If, then, it can be shown that they themselves had, long beforehand, contrived everything by pilfering it from barbarians, and had been helped not at all—not in the least—toward philosophy by their own national gods, but had rather justly found fault with their own gods, and some of them, on account of these things, had preferred atheism to the service of the gods—why then should we be blamed, and not rather be accepted and praised, for having loved the better thing, or rather for having found and grasped the only true thing, and for having withdrawn from falsehood; neither having been overturned, like the wise men of the Greeks, into godless reasoning, nor again, like those admirable philosophers, having confusedly mingled the polytheistic error with the knowledge of the God over all, nor indeed having confounded falsehood together with truth?
But not yet these things; rather, first go through for me those points by which the Greeks are proven to have plundered everything from the barbarians—not only the philosophical branches of learning, but also the common discoveries useful for life.
First, then, the one who introduced to the Greeks the common letters—the very first elements of grammar—was Cadmus, who was Phoenician by race; hence some of the ancients have also called the letters 'Phoenician.'
There are also those who say that the Syrians were the first to devise letters. And the Hebrews too would be Syrians, since they inhabited the land neighboring Phoenicia—itself called Phoenicia in ancient times, afterward Judea, and in our own day named Palestine—and it is especially with these that the sound of the Greek letters does not appear to be unrelated.
For each of the letters among them bears a name according to some meaningful sense, which cannot be found among the Greeks; and for this reason especially it is acknowledged that they are not native to the Greeks.
Now the letters among the Hebrews are twenty-two in all, of which the first is Aleph, which, rendered into the Greek tongue, would be said to mean 'learning'; the second is Beth, which is interpreted 'of a house'; the third, Gimel, which is 'fullness'; the fourth, Daleth, which signifies 'of tablets'; the fifth, He, which is 'this.' Taken all together, they complete a sense such as this: 'The learning of the house, the fullness of tablets—this is it.'
Then after these there is the sixth letter, called among them Waw, which is 'in it'; then Zayin, which is 'lives'; after which Heth, which is 'the living one'—so that the whole reads, 'In it lives the living one.'
After these, the ninth letter is Teth, which is 'good'; then Yod, which is interpreted 'beginning'; the two together, 'a good beginning.' Following these, Kaph, which is 'nevertheless'; then Lamed, which is 'learn'; the whole, 'Nevertheless, learn.'
After these, the thirteenth letter is Mem, which is 'from them'; then Nun, which is 'eternal.' Then Samekh, which is interpreted 'help'—so that what is said is, 'From them, eternal help.'
Following these is Ayin, which, when translated, signifies 'spring,' or 'eye'; then Pe, 'mouth.' Then next, Tsade, 'righteousness'; the sense of which is: 'A spring, or also an eye, and a mouth, of righteousness.'
After these there is the letter Qoph, which is interpreted 'calling'; then Resh, which is 'head.' And after these, Shin, which is 'teeth'; and last of all, the twenty-second letter, called among them, which signifies 'signs.' The sense would be: 'The calling of the head, and the signs of the teeth.'
Such, then, is the translation and interpretation of the letters among the Hebrews, forming a coherent sense of speech fitting for the learning and the profession of the letters. The like of this you would not find among the Greeks; whence, as I have said, it is necessary to acknowledge that these letters are not native to the Greeks, but have been directly formed in imitation of the barbarian tongue.
And this is proven also from the very naming of each letter. For how does Alpha differ from Aleph? Or Beta from Beth? Or Gamma from Gimel? Or Delta from Daleth? Or E from He? Or Zeta from Zayin? Or Theta from Teth? And so on with all the others similar to these.
So that it is beyond dispute that such sounds are not native to the Greeks; they belong, then, to the Hebrews, among whom each of them is also shown to have a meaning. Having begun first among these, they proceeded to others, and indeed to the Greeks as well. Let this, then, be said by me concerning the first letters. And since Clement too has touched upon this same subject, hear what he says:
They record that Apis the Egyptian practiced the art of medicine, and that afterward Asclepius developed the art further. Atlas the Libyan was the first to build a ship and to sail the sea.
The Egyptians were also the first to bring astrology to mankind, and likewise the Chaldeans. There are those who say the Carians devised prognostication by the stars. The Phrygians were the first to observe the flights of birds.
The Tuscans, neighbors of Italy, perfected the art of sacrifice. The Isaurians and Arabs elaborated the art of augury from birds, just as, of course, the Telmessians elaborated divination through dreams.
The Tyrrhenians devised the trumpet, and the Phrygians the flute; for Olympus and Marsyas were both Phrygians. The Egyptians, again, were the first to demonstrate the burning of lamps, and they divided the year into twelve months, and forbade intercourse with women in the temples, and made it a law that no one should enter the temples unwashed after being with women.
They were likewise the discoverers of geometry. Celmis and Damnameneus, the Idaean Dactyls, were the first to discover iron, in Cyprus. Another Idaean, Delas, discovered the alloying of bronze; but according to Hesiod, it was a Scythian.
Indeed, the Thracians were the first to invent the so-called 'harpe,' a curved sword, and were the first to use light shields on horseback. Likewise, the Illyrians invented the so-called 'pelte.' They also say the Tuscans devised the art of modeling in clay; and that Itanus, who was a Samnite, was the first to construct the large shield.
For Cadmus the Phoenician discovered the cutting of stone, and devised the gold mines around Mount Pangaeum. Moreover, another nation, the Cappadocians, were the first to discover the so-called 'nabla,' just as the Assyrians discovered the two-stringed instrument.
The Carthaginians were the first to construct the quadrireme, which was built by Bosporus, a native. And Medea, the Colchian, daughter of Aeetes, was the first to devise the dyeing of hair.
Moreover, the Noropes (a Paeonian nation, now called Norici) were the first to work bronze and the first to purify iron. Amycus, king of the Bebryces, discovered the boxing thongs.
They also say that Satyrus the Phrygian discovered the transverse pipe; and likewise that Hyagnis, also a Phrygian, discovered the three-stringed instrument and the diatonic mode; and that Olympus, likewise a Phrygian, discovered rhythmic strokes, just as Marsyas—being from the same region as those already mentioned—discovered the Phrygian mode, the mixophrygian, and the mixolydian; and that Thamyris the Thracian devised the Dorian mode.
We have also heard that the Persians were the first to construct the wagon, the couch, and the footstool, and that the Sidonians constructed the trireme. And the Sicels near Italy were the first to invent the phorminx, not much inferior to the kithara, and they devised castanets.
They record that in the time of Semiramis, queen of the Assyrians, fine linen garments were discovered. And Hellanicus says that Atossa, who reigned over the Persians, was the first to compose letters.
Scamon of Mytilene, then, and Theophrastus of Eresos, Cydippus of Mantinea, and further Antiphanes, Aristodemus, and Aristotle, and besides these Philostephanus, and also Strato the Peripatetic in his work On Discoveries, recorded these things; and I have set down a few of them to establish the inventive and life-benefiting nature found among the barbarians, from whom the Greeks profited in their pursuits.
These are the very words of Clement in the Stromata. To what has been said, I think it well to add also the passages from the writing of Josephus the Hebrew, which he composed in two books, On the Antiquity of the Jews, concerning the fact that the Greeks are recent, and have profited from the barbarians, and have written things at variance with themselves; for these things too will contribute to the exact and firm confirmation of what has been said. Hear, then, what he too writes, word for word:
First of all, then, it occurs to me to marvel exceedingly at those who think it necessary, concerning the most ancient events, to attend only to the Greeks and to inquire the truth from them, while distrusting us and the rest of mankind.
For I see the exact opposite has occurred, if indeed one ought not to follow vain opinions, but to derive what is just from the facts themselves. For among the Greeks, one might say, everything will be found to have happened only yesterday and the day before—I mean the foundations of cities, and the inventions of the arts, and the writing down of laws; and almost the newest thing of all among them is the diligence devoted to the writing of histories.
Yet the Greeks themselves, I suppose, acknowledge that the traditions of memory found among the Egyptians, the Chaldeans, and the Phoenicians—for I now forbear to reckon ourselves along with these—are the most ancient and the most enduring.
For all these peoples inhabit regions least subject to destruction from the surrounding elements, and they took great forethought that nothing done among them should be left unrecorded, but that it should always be consecrated in public records by their wisest men.
But the region around Greece has been overtaken by countless destructions, which have wiped out the memory of what had happened; and since they were continually establishing new ways of life, each generation supposed that the beginning of everything started from itself.
And it was only late, and with difficulty, that they came to know the nature of letters. Indeed, those who wish their use of letters to be the most ancient pride themselves on having learned them from the Phoenicians and from Cadmus.
Yet not even from that time could anyone show a record preserved either in temples or in public dedications; seeing that even concerning those who campaigned against Troy so many years later, there has since arisen great doubt and inquiry as to whether they even used letters; and the truer view rather prevails, that those men were ignorant of the use of letters as it now exists.
In general, no writing is found among the Greeks that is agreed to be older than the poetry of Homer; and he himself appears to have lived even later than the Trojan events. And they say that not even he left his own poetry in writing, but that it was preserved by memory and only later compiled from written records, and that for this reason it contains many discrepancies.
Those, however, who undertook to compose histories among them—I mean Cadmus of Miletus, and Acusilaus of Argos, and after him whatever others are said to have appeared—preceded in time the Persian expedition against Greece by only a short while.
Moreover, as for those who were the first among the Greeks to philosophize about heavenly and divine matters—such as Pherecydes of Syros, Pythagoras, and Thales—all agree in acknowledging that, having become disciples of the Egyptians and Chaldeans, they wrote only a little; and these writings are held by the Greeks to be the most ancient of all, and they scarcely believe that even these were written by those men.
How, then, is it not unreasonable that the Greeks should be so puffed up, as though they alone knew ancient matters and accurately handed down the truth about them? Or who could not easily learn from these very writers themselves that they wrote knowing nothing for certain, but each one merely conjecturing about the facts?
Indeed, they refute one another more in their own books than anything, and do not hesitate to say the most contradictory things about the same matters. I should be needlessly meddlesome, however, were I to instruct men who know better than I do how much Hellanicus disagrees with Acusilaus concerning genealogies, how much Acusilaus corrects Hesiod, or in what manner Ephorus shows Hellanicus to be lying in most points, Timaeus shows Ephorus, those who came after Timaeus show him, and everyone shows Herodotus.
Nor, again, did Timaeus deign to agree with Antiochus, Philistus, and Callias concerning Sicilian affairs; nor, in turn, have those who wrote the Atthides followed one another concerning Attic matters, nor those who record the history of Argos followed one another concerning Argive matters.
And what need is there to speak of matters pertaining to individual cities, and lesser matters, when even concerning the Persian expedition and the events that took place in it, the most highly esteemed historians have disagreed? Even Thucydides is accused by some of lying on many points, although he is thought to have written the most accurate history of his time.
Now, many other causes of such disagreement might perhaps appear to those willing to search for them; but I attribute the greatest force to the two causes I am about to set forth.
And I will state first the one that seems to me the more decisive. For the fact that, from the beginning, the Greeks did not take care to have public records made of the events occurring at each time—this above all provided both the occasion for error and the license to lie for those who afterward wished to write anything about ancient matters.
For it was not only among the other Greeks that record-keeping was neglected; even among the Athenians themselves, who are said to be autochthonous and devoted to learning, nothing of the kind is found to have taken place; rather, they say that the oldest of their public writings are the laws concerning homicide written for them by Draco, a man who lived only a little before the tyranny of Pisistratus.
As for the Arcadians, who boast of their antiquity, what need is there to speak? For even they, and only after these events, were with difficulty instructed in letters.
Since, then, no record had been set forth beforehand that would instruct those wishing to learn and refute those who lied, the great disagreement among the writers with one another arose.
And second to this, that other cause must be set down. For those who set out to write did not concern themselves with truth—although this is always the profession they readily claim—but rather displayed the power of their rhetoric; and in whatever manner they supposed they would surpass others in reputation for this, in that manner they adapted themselves: some turning to mythologizing, others praising, for favor's sake, either cities or kings; while others proceeded to attack the deeds or the writings of earlier authors, thinking that they would gain a good reputation by this.
In short, they continue doing what is most opposed of all things to true history. For it is a mark of true history that all should say and write the same things concerning the same events; whereas these men supposed that, if they did not write the same things as others, they would thereby appear to be the most truthful of all.
So much, then, from Josephus. And the testimony of Diodorus, which I shall now cite from the first book of the Library he compiled, would also serve as a seal upon what has been said; it reads, word for word, as follows:
Now that these matters have been clarified for us, it must be told how many of those among the Greeks renowned for understanding and learning traveled to Egypt in ancient times, in order to partake of the customs and learning there.
For the priests of the Egyptians record, from the writings in their sacred books, that Orpheus, Musaeus, Melampus, and Daedalus traveled to them; and besides these, Homer the poet, Lycurgus the Spartan, and further Solon the Athenian and Plato the philosopher; and that Pythagoras of Samos also came, as did Eudoxus the mathematician, and further Democritus of Abdera and Oenopides of Chios.
And of all these they show tokens—of some, images; of others, places or structures bearing names identical to theirs. And from the particular branch of learning each one zealously pursued, they bring forward proofs, establishing that they carried away from Egypt everything for which they were admired among the Greeks.
For, they say, Orpheus carried away from the Egyptians most of the mystic rites, and the orgiastic rituals concerning his own wandering, and the myth-making about the things in Hades. For the rite of Osiris, they say, is the same as that of Dionysus; and that of Isis is most similar to that of Demeter, only the names having been exchanged; and that he introduced, in fabricated form, the punishments of the impious in Hades, and the meadows of the pious, and the idol-shapes current among the many, having imitated the practices concerning burials in Egypt.
For the soul-guiding Hermes, according to the ancient custom among the Egyptians, brought up the body of Apis to a certain point and handed it over to the one wearing the mask of Cerberus's head. And when Orpheus taught this among the Greeks, Homer accordingly set it down in his poetry: 'And Cyllenian Hermes called forth the souls of hero-men; and he held a wand in his hands.'
Then, proceeding further, he adds: 'They say that Melampus brought from Egypt the rites customarily performed among the Greeks for Dionysus, and the myths told about Cronus, and those concerning the Battle of the Titans, and, in general, the whole account of the sufferings of the gods.'
They say that Daedalus imitated the construction of the labyrinth, which survives even to the present time, having been built—as some say—by Mendes, or—as others say—by King Marus, many years before the reign of Minos; and that the style of the ancient statues throughout Egypt is the same as that of the statues made by Daedalus among the Greeks.
And that Daedalus was the architect of the most beautiful propylon of Hephaestus at Memphis, and that, being admired, he obtained a wooden image of himself, made by his own hands, set up in the aforementioned temple; and finally, being deemed worthy of great glory on account of his natural talent, and having devised many further things, he obtained honors equal to the gods. For on one of the islands near Memphis there is, even to this day, a temple of Daedalus honored by the local inhabitants.
As for Homer's presence there, they adduce other signs, and especially the drug-magic that Helen worked upon Telemachus in the house of Menelaus, and the forgetfulness of the misfortunes that had befallen him.
For as to the drug that banishes grief, which the poet says Helen received from the Egyptians, from Polydamna, the wife of Thon, he appears to have investigated it with great accuracy.
For even now, they say, the women in that land make use of the aforementioned power, and that only among the women of Diospolis, from ancient times, has a remedy for anger and grief been found; that Thebes and Diospolis are one and the same city; that Aphrodite is called 'golden' among the local inhabitants by an ancient tradition; and that there is a plain called 'of golden Aphrodite' near the place named Momemphis.
And the myths told about Zeus and Pra concerning their union, and his journey abroad into Ethiopia—that he brought this myth from there. For every year among the Egyptians the shrine of Zeus is carried across the river into Libya, and after some days returns again, as though the god had come from Ethiopia. And the union of these two gods takes place, when at the festivals of the temples, both images are carried up together onto a mountain, crowned by the priests with flowers of every kind.
And that Lycurgus, Plato, and Solon incorporated many of the Egyptian customs into the legislation each drew up for his own people; and that Pythagoras learned from the Egyptians the doctrines concerning the sacred word, the theorems of geometry, the teachings about numbers, and, further, the doctrine of the transmigration of the soul into every kind of living creature.
And they suppose that Democritus too spent five years among them and was taught many things concerning astrology; and that Oenopides, likewise having spent time together with the priests and astrologers, learned other things and especially the course of the solar circle—namely, that it follows an oblique path, and moves in a direction contrary to that of the other stars.
And that of all the ancient sculptors, the most renowned spent time among them: Telecles and Theodorus, sons of Rhoecus, who made for the Samians the wooden cult-image of Pythian Apollo.
So much, then, does Diodorus also say. But let this discourse, thus demonstrated in this manner, come to its end here for me. There is no need any longer, then, to accuse us of unreasonableness, if indeed, out of longing for true piety, we too have gone over to the teachers of the wise Greeks and even of their own philosophers—I mean the barbarians—if indeed the Hebrews are barbarians.
It would be well to go through the times during which Moses and the prophets after Moses flourished, since this too would be one of the things most essential to the task before us: that those who are about to lay hold of the oracles found among these men should first, beforehand, come to a determination concerning their antiquity, so that, if it should appear that those among the Greeks who hold the same doctrines as the Hebrew prophets and theologians exist, you might no longer be in doubt as to which party it was likely took what from which—whether the elder took the things of the younger, the Hebrews the things of the Greeks, and barbarians the things of philosophers, whose very language it is not likely they understood; or, what is rather more likely, the younger took the things of the elder, and the Greeks, who investigated the affairs of most nations, were not ignorant even of the affairs of the Hebrews, which had from the beginning been translated into the Greek tongue.
Concerning Moses and the antiquity of the prophets after him, very many others have zealously set forth the demonstration in their own writings, from which I shall presently adduce a few small points.
And I too, having taken a path newer than those mentioned, will employ this method. Since it is agreed that the times of Augustus, the Roman emperor, and the birth of our Savior coincide, and since Christ made the beginning of his evangelical teaching in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, if one should wish to reckon the number of years from this point, proceeding upward to the earlier times, as far as Darius the king of the Persians and the renewal, under him, of the temple in Jerusalem—which took place after the return of the Jewish nation from Babylon—one would find, from Tiberius to the second year of Darius, 548 years.
For the second year of Darius falls in the first year of the sixty-fifth Olympiad, while the fifteenth year of Tiberius's reign among the Romans coincides with the fourth year of the two-hundred-and-first Olympiad.
There are, then, between Darius the Persian and Tiberius the Roman emperor, 137 Olympiads, which, reckoning four years to the Olympiad, amount to a period of 548 years.
Now since in the second year of Darius the seventieth year of the desolation of the temple in Jerusalem was current, as the accounts of the history establish, and since, reckoning back again from here—from the second year of Darius to the first Olympiad—256 years are gathered, that is, 64 Olympiads; so many years, too, would you find from the last year of the desolation of the said temple, going up to the fiftieth year of Uzziah, king of the Jews, in whose time Isaiah and Hosea prophesied, together with all who were contemporary with them—so that the first Olympiad among the Greeks proves contemporary with Isaiah the prophet and those of his time.
Again, going up from the first Olympiad to the still earlier times, as far as the capture of Troy, you will find years totaling 408, as the chronicles among the Greeks record.
And according to the Hebrews, going up from the fiftieth year of Uzziah, king of the Jews, to the third year of Labdon, who was then a judge among the Hebrews, you will gather the same number, 408 years; so that the capture of Troy occurred in the days of Labdon the judge, seven years before Samson began to rule the Hebrews—Samson, who they say became irresistible on account of the strength of his body, resembling the Heracles celebrated among the Greeks.
And proceeding from there to the earlier times, having gathered for yourself a further sum of 400 years, you would find, according to the Hebrews, Moses, and, according to the Greeks, Cecrops the earthborn.
The things admired among the Greeks are recorded as belonging to times lower than those of Cecrops. For after Cecrops occurs the flood in the time of Deucalion, and the conflagration in the time of Phaethon, the birth of Erichthonius, the rape of Kore, and the mysteries of Demeter, the founding of Eleusis, the farming taught by Triptolemus, the rape of Europa by Zeus, the birth of Apollo, and the arrival of Cadmus at Thebes; and, still more recent than these, Dionysus, Minos, Perseus, Asclepius, the Dioscuri, and Heracles.
Moses is established as being older than all of these, inasmuch as he flourished in age at the time of Cecrops. And going up again from Moses to the first year of the life of Abraham, you will find 505 years. And reckoning the same number of years upward from the said year of the reign of Cecrops, you will arrive at Ninus the Assyrian, who, they say, was the first to hold sway over the whole of Asia except the Indians; after whom there is named the city of Ninus, called Nineveh among the Hebrews, in whose time Zoroaster the magus reigned over the Bactrians. And the wife and successor to the kingdom of Ninus was Semiramis; so that Abraham would be contemporary with these.
These matters, then, have been established with demonstrative proof in our laboriously compiled Chronological Canons, and stand thus. But for the present, in addition to what has been said, I shall use as witness to the antiquity of Moses the one who is of all men most hostile and most inimical both to the Hebrews and to us—I mean the philosopher of our own time, who, having launched his attack against us with an excess of hatred, subjected not only us, but also the Hebrews—Moses himself and the prophets after him—to the very same slanders. For it is in this way, through the confession of enemies, that I believe the promise is confirmed beyond all dispute.
Porphyry, then, writes these very words in the fourth book of his treatise against us: 'He records the affairs of the Jews most accurately, in complete agreement both as to the places and as to their names—namely Sanchuniathon of Berytus, who received his records from Hierombalus, the priest of the god Ieuo; who, having dedicated his history to Abelbalus, king of the Berytians, was accepted both by him and by the examiners of truth in his day. And the times of these men fall even before the Trojan times, and come close to those of Moses, as the successions of the kings of Phoenicia show. And Sanchuniathon, who in the Phoenician dialect, out of love of truth, gathered together and composed the whole ancient history from the records kept in each city and from the inscriptions in the temples, lived in the time of Semiramis, queen of the Assyrians.'
So says Porphyry. It is necessary, then, to reason about the matter before us in this way: if indeed Sanchuniathon lived in the time of Semiramis, and she is agreed to be far earlier than the Trojan times, then Sanchuniathon too would be older than the Trojan times.
But this man is said to have received his records from others older than himself in time; and these men, being themselves older than he, are said to come close to the times of Moses, though they themselves did not live in the time of Moses, but only came close to his times; so that Moses is as much older than Sanchuniathon as this man falls short of his own elders, who were agreed to come close to Moses.
But by how many years it was likely that Moses preceded those men, it is hard to say; wherefore I think I shall let this point pass. But granting that Moses lived at the very time of that Sanchuniathon himself, and not earlier, I shall proceed with the proof in this manner.
If indeed Sanchuniathon was known in the time of Semiramis, queen of the Assyrians, and Moses too—granting him nothing earlier—flourished at this very time, then he too would prove contemporary with Semiramis.