« ПредишнаНапред »
and astrological triplicities. According to the latter "the triplicity preserved accordance with an equilateral triangle, and the whole zodiacal orbit is defined by three circles—viz., that of the equinox, and those of the two tropics; the twelve signs are, therefore, distributed, in triplici numero, among four equilateral triangles."
The first triangle or each triad is formed by the three signs of Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius.
The second is formed by Taurus, Virgo, and Capricorn.
The third is composed of Gemini, Libra, and Aquarius.
The fourth constituted Cancer, Scorpio, and Pisces.
I leave, as immaterial to the question, the interpretation of their conjunctions and other imputed virtues or accidents of benedics and maledics, to the unique consideration of serddewiniaeth or astrology propounded in the Tetrabibloi of one or other nation.
SYMBOLS IV., V., VI.
"I took it for a faery vision
In the symbols numbered 4, 5, and 6, and in their explanatory duplicates of 7, 8, and 9, I seem to scan, if I rightly apprehend their druidical power and life-like interpretation, a world of deep thought. These problems cannot, strictly speaking, refer to the qualities of man as an individuality, as they want the independent perpendicularity, the oblique unity—the attribute of humanity, as seen in the first and third symbols, as N6d-dyn and Nod-Pelydr goleuni. They must, therefore, in some way or other, bear some recondite elementary quality or index of thought, belonging to the wide domain of nature, as invented, unfolded, and elemented by patriarchal wisdom.
Prior, however, to my own analytical remarks on these mystic symbols of the antique world, I deem it expedient to lay before you the opinions of others, as far as I am aware of them, so that we may come to some distinct understanding as to what is already known respecting them, in point of historical elucidation, either as Sanscrit, Chaktean, Egyptian, Hebrew, or Cimmerian invention.
In this inquiry I discard the modern claims of plagiaristic Greece, as une ombre au tableau in the distant horizon. On the present occasion I purport only to briefly explain—
The Pentagon or the triple triangle=the Cadelfen or Tywarchen pumongl—symbolurn elementorum vel symbolum salutis naturale [Nos. 4 and 7].
The Shield of David or Solomon's Seal, alias the Magean David or the Ychothym Shloma=the Iaith-ndd or the elementary Cimmerian key of Adamitic language [Nos. 5 and 8].
The Sri Tantra or Khat Kon Chakra=the double triangle=the Breint-nod Derwyddon or the seal of the higher privileges of the Druids [Nos. 6 and 9].
The term Cadelfen is derived from cadw, to keep, and el/en (from el, a spirit, a self-acting movement, and fen, a flowing principle) an element. The term tywarchen or ty-warch-en, essentiality of life, from ty, what includes, arch, what is high and round, and en, a living principle.
The Hebrew term magean, applied to the symbol and usually understood as a shield, and said to be derived from ganan or gan, a cover, a shield, has, I think, an ulterior Cimmerian origin. This beautiful figure must certainly have existed, i. e., it had some name or other, prior to its adoption either as a shield, a seal, or an amulet, by Kings David or Solomon or the Hebrews.
What was that name?
Relying, as I am in duty bound to do, on the nature-depicting tendencies of Cimmerian elements, I hazard the conjecture that the Hebrews caught the phonetic sound of magien from the Noachidic Cimmerians.
What, then, does this expression signify?
The interpretation will be better gleaned and understood when we come to dive into the mysteries that will be brought to light as out of chaotic darkness. My humble opinion, therefore, is that it is no other than a natural representation of the star-like light produced at night by the glow worm, and symbolising a similar result by the mathematical figure.
Each of these mathematical problems will be found to be replete, in addition to their geometrical properties, with other elementary, symbolical, and philosophic verities, of which the keys of solution are to be found in the elementary wards of the Adamitic or Cimmerian language. Of which fact, I trust, I shall be able to give you satisfactory inductive proof.
Eckel, according to Archdeacon Williams, after having discussed in his elaborate work upon 'de Doctrina numorum,' the question of Gallic or Cimmerian coins, and the figures impressed upon them, thus writes "Of these minute sigilla or seals the most common form is the pentagon, the same as is found on the coins of Velia and Nuceria (in Umbria, or Cimmerian Italy), of the Ptolemies, and especially of Pitane, in Mysia, [the once prehistoric homes of the Cimmerians.] At first, I did not value this sigillum so highly as to induce me to hope, what I more lately found to be the case, that it could in some degree contribute to the illustration of the theology and philosophy of the Gauls. Hear, then, how it was effected. All agree that the doctrine of the druids, whom the Gauls had constituted the arbiters of sacred and profane law, was the Pythagorean." Again, after having cited Csesar, Diodorus Siculus, and Ammianus, in proof of druidical and Pythagorean principles, the author goes on to observe that the dogma of the immortality of the soul was so inveterate among the Gauls that some expressed a belief that Pythagoras borrowed his system from the Gauls. Clemens Alexandrinus writes that this was commonly believed. "After settling these points, let us return," says Mr. Eckhel, "to our pentagon—the cause of this description. According to the testimony of Lucian it was regarded by the Pythagoreans as a sacred symbol, being the triple triangle mutually implicated, consisting of five lines, and which is called by them 'Hygeia' (i. e., health or preservation); and I will show that the pentagon on the coins of Pitane, occupies the place which, in other cases, is occupied by the figure of Hygeia herself," and this he afterwards performed.
Upon this passage the learned archdeacon makes the following observations:—
"The first inference to be drawn from the beautiful combination of this mathematical figure, and which Lucian expressly ascribes to the Pythagorean school of divinity and philosophy, is that its constructors were thoroughly conversant with geometrical figures of the most complicated character. Now, if a Greek philosopher, on being shipwrecked on an unknown coast, could, on discovering a right-angled triangle roughly delineated on the sand of the sea-shore, exclaim, 'I recognize the traces of a human being,' much more reason have we to express a belief that those who first adopted this elegant, although complicated, figure as the holy symbol of Salus (or the conservative power) must not only have been deep proficients in mathematical knowledge, but also great admirers of the truth expressed by the geometrical symbol. Such, we know, were the principles and practice of the Italian school of philosophy, who, in a later age, were called Pythagoreans, after a supposed founder of a sect, named Pythagoras. But, Aristotle, who in his works had often to encounter the doctrines of their school, never once mentions the name of Pythagoras. It is now absurd to ascribe a system, so widely diffused over the more ancient civilised world, to a Pythagoras, of Samos, supposed to have been born and bred in an age when Hellenic free thought had already commenced its course, and was shattering to the very basis those symbolic and labyrinthine edifices under which the truth, as revealed from the beginning, was smothered and almost extinguished."
The venerable learned Archdeacon then goes on to state that "the equilateral triangle is to this day regarded, in Hindostan, as the symbol of Siva, and is represented on the water-jars of the worshippers "; and he refers us to a paper, written by E. C. Eavenshaw, in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society [which I cannot procure, with other references hereinafter mentioned], wherein will be found a body of valuable information respecting the use of the mathematical figures among religious Hindoos, and the doctrines which are connected with them, as interpreted by modern Brahmins. He then avers that these verities are to this day essentially identical with the tradition recorded by Lucian. Mr. Ravenshaw says, "It is a singular fact, that the double equilateral triangle which is engraved on the Sri Tantra, and whose origin and meaning have been explained, is stated, in Kitto's Biblical Encyclopcedia, to have formed one of the most usual amulets worn by the Jews, and known by them as the 'Shield of David' and. the 'Seal of Solomon.'" Mr. Ravenshaw adds, "It is difficult to determine to what nation this mystical symbol owes its origin, but it seems to have been common to all the primeval religions of Asia "; and now, it may be added, also to the primeval religion of Great Britain and Western Gaul, on the indisputable evidence of their ancient coins.
What further explanations have been given by Kitto and Eavenshaw, and others, in reference to the solution of the internal or external bearings of these symbols, I know not. In this dilemma, let the majesty of nature stand out in bold relief, as the surest guide and expositor to the Cymro—the starting-point and goal of all analytical autochthons of all climes, the Cimmerian Pharos of all ages.
Here various questions of elementary and intuitive principles suggest themselves to the mental faculties. Let us look at them in the face, without fear or equivocation. Truth needs no subterfuges or mental reservations: they belong to a trembling cause.
I. —Why was the interpretation of Khat Kon Chakra, of Yyuia, Hygeia,, or health preserved—why the idea ot'Salus, the conservative power, applied to one or more of these mathematical symbols, by the Cimmerians, Hindoos, Hebrews, Greeks, and Romans, of a later date, in preference to the opposite principle of aadevia, or the destructive agent, or, in fact, to any other fortuitous doctrine or system of inductive philosophy?
II. —Can any one of these symbols be " reduced to its original element and the circumstances and relations amidst which it came into existence discovered," so as to finally determine to what prehistoric nation these mystical symbols owe their birth, and to inferentially ascertain the originators of mathematical science?
III. —Are there any upoi \oyoi, geiriau derwyddol, or druidical formulse, or certain signal, verbal, indications, so to speak, conveyed therein, so as to decide to what primeval religion of Asia or Europe they belonged?
IV. —Can a philosophical conviction be " grounded apart from vague conjectures and sporting possibilities "?
V. —Can an authentic philological or mathematical key to an uniform interpretation of the symbol be literally, nominally, and scientifically worked out, so as to give the 'palmam ' to the nation 'qui meruit palmam' a principio literarum, and settle, so far as it goes conjointly with other potent and patent facts, the primacy of language.
Now, in the first place, to solve these not unreasonable propositions, a knowledge of the Coelbren y Beirdd or angular bardic alphabet is indispensably necessary to the examination and solution of the Adamitic problem. This Adamitic alphabet, be it never forgotten, is the primary representative—the only exclusive delineator, of angular elements in the world, and was immemorially adopted by Cimmerians, in accordance with the usages of the earlier races of mankind—to wit, the Chinese, Babylonians, Chaldoeans, and Egyptians, as symbols of thought, and not solely the mere arbitrary representations of sound acquired by subsequent letters borrowed by Cadmsean plagiarists of Greece and Rome, and which to them are nought but tinkling cymbals of bewilderment.
2. —On reference to the table of plates, you will observe that I have alphabetically applied to Symbols No. 5 and 6, in Symbol 9, the Coelbrennic characters, or, rather, in modern default of usage, their corresponding Roman or English letters, to the di-erent angles and triangles, and so forth, of the figures, as C in the east, A in the north, D in the west, W in the south, as well as
| . | or 6 circumflex in its own representative centre or square.
3. —In conjunction with this question, the interpretation of each letter, or rather each word, for with us each character is a word, as known intuitively to the Adamitic or Cimmerian language, must be thoroughly understood, as, for instance, in the case before us, the distinctly-ideal terms A, C, D, W, and □, respectively. They are discoverable on similar principles of sense and emblematic sound as the T or other letters in the second symbol or our Bardic System of Musical Notation.
What do these characteristic or Coelbrennic letters typify individually?—what collectively? K