The Hebrews and the Arabians had the same system of 28 letters for arithmetical figures; but, in order to place this Mem or Muin in the centre, the former dropped one letter. Thus we have this central letter on the figures of the Virgin, the female generative power; the allusion is plain enough.
The Momphta of Egypt, named by Plutarch, admitted by Kircher to be the passive principle of nature, is evidently nothing but the Om-tha or Om-thas, with the Mem final, the sign of 600, prefixed. The sun was the emblem of the active principle, the moon of the passive principle. Hence she was generally female, often called Isis, to which she was dedicated, and Magna Mater.[1]
The recurrence of the word Om, in the names of places in Egypt, and in Syria,[2] about Mount Sinai, is very remarkable, and raises strong ground for suspicion that it has a relation to the Om of India. We must remember that this Om is the Amen or sacred mystical word of the Bible, of the law given on Sinai.[3] It is also the word Omen—good or bad—which means prophecy.
4. Before I proceed to the following calculation, I must beg to observe, that whether the equinoxes preceded after the rate of 72 years to a degree, or something more or less, was a subject of great debate among the ancient, as it has been among modern, astronomers. But the rate of 72 has been finally determined to be sufficiently near for common mythological purposes, though not correctly true. I must also further premise that our received chronology, that is, Archbishop Usher’s, which fixes the creation at 4004 years before Christ, is generally allowed to be in error 4 years, and that it ought to be only 4000. This was done in compliance with a settlement of it by Dionysius Exiguus, who fixed it to the end of the 4713th year of the Julian period. The real reason why this is allowed to be too late by our divines is, that it makes Christ to have been born after the death of Herod, who sought to kill him. And the real reason why Usher fixed it at 4004, instead of 4000 years, was a wish to avoid the very striking appearance of judicial astrology contained in the latter number.
There was a remarkable eclipse in March 4710 of the Julian period,[4] about the time of Herod’s death, and the birth of Christ. This is as it ought to be. The conjunction of the Sun and Moon took place on the birth of Christ. This was exactly 600 years after the birth of Cyrus, who was the Messiah, to use the epithet of the Old Testament, who immediately preceded Jesus Christ.
Mr. Fry[5] states, that the year preceding the year 4 B. C., was the year of the nativity. He adds, “We arrive at B. C. 4, the year before which is supposed, by most writers of eminence,
- ↑ Clarke’s Travels, Vol. II. p. 318.
- ↑ Vide Burchardt’s Travels.
- ↑ Some will think this to he paradoxical, and if I did not know that the secret learning of the ancients was in strict keeping with it, I should think so too. But I beg my reader to refer to the history of the Cabala by Basnage, and presuming that he will oblige me in this, I shall push this abstruse speculation a little farther. The 14th, the middle numerical letter in the alphabet is called Muin: this is evidently the vine, the Marital tree, sacred to Bacchus, ייז iin, with the M prefixed. May not this ם m final be a monogram prefixed to the name, long after it came into use? It is found in all the languages. How came Bacchus to be the God of wine? (Bacchus was the sun in Taurus.) Did it arise from the junction of this Mem, as a Monogram or emblem of the sun in Taurus, mystically given to the name of the tree of wine? I know not. Let it be more probably accounted for; first taking into account the ancient mystic doctrines and practices relating to figures. It was from the mystical emblems carried on the signets of the ancients that our modern coats of arms arose. How can any thing be more recondite and mystical than the figures and monograms on the ancient signets? Any one may see an example in Clarke’s Travels, Vol. II. pp. 320, 326, ed. 4to. I shall return to the Om or M in the course of this work.
- ↑ See Asiat. Res. Vol. X. p. 48; Calmet, Chron.; and Encyclop. Britt. art. Chron., p. 754.
- ↑ Epocha of Daniel’s Proph. p. 5.
