4966. Prince of the guards. That this signifies those which are primary for interpretation, is evident from the signification of “prince of the guards,” as being things primary for interpretation (n. 4790): things primary for interpretation are those which primarily conduce to the interpretation of the Word, and thus to the understanding of the doctrinal things of love to God and of charity toward the neighbor, which are from the Word. Be it known that the memory-knowledges of the ancients were altogether different from those of the present day. As before said the memory-knowledges of the ancients treated of the correspondence of things in the natural world with things in the spiritual world. The memory-knowledges which are now called philosophy, such as that of Aristotle and others like him, were unknown to them. This is evident also from the books of the ancient writers, most of which were written in language that signified, represented, and corresponded to interior things, as is evident from the following instances, not to mention others.

[2] They located Helicon on a mountain, and by it they meant heaven; they gave to Parnassus a place below on a hill, by which they meant memory-knowledges, where they said that a flying horse, called Pegasus, broke open a fountain with his hoof; the sciences they called virgins, with other such traditions. For they knew from correspondences and representatives that a mountain denotes heaven; a hill, that heaven which is beneath, or which is with man; a horse, the understanding; the wings with which he flew, spiritual things; a hoof, the natural mind; a fountain, intelligence; the three virgins who were called the Graces, affections of good; and the virgins who were called the Muses, affections of truth. So also they assigned to the sun horses, the food of which they called ambrosia, and their drink, nectar; for they knew that the sun signified celestial love, horses the intellectual things therefrom; and that food signifies celestial things, and drink spiritual things.

[3] From the ancients also there still survives the custom for kings at their coronation to sit upon a silver throne, to be clothed with a crimson robe, to be anointed with oil, to wear a crown on the head, and to carry a scepter, sword, and keys in their hands, to ride in royal pomp upon a white horse whose hoofs are shod with silver, and to be waited on at table by the chiefs of the kingdom, with other ceremonies; for they knew that a king represented Divine truth which is from Divine good, and hence they knew what is signified by a silver throne, a crimson robe, anointing oil, a crown, a scepter, a sword, keys, a white horse, hoofs shod with silver, and being waited on by chief men. Who at this day knows these significations, and where are the knowledges that teach them? Men call such things emblems, not knowing anything whatever about correspondence and representation. From all this it is evident of what nature were the knowledges of the ancients, and that they brought them into a knowledge of spiritual and heavenly things which at this day are scarcely known to exist.

[4] The knowledges which succeeded those of the ancients, and are properly called philosophy, rather draw away the mind from the knowledge of such things, because they can also be applied to the confirmation of falsities; and moreover when truths are confirmed by means of them, they plunge the mind into darkness, because they are for the most part bare expressions, whereby confirmations are effected which are comprehended by few, and regarding which even these few are not agreed. From this it is evident how far mankind has receded from the erudition of the ancients, which led to wisdom. The Gentiles received those knowledges from the Ancient Church, the external worship of which consisted in representatives and significatives, and the internal in those things which were represented and signified. These were the knowledges which, in the genuine sense, are signified by “Egypt.”

4156. And put them in the camel’s straw. That this signifies in memory-knowledges, is evident from the signification of the “camel’s straw,” as being such knowledges (n. 3114). They are called “straw,” both because this is the food of a camel, and because they are relatively gross and devoid of order. For this reason memory-knowledges are also signified by “thickets” of trees and of the forest (n. 2831). (That “camels” denote the general memory-knowledges which are of the natural man, may be seen above, n. 3048, 3071, 3143, 3145.)

[2] That memory-knowledges are relatively gross and devoid of order, and are therefore signified by “straw,” and also by “thickets,” is not apparent to those who are in mere memory-knowledges, and are on this account reputed learned. These believe that the more a man knows, or the more memory-knowledge he possesses, the wiser he is. But that the case is very different has been made evident to me from those in the other life who when they had lived in the world had been in mere memory-knowledges, and thereby had gained the name and reputation of being learned, for they are sometimes more stupid than those who have no such skill in memory-knowledges. The reason of this has also been disclosed, namely, that memory-knowledges are indeed a means of becoming wise, but are also a means of becoming insane. To those who are in the life of good, memory-knowledges are a means of becoming wise; but to those who are in a life of evil, they are a means of becoming insane; for by means of memory-knowledges these persons confirm not only their life of evil, but also principles of falsity, and this arrogantly and with persuasion, because they believe themselves to be wiser than others.

[3] From this it comes to pass that they destroy their rational; for it is not the man who can reason from memory-knowledges, even when he can apparently do so in a more lofty manner than others, who is in the enjoyment of the rational faculty; for this skill is the result of a mere fatuous light. But that man excels in the rational who is able clearly to see that good is good, and truth truth, consequently that evil is evil, and falsity falsity; whereas the man who regards good as evil and evil as good, and also the man who regards truth as falsity and falsity as truth, can by no means be said to be rational, but rather, irrational, however able he may be to reason. With him who clearly sees that good is good and that truth is truth, and on the other hand that evil is evil and falsity is falsity, light flows in from heaven, and enlightens his intellectual faculty, and causes the reasons which he sees in his understanding to be so many rays of that light. The same light also illuminates the memory-knowledges, so that they confirm the truth, and moreover disposes them into order and into heavenly form. But they who are against good and truth, as are all who are in the life of evil, do not admit that heavenly light, but are delighted solely with their own fatuous light, the nature of which is to see as one who in the dark beholds spots and streaks on a wall, and out of them fancifully makes all kinds of figures, which however are not really figures, for when the light of day is let in, it is seen that they are nothing but spots and streaks.

[4] From all this we can see that memory-knowledges are a means of becoming wise, and also a means of becoming insane; that is, that they are a means of perfecting the rational, and also a means of destroying the rational. In the other life therefore they who by means of such knowledges have destroyed their rational, are much more stupid than they who have not been versed in them. That these knowledges are relatively gross, is manifest from their belonging to the natural or external man; whereas the rational, which is cultivated by their means, belongs to the spiritual or internal man. How far these differ and are distant the one from the other in regard to purity, may be known from what has been said and shown concerning the two memories (n. 2469-2494).