The same author again, translating from the elements of Sanchuniathon concerning the Phoenicians, observe what he says about creeping and venomous animals, which perform no good use for men, but effect destruction and injury upon those into whom they inject their hard-to-heal and grievous venom. He writes the following, word for word, in this manner.
'Now the nature of the dragon and of serpents Taautus himself deified, and after him again the Phoenicians and Egyptians; for this animal was declared by him to be of all reptiles the most full of breath and fiery; wherefore also it exhibits an unsurpassed speed by means of its breath, without feet or hands or any other of the external members by which other animals effect their movements; and it produces forms of varied shapes, and in its course has spiral impulses toward whatever speed it wishes.'
'And it is also extremely long-lived, and not only is it its nature, upon shedding its old age, to grow young again, but it is also capable of receiving a greater growth; and when it has fulfilled its appointed measure, it consumes itself, just as Taautus likewise set down in the sacred writings. For this reason this animal is included in temples and in mysteries.'
'We have spoken more fully about it in the memoirs entitled Ethothian; in which it is established that it is immortal, and that it dissolves into itself, as has been said; for this animal does not die a natural death, unless it is struck by some violence. The Phoenicians call it Agathodaemon (Good Spirit); likewise the Egyptians also name it Kneph, and they add to it the head of a hawk, on account of the effectiveness of the hawk.'
And Epeeis says, speaking allegorically (he who among them was named the greatest hierophant and sacred scribe, whom Areius of Heracleopolis translated), word for word, as follows: 'The first, the most divine being, is a serpent having the form of a hawk, exceedingly graceful; whenever it opened its eyes, it filled the whole region of its own primordial abode with light; but if it closed them, darkness came about.'
Epeeis, by saying 'it shed light,' gives the sense that it is also fiery; for it is characteristic of light to shine forth. And Pherecydes, having taken his starting-points from the Phoenicians, theologized concerning the god called by him Ophion, and the Ophionidae, concerning whom we shall speak again.
Furthermore, the Egyptians too, drawing on the same conception, when depicting the cosmos, draw a circle of air-like and fiery color, and in the middle a serpent stretched out, having the form of a hawk; and the whole figure resembles our letter theta; the circle signifying the cosmos, and the serpent in the middle signifying the Agathodaemon that holds it together.
And Zoroaster the magus also, in the Sacred Collection of the Persians, says, word for word: 'God is one having the head of a hawk. This is the first, incorruptible, eternal, unbegotten, without parts, most unlike anything else, the charioteer of all that is good, incorruptible, best of the good, wisest of the wise; he is also the father of good order and justice, self-taught, natural, perfect, and wise, and the sole discoverer of the sacred natural order.' Ostanes says the same things about him in the treatise entitled The Octateuch.
And all these, having taken their starting-points from Taautus, theorized about nature, as has been said. And having built temples in their sanctuaries for the primal elements represented by the serpents, they consecrated them there, and to these they performed festivals and sacrifices and mystic rites, considering them the greatest gods and rulers of the universe. So much, then, concerning serpents.
But indeed, the theology of the Phoenicians contains this general character; and it is from this that the saving Gospel-word proclaims that we must flee without turning back, and pursue instead the healing of the mental derangement of the ancients.
But that these things are not myths and fabrications of poets containing some hidden theory in their underlying meanings, but are the true testimonies of wise and ancient theologians, as they themselves would claim, containing matters more ancient than all poets and prose-writers, and bringing with them credibility of their accounts from the designation and history of the gods which still to this day prevails in the cities and villages throughout Phoenicia, as well as from the mysteries celebrated among each people—this would be clear, so that it is no longer necessary to search out forced physical interpretations of these matters, since the facts themselves bring a clear refutation deriving from them. Such, then, is the theology of the Phoenicians; it is time now, having passed on, to examine also the affairs of the Egyptians.