The Astronomy of the Bible Part 21

Coming down to times when astronomy had so far advanced that a catalogue of the stars had been drawn up, with their positions determined by actual measurement, it became possible for astrologers to draw up something like a definite system of prediction, based upon the constellations or parts of a constellation that happened to be rising at any given moment, and this was the system employed when Zeuchros of Babylon wrote in the first century of our era. His system must have been started later than 700 B.C., for in it Aries is considered as the leader of the zodiac; the constellations are already disestablished in favour of the Signs; and the Signs are each divided into three. A practical drawback to this particular astrological system was that the aspect presented by the heavens on one evening was precisely the same as that presented on the next evening four minutes earlier. The field for prediction therefore was very limited and repeated itself too much for the purpose of fortune-tellers.

The introduction of the planets into astrology gave a greater diversity to the material used by the fortune-tellers. An early phase of planetary astrology consisted in the allotment of a planet to each hour of the day and also to each day of the week. It has been already shown in the chapter on "Saturn and Astrology," that this system arose from the Ptolemaic idea of the solar system grafted on the Egyptian division of the day into twenty-four hours, and applied to the week of seven days.

It probably originated in Alexandria, and arose not earlier than the third century before our era. Mathematical astrology--the complex system now in vogue--involves a considerable knowledge of the apparent movements of the planets and a development of mathematics such as did not exist until the days of Hipparchus. It also employs the purely imaginary signs of the zodiac, not the constellations; and reckons the first point of Aries as at the spring equinox. So far as we can ascertain, the spring equinox marked the first point of the constellation Aries about B.C. 110.

All these varied forms of astrology are therefore comparatively recent.

Before that it was of course reckoned ominous if an eclipse took place, or a comet was seen, or a bright planet came near the moon, just as spilling salt or crossing knives may be reckoned ominous to-day. The omens had as little to do with observation, or with anything that could be called scientific, in the one case as in the other.

It is important to realize that astrology, as anything more than the crude observance of omens, is younger than astronomy by at least 2,000 years.

_Mazzaroth_ occurs only once in the Bible, viz. in Job x.x.xviii.

32, already so often quoted, but a similar word _Mazzaloth_ occurs in 2 Kings xxiii. 5, where it is said that Josiah put down the idolatrous priests, "them also that burned incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets (_Mazzaloth_), and to all the host of heaven." The context itself, as well as the parallel pa.s.sage in Deuteronomy--"When thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldst be driven to wors.h.i.+p them,"--shows clearly that celestial luminaries of some kind are intended, probably certain groups of stars, distinguished from the general "host of heaven."

Comparing Job ix. 9, with Job x.x.xviii. 31, 32, we find _'Ash_, or _'Ayish_, _Kimah_ and _Kesil_ common to the two pa.s.sages; if we take _'Ash_ and _'Ayish_ as identical, this leaves the "chambers of the south" as the equivalent of _Mazzaroth_. The same expression occurs in the singular in Job x.x.xvii. 9--"Out of the south (_marg._ chamber) cometh the whirlwind." There need be but little question as to the significance of these various pa.s.sages. The correspondence of the word _Mazzaroth_ with the Babylonian _mizrata_, the "divisions" of the year, answering to the twelve signs of the zodiac, points in exactly the same direction as the correspondence in idea which is evident between the "chambers of the south" and the Arabic _Al man.a.z.il_, "the mansions" or "resting-places" of the moon in the lunar zodiac.

Mazzaroth are therefore the "divisions" of the zodiac, the "chambers"

through which the sun successively pa.s.ses in the course of the year, his "resting-place" for a month. They are "the chambers of the south," since that is their distinctive position. In Palestine, the sun, even at rising or setting at midsummer, pa.s.ses but little to the north of east or west. Roughly speaking, the "south" is the sun's quarter, and therefore it is necessarily the quarter of the constellation in which the sun is placed.

It has been made an objection to this identification that the Israelites are said to have wors.h.i.+pped _Mazzaloth_, and we have no direct evidence that the signs or constellations of the zodiac were wors.h.i.+pped as such. But this is to make a distinction that is hardly warranted. The Creation tablets, as we have seen, distinctly record the allocation of the great G.o.ds to the various signs, Merodach himself being one of the three deities a.s.sociated with the month Adar, just as in Egypt a G.o.d presided over each one of the thirty-six decades of the year.

Again, it is probable that the "golden calf," wors.h.i.+pped by the Israelites in the wilderness, and, after the disruption, at Bethel and at Dan, was none other than an attempt to wors.h.i.+p Jehovah under the symbol of Taurus, the leader of the zodiac and cognizance of the tribe of Joseph; regarded as a type of Him Who had been the Leader of the people out of Egypt, and the Giver of the blessings a.s.sociated with the return of the sun to Taurus, the revival of nature in spring-time. It was intended as a wors.h.i.+p of Jehovah; it was in reality dire rebellion against Him, and a beginning of the wors.h.i.+p of "_Mazzaloth_ and the heavenly host;" an idolatry that was bound to bring other idolatries in its train.

A three-fold symbol found continually on Babylonian monuments, "the triad of stars," undoubtedly at one time set forth Sin, the moon-G.o.d, Samas, the sun-G.o.d, and Itar, in this connection possibly the planet Venus. It has therefore been suggested by Prof. Schiaparelli that _Mazzaloth_ is the planet Venus; and, since the word is plural in form, Venus in her double capacity;--sometimes an evening, sometimes a morning star. The sun and the moon and _Mazzaloth_ would then set forth the three brightest luminaries, whilst the general congress of stars would be represented by the "host of heaven." But though Venus is sometimes the brightest of the planets, she is essentially of the same order as Jupiter or Mars, and is not of the same order as the sun and moon, with whom, on this supposition, she is singled out to be ranked.

Moreover, if Itar or Ashtoreth were intended in this pa.s.sage, it does not appear why she should not be expressly named as such; especially as Baal, so often coupled with her, is named. The "triad of stars," too, had originally quite a different meaning, as will be seen later.

Moreover, the parallelism between Job ix. and Job x.x.xviii. is destroyed by this rendering, since the planet Venus could not be described as "the chambers of the south." These are therefore referred by Professor Schiaparelli to the glorious ma.s.s of stars in the far south, s.h.i.+ning in the constellations that set forth the Deluge story,--the s.h.i.+p, and the Centaur, much the most brilliant region of the whole sky.

Another interpretation of _Mazzaroth_ is given by Dr. Cheyne, on grounds that refute Professor Schiaparelli's suggestion, but it is itself open to objection from an astronomical point of view. He writes--

"_Mazzaroth_ is probably not to be identified with _Mazzaloth_ (2 Kings xxiii. 5) in spite of the authority of the Sept. and the Targum. . . . _Mazzaroth_ = a.s.s. _Mazarati_; _Mazzaloth_ (i.e. the zodiacal signs) seems to be the plural of _Mazzala_ = a.s.s. _Manzaltu_, station."[254:1]

Dr. Cheyne therefore renders the pa.s.sage thus--

"Dost thou bring forth the moon's watches at their season, And the Bear and her offspring--dost thou guide them?

Knowest thou the laws of heaven?

Dost thou determine its influence upon the earth?"

_Mazzaloth_ are therefore "the zodiacal signs," but _Mazzaroth_ "the watches or stations of the moon, which marked the progress of the month;"[254:2] or, in other words, the lunar zodiac.

But the lunar and the solar zodiac are only different ways of dividing the same belt of stars. Consequently when, as in the pa.s.sage before us, reference is made to the actual belt of stars as a whole, there is no difference between the two. So that we are obliged, as before, to consider _Mazzaroth_ and _Mazzaloth_ as identical, and both as setting forth the stars of the zodiac.

So far as the two zodiacs differ, it is the solar and not the lunar zodiac that is intended. This is evident when we consider the different natures of the apparent motions of the sun and the moon. The sun pa.s.ses through a twelfth part of the zodiac each month, and month by month the successive constellations of the zodiac are brought out, each in its own season; each having a period during which it rises at sunset, is visible the whole night, and sets at sunrise. The solar _Mazzaroth_ are therefore emphatically brought out, each "in its season." Not so the lunar _Mazzaroth_.

The expression, "the watches or stations of the moon which marked the progress of the month," is unsuitable when astronomically considered.

"Watches" refer strictly to divisions of the day and night; the "stations" of the moon refer to the twenty-seven or twenty-eight divisions of the lunar zodiac; the "progress of the month" refers to the complete sequence of the lunar phases. These are three entirely different matters, and Dr. Cheyne has confused them. The progress of the moon through its complete series of stations is accomplished in a siderial month--that is, twenty-seven days eight hours, but from the nature of the case it cannot be said that these "stations" are brought out each in his season, in that time, as a month makes but a small change in the aspect of the sky. The moon pa.s.ses through the complete succession of its phases in the course of a synodical month, which is in the mean twenty-nine days, thirteen hours--that is to say from new to new, or full to full--but no particular star, or constellation, or "station" has any fixed relation to any one given phase of the moon. In the course of some four or five years the moon will have been both new and full in every one of the "lunar stations."

"Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven?

Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?"

He, who has lived out under the stars, in contact with the actual workings of nature, knows what it is to watch "Mazzaroth" brought "out in his season;" the silent return to the skies of the constellations, month by month, simultaneous with the changes on the face of the earth.

Overhead, the glorious procession, so regular and unfaltering, of the silent, unapproachable stars: below, in unfailing answer, the succession of spring and summer, autumn and winter, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, rain and drought. If there be but eyes to see, this majestic Order, so smooth in working, so magnificent in scale, will impress the most stolid as the immediate acting of G.o.d; and the beholder will feel at the same a reverent awe, and an uplifting of the spirit as he sees the action of "the ordinances of heaven," and the evidence of "the dominion thereof in the earth."

Dr. Cheyne, however, only sees in these beautiful and appropriate lines the influence upon the sacred writer of "the physical theology of Babylonia";[256:1] in other words, its idolatrous astrology, "the influence of the sky upon the earth."

But what would Job understand by the question, "Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?" Just this: "Canst thou so move the great celestial sphere that the varied constellations of the zodiac shall come into view, each in their turn, and with them the earth pa.s.s through its proper successive seasons?" The question therefore embraced and was an extension of the two that preceded it. "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades? Canst thou prevent the revival of all the forces of nature in the springtime?" and "Canst thou loose the bands of Orion; canst thou free the ground from the numbing frosts of winter?"

The question to us would not greatly differ in its meaning, except that we should better understand the mechanism underlying the phenomena. The question would mean, "Canst thou move this vast globe of the earth, weighing six thousand million times a million million tons, continually in its...o...b..t, more than 580 millions of miles in circuit, with a speed of nearly nineteen miles in every second of time, thus bringing into view different constellations at different times of the year, and presenting the various zones of the earth in different aspects to the sun's light and heat?" To us, as to Job, the question would come as:

"Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven?

Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?"

It is going beyond astronomy, yet it may be permitted to an astronomer, to refer for comparison to a parallel thought, not couched in the form of a question, but in the form of a prayer:

"Thy will be done, As in heaven, so in earth."

FOOTNOTES:

[254:1] Rev. T. K. Cheyne, M.A., _Job and Solomon_, p. 290.

[254:2] _Ibid._, p. 52.

[256:1] Rev. T. K. Cheyne, M.A., _Job and Solomon_, p. 52.

CHAPTER IX

ARCTURUS

In two pa.s.sages of the Book of Job a word, _'Ash_ or _'Ayish_, is used, by context evidently one of the constellations of the sky, but the identification of which is doubtful. In our Authorized Version the first pa.s.sage is rendered thus:--

(G.o.d) "Which maketh Arcturus (_'Ash_), Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south";

and the second:--

"Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, Or loose the bands of Orion?

Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?

Or canst thou guide Arcturus (_'Ayish_) with his sons?

Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven?

Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?"

The words (or word, for possibly _'Ayish_ is no more than a variant of _'Ash_) here translated "Arcturus" were rendered by the "Seventy" as "Arktouros" in the first pa.s.sage; as "Hesperos" in the second pa.s.sage; and their rendering was followed by the Vulgate. The rendering Hesper or Vesper is absurd, as "the sons" of Hesper has no meaning. "Arktouros"

is not improbably a misrendering of "Arktos," "the north," which would give a free but not a literal translation of the meaning of the pa.s.sage.

In another pa.s.sage from Job (x.x.xvii. 9) where the south wind is contrasted with the cold from another quarter of the sky, the "Seventy"--again followed by the Vulgate--rendered it as "cold from Arcturus." Now cold came to the Jews, as it does to us, from the north, and the star which we know as Arcturus could not be described as typifying that direction either now or when the Septuagint or Vulgate versions were made. The Peschitta, the Syriac version of the Bible, made about the second century after Christ, gives as the Syriac equivalent for 'Ash, or 'Ayish, the word _'iyutha_, but it also renders _Kesil_ by the same word in Amos v. 8, so that the translators were evidently quite at sea as to the ident.i.ty of these constellations. We are also in doubt as to what star or constellation the Syrians meant by _'Iyutha_, and apparently they were in some doubt themselves, for in the Talmud we are told that there was a disputation, held in the presence of the great teacher Rabbi Jehuda, about 150 years after Christ, whether _'Iyutha_ was situated in the head of the Bull, or in the tail of the Ram.

Oriental scholars now a.s.sign it either to Aldebaran in the head of the Bull, the "sons" being in this case the other members of the Hyades group of which Aldebaran is the brightest star; or else identifying it with the Arabic _el-'aiyuq_, the name of the star which the Greeks call _Aix_, and we call Capella, the "sons" on this inference being the three small stars near, called by the Greeks and by ourselves the "Kids." The word _'Ash_ is used several times in Scripture, but without any astronomical signification, and is there rendered "moth," as in Isaiah, where it says--