The mysterious allegory of the Garden of the Hesperides, we regard as the ultimate combined wisdom of Ethiopia and Egypt comprising their ethics, religion, philosophy, literature, arts, science, and wealth; in a word, their entire social economy; and that among the wreck of destruction consequent to the successive invasions and occupancy of these countires, especially Egypt by foreigners were these legends become as Lost Arts. Their reproduction was desirable, but not to be expected, and except by the most intimate intercourse with the native Africans of the highest intelligence in the interior and assiduous study, could a conception be attained.
There is little doubt as to the Ethiopians having been the first people in propagating an advanced civilization in morals, religion, arts, science, and literature, the Egyptians of the same race being cooperative, and probably coordinate. Every fact in archaeology and ancient research bears evidence of this. The age of the Pyramid and masterly Sphinxes from the peculiarity of their characteristic structures, were among the earliest and very first of their architectural works, and the only ones, from their solidity which have withstood the ravages and wreck of time, and not been either or partially destroyed by removal, shattering defacing or deforming.
We have proof from very high authority of the antiquity of the original rulers in Egypt, since as far back as the time of the advent of the Israelites, the brethren of Joseph, into Egypt B.C. 1706, that the dynasty of the Rameses had long since ceased and that of the Pharaohs was established, and a foreigner was on the throne; for when Joseph presented his father as the representative head of his brethren before Pharaoh to ask permission to settle them upon land, he said: "The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell. "And Joseph placed his father and his brethren and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses as Pharaoh had commanded." Gen. xivii. 6,11.
Whatever may have been the length of time from their advent into (till their exodus from) Egypt, and they dwelt there upwards of four hundred years, it is evident to our mind that the rule of the Assyrians continued during the Israelitish bondage.
And when Abraham visited Egypt to escape a famine in his own country, B.C. 1996, a Pharaoh ruled, and this was 2114 P.D. or after the deluge; Nimrod having begun his reign in Shinar, B.C. 2347. The advent of Cush and Mizraim into Africa, must have been coeval with, if not anterior to, that of Nimrod in his adventure; hence the antiquity of the first original race rulers in Ethiopia and Egypt.
To recur to the past devastation of the Nilotic region by invasion, and the consequent destruction of emblems, paintings, statuary and design, as well as other evidences of greatness of the African race, we learn from authentic history, that when Cambyses, King of Persia invaded Egypt, "he was so offended at the superstition of Egyptians that he killed their god Apis, the ox or sacred bull, and plundered their temples." And in the history of the Ptolemies, we learn that when Ptolemy III surnamed Evergetes, returned from the oriental conquest, "loaded with the spoils of nations, among the immense riches which he brought he had two thousand five hundred Egyptian gods, which Cambyses had carried away into Persia, when he conquered Egypt."
Think of this, by one consequence; and what must have been the spoilation and destruction by others before and since during a period of more than three thousand years! And yet we still expect to find evidence of their former greatness by the remaining productions of the original inhabitants! It is simply impossible. We do know that the first dynastic name in Egypt was that of Rameses and we claim that Ham himself was the first who obtained it. And though his son, Mizraim, who ruled jointly with him bore the name Sesotris, he also took the dynastic throne of Rameses II on succeeding his father to the throne of Egypt. And for aught we know by history that the dynastic title of Pharaoh first came by Assyrian succession in Egypt. The Persian succeeded the Assyrian, but we do not learn, as theirs was of comparative short duration that they established a dynasty at all, and if so, what title, other than King of Egypt, they bore. It may have been that succeeding the Pharaohs, they accepted of that regal title while holding the reins.
The Ptolemian dynasty was the next in succession to the Pharaoh, and of Greco Macedonian origin, as in another place stated, taking its rise on the division of the Macedonia Empire after the death of Alexander the Great, commencing with Ptolemais Lagus, nineteen years after the demise of Alexander, to whom, as one of the greatest and bravest of his generals, Egypt fell as his share of the empire.
This dynasty was of long duration, continuing till B.C. 6, six years before the advent of our Savior Jesus Christ and the last consequently of permanent foreign rule before the Christian era in Egypt. But we know that there were frequent eruptions and displacements among the several strong powers which succeeded to rule in Egypt and Ethiopia; as B.C. 640, Psalmaticus ruled, and previous to him, Sebachus, a powerful Ethiopian prince ascended the throne of Egypt, and ruled over both countries with great wisdom, prudence, moderation, and acceptance to the people. Also, as we learn that B.C. 146, the Saracens made a descent upon and gained power in Egypt which must have been during the Ptolemian dynasty, which for the time received a check, but resuming its power, continued till near the beginning of the Christian era, or within six years of that event.
Thus much we have said in vindication of a race and people once enlightened, learned, proud and powerful; the leaders in civilization whose status was such that God through his holy prophet spake saying: "And they shall be afraid and ashamed of Ethiopia, their expectation, and Egypt, their glory." Isa. xx. 6. This prophetic declaration shows not only the status, but the identity of race and international relations of these two peoples, whose every consideration has been looked upon and regarded in modern times as wrapped up in mystery, with uncertainty and doubt.
A historical circumstance recorded in Holy Writ shows the height to which this race had attained and the lasting influence shed abroad among the people as controlling their actions and conduct. Although their national power had passed away from them, their integrity and the virtue of their national polity were such that when Herod, King of Judea, ordered the slaughter of the young children that the infant Savior might be destroyed, "the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying 'Arise and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word, for Herod will seek the young child to destroy Him.'" Matt. ii. 13.
It must be remembered at this time that the Romans as a nation held universal power over the other governments of the earth; that the Greco Macedonians ruled in Egypt and both Jews and Greeks were subject to Roman power. All this seems wonderful and almost incredible that only in Africa could the Son of God be saved. Nor is this all. God's purposes towards this race as made manifest, seem yet a higher destiny among the children of men.
When Christ's mission on earth had been fulfilled and the crucifixion decreed, as essential to the plan of salvation, according to the Christian belief the Cross had to be borne up the hill of Calvary.
Upon the shoulders of the Saviour it was placed three times, when he groaned and fell to the ground by reason of its weight. He could not bear it. "The spirit was willing, but the flesh was weak." Jews, Greeks, and Romans stood around, "who buffeted and scourged him" to compel him to carry it, but he could not, and they would not do it, deeming it a disgrace to them to carry the cross for his crucifixtion. Under the cross the Son of God lay prostrate at the foot of Mount Calvary! Here was a scene which beggars description, and is almost sacrilegious to express; the will of God thwarted, and the plan of salvation checked! All heaven might well have stood appalled, and angels gazed with wonder, when just at this moment there appers at the scene "a man of Cyrene, Simon, by name (Simon Niger, meaning black in the Latin tongue), him they compelled to bear his cross." Matt. xxvi. 32.
So the African was the first bearer of the cross of Jesus Christ. Was this an accident, or a providence of God? Was the ram caught by the horns in the bushes, as a sacrifice for Abraham to save his son Isaac, an accident or a providence of God? If he thus provided for the salvation of an individual, would he not also specially provide for the salvation of all mankind? We think this is beyond a question, and prophetically designed. And yet another evidence of the favor of Providence to this race is presented in the Holy Scriptures. After the mission of Christ had been completed, and the decree went forth forbidding all people from following the believers and teachers of His doctrine, Africa again appears in the person of her sovereign, Queen of Ethiopia, who sends an ambassador to Jerusalem to worship and be baptized in the Christian faith. This person was the royal representative or commissioner from Ethiopia, the chief treasurer to the Queen who came in great state, drawn in his chariot by camels, attended by a retinue of followers. This is, probably, the first delegate ever sent to receive the Christian religion for a nation. This nation was black. Is not this wonderful? Can we see no special providence in it?
Has God no purpose in all this? Is there not in this a prophetic destiny shown for this people in a higher scale of morals and religion than has yet been attained?
Being made the protectors of the infant Son of God; to assist in the plan of salvation; and, lastly, to promulgate the precepts of redemption taught by the ascended Savior, certainly points to a higher and holier mission designed for that race than has yet been developed in the progress of civilization.
We now recur to that part of this chapter, the social polity of Ethiopia and Egypt, reduced to a legend of the Gardens of the Hesperides. Such were their discretion, caution, prudence, judgement, care and jealousy of others, that whatever they desired to conceal, was exhibited in such a manner, that while it was perfectly plain and comprehensible to themselves, the design was obscure and unintelligible to others.
Take for example the figure from the Duke's "Primeval Man," and while three priests present themselves in the attitude of soldiers (and we know by their caps and dress that they are priests) before the high priestess or goddess, Isis, to be divine favor for the King in raising troops, a special messenger priest, as the representative of his majesty, stands in the back ground, quite out of their, but full in her, sight; while he with his right hand presents her with the royal salutation; he at the same time holds firmly in the grasp of the clinched fist of his left hand the emblem of a bow to assure the priestess that she is not imposed upon, and will be safe in meeting the royal pleasure of the King, in any assurance she may take, or encouragement she may give to the persons before her. The national emblem was made to represent the power and strength of the country; in like manner was the second emblem made to represent the strength and power of the means and efforts represented by it as necessary in destroying all that is detrimental in promoting the highest civilization. And how beautifully illustrative are they when reduced to an abridgement or condensed symbol.
The Garden of Hesperides, as before stated, is an allegorical disguisement of the wisdom of the Ethiopians and Egyptians, a philosophical depository of the mental and material possessions of those counties presented in one view to themselves while concealed from others. And here is wherein consisted the beauties of their wisdom. The location of the garden has ever been to the historian as much of a mystery and a myth as the garden itself. Some supposed it to have existed in Egypt, others in Libya, and some writers placed it in Northern Africa at the foot of the Atlas Mountains. But the Ethiopians themselves, the originators of the allegory, placed it, where most naturally it should have been: in Central Africa, where none had access to it but themselves.
Then its contents, "golden fruits," the very words of which express everything of wealth, guarded by a dreadful dragon or serpent that never slept. What a place, and what a description of it!
It is the concentrated view of such a place, as we believe to be among the lost arts of Africa, that we design here to reproduce: the national and family emblems, once the pride of Ethiopia and Egypt, the Garden of the Hesperides and place of its location, which we sacredly believe to have been none other than that region of Africa embracing the entire region of the Nile and Niger, especially including that mysterious portion now known as the Great Sahara, a place of untold wealth, of unequaled fertility, and productiveness.
