or "the strong one who establishes us;"

_nachaghel_. El is powerful, or the Angel of Strength; and amanel, or "the fostering angel."

In some fragments the names of good angels found have been Nadkiel, Ramiel, Damael, Hachael, and Sharmiel, which we shall probably notice again subsequently.

We do not lay any particular stress upon the fact of the bowls, on which these inscriptions were found, having been dug up amongst Babylonian ruins; nor do we care to prove either that they were of Jewish or Chaldean origin. What we here desire to show is, that there existed in Babylon a full belief in the existence of evil and good influences which were invisible; that some individuals had, or were thought to possess, supernatural powers for harm, which could be counteracted by those who placed themselves under the protection of potencies supposed to be holier, wiser, or stronger than the evil genii From the method in which everything connected with witchcraft, magic, astrology, and the like, is spoken of in the Old Testament, and from the fact that slaves are much more likely to imitate their masters than conquerors to become pupils of the vanquished, we conclude that it was not the Hebrews who taught the Chaldees, but that the contrary was the case.

In the view thus enunciated we are confirmed by the manner in which old Jewish writers spoke of the nation that enslaved them--e.g., "Babylon, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency" (Isa. xiii. 19); "All of them princes to look at after the manner of the Babylonians of Chaldea."...

And "she (Jerusalem) doted upon them, and sent messengers unto them into Chaldea; and... she was polluted with them, and her mind was alienated from (or by) them" (Ezek. xxiii. 15-17); "It is a mighty nation, it is an ancient nation, a nation whose language thou knowest not" (Jerem.

v. 15)--Jeremiah knew more about the people than Isaiah (see Isa.

xxiii. 13). Habakkuk, again, speaking of the same people, says (chap, i. 6-10)--"The Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation... terrible and dreadful:... they shall scoff at the kings, and the princes shall be a scorn unto them." Such being the estimation of the Babylonians by Hebrew prophets, it is morally certain that the Jews would regard them with respect, admire, study, and copy them. To what extent the imitation went it is difficult to say.

When, therefore, we find that the descendants of Abraham, a patriarch whom a veneration for the ancient Babylonians induced the Israelite mythologists to represent as being a Chaldee; and those who were taught on the banks of the Euphrates, were spoken of in Rome about the time of our era, and shortly afterwards, as being almost synonymous epithets for sorcerers, astrologers, charmers, &c., we must conclude that the Mesopotamian was the master, the Palestinian the pupil. That the two were regarded as relatives we infer from Juvenal (sat. vi.

544-552)--"For a small piece of money the Jews sell whatever dreams you may choose, but an Armenian or Commagenian soothsayer promises a tender love;... but her (i.e., the lady who consults such folk) confidence in Chaldeans will be the greater."

But, ere we leave this portion of our Essay, we must notice one other piece of evidence of considerable value which is drawn from the New Testament. We find, for example, in Acts xxiii. 8, "The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit, but the Pharisees confess both." If we inquire into the origin of these sects--and we shall be greatly a.s.sisted in doing so by two very elaborate articles by the erudite Dr. Ginsburg, in Kitto's _Cyclopaedia of Biblical Knowledge_--we shall see reason to believe that the Sadducees were a sect who considered that they were not bound to believe any tenet as necessary unless they could find it distinctly enunciated in the Pentateuch. They resolutely declined, therefore, to accept as revelation such stories as had been adopted by the Hebrews from Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and possibly from the Romans.

We might inst.i.tute a comparison between the Sadducees and those whom we know as "reformers." The first acknowledged the authority of Moses alone, such as they found it in "the five books;" the second acknowledged the authority of Jesus and his apostles, such as they found it in the New Testament: the first rejected the commentaries of Rabbis; the second those of "the fathers." Both appealed to antiquity, and both traced to what we may designate paganism, heathenism, or foreign sources generally, a large portion of the current faith which they saw around them. The Sadducees regarded the doctrine of seraphic interference, and all the angelic mythology common in their time, as the fond fancy of those who desired to harmonize Judaism with Gentilism. The Reformers, in their turn, rejected all the fables of Papal anchorites, &c.; denied the power of any martyr to influence the condition of the living after their death; and generally opposed the saintly, as the Sadducees opposed the angelic, hierarchy. Individuals who sympathize with Luther, Calvin, and those of a similar way of thinking, may readily understand the Sadducees, whereas, those of what is called the "High Church," will give their interest to the Pharisees, who upheld the then mediaeval customs, &c.

It is probable that some will say, that Jesus of Nazareth, being the son of G.o.d, a deity incarnate, and consequently familiar with everything which goes on in the court of heaven; having adopted the angelic mythology; having conversed familiarly with the devil; having sent, at least, two thousand devils out of one man into a herd of swine; having gone down to h.e.l.l, wherever that may be; and having preached to the spirits imprisoned there, whoever they may be or have been; having, still further, had an angel to comfort him; having had a conference with Moses and Elijah on a certain hill; having a.s.serted that he had only to pray to his father to obtain the a.s.sistance of twelve legions of angels; and having also told us that every child has an angel who stands before the face of G.o.d--seeing these things, I say, one can imagine persons a.s.severating that all our current notions of angels, which are built upon the New Testament, must be true.

To this we rejoin, that these a.s.sertions beg the question. The philosopher affirms that the idea of angels is incompatible with that of an omnipresent G.o.d--that the belief of Jesus in an angelic mythology proves him to have had an anthropomorphic notion of "the Supreme," and, as a consequence, it follows that Jesus was nothing more than a Jew, although very superior to the generality of his countrymen, having possibly been taught by some Buddhist.* The bigot, on the other hand, can only scream out the formularies which the so-called orthodox provide for him. Johanna Southcote once made some folks believe that she was pregnant with a Messiah, and she had most enthusiastic followers; but neither argument nor rhetoric sufficed to beget the promised baby and, in like manner, no amount of declamation can convert an a.s.sumption into a fact. But of this truth most of our theologians appear to be ignorant, and, like the heathen with their litanies, they think that they will obtain their will by "much speaking."

* It will be noticed by the reader, that the remarks in the text have reference to the supernatural stories which were interwoven into the biography of Jesus by those whom we call Evangelists. The bibliolaters must, however, stand or fall by the many legendary tales which pa.s.s current for truth. If Jesus, as an ordinary Jew, believed in angels--just as our king, James I., believed in the existence of modern witches --we cannot use his evidence to prove the existence of angels and devils, any more than the Christian laws against witchcraft demonstrate that old women and men sold their souls and bodies to Satan. If, on the other hand, we allow that the spiritual mythology of the New Testament is due to Pharasaic influence, all the testimony propounded in favour of the a.s.sertion, that Jesus was, in reality, "a son of Jehovah," crumbles away.

When summoned, a long time ago, to give evidence in a court of justice, the question was put to me--"Now, doctor, you have heard the symptoms from which the deceased suffered; do you believe that they were produced by a.r.s.enic?" Being doubtful about the propriety of the query in a court of law so prudish as ours is, I remained silent, and in an instant the judge, Baron Alderson, said--"I won't allow that question to be put or answered; you want the witness to take the place of the jury, and it shall not be done. You may ask the doctor, if you will, what are the symptoms produced by a.r.s.enic, when taken in a poisonous dose, and then it is the business of the jury to compare those, with such as have already been sworn to as occurring in the man before he died." This anecdote is frequently in my mind when I am composing an essay like the present. If I wish to convince the jury who reads my papers of the truth of a particular conclusion to which I have arrived, it is not enough for me to express my own opinions. I may a.s.sert, in the matter in question, that I am a skilled witness, and have closely investigated the subject, but it is open to any one to doubt my industry and to distrust my judgment; consequently, it is necessary for me to adduce evidence, as well as to draw deductions therefrom.

The hypothesis which I have formed, after a pretty extensive reading, is, that the belief in the mythology of angels which is current amongst Christians at the present time, and which is based upon a series of pretended revelations, said to have been made exclusively to Jews of ancient times, is, in reality, founded upon fancies of pagan priests or poets; and, as a corollary, I infer, either that our celestial mythology must be given up to oblivion, as being heathenish, or that we must abandon those claims to an exclusive inspiration which have been made for, and accorded by many to, the Bible. I have already described the ideas a.s.sociated with angels in some ancient peoples, and I now propose to examine those of other nations with whom the Jews and Christians, directly or indirectly, came in contact.

The reader of ancient Roman history cannot doubt that the city on the Tiber was indebted to the Etruscans for all, or nearly all, of its early knowledge. It is probable that the original G.o.ds and G.o.ddesses of Rome were those of their northern neighbours, and everything which the Romans knew of augury was due to the priests of Etruria; consequently it is not unprofitable to inquire, as far as we can, whether these had any idea of beings such as we call angels. As we have not many available written remains of the remarkable people to whom we refer, we are obliged to be satisfied with pictorial and other relics which have survived until our days. Some of the scenes depicted on urns, vases, and walls, in tombs and elsewhere, are sufficiently explanatory of the subjects which the artist has desired to pourtray; others, on the contrary, can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Paying no attention to the latter, we may safely affirm, that the Etruscans had ideas upon the subject of angels very similar to our own. The form which their artists gave to them is precisely that which is current at the present day, except that, unlike the Christian, the Etruscan angels were of different s.e.xes.

Sometimes both males and females were draped from the neck to the feet, in other drawings they were partially or wholly nude. In the vast majority of cases each one possessed two wings that were attached to the back, behind the arms, precisely as they are in modern pictures; but in one very remarkable instance (plate 7, _Description de quelques Vases Etrusques_, par H. D. de Luynes--folio, Paris, 1840) the beings to whom we refer had each three pairs of pinions, the one attached to the shoulder blades, a second to the loins, and a third to the calves of the legs. These creatures correspond to our demons or imps of Satan, or the devils of the New Testament which were sent into a herd of swine.

Some of the winged Etruscan demons must be regarded as "angels of death," for they are represented as hovering in the air over individuals, such as Ca.s.sandra and Polynices, who are about to be sacrificed. One angel, who, as usual, Diaitized bv is spoken of by the Christian describer thereof as a G.o.ddess, is designated "Cunina." Her business was to look after and take charge of infants in their cradle.

A being such as this, by whatever name we may designate her, cannot fail to remind us of the expression in the New Testament--"Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my father which is in heaven"

(Matt, xviii. 10). In another Etruscan painting we find two angelic beings, fully draped, carrying a nude corpse apparently to the future or invisible state. These naturally remind us of the pa.s.sage in Rev.

xx. 1--"I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand." In some Etruscan paintings we have scenes which are supposed to indicate the preparation of a bride for the wedding ceremony. In these there are diminutive angels introduced, which are sometimes hovering in the air and sometimes seated on the edge of the bath; these are by the learned supposed to represent Cupid, Eros, Hymen, or Love, and they indicate the devout feeling, that an angel watches over those who contract marriage in an orthodox manner.*

* Whether the Romans obtained all their inferior deities from the Etruscans, or whether the priests of the Eternal City in ancient times improved upon the mythology which came to them from their predecessors, just as the priests of modern Rome have expanded, without improving, the Christianised paganism which came to them, is a matter difficult to decide. But it is certain that the old Romans multiplied their "G.o.ds," as the modern ones have multiplied their "saints." Amongst the former were many curious deities, who presided at the wedding of young people, some at the public ceremony, and others at the private rites.

"PRema" was the angel of quietness, whose business it was to see "ne subacta virgo se ultra modum commovens s.e.m.e.n a v.u.l.v.a ejiceret." "Subigus" was another angel or demiG.o.d, whose duty it was to see that the consummation should take place in an appropriate manner--lovingly, pleasantly, and peacefully. There was another--Pertunda--of whom Augustine (Civ. Dei, vol. 9) remarks--"Si adest dea Prema ut subacta se non commoveat quum prematur, dea Pertunda quid ea facit?" In modern times the Papal saints, Cosmo, Damian, Foutin, and sundry others, have had the special duty a.s.signed to them to make the husband fit for his marital duties.

That the absence of such a spirit was looked upon as unlucky we gather from an expression in Propertius (b. v. el. 3) in which a wife, whose husband has been obliged to leave her, and go to a distant war, when bewailing her destiny, amongst other references says--"I wedded without a G.o.d to accompany me." This calls to memory the statement in Hebrews i. 14, wherein, after speaking of angels, the writer asks--"Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?"--a sentence which implies the idea that those who are not heirs of salvation have not angels which minister for them. The doctrine was certainly not exclusively Christian. Of this any one may a.s.sure himself by referring to Eccles. v. 6--"Neither say thou before the angel that it was an error; wherefore... should G.o.d destroy the works of thine hands?"

Again, we find an angel seated between two young folk of opposite s.e.xes, and archaeologists tell us that the winged creature thus figured is a nuptial G.o.d--one whose business is to induce appropriate couples to meet, to love, and to marry. Such a celestial match-maker was the Jewish Raphael, who, though "one of the seven holy angels, which present the prayers of the saints, and which go in and out before the glory of the Holy One" (Tobit xii. 15)--yet condescended to conduct Tobias a long way to meet Sara, and instructed him how he could marry her with safety, and defeat a devil.

Amongst other individuals, in the Etruscan mythological paintings who are winged, are the following, which are named thus by the authors who describe the vases, &c., whether rightly or wrongly it is not necessary for me to prove:--Ja.n.u.s; Furina, the G.o.ddess of thieves; Mercury, the messenger of Jupiter and the patron of robbers; Vacuna, or Desideria, or Venus, the G.o.ddess of indolence, desire, or love; Hymen, the angel or G.o.d of marriage; Cupid, the G.o.d of love; Victory, Bacchus, Silenus, Dryads, Calliope, Tempest, Fame, Proserpine; Iibitina, the G.o.ddess of funerals; Venus, infera, Nemesis, or fate; Death, life, Charybdis, The Furies, Geryon, Justice, Peace, Iris, and Diana. On such a subject the reader may consult with advantage Augustine (_de Civitate Dei_, b. vl.

c. 9); Arn.o.bius (_Adversus Gentes_, b. iv. c. 7); and Tertullian (_Ad Nationes_, b. ii. c. 11).

We may now refer to a remarkable series of drawings, representing the funeral of Patroclus, described by Homer, which were discovered in the Etruscan sepulchre of the Tarquinii near what once was Vulci and is now "Ponte della Badia," in the year 1857, and which is described in _Noel des Vergers L'Etrurie et les Etrusques_, and in _Corpus Inscriptionum Italicarum_ (Turin 1867), the latter of which I use as my authority. In one of the scenes we find depicted the sacrifice of the Trojan youths at the grave of Patroclus. The artist has not left to the fancy of the observer the identification of his figures, but has written in Etruscan letters the modified names of the actors. Beginning from the right hand, we find Ajax Oileus, and next to him a naked Trojan youth, whose hands are bound behind his back, and who is guarded by Telamonian Ajax. Behind and besides him is Charon, and in front of the latter is another Trojan youth, nude, seated on the ground, and receiving his death-wound from Achilles. Behind the latter stands a winged, draped, tall female figure, whom at one time I took to be the glorified soul of Patroclus; but, having seen a similar figure on other Etruscan designs depicting human sacrifice or death, and finding over the head of this one the word _fanth, vanth, or fano_--according to the value which we a.s.sign to the digamma or F and O--which is, I think, equivalent to the Latin _Fatum_, fate, &c., we must regard the figure as resembling Azrael--"the angel of death." Besides and behind her stands a draped man unarmed, having a fixed countenance of settled melancholy, and regarding without a shade of exultation the death of the young Trojan whom Achilles slaughters.

Over his head are the words _hinthial patrucles_, which is believed to signify "the shade of Patroclus." The last figure in the group is Agamemnon.

This and the other sculptures in the tomb are extremely interesting to the archaeologists, firstly, because they bear evidence of a very superior style of art; secondly, because they testify to the antiquity of Homer's _Iliad_, and its popularity in other nations than the Greek.

They show, moreover, that the wealthy men amongst the Etrurians were not ignorant of the Grecian language, or rather literature, although they had difficulty in adapting the h.e.l.lenic words to their own alphabet; lastly, they ought to be especially valuable to us inasmuch as they demonstrate the existence of a belief in ancient Italy of the resurrection of the body, and of the existence of angels precisely the same in shape as those which pious Christians delight to see in their churches, and in their manuals of devotion. It is worthy of notice that upon some Etruscan vases in the museum at Munich there are angelic warriors covered with armour--a winged female carrying a caduceus, and winged horses--like Pegasus, and probably like those seen by Zechariah, the Hebrew vaticinator.

We consider it best to omit making any remarks respecting the ideas entertained about angels by the Phoenicians, for we have scarcely any information about their mythology beyond the names of certain G.o.ds and G.o.ddesses. It will be more profitable to pa.s.s on to the Greeks, and inquire into the general system of their theological belief. This is, we think, a matter of some importance, for this people, as victors and masters, came into contact with the Jews in the time of Joel, about b.c.