https://archive.org/details/mythologyofallra12gray/page/246

INDO-CHINESE MYTHOLOGY

BY
SIR JAMES GEORGE SCOTT



AUTHOR'S PREFACE

THE mythology of Burma, Siam, and Indo-China needs
no special discussion. It has been borrowed almost en-
tirely from India and is only slightly modified by aboriginal
characteristics. A great deal, however, has been grafted on
from the serpent-, tree-, and spirit-worship of the native tribes,
or (in the case of the Burmese) from the tribal beliefs held
before the Indo-Chinese peoples came to settle in their present
abodes. Research has thus far been insufficient to show whence
the Burmese came, whether they received their religion first
from the north or from the south, or whether they originally
had a script of their own. There Is hope that, with further
investigation, enough data may be found to determine the
Pyu character, but the few examples hitherto found have not
enabled Mr. Blagden to go very far.

For the coloured plates In this study I am Indebted to the
courtesy of Sir Richard Carnac Temple and to his publishers,
Messrs. W. Griggs and Sons, Ltd., London, who have placed
at my disposal the Illustrations of his Thirty-Seven Nats of
Burma.

J. GEORGE SCOTT.

London, May 21, 1917.



TRANSCRIPTION AND PRONUNCIATION

THE system of transliteration and pronunciation here fol-
lowed is the one prescribed by the Government of India
for the Indian languages generally. The vowels, on the whole,
are pronounced as in Italian; e has the sound of e in French
mere or of e in terror^ and e oi e in French verite, while e has a
similar value, though less accentuated. The vowels of the
diphthongs generally coalesce. Thus ai is pronounced as in
aisle; ao and au are sounded as in Latin aurum or English
how, with greater stress in the case of ao than in that of au\
aw is pronounced as in saw, ei as in feign, eo as in Eothen, oi
as in soil; a and o are pronounced as in German, and the pe-
culiar Shan diphthongs au and 6u have the u sound added, the
former almost resembling the miauling of a cat.

In Burmese and Shan the aspirate is sounded before other
consonants, such as t, p, k, I, s, and w, and is therefore prefixed,
as in ht, hp, hk, hi, hs, and hw; it amounts to a rough breathing.
In such words as gyi and kya, gy and ky are nearly equivalent
toj, but have a lighter sound, almost like dyi or tya pronounced
as one syllable. The sound of kzv is approximately that of
qua in quantity; my, ny, and py with a following vowel are
always pronounced as one syllable, the y being little more than
a slight breathing; ng is decidedly nasal, the n predominating
and whittling the g to a mere shadow. The pronunciation of
hnget ("bird") is taken as the test of correct Burmese vocahz-
ing; it begins with a guttural h, blends into a nasal n, all but
ignores the g, and ends on a staccato e, with the t eliminated.



INDO-CHINESE MYTHOLOGY



CHAPTER I

THE PEOPLES AND RELIGIONS OF
INDO-CHINA

SOME ethnologists maintain that at one time a common
language was spoken all over Farther India from the Irra-
waddy River to the Gulf of Tongking. Whether this was
Mon, the language of the Talaings, who for a thousand years
held the south of Burma and warred with the Burmese, or
whether it was Hkmer (or Khmer), the language of the founders
of Champa and of the builders of the great Angkor Temple in
Cambodia, has not been determined and is not likely to be
ascertained. Down to the present day the Munda languages
are spoken in a belt which extends right across Continental
India from Murshidabad on the east to Nimar on the west,
Munda being the name given by F. Max Miiller to the whole
family of languages. The early philologists, Hodgson and
Logan, called this Munda group the Kol family, but Sir
George Campbell altered this to Kolarian, to the great indigna-
tion of those who thought it might lead the unlearned to imag-
ine a connexion with the Aryans, which would be quite wrong,
though he meant only to suggest Kolar in Southern India as
a sort of nucleus. There are resemblances between the Munda
languages and the Mon-Hkmer which have long been pointed
out, and the theory is that there may have been at one time a
common tongue which was spoken from the Indian Ocean to
the China Sea, across the Indian Continent, over the whole



254 INDO-CHINESE MYTHOLOGY

of Indo-China, and even In the East Indian Archipelago and
Australia.^ There Is certainly a substratum In common, and
there are links In the Nancaorl dialects of the Nicobars and
In the vocabularies of the Malacca neighbourhood. But the
Dravldlans, who Inhabit the southern half of India, also fused
with the Negritos from Malaysia, and It Is quite certain that
the Dravldlans are fundamentally distinct from the Munda.

It might be thought that the mythology of the various races
should help In this puzzle, but It gives no assistance, and there
are as great differences in the myths as there are in the lan-
guages, which are as distinct from one another as French Is
from German. There are general resemblances just as there are
resemblances between the flint arrow-heads found in all con-
tinents and Islands. The celts found In the graves of Algon-
quian chiefs are not easily distinguished from those used
at the present day by the Papuans of the Snowy Range in
New Guinea, and those found near the tumulus on the Plain
of Marathon could be fitted to the reed shafts of the Sam-
oyeds without looking singular. It Is the same with the super-
stitions and the myths which are found among primitive tribes
all over the world. They are very vague In their religious con-
ceptions, but they all agree in believing that this world Is the
home of a shadowy host of powerful and malevolent beings
who usually have a local habitation In a hill, stream, or patch
of primeval forest, and interest themselves in the affairs of
men. As often as not they are dead ancestors, the originators
of the tribe or caste, with a vague following of distinguished
or insignificant descendants. Indeed, some scholars are con-
vinced that the worship of death is the basis and root of all
religions, and Grant Allen, In his History of Religion, main-
tained that all the sacred objects of the world are either dead
men themselves, as corpses, mummies, ghosts, or gods; or
else the tomb where such men are buried; or else the temple,
shrine, or hut which covers the tomb; or else the tombstone,
altar, Image, or statue standing over it and representing the



PLATE IV

Shrine of the Tree-Spirit

This spirit-shrine is shaded by a pipal-tree {Ficus
religiosa), which is associated with spirits in India
as well. The sheds of the bazaar may be seen just
behind the shrine, which is about fifteen miles north
of Loilem, one of the district head-quarters of the
Southern Shan States. Cf. Plate VIII.



PEOPLES AND RELIGIONS OF INDO-CHINA 255

ghost; or else the statue, idol, or household god which is
fashioned as the deputy of the dead; or else the tree which
grows above the barrow; or else the well, or tank, or spring,
natural or artificial, by whose side the dead man has been laid
to rest. Families worshipped their first and subsequent an-
cestors; villagers worshipped the man who founded the village,
and from whom they all claimed descent. In similar fashion
Herbert Spencer was persuaded that "the rudimentary form
of all religion is the propitiation of dead ancestors." Myths
are woven round the history of their lives; illness and mis-
fortunes of all kinds are attributed to their influence; there is
a general belief in magic and witchcraft, and a ritual is devised
which elaborates the legend. Wizards are employed to deter-
mine the cause of trouble and to remove it, either by incanta-
tions and exorcism, or by placating the offended ghostly being
by a suitable sacrifice; their services are also requisitioned when
it is desired to secure good crops, to cause an injury to an enemy,
or to ascertain the omens relating to some proposed course of
action.

However important the cult of the dead may be in primitive
religion, it is not the only factor. Natural forces long familiar-
ized to the popular mind are transformed into actual beings
with human passions and prejudices, and thus we get per-
sonifications of Thanatos (Death), the brother of Sleep; Bel-
Merodach, the light of the sun; Surya, Zeus, the Sun itself;
Indra, the god of the atmosphere; and Balder, the summer god.
The dwarfish races of America, Scotland, and the Deccan are
believed by many to have become hobgoblins ; and the personi-
fications of fire, wind, and war are obvious symbols. These are
all features of animism — the belief which attributes human
intelligence and action to every phenomenon and object of
nature, and which sees in them all a human anima, or prin-
ciple of life. The people of Burma, Siam, and Annam were all
animists in the earliest days, and there are strong traces of
the belief among the Buddhists they now claim to be. These



256 INDO-CHINESE MYTHOLOGY

universal features are sometimes coupled with belief in a
supreme god, who usually interests himself very little in earthly
affairs, and with belief in metempsychosis, or transincorpora-
tion of souls; and the shadowy beings are sometimes Invested
with definite powers and functions, and provided with a
genealogy and bodily form. But all these primitive deities —
wherever they are found — bear a close resemblance to one
another. Spiritually they are as much alike as, physically, are
the arrow-heads that are discovered everywhere, or the early
pottery which is very much of the same style no matter where
it has been produced.

There might be some hope of consistence In the mythological
beliefs If we could be at all certain that a considerable pro-
portion of the original Inhabitants of Indo-China might still
be found In Burma, Slam, and Annam, There is not even an
agreement as to who the aborigines were, whether Negrito, or
Malaysian, or Mongolian, and it is practically certain that they
are as extinct as the Iroquois in Chicago or the Trinobantes
in Middlesex, except for a few baffling, isolated groups which
remain like boulders carved far back In the Glacial Age, or
peaks that rise out of the ocean as the last vestige of submerged
continents. Students of ethnology dispute relentlessly with
one another as to whether certain tribes are autochthonous,
like ridges worn by the Ice-streams of glaciers, or are erratic
boulders, ground moraine, or boulder clay, stranded in alien
countries, like round masses of Ailsa Craig granite carried down
to South Wales, the Midlands, and even the north of Ireland,
The ice-sheet always moving south changed the face of the
land, just as the waves of humanity which poured south from
Central Asia altered the populations. They followed one on
the other, set in motion by some natural or social upheaval,
and they drove their forerunners before them, or followed the
example of the Israelites, who "warred against the Midianltes,
. . . and they slew all the males . . , and they burnt all their
cities wherein they dwelt."



PEOPLES AND RELIGIONS OF INDO-CHINA 257

The history of these old days is a series of paroxysms. Its
keynote was bloodshed and famine and the merciless oblitera-
tion of countless innocents. The slaughter of Orientals by
Orientals has none of the characteristics of religious or political
hatred. It is simple blood-lust and it goes on still where it is
possible. When the Manchus marched south, early in the
seventeenth century, to destroy the fugitive Ming Court at Nan-
king, they massacred eight hundred thousand of the population
(estimated at a million) of Yang-chou-fu. In 191 1 the Chinese
Republicans sacked the Tatar city of Si-ngan-fu and butchered
every Manchu man, woman, and child. Pestilences spare a
few here and there; savage man does not. But there was one
saving point about the genuine savages of two thousand or
more years ago which distinguishes them from the civilized
savages. They seldom brought their women with them, or
only a few, and so they took to wife the daughters of the land.
As a consequence, the only races that are not composite are
those who are settled in inaccessible mountains which tempted
no one to conquer.

The result of this is that there is no general Indo-Chinese,
or even separate Burmese, Siamese, or Annamese mythology,
as there is an Eddie, a Semitic, Egyptian, Graeco-Roman, or
Indian mythology. The Mundas and Dravidians may have
brought some of their traditional beliefs or myths with them
when they were driven from India to Indo-China by the con-
quering Aryans, but when Kublai Khan broke up the Lao-tai
(Shan) Kingdom in Yiin-nan in the thirteenth century, a
flood of Tibeto-Burman and Siamese-Chinese legends must
have submerged or diluted the old traditions. The mythology
of all three countries, therefore, is a mixture of hero-worship
and distorted history — national and individual — each of them
mixed with the worship of intangible natural forces. Conse-
quently the mythological beliefs of the three countries are as
heterogeneous as their populations. The vast majority of the
inhabitants of Annam, not less than of Burma and Siam, are



258 INDO-CHINESE MYTHOLOGY

nominally Buddhist; but there are deities of Brahmanic origin,
alongside of demons with human passions and prejudices, and
abundance of obvious nature-myths.

As a matter of fact, Indo-China seems to have been the com-
mon refuge for fugitive tribes from both India and China.
The expansion of the Chinese Empire (which for centuries did
not exist south of the Yang-tse-kiang), and the inroads of
Scythian tribes on the confines of the Indian empires of Chan-
dragupta and Asoka, whose reigns ended in 297 and 232 (or
231) B. c. respectively, combined to drive out the aborigines,
both to the north-east and to the north-west; and these met
and struggled with one another, not for supremacy, but for
mere existence, in the lands which we call Indo-China. It is
only some such theory which will account for the extraordi-
nary variety and marked dissimilarity of races to be found in the
sheltered valleys or in the high ranges of the Shan States, the
Lao country, and Tongking and Annam.

There is a general similarity of myths and traditions among
all the races and tribes of Eastern Asia. In some of them this
resemblance exists as it has been handed down for many
generations; in others it is to be inferred only from practices
and superstitions which remain In essence despite profound
outward changes. It is not possible to say which tribe or people
can claim to be the originator, and which merely the taught.
There Is a common deposit, and all the beliefs, rites, and cus-
toms may have found their way from north to south, or from
east to west; or they may have been universal and simulta-
neous; and the modifications may be due only to the individual
character and habits of each separate tribe. It is not possible
to say that there is any noticeable uniformity in customs even
among the same clan or settlement, to say nothing of the family
or sub-family. All of them believe in witchcraft, and there are
striking resem.blances and differences. The resemblances may
be due to a sort of logical process following on common Ideas,
or the similar practices may be due to the Kachins borrowing



PEOPLES AND RELIGIONS OF INDO-CHINA 259

from the Burmese, or perhaps from the Shans, or the Do
mimicking the practices of the Tongkingese, or vice versa. All
of them, English-speaking Burmans or French-speaking Anna-
mese, have, deep-seated in their being, a primitive belief in
spirits, demons, Nats, Hpis, Dewas, or whatever they may be
called. The great ethnic religions of Asia have never been able
to eradicate the firm belief among the mass of the people that
ghosts, spirits, demons, angels, or devils are able to interfere
in the affairs of man.

Perhaps ninety per cent of the population of the three Indo-
Chinese countries are, and believe themselves to be, Buddhist;
but their Buddhism is not the abstruse philosophy which
Gotama taught, any more than it is the practical popular
religion set forth in the edicts of Asoka in the third century
before Christ. The Buddha did not teach the existence of any
supreme being; he made no attempt to solve the mystery of
the beginning of human existence; and he had very little to
say of the end, or of Nirvana. King Asoka was not concerned
to do more than to give a simple version of a pure religion, urg-
ing mankind to the performance of good deeds and promising a
reward, which the least educated could understand, in the
happy, semi-human existence of the Lower Heavens round about
Mount Meru (supposed to form the centre of the inhabited
world), the mythical height which the Burmese call Myimmo
Taung, and the Siamese Phra Men. Superstition and love of
the marvellous are, however, inborn in mankind. Legends and
myths seem to be necessary to the masses, and the consequence
has been the practical deification of the Buddha Gotama and
of some imagined predecessors, the acknowledgement of a celes-
tial hierarchy, and the introduction of complicated ceremonies
and of a ritual of which the Teacher of the Law or his devout
interpreters never dreamed. Buddhism was in the beginning
a reformed Brahmanism, induced by the arrogance of the
priesthood and the system of caste. In India, the astute Brah-
mans enticed dissenters back by representing Gotama to be

6. Von Gutschmidt in ZDMG xv. 64, on Ibn Wahshijja’s work
on N abataean A griculture.

7. Mas‘udi tenth century a.d. See Von Gutschmidt, ibid.

8. In Book iii of the Annals y edited by J. de Goeje. A French
translation from the Persian translation will be found in H. Zottenberg,
Chronique de Abu Djafar Tabariy ii. 54—66. See also the article on
“ Djirdjis,” in Dictionary of Islam.

9. See A. Chwolson, liber Tammuz und die Menschen V erehrungy
pp. 50-56.

10. Baudissin, p. 74, after H. Pognon, Inscnftions Semitiques.

11. From Pseudo-Mileto, third century a.d., ed. Cureton. See also
E. Renan, Memoires de VInstituty xxiii. part 2, pp. 319 ff., and Bau-
dissin, p. 74.

12. Never with divine prefix in Cuneiform texts, which excludes the
reading of the name on a seal ^X-a-du-ni as ^A-du-ni-AMy as argued
by G. Dossin, RA xxvii. 92.

13. See S. Langdon, RA xxvii. 24, and the title used for a deity at
Nerib near Harran in the Cassite period, ihid.y p. 88.

14. See p. 322.

15. In the Syriac work, “Treasure Cave,” edited by C. Bezold,
Die Schatzhohle syrish und deutschy Leipzig, 1883—88, p. 37. See
also Baudissin, p. 116.

16. On this whole subject of the influence of the Tammuz-Ishtar cult
upon the origins of Christianity, see H. Zimmern, Belti fBHtijoy
Beletja) einey zun'dchst Sfrachlichey Studie %ur V orgeschichte der Ma-
donnakultSy Paul Haupt Anniversary Volume, pp. 281-292.


4 H


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


17. Eusebius, quoting Philo of Byblus, Book i. chap. lO.

18. Here undoubtedly Marduk, XA vi. 243, 1 . 35, as in Langdon
[a], p. 202, 1 . 83, and A. Boissier, Choix de Textes, p. 84, 1 . 13.

19. CT xxviii, PL 44, K. 717, 11 , 4 and 9. Read probably ana
iruti inissi.

20. mu-dam- \mt-ik amati-iad\ , P. Haupt, A kkadische und Sumerische
KeUschrijitexte, No. l"],!. I.

21. Langdon . No. 143.

22. Langdon, PBS x. 287—8.

23. E. Ebeling, KAR No. 357, 11 . 33-37 and MV AG, 1918, 2, p. 9.

24. See p. 132.

25. See p. 322.

26. The text has ^Ur-LU. In any case the first king of the last
dynasty of Ur is intended.

27. Idin-Ishtar is the name of some unknown ruler, probably of the
city where the liturgy was written.

28. H. de Genouillac, Textes Sumenens ReligieuXy AO 5374,
11. 191-209.

29. This is a poetic description of the land of the dead. The
“ chariot ” probably refers to the chariots found in the tombs of early
Sumerian kings at Kish and Ur. These were placed beside the dead
in the belief that the kings would be able to use them in Aralu.

30. Extracts from H. Zimmern, Sumerische KultUeder, No. 26,
rev. ii-iii.

31. Deimel, iii. No. I, obv. i. 1 . 2; rev. ii. 1 . 5.

32. Identical with ^A-tu-ud, and ^ A-tu-tu{r') , sister of Lillu, a title
of Tammuz, RA xix. 178, 1 . 1 1 ; 181, n. 2. Probably for ^NlN(e)-
tud, the Mother-goddess, who is both mother and sister of Tammuz.

33. Or better Usudsud, “ the far away.” See Van, TC xv. PI. 9,

1. 65.

34. H, de Genouillac, TC xv. PI. x. 11 . 77-92.

35. H. de Genouillac, TC xv. PI. 12, 11 . 118—123.

36. CT XV. 26, 22—27, 24 with variant, ibid.y 30, obv. I to rev. 25.
A similar passage in TC xv, PI. 12, 11 . 1 18—140.

37. Text in Rawlinson, iv. PI. 30, No. 2, with duplicate in G.
Reisner, Sumerisch-Babylomsche HymneUy No, 37.

38. J. G. Frazer, Adonis Attis and Osiris y p. 194.

39. Selections from Langdon , pp. 99-103.

40. CT XV. PI. 14 and see Langdon [g], pp. 272-5.


NOTES


415


Chapter XII

1. General works on this subject to be consulted are W. R. Smith,
Religion of the Semites^ London, 1901; R. C. Thompson, Semitic
Magic, London, 1908; Edmond Doutte, Magie et religion dam
V A jrique du nord, Algiers, 1908.

2. See the article “ Demons and Spirits (Jewish) ” in ERE by
H. Loewe, and J. A. Montgomery, Aramaic Incantation texts jrom
Niffur, Philadelphia 1913, especially Montgomery’s references to the
literature, p. 74, n. 35.

3. See Luke xi. 14—20,

4. Matthew iv. I— ll; Mark i. 12-13; Luke iv. 1-13.

5. See Charles Singer, From Magic to Science, London, 1928.

6. Wellhausen, pp. 148—159.

7. For charms and talismans used in Islamic religion against the
demons, see H. A. Winckler, Siegel und Charaktere in der Muhamme-
danischen Zauberei, Heft vii. of Beihefte of Der Islam, Berlin, 1930.
D. S. Margoliouth, Arabic Documents jrom the Monneret Collection,
Islamica, iv. 249—271.

8. Edited by L. S. A. Wells in Charles, ii. 137.

9. SeeLangdon [g],p. 154536-

10. “The Scape-goat in Babylonian Religion,” S. Langdon in Ex-
pository Times, xxiv. 9—15.

11. CT xvi. 35, 30—4, restored from Collection of J. B. Nies, ii.
No. 22, 115-8.

12. CT xvi. 10, 21-4 =12, 51-2,

13. CT xvi. 27, 18.

14. Thompson [e], pp. 68—76; S. Lane-Poole, Arabian Society in
the Middle Ages, pp. 35—6.

15. Yast ix. 34 in W. Max Miiller’s Sacred Books of the East, xxiii.
61—2 (translated by J. Darmesteter). W. Bousset’s statement in Die
Religion des Judentums im N. T. Zeitalter (Berlin, 1902), p. 464, re-
garding a myth of the union of daevas and drujas is both philologically
and materially false.

16. CT xvi. 1 2 1, 1-23.

17. ibid., 15, iv. 60-v. 17.

18. CT xvi. 14 B 8—38.

19. KAR No. 88, Frag. 5, 2.

20. Charles, ii. 485.

21. P. Haupt, ASKT 90, 60-63; xvii. PI. 34, 15-20; Raw-
linson, iv. PI. 29, B 23-30; CT xvi. PI. 31, 97-99; CT xvi. PI, 5,
195-197. The list, KAR 227, rev. Ill, 34-6 omits the gallu and
wicked god. Often the lists contain only the first five, CT xvi. PI. i.


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


416

12; PL 14, Col. Ill, 27; RawHnson, v. PL 50, ii. 17-19; CT xvi. 17,
K, 4947 -j- K. 4988.

22. Rawlinson, v. PL 50, A, 41—62.

23. Isaiah xxxiv. 14.

24. M. Gaster, “Two Thousand Years of Charm against a Child
Stealing Witch,” Folk-LorCy xi. 129—62. See also Montgomery,
of. cit.y pp. 262—3.

25 - J. A. Montgomery, Aramaic Incantation TextSy No. 42. See
M. Schwab, PSBA xii. 300 ff. On Lilu, in Jewish mythology repre-
sented by Asmodeus, and Lilith, see Thompson [e], pp. 65—80.
S. Langdon, Babyloniacay iv. 187—191.

26. Rawlinson, iv. PL 29, No. 2.

27. Gudea statue B. hi. 15; Cylinder B ii. 9.

28. F. Perles in Babyloniacay vi. 235.

29. R. C. Thompson, JRAS (1929), pp. 801—823.

30. CTxvi. PL I, 28-Pl. 2, 56.

31. M. Gaster, Folk-LorCy xi. 129; J. Montgomery, of. cit.y No.
42, 1. 10.

32. See Hesychius under FeXXw; Stephanus, Thesaurus graecae
Linguae; Zenobius, hi. 3.

33. Fritz Pradel, Griechische Gebetey Religions geschichtliche V er-
suchey hi. Heft 3 (1907), pp. 23 and 91. On Gello of the Christian
Greek demonology see C. du F. Du Cange, Glossarium ad Scriftores
mediae et infimae Graecitatisy sub FeXXaj. L. Allacci, De Temflis
Graecorum (1645), PP* Ii6f.

34. The reading Lamastu formerly read Labartu was established
by ^La-ma-as-tumy Ungnad, in ZA xxxvi. 108, and by a Bodleian Tab-
let with NPr La-ma-za-tum-KI y Var. La-mas -tum-K I. The Su-
merian reading Lam-me usually read Dim-me may be defended by, (a)
la-am-ma = lamassUy the animal genius; (b) the phonetic change d ~> I
(very common) ; and (c) the Greek Lamkay which seems to have been
borrowed along with Gello.

35. PB 5 i^. No. 1 13, duplicate of Rawlinson, iv. Pis. 56 and 58.

36. The Assyrian edition of these thirteen incantations is edited by
D. W. Myhrman, ZA xvi. 154—200. The third tablet of the series
containing the rituals has not been recovered in the early edition, but
the colophon of the Tablet of the early editions (see note 35) of the
thirteen incantations states that the series is incomplete. It clearly con-
tained the matter preserved in Rawlinson, iv. PL 55 = Myhrman, pp.

184-195*

37. Duplicates are RA xviii. 198; F. Weissbach, Bab. Miscelleny
p. 42. A duplicate of incantation five is Ebeling, KARy 239, Cols,
i— ii.

38. CT xvii. PL 13, 21 ff.; RA xviii. 165, 11 . 16-24.


NOTES


417


39. From the Berlin Museum, VA 3477, published by Friedrich
Delitzsch, Beiblatt zum Jahrbuch des Kbnigl.-Preusz. Kunstsammlung,
1908, p. 75; also in 1921, by F, Thureau-Dangin, RA xviii. PI. I,
No. 3, with description by L. Delaporte, p. 179, No. vi.

40. Ebeling, KAR No. 71, 11 . 5—6.

41. ZA xvi. 178, 11 . 6— 1 1 ; P. Haupt, ASKT p. 94, 11 . 59-68; on
an amulet, RA xviii. 195. In this text sumundu = katilu, “slayer.”

42. For a description of Fig. 44 by L. Delaporte, see RA xviii.

172-4*

43. Read ezzit samrat ( = UL) namurrat u Pi-i barbaraty etc., IV
Raw. PI. 55 rev. I = RA xviii. 166, 1 . 13; PBS. i^. 113, 1 . I2; ZA
xvi. 156, 1. 39.

44. ZA xvi. 174, 11 . 25-52; ci RA xviii. 13-29.

45 * mudammelaty from emeluy to suckle, Hebrew ^-w-l. See ntmily
Langdon [a], p. 40, 1 . 33.

46. nasdsu — nasu?

47. ZA xvi. 180, 11 . 29-43 ;PR 5 i^. rev. 11 . 15-27.

48. Translation by F. Thureau-Dangin, RA xviii. 197, restored
from Ebeling, KAR No. 76, 1—8 T No. 88, p. 156, below, 14 ff.

49. A. H. Sayce, The Babylonian and Oriental Recordy iii. 17F
Text in Frank [a], p. 88, with corrections by Zimmern, OLZ 1917,
pp. 102—5; f'* Layard, Culte de Venus (Paris, 1837—49), PI. xvii,
and AKF iii. 56.

50. The three other winged figures of Pazuzu in the round, are one
in the Louvre, Frank [a], p. 80, described in RA xviii. 189, with in-
scription, p. 1 90; one in the British Museum, L. W. King, Babylonian
Religiony London (1899), p. 43; another in the Louvre, Thureau-
Dangin, RA xviii. 19 1. See also JRAS 1926, PI. xi. No. 7, from Ur.

51. RA xviii. 192.

52. Frank [a], p. 82, note; p. 83 note. The two heads are pub-
lished by King, ibid.y p. 189 and Thompson [a], i. PI. ii. 91875.

53. C. Frank. RA vii. 24. Text li-li-HI! A complete list of heads
of Pazuzu, in RA xviii. 192—3.

54. RA xviii. PI. i. No. I. On the Constantinople amulet,
Frank [a], PI. iii, there are only six devils — panther, dog, bird, lion,
serpent, ram.

55. CT xvi. 19, 11 . 1-28.

56. See W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im neutestament-
lichen Zeitalter (Berlin, 1903), pp. 326—336.



"?A

"1




1

52. The throne of Ea supports a tortoise in King . Plates i,
Ixiii, Ixxvi. In PI. Ixxxiii his symbol is identical with those of Anu and
Enlil. In DP ii. 90, 5, the symbol of Ea, fig. 50, is named mum
(mu) u suhurmasu. “ Mummu and skate-goat.”

53. Wife of Ea.

54. CT xvi. 2, 11 . 65—85.

55. “ Hymn of Eridu,” AJSL xxxix. 163.

56. See, however, the myth of Dilmun, pp. 190 ff.

57. E. Nassouhi, MAG iii. 23, 1 . 5; Langdon [a], p. 190, n. 3.
A scribe wrote to the king that a founder had cast fifty kuribu. Harper,

1194, 3 -

58. Note the title of the goddess Mah, Ninsikilla, Rawlinson, ii. 54,
no. 2, 7; King, Catalogue, Sufflement, No. 51, lO.

59. See Langdon [d], PI. 35, no. I, and pp. 73-5. Also Koldewey,
pp. 271—3, identified these figurines with Ninmah.

60. CT xvii. 42, 11 . I— 13.

61. Temple of Marduk in Babylon.

62. Title of Ea.

63. CT xiii. 35, 11 . 10-36, 21; Dhorme [a], pp. 84-7.

64. Sasuru.

65. CT XV. 49, rev. i (iv), 11 . 1-14; Dhorme [a], p. 138.

66. lullu or lilu is the Sumerian loan-word employed for “ man ” in
these myths, and is not used for “ man ” elsewhere. The word seems
to mean “ feeble one.”

67. Langdon, Paradis, pp. 36-9. This is Tablet iii of the myth.


NOTES


397

muma ilu awelum of the old version; Clay, Morgan iv, is Tablet ii.
The Assyrian version, CT xv. 49, is Tablet i of that edition.

68. 7 jA xvi. 178, 1. 20.

69. For the pictograph see Langdon , p. 15, No. 105.

70. For the Sumerian hymn of Nintur and her son Assirgi at Kesh,
see OECT i. 48—59; of Ninhursag and Lil at Kesh and Adah, Thureau-
Dangin, RA xix. 175-185; cf. Langdon [a], pp. 215 f.

71. RA xix. 175-185.

72. Thompson [c], p. 12, 11 . 20—35.

73. So restore, ibid., col. 5, 11 . 39, 40; col. 6, 11 . 16, 17; Plate 9,
col. 3, 1 . 48; from Plate il, 1 . 17, and Philadelphia Tablet, rev. iii,
11 . 29—30. Gilgamish, son of Ninsun, PI. 56, 57.

74. That this was the symbol of Ninurta as Zamama, the special
name for the War-god, is proved by the monument, DP i. 168, where
it is inscribed.

75. Written ^Mas^ King, PSBA, 1913, p. 76.

76. V. Scheil, in DP ii. 90, 11 . 20—22.

77. Scheil-Legrain, in DP xiv. 35. On Morgan, DP i. 168, the
pillar has no eagle, but the name Shuqamuna.

78. Lion ? ratherthan panther (cf. Thureau-Dangin, RA xvi. 137 )*
See King . Plates i, Ixxviii.

79. DP ii. 91, 1 . 24. See note 97 below.

80. Rawlinson, ii. 59, A 6—7. For umunesiga — see
Weissbach, Plate 13, 1 . 29, but as title of Nergal, E. Weidner, AKF
ii. 79, 1. 8.

81. Vase of Entemena, Heuzey, Catalogue des antiquttes chal-
deenesy No. 218. On the stele des vautours Ningirsu holds this em-
blem in his hand, over a cage filled with dead enemies, ihid.y no. lO.

82. Ward, No. 63. Location certain by the name of the god Shara.

83. Langdon , PI. 22, no. 16, and p. 83. The animals are not
asses, but stags or antelopes, as a new seal, in the Field Museum, from
Kish proves, Mackay, Part 2, Plate vi. No. 7.

84. Ward, p. 60.

85. A seal from Shittab in Kazallu, east of the Tigris, has an eagle
grasping two lions erect, heads, en jacey Menant, Catalogue de la Hayey
Plate I.

86. CT xxiv. 41, 65; XXV. 12, 3 and 19.

87. E. Pottier in DP xiii. 42, figs. 137-8; Plates 28, 31, 34, 35.

88. Hall and Woolley, Plate 6.

89. DP xiii, Plate 18.

90. Contenau . Nos. 84, 293, 314, 322; Ward, Nos. 864,
865.

91. Josephus, Antiq.y xvii.

92. Genesis i. 2, 3.


398 SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY

93. For the eagle on coins of Jerusalem see p. 388, note 223, and
p. 117.

94. See Langdon [g], p. 19. On the eagle in late West Semitic
religion see R. Dussaud, “ L’aigle symbole du Dieu solaire,” R Arch. i.

134-143 (1903);

95. Wife of Ninurta,

96. i.e., the foreign lands.

97. See p. 1 15.

98. asakkuy a title of Ninurta, several times in this epic. See S. Gel-
ler, ATU p. 280, 1 . 5; p. 289, 1 . 5.

99. Somewhere in Tablets vi, viii. Geller, ATU i. 288. rev. 3—5.

100. Temple of Ninurta in Nippur.

10 1. For Ishtar as goddess of Fate who spins the cord of life, see
JRAS, 1930, p. 28. Here Bau “severs the cord,” surely parallel to
the Greek myth of Atropos who cuts the threads of life. But “ to sever
the cord ” here seems to be used by synecdoche for “ to determine fate.”

102. Langdon [g], p. 252, 1 . 13.

103. Here, as in other addresses to the stone in question, various
species of it are added.

104. Temple of Ningirsu at Lagash.

105. On the Parentalia or feast for the souls of the dead, see Essays
in Modem Theology^ dedicated to C. A. Briggs, pp. 141—161.

106. This is clear from the fragment, KAR No. 363.

107. The fragments of this series were edited by F. Hrozny, MV A Gy
1906, pp. 164—179; duplicates have since been found. A fragment of
the Sumerian original which contained the entire epic on one tablet is
in H. Radau, Sumerian Hymns and Prayers to nin-ib (= BE '29)',
No. 9. The obverse contains a few lines of Tablet i, obv. 20 ff., and
the reverse has a few lines from the top of Tablet iii, reverse. I agree
with Hrozny in placing K. 8531 and Rm. 126 in this series. The con-
tents seem to prove this, but he was wrong in including K. 38. See
below. A duplicate of K. 8531, or Tablet ii, is in Ebeling, KAR 12,
and KAR 18 restores some parts of Tablet iii.

108. CT xxiv. 7, 1 . 23; xxix. 47, K. 7145, 7; Rawlinson, ii. 59,
All. See also Langdon [a], p. 158, 1 . 55 and var. ga-s a-an-kar-
nun-na PBS x. 304, 1 . 4. The last passage would naturally be taken
to prove that this deity is a goddess, but female barbers are unknown,
and the gender seems to be masculine in the epic.

109. Gudea, Cyl. B, 7, 12-8, 9.

1 10. ibid., 13, 18-14, 7.

111. See B. Landsberger, ZA xxxvii. 93, n. 2, on S. Smith’s His-
torical Texts, p. 86, 1 . 21.

1 12. Cyl. A. 26, 24; Langdon [g], p. 86, 140.

1 13. See pp. 1 19—124. Hrozny, Ntnrag, pp. 12—15.


NOTES


399


1 14. CT XXV. 14, 11 . 17—22.

1 15. This apparently refers to the dragons of chaos, Zu, Mush-
rushshu, etc.

1 16. Langdon [g], pp. 251-5.

1 1 7. See F. Hommel, Bab.^ ii. 60.

1 1 8. Cyl. A. 25, 11 . 24-26.

1 19. Langdon , p. 48, 1 . 22 = [g], p. 76, 1 . i.

120. Cyl. A. 26, 1 . 6.

1 21. See pp. 1 18 and 128.

122. See Carnoy, Iranian Mythology, pp. 263 £F. (in this Series).

123. ibid., Plate 39.

124. See p. 128.

125. Cf. Langdon [g], p. 208, 1 . 5, with [a], p. 124, 1 . 120, and
p. 144, 1. 121.

126. Ward, pp. 167—248.

127. See pp. 1 13-4.

128. CT XXV. 13, 1 . 27. As husband of Gula (wife of Ninurta),
CT XXV. I, 1 . 23. But as son of Gula, Langdon [g], p. 156, 1 . 38.

129. Deimel, ii. Nos. 5, rev. iv. 3; 6 obv. iii. 5, with Nikilim-as-bar ;
No. I, iv. 5.

130. Rawlinson, ii. 60, A 24.

13 1. Langdon [g], p. 66, 11 . IO-13.

132. Clay, YOS i. 53, 1 . 170.

133. So Halevy, RS, xiii. 180; xix. 340. It cannot be argued that
En-nammasht is a hybrid of Sumerian and Semitic, for nammashtu
(PBS X. 214, Col. iii. l) is probably Sumerian. This explanation is im-
possible if the title anu-asat, var. of ^ nin-ib is right. Langdon in SO
(Helsingfors, 1925), i. 95-1 00.

134. See p. 60.

135. Knudtzon, p. 1573. Schroeder, OLZ, 1915, p. 295, en-
deavoured to read Beth- Lahama, and identify this city with Bethlehem,
south of Jerusalem. Dhorme, RB, 1908, p. 517, and 1909, p. 26,
reads Beth-Anat for both cities.

136. Knudtzon, ibid.. No. 84, 1 . 33.

137. Psalm Ixxiv. 14.

138. Isaiah xxvii. i.

139. Job ix. 13.

140. Isaiah li. 9.

14 1. ZA xxxiii. 129, 1 . 46. On the other hand the reading of the
more common name di-tar as Sa-kut is uncertain; more probable is
di-dar or di-kur.

142. Langdon [g], p. 199, 11 . 13-16 == p. 207, 11 . 14-21.

143. In the treaty of Asarhaddon with Balu of Tyre read As-tar-tu,
RA xxvi. 1 9 1, 1 . 19 (after my collation).


400


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


144. i.e., Enlil.

145. Name of the lower world.

146. King [c], No. 27; Lutz, PBS i. 2, No. 119.

147. The existing fragments are edited by Erich Ebeling, “ Der
Akkadische Mythus vom Pestgotte Era,” Berliner Beitrage zur Keil-
schrijtjorschung, ii. i . An earlier edition of the fragments of the Ashur-
banipal library, by E. J. Harper, BA ii. 425-437; P. Jensen, KB vi. l.

56-73-

148. Apparently synonym for Enlil or Marduk.

149. KAR No. 321, obv. 1-17 (restored by C. J. Weir, JRASy
1930, pp. 41—2) as far as rev. 6.

150. See p. 103 and Langdon, OECT ii. 4; Onnes the Annedotus.
15 I. See Zimmern, ZA xxxv. 1 5 I— 4; S. Smith, JRAS, 1926, pp.

695-701.

152. A dragon of chaos. This is the only reference to Nergal-Irra as
the protagonist of the gods in this famous myth. It proves his original
identity with his brother Ninurta.

153. Read ha-bi-nisy var. K. 2755, ha-bl-in-nu.

154. Supposed to be the Lebanons.

155. Refers perhaps to the exile of Kashtiliash, King of Babylon,
taken to Ashur by Tukulti-Ninurta.

156. C. F. Jean, RA xxi. 93-104.

157. Zimmern [d]. No. 54.

158. KAR No. 298, obv. 21—5; Zimmern [d]. Nos. 45, 46.

159. Craig, ii. 13. ^

160. Title of Arallu. See Langdon [a], p. 71, n. 16.

1 6 1. E. Ebeling in AKF i. 93.

162. See Bab.y ii. 144.

163. See JRASy 1928, 843-48.

164. So A. T. Clay, YOS i. Nos. 46, 50, 51; Dougherty, YOS vi.
226. No. 47 omits the hkpu on the twenty-eighth day, and on the four-
teenth adds a ceremony of the kettle-drum. No. 48, a month of thirty
days, has hitfu on the sixth and thirteenth, or a day earlier. No. 49 has
hitfu on the sixth, fourteenth, twenty-first, and twenty-seventh days.
C. E. Keiser, Nies Collectiony i. 167, has hitfu on the sixth, fourteenth,
twenty-first, and twenty-eighth, and a ceremony for the kettle-drum on
the seventh.

165. Weidner , pp. 32, 1 . 54; 52, 1 . 40; cf. p. 46, 1 . 46.

166. See Chwolsohn, ii. 22.

167. See Langdon [c], p. 99, n. 9.

168. All references to this epic are taken from Langdon [a].

169. CT 50, No. 47406, and BA v. 655.

170. See RA xxiv. 147-8.

171. For details and literature on the zagmuk of Marduk see Lang-


NOTES 401

don [a], pp. 20—32; S. A. Pallis, The Babylonian Akitu Festival^
Copenhagen, 1926.

172. King [d],ii. 87-91.

173. See also King , Plates 44, 53, 65, 76, 90. Ibtd.y Plate 34,
the symbol on the table appears to be a stone pillar.

174. RA xvi. 136, and Plate i.

175. Sir H. Rawlinson, xviii. The only certainty about Raw-

linson’s thesis is that the first stage was black.

176. See Thureau-Dangin [c], p. 141, 11 . 370—1.

177. See Kugler, pp. 6, 218. Cf. the title of Mercury = Nabu,
^gu-udy with gu-ud — fidnu sa samCy “ tablet of the Heavens.”

178. Charles, if. 443.

179. See R. Wiinsch, Antike Fluchttajelny p. 19, 1 . 42, and note.
For index of passages, C. Wessely, DWAW xxxvi. 172; Ixii. 52, 1 . 965*

180. Ebeling, KAR No. 227, rev. iii. 8-24.

18 1. See Knudtzon, pp. 968—75.

182. CT xvii. 42, 11 . 26 fF.


Chapter III

1. Attendants of Nergal. See p. 138.

2. The souls of men had not yet been permitted to enter Arallu.

3. i.e., the land of the dead.

4. Attributed to the pre-Sargonic period by L. Legrafn, MJ xix.
393. But see the account of its discovery by Hilprecht, p. 337.

5. About 6^ miles in ordinary Babylonian measurement.

6. Texts, transcription, and translation of this poem by S. Langdon,
The Legend of Etana and the Eagley Paris, 1931.

7. For variants of the Alexander myth, with critical examination
of the texts and literature, see Gabriel Millet, “ L’ Ascension d’ Alexan-
dre,” Syriay iv. (1923) 83—133, a work not yet completed.


Chapter IV

I. The Amarna tablet is published by O. Schroeder, V orderasiathche
SchnftdenkmdleTy xii. 194, and lastly edited by Knudtzon, No. 356.
Most recent translation by E. Ebeling in Gressmann, pp. 143—146,
which see for the Assyrian fragments. Transcription and translation
by P. Jensen, KB vi. i, 92-101 ; Dhorme [a], pp. 148—161. A discus-
sion of the texts and theology in Langdon [e], pp. 78— lOO. A new
copy of the Scheil text now in A. T. Clay, A Hebrew Deluge Story in
Cuneiforniy PI. iv. and Morgan Library y Vol. iv. No. 3.


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


402

2. ud-sar -num ^En-lil-loy S. Smith, Babylonian Historical Texts,
PL ix. 12; B. Landsberger and T. Bauer, in ZA xxxvii. 92.

3. ZA xvi. 170, 11 . 24—5, restored by PBS P, 1 13, 11 . 58-9.

4. Read suma lu-usckur, not mu-lu-mu, or, as corrected by all
editors, kul-lu-mu.

5. Zer ameluti, said of Adapa, Langdon [e], p. 96, 12.

6. See R. Koldewey, Die Temfel von Babylon und Borsiffa, Blatt
4, and pp. 29 and 68; Langdon [d], p. 91 and PL xlv; Gressmann,
Nos. 478 a, b.

7. See RA xiv. 194; Delegation en Perse, i. 168.

8. See Weidner [c], p. 94.

9. The theory was developed at length by Paul Toscane in DP, Vol.
xii, where he finds the serpent and the Tree of Life in the geometrical
designs of the early painted ware of Susa. Apparently Edmont Pottier,
who edited the early Susa pottery in Vol. xiii of the same series, disagrees
with Toscane and does not make any reference to his theory in the
preceding volume.

10. i.e., to the house of the Water-god, the Apsu.

11. Read KU (di-ib) = sabdtu, A. T. Clay, Miscellaneous Texts,
No. 53, 1 . 132; with phonetic prefixes is-sa-KU-at. In the preceding
line, restore a-ma-ta da-mi-iq-ta.

12. King . Pis. xliii; xlviii; Ixvi; Ixxxi; xix; RA xvi. PL ii;
I Raw. PL 70.

13. ibid.. Pis. Ixxvii, xci; DP i. PL xiv; vi. PL 9. See this type
with inscription, ‘^Gu-la, on a Susa boundary stone, Hinke [a], p. 105;
RA xiv. 194.

14. ZA xxxvi. 21 1.

15. Ebeling, No. 7 1, obv. 3— 6.

16. In the original document the name Eve (Hawwa) did not
occur.

17. A citation from one of these rituals on p. 276. See also T. H.
Meek, BA x. 1—5.

18. So Paul Haupt, ZA xxx. 66, and R. C. Thompson, Assyrian
Herbal, p. 46, but Thompson retracts this identification, p. 262, n. 2.

19. Harper, No. 771, 1—7.

20. Stele from Seripul, Gressmann, No. 254. On the botanical
identification see Boissier, Melanges ddarcheologie orientale, Geneva,

1930, P- 7 -

21. It may be referred to in the early document. Genesis xiii. lo, as
the “ Garden of Yaw,” mentioned also by Post-exilic Isaiah li. 3.

22. Ezekiel xxviii. 12—19.


NOTES


403


Chapter V

1. See Shimtu, p. 21.

2. See RA xxii. 32.

3. In this discussion Tibir is used wherever the text indicates this
reading. Tibir is probably the original of Tubal- (Cain), Genesis
iv. 22.

4. The verb employed here corresponds to the Accadian banuy used
of Enid’s creating the first patrons of the arts from clay. See F. H.
Weissbach, Babylonische Mhcelleriy No. 12.

5. Title of Tammuz.

6. To emphasize this statement the scribe of a small Tablet, dupli-
cate of lines 21—41, has written it also on the edge of the Tablet, unless
he had omitted it in the text and wished to indicate its insertion in this
manner. See Langdon, BE xxxi. No. 15.

7. The first part of this poem from Nippur is published by G. A.
Barton, Miscellaneous Babylonian Inscriftionsy No. 8, and Pis. xxxvi—
xxxvii, and in Langdon [e], Pis. vii— viii, with transcription and transla-
tion, pp. 135—148. E. Chiera has discovered that this is only part of
a longer poem, written on a large four (or six? ) column Tablet, and
he has also found new duplicates and identified two fragments already
published by S. Langdon and H. Radau as part of the same composition.
See Edward Chiera, Sumerian Religious TextSy Upland, Pa. (1924),
No. 25, and pp. 26—32.

8. OECT i. 39-42.

9. The text and English edition by the writer in BBS x. part i,
and later corrected French edition in Langdon [e]. Interpretations
have been given by many other scholars and the literature on this poem
is great. It has been collected by E. F. Weidner [d]. Nos. 984—1012.

10. This name means “the pure queen,” and is applied to various
goddesses. Here it probably refers to the wife of Nabu, or of Nesu, or to
Gula-Bau, wife of Ninurta, also called Nesu, or LisT. In line 1 1 of
this column Ninsikilla, or Eressikilla, stands for Damkina, wife of Enki.

11. e-gu-kar-ra. Cf. E. Chiera, BBS viii. No. 169, col. ii. 1 . 7*
Ehe quay of Eridu is mentioned in AJSL xxxix. 166, 1 . 2.

12. Read e-suhur-e = bit sahuru.

13. For Shamash in the lower world, see CT xvi. PI. 46, 1 . 195.

14. See pp. 190-3.

15. Morris Jastrow, G. A. Barton, P. Maurus Witzel. I am con-

vinced that my interpretation was wrong here, and chiefly by the similar
Accadian text edited by P. Dhorme, RA vii. 18, col. ii. 2, and by the
Sumerian myth edited by myself in RA xix. 67—77. especially

Eannatum a-sag-ga su-dug-ga ^Ningirsu-ka-day “ E. whose seed was


404


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


poured into the womb by Ningirsu,” Stela of the Vultures y obverse v.
1-3, Thureau-Dangin [e], p. 10. Also Gudea’s birth in natural man-
ner by the goddess Gatumdug, in Gudea, Cylinder A, 3, 8, is another
example of this myth.

16. Compare the revelation of Enki to Damkina concerning Ibik-
Ishtar, “ the creation of Enki,” Z/f xxxi. 92, 11 . 8—10.

17. On us .. . ziy see us-sigy siky AJSL xxxix. 166, 1 . 5; JRAS
1925, p. 494,1. 23.

18. Enlil issued the same order when he lay with Ninlil, RA xix.
73, 11. 32-3.

19. Epithet of Enki’s wife.

20. lal = wasaru; see Langdon [a], p, 80, n. I.

21. Cf. RA xix. 74, 1 . 43, and PBS x. 192, 1 . 7.

22. Identified with the poppy by some scholars.

23. gts-mal is not the sign for weapon {lita^ in the period of this
text.

24. RA xix. 76.

Chapter VI

1. The evidence has been popularly presented by Harold Peake,
The Floody London, 1930, pp. 95—112. See also Illustrated London
NewSy 1930, Feb. 8, pp. 206-7.

2. See Langdon, OECT ii. 9, n. 5.

3. British Museum, K. 4874, 1 . 13.

4. See OECT ii. 8, n. 3.

5. Berossus, as preserved by Eusebius. See Cory, pp. 26-9.

6. See the article “ Puranas,” by F. E. Pargiter in ERE x. 447—
55, and OECT ii. 26—7.

7. See OECT ii. 2—3.

8. See p. 38.

9. The original text was published by A. Poebel, PBS v. No. 1,
with translation, PBS iv. 9—70. Translation by E. Ebeling, in Gress-
mann, p. 198, and by Ungnad [f], p. I2i.

10. See S. Langdon, Babylonian Wisdoniy pp. 88—9; E. Ebeling,
KeilinschAjt-Texte Religibsen Inhalts , No. III.

11. In any case mountains in the far west, and not mons Masius in
Armenia. Hardly to be connected with Masis in the Alexander Legend,
E. A. Budge, The History of Alexander the Greaty p. 168, 1 . lOI. The
following passages are taken from the Epic of Gilgamish, Tablet IX.

1 2. End of Tablet IX, col. ii.

13. Read probably ul inamdin-su \^ana amart] qa-ab-sa arkat-suy
after col. v. 34.

14. Bruno Meissner, Mitteilungen der V order asiatischen Gesellschajty
1902, No. I. Thompson [e], p. 43.


NOTES


405

15. A. \Jngna.A.,Gilgamesch Epos, p. 27. Also Zi-du-ri, J. Fried-
rich, in ZA xxxix. 22, 1 . 9.

26. For the Minaean inscriptions at al-‘ 01 a and the prolific inscrip-
tional material of the Lihyani or Thamudi of the sixth century B.c.
there, see D. H. Muller, “ Epigraphische Denkmaler aus Arabischen,”
DWAWy 1889. For the Safa inscriptions of the Hauran, see Dussaud
. The only Himyaritic names based on god as brother, known to
me, are Ah-nadab or Ahi-nadab, “ the brother is generous.” Cf.
Hebrew Ahi-nadab, Assyrian Ahi-nadbi, and Phoenician Ah-nadab,
Tallquist [a], p. 17, and Ahu-Karib, “the brother is gracious,” Piker,
PSBA, 1916, p. 156.

27. Tallquist [a], p. 16.

28. ibid. ypp. 17,305.

29. Syria, v. 135-157; Vincent, RB, 1925, pp. 1 80 IT. This tomb
inscription of Ahi-ram of Gebal is dated by Dussaud on the basis of
Egyptian antiquities found with it as early as the fourteenth century, but
the epigraphy is decisively against the early date. The Egyptian monu-
ments found with the sarcophagus of Ahiram afford no evidence for
the date of the sarcophagus, and the Phoenician inscription cut in the
wall of the tomb-shaft is also no evidence that it is contemporary with
the Egyptian remains. The best epigraphists whom I have consulted
also emphatically deny the early date.

30. The title ^ammu, ^am, in Semitic religion is not found in early
Accadian, and appears first in Babylonian with the Amoritic invasion.
See Bauer, p. 73.

31. Gray, p. 254, saw this difficulty. See p. 12, where a more
probable reason based on Enlil as brother of Aruru is discussed.

32. Ungnad [d], p. 86.

33. Judges i. 35.

34. In any case a bird.

35. Of Yaw in Deut. xxxii. 4, 18; in the VPr Pedah-zur, “the
ransom of Zur,” and in the name of a city in Judah, Beth-zur, “ House
of Zur”; of some Aramaic deity in Bar-zur, “Son of Zur,” Cooke,
No. 62, I. But see Gray, pp. 195—6. According to Piker, PSBA,
1916, p. 173, the word sor is employed in Himyaric as a title of a god,
Zor-‘addan.

36. Animal names in Sumerian do not exist. There such epithets as
“ dog,” “ calf,” in Sumerian mean “ servant ” or “ offspring.” See
ERE ix. 1 7 1.

V 26


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


380

37. See Dussaud, NAMS x. 616, for Dhi’b at Safa in the Hauran,
first century a.d. For the name in classical Arabic, see Margoliouth,
“ Names (Arabic),” ERE ix. 138. Cf. the Palmyrene (Aramaic)
name ‘Ugaitu, “ the little mountain goat.”

38. E. Littmann, “ Vorbericht der deutschen Aksum Expedition,”
ABAW, 1906, p. 9, 1 . 4; Nielsen, “ Die Athiopischen Gbtter,”
ZDMG Ixvi. 589-600.

39. According to Nielsen the Ethiopic Earth deity is the Sun-goddess
of South Arabia. An exact parallel to this exists in Sumerian, where
the Earth-god Enlil is often identified with Babbar-Shamash. See
Langdon, PBS x. 158, n. i, 308, n. 2.

40. Numbers xxi. 29.

41. Exodus iv. 22.

42. Deut. xxxii. 6.

43. Deut. V. 18.

44. Jeremiah xxxi. 9, 20. See above, p. 7, on the fatherhood of
god.

45. Heracles apxvy^T"<l^> Cooke, No. 36.

46. Ungnad, [c], p. 409.

47. So in Assyrian.

48. Noldeke, p. 103. For Hebrew names composed with ab,
“ father,” as title of Yaw, El, or some Canaanitish deity, see Gray,
pp. 22—34. For those containing ben, “son,” bath, “ daughter,” ibid.,
PP- 64-75- J- G. Frazer, Adonis, Attis, Osiris, p. 44, n. 4, misunder-
stands the Semitic structure of these names when he translates, for
example, Abi-yah by “ Father of Jehovah,” etc., and argues that human
kings married with the Mother-goddess and produced the heir to the
throne. These names are not construct formations, as Gray, p. 79,
proved. A name like Yo-ah cannot mean anything but “ Jo is brother.”

49. See Langdon [e], pp. 20—23.

50. ibid., p. 23. Hence a name like §es-kalla, “the brother is
strong,” may refer to Tammuz (see p. or to Enlil. For names in
which ses clearly refers to Tammuz, see Chiera, PBS xi. 235—6.

5 1 . A title of the Mother-goddess. See for ama names, Chiera,
PBS xi. 241-2.

52. lipit qat ^^°'^Arurn mitharis nafisti. See Langdon, [e], p. 26,

n. 5.

53. Jensen, KB vi.^ 62, 9 = 58, 5.

54. Cf. Dammu-mu-al-lid, Tallquist [a], p. 254, s.v. “ Dammu.”
But Ungnad , p. 407, 36, questions the reading.

55. MiiXirra, Herodotus, I. 131. See Zimmern, KAT^ p. 423,

n. 7.

56. RESi. 18.2; hi. 15.90.

57. See Gray, p. 64, n. 2.


NOTES


381

58. Hubert Grimme, OLZ, 1912, p. 16, tries to explain these names
by transformation of a male deity into a female. He thinks that ‘Ashtar-
Kemosh means “ Kemosh as a female deity,” and I suppose logically he
would interpret Eshmun-'Ashtar by ‘Ashtar as a male deity. The Jews
of Elephantine in Egypt worshipped several deities of this type, ‘ Anat-
Yaw, ‘Anat-Bethel, Herem-Bethel, Ashim-Bethel, all of which are ap-
parently combinations of a female and male deity. See Cowley, pp.
xviii, xix. Combinations of male deities are common in Assyria; Asur-
Adad is specifically explained as a type of Asur who exercises the func-
tions of the Rain and Omen-god Adad, Rawlinson, iii. 66, obverse, iv.
35—37; Dagan-Asur, ibid.^ i. 14.

59. Dussaud , x. 41 1—745.

60. This spelling indicates rather the Arabic ildt with article al-ildty
as Brockelmann, i. 257, states.

61. Dussand, of. cit., p. 457, is clearly right in identifying Hat
of the North Arabians with Astarte. Nielsen , i. 253—265, ar-
gues that Hat in the Hauran is also the great Sun-goddess of South
Arabia.

62. So Fleischer, Wellhausen, Ndldeke, in Nielsen, ibid., p. 256.

63. Nielsen’s principal argument in favour of Hat as a Sun-goddess in
North Arabia of the Hauran is the design of the sun, a circle with rays,
which accompanies several rock inscriptions, as ZDMG xxx. 514, Tafel
I.e.; Dussaud . No. 307. On Vogiie, ibid.. No. 269, the sun is
represented by a plain cross in a circle. This is a common Babylonian
design for the Sun-god. See Langdon, JRASy 1927, p. 44. But the
North Arabian Hat, al-ilat, Allat, was identified with Athena, the War-
goddess, and hence is Ishtar as War-goddess, Langdon [h], p. 100 f.
For Allat = Athena, see the inscription on an altar found at Cordova,
Syria, v. 344, 'KB-qva ’AXXdfl, and Dussaud [a], p. 129. The Palmy-
rene NPr Wahab-ilat, “ Gift of Hat,” is rendered by the Greek Atheno-
doros, Clermont-Ganneau, RB, 1920, p. 392. Allat in Safaitic inscrip-
tions is also the planet Venus, a complete assimilation to the Babylonian
Ishtar.

64. Here written “^*Na-ba-ai-te, gentilic Na-ba-ai-ti-ai (Nabataean),
who are certainly the ancient Arabian people mentioned in Genesis and
Deutero-Isaiah, Nebajoth. In the Nabataean inscriptions they are called
N-b-t-u, pronounced Nabataei by Pliny in Latin; hence many scholars
deny the identity of the Assyrian and Hebrew name with the Naba-
taeans of Arabia Petraea. See Streck, p. 66, n. 4.

65. Hesychius, i. 533, s. v. Aovffdprjv; Dalman, p. 50; Hill ,
p. xxvi.

66. Briinnow and Domaszewski, i. 189.

67. In any case Strabo describes the Nabataeans as sun worshippers,
xvi. 4. 26.


382 SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY

68. See Briinnow, op. cit., p. 191. Epiphanius identifies Chaabu
with Core.

69. Kazwmi Atar el-Bilad, cited by Briinnow, p. 188.

70. Vogiie, at Salhad, Nabataean Inscriptions, No. 8.

71. For the explanation of this baetyl as symbol of Dusares, see Hill
[a], p. xxvii.

72. Mordtmann, ZDMG xxix. loi.

73. ZDMG xxix. 99.

74. CT xxiv. 13, 1 . 39 and 25, 1 . 95.

75. Origen, contra Celsum, v. 37.

76. See Daremberg and Saglio, article “ Dusares,” by Lenormant,
and Cumont’s article “ Dusares ” in Pauly- Wissowa.

77. See the myth of the death and resurrection of Bel-Marduk.

78. Aion, personification in late Greek mysteries of “The Age,”
the period when a new era of happiness should replace the mortal age
of sorrow. See on the Alexandrian legend and cult, Reitzenstein, pp.
195—6, with literature.

79. See Jules Girard, “ Dionysia,” Dictionnaire des Antiquites,
p. 233. Herodotus, iii, 8, says that the Arabic name of Dionysus
was ‘Orotalt, an obscure word which probably ends with “ Alat.”
He is then the “ Orot ” of the goddess Alat, his mother. This is
apparently a corruption of Walad-alat, “ child of Alat.” On the
festival of Dionysus, called Anthesteria, and its Asiatic origin see also
Deubner.

80. Cumont, p. 98.

81. Hill , Plate 12, 11 . 19-22.

82. z^zW., Plate 19,11. 1-4.

83. Cumont, p. no, n. 5.

84. Tux’? TToXecos. See “ Tyche ” in Roscher and Daremberg-Saglio.

85. For Allat of Petra on coins see Hill , Plate v. 10, ii, 13,

14, 15-

86. Briinnow and Domaszewski, i. 225, 182, Fig. 212.

87. Cumont, p. no.

88. ibid.y Plate Ixxxii and p. 216.

89. Here always in Greek Narata.

90. Langdon [h], pp. 48—49, 53, n. 4. She is the sister of Tam-
muz, and particularly associated with rivers and flocks. She appears as
the wife of Nebo, hirat ‘’Muzibsa, RA xi. 97, 1 . 3; hirat '^Nabi, vs. i. 36,

i. 5.

91. mixs in inscriptions from the Hejra, Cooke, No. 79, 5; 80,
4; 86, 8. The word is here read as a feminine plural, after Wellhausen,
p. 24, but as a singular, Manuthu, by Cooke. Goldzieher, in Archaeo-
log. epigr. Mittheil. aus CEsterreich, vi. 109 (1882), also takes the word
as plural, from the Latin inscription in Aquileja, Manawat, with Melag-


NOTES 383

bel (= Melekbel), the Sun-god of Palmyra. See Langdon, “The
Semitic goddess of Fate, Fortuna-Tyche,” JRAS xxi. 9 (1930).

92. in NPr Ta‘bad-Manat, Littman, MV AG 1904, PL i. 34.

93. Wellhausen, ZDMG Ixxvi. 698; Fischer, ibid., Ixxvii. 120;
Dalman, p. 52.

94. Dusares and Manathu, CIS ii. 320 F.

95. A West Semitic goddess of Fate.

96. Isaiah Ixv. ii.

97. The verb m-n-w, m-n-j, is common to all Semitic languages,
and means “ to count,” “ to assign to,” “ to apportion,” “ to allot.”
The feminine form appears perhaps in me-nat E-mah, “ She who as-
signs fate”(?) in Emah, title of the Mother-goddess nunus-egi-me-a,
Rawlinson, ii. 59 A 39; L. W. King, Catalogue SufpL, No. 51, 10.
Here a title of ^Mahhelit ilani. The statement in Gesenius, Thesaurus,
addenda, p. 97b, that Meni is found on coins of the Persian period in the
NPr Abdmeni is false. The reading is Abrokomu. See Babelon,
p. Ixxx.

98. Langdon, “Hymn to Ishtar as the Belit of Nippur,” AKF, i.
21, 11 . 5—7. The same titles in the great theological list, CT xxiv.
41,11. 81—2. There Me-nu-an-nim, Me-nu-ul-lim.

99. A title of Ishtar as the “ spinning goddess ” is uttu, a Sumerian
word explained by minutu, “ fate.” The mythology of a goddess who
spins and cuts the thread of life belongs eventually to Sumerian religion,
and appears in Greece in the characters of the three Moirae. See Lang-
don, “ The Semitic Goddess of Fate,” JRAS, 1929.

100. See Wellhausen, pp. 25—29.

101. Zimmern [a], ii. 572-589.

102. Simat malki, Ebeling, KAR, p. 109, Rev. ii.

103. ^^°'*stmati.

104. '^^^*simdti is singular in Schroeder, KAV No. 42, col. ii. 1 . 25;
RA xiv. 171, col. ii. 1 . I; KAV No. 42, col. ii. 1 . 33; RA xiv. 71, col.
ii. 11 . 9—22. But plural, syn. Ishtarati, Thurean-Dangin [d], pp. 2—3.
For the singular cf. NPr Simti-ippessir, “ My fate is appeased,” RA ix.
56, No. 3.

105. R Arch ii. 229 (1903), iii. 252, n. 2 (1904).

106. “Lord of Revelry,” identified with Jupiter. See Cumont in
Pauly-Wissowa, sub voce.

107. R Arch ii. 29 (1903). A similar Latin inscription from this
temple in CIL iii. 159.

108. The name is also written ’Zeifuos on an inscription from near
Aleppo, Lidzbarski [a], ii. 323. Dussaud, R Arch, 1954, p. 257, re-
gards Seimios as a masculine form of Semia, and since Semi is daugh-
ter of Adad = Balmarcod, he takes Seimios to be the son of Adad.
There are in fact two Aramaean deities known as Apil-Adad and Marat-


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


384

Adad. See Tallquist , p. 227, and Rawlinson, in. 66, obv. iii. 38.
The Aramaic may have been Bar-Adad and Barat-Adad.

109. CRAIy 1902, p. 235; R Arch 387 (1902).

no. See Ronzevalle, R Arch ii. 29 ff. (1903). The last name is
a plural. Cf. ShTmati for Shimti above, and Ashtaroth, Anathoth
in OT.

111. 2 Kings xvii. 30. H Grimme, OLZ, 1912, p. 14. For the
form Ashima = Shima = Bab. Shimtu, cf. Abast for Bast, Cooke,
p. 69; Arsa = Rusa, p. 48.

1 1 2. See previous note.

1 13. She probably has a quiver with arrows slung from each
shoulder, as in designs of the martial Ishtar, Langdon [h], Plate i.
No. I.

1 14. The LXX renders his name by dainoiv. This deity’s gender
is fixed by NPr Gad-ram, Chabot, p. 929 (Phoenician); Gad-tob,
pp. 236, 1167 (Nabataean); Gadmelk (Hebrew).

1 1 5. Wellhausen, p. 59.

1 16. This title is of South Arabian origin, and a title of the Mother-
goddess Allat. She is the evening star in Safaitic inscriptions, Well-
hausen, p. 58; Dussaud [a], pp. 144 flF.; Littmann, p. 113.

1 17. For Allat as Venus see Dussaud [a], p. 131.

1 18. Wellhausen, p. 59.

119. Langdon [h],p. 181.

120. Zimmern, BSGW Ixviii. 26, 11 . 13-14.

1 2 1 . See ‘Anat, below.

122. Dussaud, R Arch, 1903, p. 128.

123. THttu, “nun,” “sacred woman,” describes Ishtar as patron-
ess of priestesses and harlots. Venus as evening star is called Ttib =
simtu, Vimtan, “twilight.” Te-li-ti ‘’Is-tar, (Craig, p. 67, 1 . 26) is
a variant of "^zib Tstar, Ebeling, KAR p. 144, 1 . 16. ^imtu, “ twilight,”
may be the same as Simtu, “ fate,” and Ishtar’s title, Shimti, “ Fate,”
may be derived from astrology, while the Semitic mythology of Ishtar as
Fortuna, Fata, may rest upon omens taken from her planet.

124. JRAS, 1926, pp. 18, 11 . 4-6, 36, II. 18-20.

125. ibid., pp. 32, 37 ff.

126. Jer. vii. 18.

127. Jer. xliv. 17.

128. In my opinion Hammurabi, Ammarabi, etc., is Amraphel, king
of Kingin (Kingir, Singir, Heb. Shinegar, Shinar, Gen. xiv. 9). For
attempts to disprove this, see Albright, JSOR x. 231 ff., where the im-
possible reading ‘Ammurawih is accepted. In a late Assyrian letter
the reading Am-mu-ra-pi lugal may be the true pronunciation of the
word as heard by the early Hebrew scribes. Lugal is the Sumerian
word for §arru, “ king,” but Ammurabi lugal occurs unnumbered times


NOTES


385

in cuneiform writing, and lugal may have been read lu, since the ordinary
word lii = ameluy “ free-man,” belu, “ lord,” is a variant of lugal, cf.
Lugal-an-da, Lu-an-da, Allotte de la Fuye, No. 13 1, v. i. Granted
that in this common phrase the title was pronounced lu, Amraphel is the
direct rendering of it. See Jirku , p. 57; Bauer, pp. 53 flF.

129. i.e., “remained not in her war chariot.” See Fig. ii.

130. Zimmern , p. 16, 14—20.

13 1. Fig. II shews the Bab. Ishtar in her war chariot. Astarte’s
chariot on coins of Syria and Phoenicia is taken from Bab. mythology.
See the coin of Sidon, Hill [a], Plate xxv, 1 1, above the quadriga of the
Sun-god.

132. Zimmern , p. 26, 21—28.

133. Scheil, RA XV. 175, 25-30.

134. ibid., p. 1 8 1.

135. Cf. AKF i. 23, 26, where Ishtar is called mufahhirat saltum.

136. Ishullanu, gardener in the service of Anu. Two gardeners of
Anu are the gods Igi-sig-sig (“bright-eyed”) and Ennunsilimma
(“guardian of peace”), CT xxiv, 3, 25 = 21, 59.

137. Text tal-la-li, which may be an error for hulali, after Jensen.

138. See Chapter VII.

139. For a representation of Gilgamish and Enkidu in combat with
the bull, which is faithful to the text of the epic, where Enkidu seizes the
bull by the tail, see Ward, No. 182.

140. For the astronomical meaning of this tale see Ungnad [e],
pp. 1 1— 13. According to him the back parts of the bull are still missing,
and this he explains from the mutilation described in the epic.

141. See Bauer, pp. 69, 73. Anatum is a title of the Western
Asratu, Astart, Pinches in Paul Haupt Festschrijt, p. 218. As-tar-tu,
i.e. Astarte, is described as a War-goddess in a cuneiform list of
Phoenician deities by Asarhaddon, K 3500, rev. ii. 18; RA xxvi. 191,
read AZ not IS.

142. See Erman and Ranke, p. 616, n. 3; Albright, AJSL xli.
82-3.

143. Especially at Gebal.

144. See Langdon [h], pp. 95 f.

145. Rowe, MJ xvi. 310.

146. So I Sam, xxxi. lo, but in i Chron. x. 10, Saul’s head was
placed in the temple of Dagon.

147. See W. R. Smith, pp. 219, 294.

148. See Koldewey, p. 57.

149. Andrae, pp. 34-38.

150. For the serpent as symbol of the Earth-goddess, see Langdon
[h],pp. 114-128.

1 5 1 . This seems to be their use in Babylonia and Assyria, as on the


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


386

seal, Menant, i. 163. The Canaanitish shrine in Fig. 15 does not quite
agree with this explanation.

152. Present feminine participle of -wapaKhirTOiv, “to peep out of
a window.”

153. See Herbig in OLZ, 1927, pp. 917-922, with Plate of
Cypriote dove houses and the goddess peering from a window. See
also Gressmann, ii. Abb. 523—4.

154. Kiltlt sa afatiy “ Kilili of windows,” ShurpUy hi. 74.

155. Ebeling, MVAGy 1918, part 2, pp. 22, 32 ff.

156. Craig, p. 57, 32.

157. CT xvii. 35, 73 = Ebeling, KAR 46, 7. The Sumerian has
here igi-laly “ she who peers out.”

158. BA hi. 238, 1 . 40 = Rawlinson, hi, Plate 66, obv. hi. 16, 17.

159. ShurfUy hi. 74—6.

160. ibid.y 1. 77.

16 1. Either aquatic bird or winged insect. Hunger, MVAGy 1909,
p. 281. Zimmern, OLZ, 1918, p. i, decides for kililty “crown,” on
account of the statement in Herodotus, i. 199; each year all Baby-
lonian women must give themselves once to a stranger for hire in the
temple of Aphrodite (Ishtar). Many sat in the sacred area of her
temple wearing a crown made from a cord.

162. Knudtzon, No. 23.

163. See also Koldewey, p. 272; Layard, p. 477; Peters, ii. 374—5.

164. For the various local types see Contenau [a].

165. Gen. xxxi. 19-34.

166. Gen. XXXV. 4.

167. I Sam. xix. 13.

168. Hosea hi. 4.

169. Chiera, PBS i. 89, 10-12.

170. Littmann, p. 77.

1 7 1. talimat ''^‘^Samas.

172. On Azizos and Monimos, see Dussaud, R Archy 1903, pp.
128-133.

173. Dussaud, p. 371.

174. See the Aramaic or West Semitic NPra in Assyria of the eighth
and seventh centuries B.c., A-ta-a-id-ri, At-ta-a-id-ri, “ Ata is my
help”; A-ta-su-ri, “Ata is my bulwark.” A coin from Hierapolis,
reign of Alexander the Great, has the head of the goddess on Obv. with
inscription 77 o^J/, “‘Ata,” Babelon, p. 45, No. 316, and pp. li, liii.
Figs. 14, 15. Among these Aramaic NPra from Harran, east of the
Euphrates, is found A-tar-id-ri. See Johns [a], p. 17.

175. On Fig. 21 this refers to the miniature shrine, apparently symbol
of the ark of the Deluge. It has been suggested that semeios here refers
to Semea, Simi.


NOTES 387

176. Hierapolis in North Syria is 1 10 miles east of the sea-coast, and
18 miles west of the Euphrates.

177. Lucian, de Dea Syria, §§ 12—13, 33, 48.

178. Saturnalia,

179. This is the view of numismatists. See Hill , p. xci.

180. Cook, i. 586.

18 1. Cooke, p. 52.

182. Cassite period, PBS x. 338, 1 . 23; First Dynasty, RA xiii. 1 1.

183. CT XXV. 16, 24-7.

184. CT XXV. 16, 22. Adad of the city Hallaba, MV AG, 1908,
p. 234, period eighth century b.c. According to most scholars Halman,
which occurs earlier (ninth century), is Aleppo.

185. MV AG, 1908, pp. 236, 6.

186. Ebeling, KAR 142, iii. 24.

Azazel, to whom propitiation was thus made, is clearly a
primitive satyr of the flocks, the leader of the hairy race of
Jinns called §e‘irim, and a good demon whom later mythology
transformed into a devil. He corresponds to the Sumerian
genius Ninamaskug, “ Lord of the pure cattle-stall,” ® de-
scribed as the shepherd and psalmist of Enlil. In a similar
ritual, the mashhulduhhu in Babylonian magic, “ the goat
upon which sin was poured out ” was sacred to Ninamaskug.
This word {mashhulduhhu) is of Sumerian origin and ap-
parently meant a live goat consecrated by priests. A demon
could be expelled from a man by placing the head of the
“ scapegoat ” (so the ancient versions rendered Azazel) to the
head of the man. The poisonous tabu was cast into the goat’s
mouth and the demon departed into the goat.’“ The cere-
mony was performed at sunset, when the “ scapegoat ” was
placed next to the man’s body. The fillet which had been tied
to the goat’s head was then tied to the patient’s head.’^


DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 357

It may be assumed that Azazel was a primitive Semitic genius
of the flocks j in late Jewish mythology, chiefly preserved in the
Book of Enoch, he was transformed into one of the angels who
descended from Heaven and married the daughters of men.
He is usually described as the leader of these angels j they cor-
rupted the earth, and their offspring were giants. And so Yaw
caused Azazel to be bound and cast into a pit in the desert j for
according to Jewish tradition the “ scapegoat ” was sent to per-
ish in the desert. The myth that demons cohabit with women,
and female demons with men, is universal in Semitic folk-lore
and in Sumerian. Female demons are said to be “ the harlot,
mother womb that bears children,” and the ala (Sumerian)
demon was bisexual j a man is said to have impregnated him.^®
The Jinn of Arabian demonology are said to cohabit with hu-
man beings, and their offspring are also invisible spirits.^* Per-
sian demonology contains a legend of how the demon Azi rav-
ished two beautiful women, but there is no other reference to
this belief in Persian sources.^^

In Sumero-Babylonian mythology the devils were the off-
spring of Anu, the Heaven-god.

“ Cold, fever diminishing all things.

Evil devil whom Anu begat.

Namtaru, beloved son of Enlil, borne by Ereshkigal.

On high they have decimated, on earth they have laid misery.

They are the creation of Hell.

On high they roar, on earth they shriek.

Bitter poison sent by the gods are they.

Great storms which have been let loose from Heaven are they.

Owl( ? ) which cries in the city are they.

Begotten by Anu, children, offspring of the nether world are they.”

“ Giants seven times two are they.

All one begetting, created by the begetting of Anu, are they.

They are surging blasts of wind.

A wife they married not, children they begat not.

Child they know not.

Horses which grew up in the mountain are they.

They are wicked ones of Enki.


358


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


Throne-bearers of the gods are they.

To trouble the streets they stand in the ways.

They stalk before Nergal, strong hero of Enlil.”

The most terrible of all Sumerian demonesses, the Lamme,
Lamashtu in Babylonian, was the daughter of the Heaven-god.
The devils of Sumero-Babylonian mythology were, therefore,
sons of the Heaven-god,” corresponding to the “ sons of
Elohim ” in the Semitic myth preserved in the early Hebrew
source. Genesis vi. 1-4. The “ sons of Elbhim ” saw the daugh-
ters of men and took for themselves wives which they chose,
and so the Nephilim or giants were born, and the Gibborim, or
heroes of old, men of fame. These giants, which were believed
to have inhabited the earth in prehistoric times, were also
known as Rephaim, whom the Israelites claimed to have found
in Moab (Emim and Anaqim, p. 355) among the Ammonites,
and in Bashan, in Trans- Jordania. Likewise their spies found
Nephilim in southern Canaan, among whom were the “ sons
of Anaq,” identical with the fabulous Anaqim of the Deutero-
nomic account.

A class of demons in Hebrew mythology were the sedim^
singular sed, derived from Babylonia, where the seduy Su-
merian alady is by origin a bovine spirit, in sculpture usually
represented by colossal winged bulls. Fig. 96 shews one of
these sedu placed at the palace-gate of Ashurnazirpal. These
protecting spirits are invariably mentioned with the lamma or
lamassUy probably winged cows as seen in Fig. 97, or in any
case winged female animals. Asarhaddon boasted that he
placed sedus and lamassus at the right and left of his door-
way, “ which turn back the breast of the evil one, as was their
purpose, protecting the foot-way, bringing peace to the foot-
steps of the king their maker.” The representation of the sedu-
genius, as seen in Fig. 96, probably affords only a special design
of the various forms in which they presented themselves to the
vivid imagination of the Babylonians and Assyrians. This
winged bull is one of the good seduy and one passage states that


DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 359

the “good sedu” is a goat {Nies Collectioriy ii. 22, 140 and
177). There were also evil

“ Decimating Heaven and Earth, sMu decimating the land,

Sedu decimating the land, whose power is of Heaven,

Whose power is of Heaven, whose roving is in Heaven.



The galluy the goring ox, the mighty ghost.

Ghost which violates all houses.

Shameless gallu, seven are they.

They grind the land like meal,

They know not mercy.

Raging against the people.

Eaters of the flesh, causing blood to flow like rain, drinking the
arteries.

Once on a time, in the place of the forms of the gods.


36 o SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY



Fig. 97. The Sumerian Lamassu


DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 361

In the house of the god of the holy chamber, of the goddess of flocks
and grain, they grew fat.

The galluy who are full of wickedness, are they.

Ceaselessly they eat blood.

Cause them to swear the curse, and may they not return outside or in-
side (the house).

May they be cursed by the life of Heaven and Earth.”

Here the sedu are identical with the seven devils, and are
explicitly described as ghosts who ravage the land in the shape
of bulls. They are described as evil and merciless, and asso-
ciated with ghosts from the grave. The ideogram employed
in writing sedu probably means “ strong one of the pit,” a
spirit whose abode is in Hell. The ideogram for “ bull ” has
also the value alad {= sedu^ and may be used besides as a
title of Nergal, lord of the dead. The good and evil sedu was,
therefore, a genius of the underworld, usually conceived of as
a bull and, like all other demons, connected with wander-
ing souls of the dead. These then were the mythical beings
of Canaanitish mythology. The writer of the song attributed
to Moses, but of a later age, Deuteronomy xxxii. 17, accused
the Hebrews of sacrificing to the sedim (devils) “ which are
no god.” The writer of Psalm cvi. 37 states that, in the old
paganism of Canaan, sons and daughters were sacrificed to the
sedim, from which the inference may be drawn that here also
the sedim were associated with Nergal, or with Malik (Mo-
loch) the terrible god of plague, fiery heat, and Inferno. Hu-
man sacrifies of expiation to this god have been discussed on
page 52, and the same sacrifices would naturally be made to
demons who served Nergal or Moloch. The sedim survived
in late Jewish mythology, and Baruch, writing in New Testa-
ment times, has these lines in his lamentation over Jerusalem:

“ I will call the Sirens from the sea.

And ye Liliths, come ye from the desert.

And ye Shedim and dragons (Tannim) from the forests.”^®

The Babylonian demon Lilu, Lillu, derived from Sumerian
lily “ wind,” “ wind-demon,” had the unenviable and baneful


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


362

role of a spirit of lasciviousness, enticing women in their sleep.
His counterpart, the demoness Lilitu, or Ardat Lilli, Ardat
Lili, “ Handmaid of Lilu,” exercised the same pernicious in-
fluence over men, and enjoys the unique distinction of having
handed down to our times the only Sumerian word which sur-
vives in the English language. The demon Lilu, and the
demonesses Lilitu and Ardat Lili, are named regularly among
the ordinary names of the Sumerian demons as Ullay kiskil Ullay
“ Maid of Ullay” and kiskil-uddakarruy “ Maid who seizes away
the light,” the last being only a late form of Lilith. The regu-
lar list of these devils in Babylonia is, “ Wicked Utukku, wicked
Alu, wicked ghost {etimmu)y wicked Gallu, wicked god, wicked
Spy (Rabisu) Lamashtu, Labasu, the Seizer (Ahhazu), Lilu,
Lilith, Maid of Lilu,” in all twelve demons, who cause disease,
pestilence, and death.®^

There is no special myth concerning either Lilu or Lilitu in
cuneiform texts but the activities of the group mentioned above
are defined in one text as follows:

“ He against whom the wicked Utukku hurled himself,

Whom in his bed the wicked Alu covered,

Whom the wicked ghost by night overwhelmed.

Whom the great Gallu assaulted.

Whose limbs the wicked god lacerated.

Whom Lamashtu possessed with a seizing hand,

Whom Labasu overwhelmed.

Whom the Seizer fastened upon.

Whom the Maid of Lilu chose.

The man, whom the Maid of Lilu pressed to her bosom.”

The omission of the Spy and Lilu in this list indicates their
inferior importance. Lilitu, the demoness of the wind who
seduced men by night, passed into Hebrew mythology and is
the most baneful and frequently mentioned of evil spirits
throughout the history of Judaism to the present day. She
figures largely in late Greek and in Christian demonology, and
forms the subject of many Christian myths. A post-exilic poem


DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 363

and prophecy on the destruction of nations has these lines on
the desolation of Edom:

“ Wild beasts shall meet jackals,

And satyr cry to its fellow.

Only there shall Lilith have rest,

And find for herself a place of repose.”

In later Jewish demonology Lilith was a hairy night-
demoness, and the Targum warned men not to sleep alone in
a house for fear of her. She also inherited in Judaism the char-
acter of the dreadful child-slaying Babylonian Lamashtu. To
this day there are oral Rumanian tales of how the wind-maids
smote a man on the way with disease of the eyes, and how they
were found and overcome by St. Michael j and tales of the
demoness Avezuha who sought to harm Mary the Mother of
Jesus before the birth of her divine son. A Hebrew legend in
the “ Mystery of the Lord ” says that Lilith was the first wife
of Adam, mother of all the Sheddim {sedus)^ and a child-
stealer. There is a Syriac tale of how the holy Mar Ebedishu
bound Lilith, and forced her to reveal all her names. She ap-
proaches no house where her names are written.^^

In Mandean mythology there were Liliths, Zahriel being
the name of the Lilith who watched over the beds of women in
travail in order to steal the child. In Rumanian Christian
mythology the Sumero-Accadian male demon Gallu becomes
the child-stealing Lilith, under the form Gelu. A Jewish
charm written on a bowl has the following legend: Elijah the
prophet met the wicked Lilith on the road and asked her where
she was going, calling her “ thou foul one, spirit of foulness.”
She confessed that she was seeking the house of a woman in
child-birth to suck the marrow of the child’s bones, to devour
his flesh. Elijah restrained her in the name of Y(aw), and
she appealed to him not to ban her in the name of Y(aw), God
of Israel. She told him that if they repeated her names, or if
she saw her names written, she and her whole band would have
no power over that place. She gave fifteen names, and Elijah

V — 25


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


364

adjured her by Y(aw), the holy figure 613, by Abraham, Isaac,
the holy tabernacle, the Seraphs, the wheels and holy beasts,
and the ten books of the Law, not to come near the woman and
child.^'*

The most commonly named demons of Sumerian mythology
are the Utukku limnu, who seizes a man’s shoulder; Alu
limnu, who attacks a man’s breast; Etimmu limnu, who at-
tacks the bowels; Gallu limnu, who attacks a man’s hand,^®
often associated with the Asakku, “ the robber,” who attacks
the head, and the wicked Namtaru, who attacks the throat.
The earliest mention of any of these demons in Sumerian is by
Gudea who claims to have expelled the u-dug-ga, the terrible,
from his city.^^ The same ruler speaks of the “ favourable
u-dugy* who went before him. Not until the end of Sumerian
civilization is found the peculiar ideographic writing for this
good and evil spirit. The ideogram begins with the sign for
the fraction 2/3, whereas the sign for ghost, gigimy “he of
darkness,” in Accadian etimmUy begins with the sign for 1/3.
Both words have a similar meaning, and designate spirits which
have ascended from the lower world. Gigim or etimmu is
the ordinary word for the souls of the departed, and passed
into the late Jewish vocabulary as ftmtd^ It is possible that the
ideograms mean “ one-third divine,” “ two-thirds divine.”
Offerings to etimmey or souls of the departed, were a common
custom in Sumerian, Babylonian, and Assyrian religion. Dis-
eases and troubles of all kinds are attributed to the “ Hand of
a ghost.” The following passage defines the activities of
the seven demons, a number to which the larger list of twelve
was ordinarily reduced, in harmony with the mythological
power attached to the number “ seven.”

“ The wicked Utukku who slays man alive on the plain.

The wicked Alu who covers (man) like a garment.

The wicked Etimmu, the wicked Gallu, who bind the body.

The Lamme (Lamashtu), the Lammea (Labasu), who cause disease
in the body.

The Lilu who wanders in the plain.


DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 365

They have come nigh unto a suffering man on the outside.

They have brought about a painful malady in his body.

The curse of evil has come into his body.

An evil goblin they have placed in his body.

An evil bane has come into his body.

Evil poison they have placed in his body.

An evil malediction has come into his parts.

Evil and trouble they have placed in his body.

Poison and taint have come into his body.

They have produced evil.

Evil being, evil face, evil mouth, evil tongue.

Sorcery, venom, slaver, wricked machinations.

Which are produced in the body of the sick man.

O woe for the sick man whom they cause to moan like a saharrat-
pot.”

They are described in this text as having ascended from the
house of Ekur, and as the messengers of the Earth-god, Enlil.
The priest of magic entered to expel them with the “ Utukku
{sedu^ of mercy ” on his right hand, the “ Lamassu of mercy ”
on his left hand. In this list the demon Alu can be identified
with Ailo, one of the names of Lilith in Jewish demonology.®^
The Gallu passed into Greek mythology as FeXXo), Gello,
and is said to have been mentioned by Sappho. According to
Greek writers she was an overfond mother who died before her
time, and she appears to children and those who die prema-
turely (from Suidas) j she is said to have been the image of the
vampire Empousa and a demoness who snatches away chil-
dren.®® The names of the Sumerian and Babylonian demons
were, therefore, known to the classical Greek writers, and
Gallu, originally a male demon, passed into Greek as a female
and was identified with the child-snatching Lamia of Sumerian
demonology. Alu and Gallu both appear as forms of Lilith
throughout Jewish and Christian demonology, due to the fact
that the Greek ending 6 is feminine, and that they had been
confounded with Lamia and Lilitu, with whom they are con-
stantly mentioned. Gallu has survived to the present day as
one of the names of the demoness Lilith, and occurs repeatedly
in Christian demonology of the Middle Ages as Gelou, Gilou.


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


366

One of these legends, written in Greek, says that St. Michael,
descending from Sinai, met Abyzu, demoness of all ills, causing
the milk of women to be cold, frightening children in sleep.
St. Michael forced her to reveal her forty names, the first of
which is Gilou.®®

The most dreaded of all Sumerian demons was Lamme, or
Lamashtu in Accadian, the female vampire who slew children,
drank the blood of men, and ate their flesh. This name passed
into Greek mythology as Lamia, derived from another name
of her, Lam-me-a.®^ Sappho made mention of her, and a
Scholiast on Theocritus wrote that Lamia was queen of the
Laestrygonians and the same as Gello, “ who, being unfor-
tunate in her own offspring, desired, as they departed, to slay
all those that remained.” Through her title Gello this terrible
creation of Sumerian superstition passed into the demonology
of Europe. She appears first in the texts of the First Baby-
lonian dynasty,®® and in a series of thirteen incantations, which
continued to be used as the standard of magic ritual against her
malevolent activity in Babylonia and Assyria.®®

Following the late Assyrian edition, which adds a ritual after
each incantation, this demoness is described as follows, in the
first incantation. She has seven names, Lamme, daughter of
Anu, sister of the gods of the streets; Sword which shatters the
head; She that kindles a fire (fever); She whose face is hor-
rible; Controller of the slayers of the hand of Irnina; Mayest
thou swear by the name of the great gods and with the birds of
Heaven fly away.®^ The seven devils are also called the seven
wicked Lamme (Lamashti) and the seven Lammea (Labasi),
wicked fevers; and an incantation to protect a woman in child-
birth against this dreadful child-snatching demoness describes
her as the “ seven witches,” who bind men and murder
maidens.®® This text was written on amulets in accordance with
the tradition that a demon would enter no house where he saw
his name written, a belief which is common to all magical prac-
tices to this day. Fig. 98, a stone plaque whose upper shoul-

TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR


337


as the tenth century where the gods of the whole earth are said
to have held a feast of wailing in the temple AskuL Askul is
a corrupt survival of the name of Marduk’s temple Esagila,
and the legend concerning the assembly of gods is obviously
based upon one of the principal features of the Babylonian
New Year’s festival, when the gods of all Babylonia assembled
at Esagila to decree fates for the ensuing year. The survival
of a cult, in which the gods bewailed Tammuz in Esagila,
proves that this Harranian sect had kept alive the myth of the
Death and Resurrection of Marduk, which was, in fact, only
a transformation of the old Sumerian Tammuz myth.

Tammuz, therefore, survived for centuries in West Semitic
religion as a god of corn and vegetation, who died, and whose
death was attributed to a king in this pagan cult of Syria. In
the myth of the death of Bel-Marduk there are repeated refer-
ences to Bel’s having met a violent death.^ In the Sumero-
Babylonian liturgies there are no clear references to the death
of the young shepherd of the flocks and corn at the hands of a
king, or of another god, rival for the love of his beautiful sister
Ishtar. These texts refer frequently to the gallu and other
demons who seized Tammuz; one of them is called his slayer.^
The Sumerian myth, therefore, attributed the death of the
beautiful youth loved by Ishtar to the seven demons of the
lower world.*

Whatever may have been the origin of the myth among the
Harranlans that Tammuz was slain by a king, it is not certain
that a legend of this kind existed In the Sumerian texts. The
Harranians said that Tammuz summoned a king to worship
the seven planets and the twelve signs of the zodiac, and for
that reason the king slew him, but he returned to life. The
king repeatedly slew him, but each time he returned until he
was finally annihilated by grinding his bones in a mill. A
similar myth is told of the Christian martyr Saint George, born
at Lydda, modern Ludd in Palestine, 270 a.d. He was said to
have been an officer in the Roman army and a Christian. When


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


338

Diocletian persecuted the Christians this officer defied his em-
peror, resigned from the army, and suffered martyrdom, at
Nicomedia in Bithynia, the summer residence of Diocletian, in
the year of the persecution, 303 a.d.® He was said to have sum-
moned his king to turn to Christ, and for this reason the king
slew him. But he returned to lifej the king repeatedly slew
him, but like Tammuz he returned to life each time until he
was finally slain and buried at Lydda. The legend of St.
George was particularly famous in Armenia, where it gave a
name to the province Georgia. It was even more famous
among Islamic writers than among Christians in the Middle
Ages, and one of the Arabic writers who described the Tammuz
cult of the Harranians actually compares the legends of Tam-
muz and Saint George.®

According to another Arabic writer ’’ the legend of St. George
was transferred to the Tigris Valley. The king who slew him
lived at Mausil (Mossul). He is reported to have burned St.
George and to have scattered the ashes in the Tigris. The most
marvellous account of Djirdjis, as the Arabs called George of
Lydda, is related by the Arabic historian Tabari (ninth and
tenth centuries a.d.).® He places the story of George’s perse-
cutions at the hands of Dadyane (Diocletian) at Mossul and
repeats much the same tale with incredible stories of how the
Roman emperor endeavoured to destroy him. He was bound
to a plank and scraped with iron combs, but he died not. Dio-
cletian confined him in a cauldron of boiling water, but he came
out well and sound. He bound him hand and foot and had a
marble pillar laid on his back, so heavy that twenty men were
required to lift it. An angel came by night and lifted away
the pillar. He caused him to be sawn into two parts j each
half was cut into seven pieces and thrown to Hons. The lions
smelled the fourteen pieces and ate not. God assembled the
morsels and restored him to life. He was placed in a hollow
metal statue and baked for three days. The angel Michael
broke the statue and he came out alive. Finally the emperor


TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR


339

drove over his prostrate body in a chariot, whose wheels were
fitted with sharp knives. The body was severed in innumerable
pieces. They were assembled and burned and the ashes taken
to the shore of the sea. A wind gathered the ashes and George
again lived. He finally perished in some way at the hands of
Diocletian.

Saint George summoned Diocletian to turn to Christianity,
and Tammuz summoned a king to worship the stars. The
Christian myth, also a favourite one among the Arabians, is
obviously based upon the Tammuz legend of the Harranians.
An Arabic writer, Wahshijja, says that Tammuz was not a
Chaldaean, nor a Canaanite, nor a Hebrew, nor an Assyrian, but
a Djanbasien, or Djanbanien. This word seems to have no
relation to the word “ Shumerian,” which is undoubtedly meant
in this tradition. The same writer says that when the idols of
all the earth assembled before the golden idol of the sun in the
temple Askul (Esagila) in Babylon to bewail Tammuz, they
also wailed for one Yanbushad, who is furthermore described
as an ancient wise man.® Yanbushad is clearly the corruption of
some Babylonian name beginning with Nabu. This writer pre-
serves the older form of the name Tammuzi, based upon the
Sumerian original Dumu-zi.

Tammuz was consistently identified by early Christian writ-
ers with Adoni of Gebal (Byblos), and the Greek Adonis. In
the mythology of that cult there is also a similar legend of the
death of the young god. Bar Bahlul, a Syriac lexicographer of
the tenth century, says that Tamoza was a shepherd and hunter,
which agrees precisely with the Sumerian legends in which he
is constantly described as a shepherd. In Syrian legend this
Tamdza is said to have loved a beautiful woman from Cyprus
named Ba^alti, whose husband was Hephaestos. She fled with
Tammuz to the Lebanons, whither Hephaestos pursued the
fugitives. But Tammuz met Hephaestos and slew himj after-
wards Tammuz was slain by a boar. Ba‘alti died of love over
his body, and her father Heracles founded a feast of mourning


340


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


for her in the month Tammuz/® An earlier Christian Syriac
writer of the third century has the legend after this manner.
Ba‘alti, queen of Cyprus, was worshipped by the Phoenicians.
She fell in love with Tamdza, son of Kutar, king of the Phoeni-
cians, abandoned her kingdom, and took up her abode at Gebal.
She had loved Ares previously; Hephaestos, her husband, had
discovered them in intercourse, wherefore he slew Tammuz as
he was hunting wild hogs in the Lebanons.“ In all these leg-
ends Tammuz is employed by these Syriac writers for the Phoe-
nician Adoni-Esmun, since this name for the dying god was
more familiar to all the West Semitic peoples outside Phoenicia
than the local title (Adum) of Tammuz at Gebal. In fact,
a Sumerian title of Tammuz at Gebal is documented as early as
the fifteenth century; Rib-Addi, governor of Gebal, in a letter
to the king of Egypt, speaks of his god as Da-mu-ya, “ My
god Damu,” an ordinary title of Tammuz in the Sumerian litur-
gies. Beyond all doubt Adorn of Gebal, who is first mentioned
as Adonis by Strabo in the third century b.c., is only a Phoenician
title of the Babylonian Dumuzi, and his entire cult was bor-
rowed from Babylonia at an early period. Although the Phoe-
nician cult of Adorn and his lover, the Mother-goddess Astarte,
commonly called Ba‘alat of Gebal, developed certain new myth-
ological aspects in Phoenicia, the Syrian descriptions of them
as Tamdza and Ba^alti prove that they are borrowed from Du-
muzi and Ishtar, commonly called heltl, “ my lady,” of Baby-
lonia. The legend that Tammuz was slain by the husband of
the goddess is apparently peculiar to the Phoenician cult, but in
the case of St. George his death at the hands of a king was an
historical fact, which suggested to Christians the tales connected
with Tammuz in West Semitic mythology.

It is probable that the West Semitic word aduniy adoniy “ my
lord,” was a common title of Tammuz in Assyria and in the
Tammuz cults of the Syrian provinces as early as the age of
Hammurabi.^® The title Ba‘alti for Ishtar, his sister and lover
in the Phoenician cult, leaves no doubt concerning Babylonian


TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR


341


influence upon the Adonis cult. In the Tammuz hymns Ishtar
is repeatedly addressed as “ my lady ” in Sumerian, and as
hHtiy “ my lady,” in Accadian texts. Belti, “ my lady,” is char-
acteristic of the addresses to Zarbanit, wife of Marduk, and
Bel and Belti of Babylon usurped the role of Tammuz and
Ishtar in the late period.^^ Zarbanit is also addressed as
belit-ni, “ our lady,” the probable origin of the Syriac title of
the goddess who loved Tammuz, namely Baltin.^® The Baby-
lonian title “ our lady,” for the sister, wife, and lover of Tam-
muz and Adonis was, therefore, current among West Semitic
peoples in the periods preceding and following the rise of Chris-
tianity, and may have been transferred to the Virgin Mary as
“ Our Lady,” Madonna, precisely as B81, the Kvpios of late
Greek writers, may have provided the Greek Christian title
Kyrios Christos.^®

Christian and Arabic writers generally represent Tammuz
to have been a human being, who suffered death at the hands
of a king. There is direct evidence that Tammuz, always des-
ignated as a god in Sumerian, was originally a deified man.
This view might be defended by the fact that the earliest his-
torical reference to Tammuz mentions him as the fourth king
of the prehistoric dynasty of Erech and predecessor of Gilga-
mish. Although the name Dumu-zi does not otherwise occur
as a personal name, “ god-Dumu-zi ” is only the name of a
deified king, and it is difficult to deny the human origin of this
god. Here he is clearly a deified king, and apparently the
myth of a young king loved by the beautiful Innini or Ishtar,
and who died for the life of the earth, is the original idea which
gave rise to this cult. Also in West Semitic religion the kings
of cities suffered death at the hands of their people to satisfy
the powers of Hades and to ensure the return of life after the
season of drought and decay. Of this custom Eusebius writ-
ing on Semitic pagan customs says: “ It was the custom among
the ancients, in times of great calamity, in order to prevent the
ruin of all, for the rulers of the city or nation to sacrifice to


342


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


the avenging deities the most beloved of their children as an
atonement.” He then cites the example of Cronus, who was
believed to have been first a king and then deified, becoming
the Sun-god El of the Phoenicians j he sacrificed his son Anobret
when great dangers beset the land.^^

Now the name Tammuz is derived from dumu, “ son,” and
2/, which has three principal meanings j it may stand for zid,
“ faithful,” “ true or for zig, “ to go forth,” “ to rise up ”j
and also “ breath of life.” Tammuz may mean, therefore,
“ Faithful son,” or “ Risen son,” or “ Son of life.” The last
interpretation is most improbable, for no Accadian phrase mar
napishti, “ son of life,” is known. Moreover it is certain that
the original name was Dumuzida, and Marduk, in a passage
where he is identified with Tammuz, is described in Accadian as
the “ faithful son.” The text, which is a theological commen-
tary, states that there was wailing for the god Dumu-e-zi, that
is, “ Son of the temple Ezida,” in the month of Tammuz } lam-
entations in the month Tammuz, wailing for the god Lugaldu-
kug (Marduk),^® and wailing in the month Tebit for the god
Enmesharra. Here the god of flocks and vegetation is bewailed
in the fourth month (July) and the Sun-god, Enmesharra, or
Nergal, in the tenth month (January). The Sun-god at mid-
winter resided also in the Underworld. Another (omen) text
states that Tammuz departed to the lower world in the month
of Tammuz, and Nergal in the month Kislev (December).^®
Since the verb zid has also the meaning “ to come forth,” “ to
arise,” as a variant of the verb zig, it is also possible that dumu-
zid means “ sun who is risen,” referring to the resurrection of
Tammuz. A hymn of the midsummer wailings for this god
runs as follows:

“ She of the dawn, she of the dawn, daily with weeping is surfeited.
Sobbing goes the daughter of Kullab;

‘ O heavenly psalmist, lord of earth (Ninsubur),

O my holy psalmist, thou of the lapis lazuli sandals ( ? ),

My messenger, who turns my words to good account.^®


TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR


343


My herald who established my words.

Herald of counsel, man of woe.

O my exalted one, in thy resurrection, in thy resurrection,

O my exalted one, in thy rising to the bosom of the mother that bore
(thee).

To the bosom of thy mother, to the bosom of thy beloved rise.

O my exalted one. Who is like Shamash? Thou art like Shamash.

O my exalted one. Who is like Nannar? Thou art like Nannar.’ ”

Another Sumerian hymn describes the wailing of the mother
of Tammuz:

“ Because of thee she wanders far for thee.

O man, my Damu, my irrigator thou art.

Thy mother, lady of tears, wearies not.

The mother, queen who gives life to the afflicted, tarries not to repose.
In thy perdition, in thy resurrection, she calls thee with melodious
sighing.”

To which Tammuz replied:

“ In my vast chamber, in my land of misery,

A lord am I, in Aralu, where I am cast away,

A man am I, unto the far-away land I go.”

The hymn continues:

“ I weary with heart woe, where shall I rest?

O sing to the lyre, I weary with heart woe, where shall I rest? ”

On the whole it is probable that Dumuzi(d) meant originally
the “ faithful ” son, and that the myth of a beautiful young
god arose in prehistoric times when a king sacrificed his son
for the welfare of his people. The calamity which instigated
this sacrifice may have been some impending national disaster;
in Sumerian religion it was the death of a god who perished
annually at midsummer with the withering grass and drying
soil of the drought-afflicted Mesopotamian valley. One son of
a divinely appointed king had died for man, a perpetual atone-
ment and a sacrifice to the merciless powers of the Under-
world; a perpetual atonement in that he returned each year


344


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


with the returning rains and spring sun only to die again in the
torrid heat, when the flocks longed for water, and Tammuz
their shepherd departed again to the mournful sound of the
shepherd’s lute and the cries of weeping women.

The prehistoric king of Erech who is called the deified
Dumuzi has, in the dynastic list, the title “ fisherman whose
city was Habur.” Habur is one of the names of Eridu, city of
the Water-god Enki-Ea, and the liturgies of the midsummer
wailings repeatedly refer to Tammuz and Innini (Ishtar) as
the son and daughter of Ea of Eridu. An Accadian prayer to
Tammuz reads as follows:

“ O Dumuzi, lord, shepherd of Anu, the brilliant.

Spouse of Ishtar, the queen, first-born son of Nudimmud,

Sturdy one, leader without rival, eater of roasted bread, baked cakes
of the ashes,

Clothed with a cowl, bearing a wand, drinking water of a soiled (? )
leather pouch.

Builder of homes, lord of the cattle stalls, supreme one, and pre-
eminent art thou.”

“ The first born son ” of Nudimmud or Ea was Tammuz, and
so also was Marduk. There is reason to suppose that Ninurta,
son of Enlil, was also regarded as a dying god and connected
with the swine, as was Adonis of Gebal.^* The earliest known
title of Marduk was Asarij a connection between this title and
the Egyptian Osiris has long been suggested. Marduk’s sudden
appearance as Tammuz in the late period is, therefore, based
upon the early Sumerian theology of Eridu, where the only son
of the Water-god became the deity of irrigation, of flocks and
pastures, the final outcome of the cult originating in the worship
of the man Dumuzi of Habur. Marduk-Asari and Tammuz
were then only diversified names and aspects of the dying god,
and if Asari be Osiris it is extremely probable that the Egyptian
myth of Osiris and Isis was borrowed from Asari and Ishtar in
prehistoric times. In the late hymn cited above, the first line
refers to Tammuz as a star or constellation.


TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR


345


But the ancient belief that a king or a king’s son had died for
man and all living creatures could not be eradicated from this
myth even by the immortality conferred upon him by his sacri-
fice and his annual triumph over death. The kings of Ur and
Isin, after their deaths, all became dying gods, and appear in
the hymns of the wailings as titles of Tammuz. A long liturgy,
from which the following address to his sister, urging her to go
to the departed Tammuz, is taken, contains this passage:

“ Mayest thou go, thou shalt cause him to rejoice.

O valorous one, star of Heaven, go to greet him.

To cause Ububu to repose, mayest thou go, thou shalt cause him to
rejoice.

To cause Umunmufzida] to repose, etc.

To cause my Damu to repose, etc.

To cause Isirana to repose, etc.

To cause Igisub to repose, etc.”

These lines contain five divine titles of Tammuz. Umunmuzida
is identical with Ningishzida and only a dialectic form of that
more ancient title, “ Faithful lord of the tree,” which gave rise
to an independent deity. Adapa found Tammuz and Ningish-
zida at the gates of Heaven. Damu, apparently connected with
dumuy “ son,” is a very common title of Tammuz, and so is
Isir, which here has the suffix («)««, “ the heavenly.” Igisub
means “ he of the bright eyes.” This hymn then continues
with the names of the kings of Ur and Isin, each accorded the
title of a god:

“To the shepherd Ur-Nammu mayest thou go, thou shalt cause him
to rejoice.

To the man Dungi mayest thou go, thou shalt cause him to rejoice.
To the shepherd Bur-Sin, etc.

To the man Gimil-Sin, etc.

To the shepherd Ibi-Sin, etc.”

The liturgical formula into which the names of the five kings
of Ur are cast, “ shepherd ” alternating with “ man,” is begun
again when the liturgy reaches the names of the kings of Isin:


346 SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY

“To the shepherd Ishbi-Girra mayest thou go, thou shalt cause him
to rejoice.

To the man Gimil-ili-shu, etc.

To the shepherd Idin-Dagan, etc.

To the shepherd Ishme-Dagan, etc.

To the shepherd Bur-Sin, etc.

To the shepherd Idin-Ishtar, etc.^^

To these lords of . . . mayest thou go, thou shalt cause them to
repose.”

Another liturgy has the following extracts:

“ My husband, he who sleeps.

The sturdy youth in the land of weeping.

The youth Umunmuzida, he who sleeps.

In the way of pain, on the road of the chariot,^®

Isir, the bright-eyed, he who sleeps,

O, in the way of the tomb, weep.

Lord Idin-Dagan sleeps.

The garden of itself restrains (its growth).

The city (weeps) for Ishme-Dagan who slumbers,

And the garden of itself restrains (its growth).

The city (weeps) for Lipit-Ishtar, who sleeps.

The city (weeps) for Ur-Ninurta, who sleeps.

The city (weeps) for Bur-Sin, who sleeps.

The sturdy youth in the land of weeping.”

Four hours before sunrise on the fifth day the high priest
rose, bathed in water of the Tigris and Euphrates, drew aside
the curtain {gadalu) from before Bel, and recited a hymn to
Bel and one to Beltis, in Sumerian. Both hymns are of an astral
character, and it is curious that the day on which they were sung
(fifth), should correspond to the astral character of the fifth
book of the Epic of Creation. In the hymn to Marduk the
constellations Bootes and Eridanus, and the planets Jupiter
(Marduk), Mercury (Nabu), Saturn (Ninurta), are addressed.
Mars, usually planet of Ninurta, is addressed as the Fire-god
Gibil. Sirius “ measures the waters of the Tamtu,” that is here
the Milky Way. Addresses to Arcturus, Regulus(?), Grus
(Adad), the breast of Scorpio “who treads the bosom
of Tamtu,” to the sun and moon, close the astral hymn to
Marduk.

The hymn to Marduk’s wife Beltis also contains addresses to
constellations and stars j Venus, the Bow Star (Canis Major),
the planet and constellation of Ishtarj the Goat Star (Lyra),
also identified with Ishtarj the Star of Abundance (Coma Bere-
neces), identified with the goddess NE-zil-la j the star of venery
(Corona Borealis), identified with the goddess Nanaj the
Wagon Star (Ursa Major), identified with Ninlilj the hymn
ends with addresses to the constellations of Zarbanit (Virgo)
and Ninmah. The priests and psalmists now enter to sing the
liturgies for that day.

Two hours after sunrise the morning sacrifices for BSl and
Beltis are finished and a priest of incantation purifies the temple
with water from the Tigris and Euphrates. The kettle-drum


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


318

is sounded, torch and censer brought into the court, but the
magician must not enter the chapel of Bel and Beltis. He then
enters the chapel of Nabu and purifies it with censer, torch,
and holy water, and sprinkles it with Tigris and Euphrates
water. He places a silver censer in the court, calls a sword
bearer, who slays a sheep and atones the chapel of Nabu with
the sheep’s body. After reciting incantations for the purifica-
tion of this chapel, the magician must remove the sheep’s body,
go to the river, and, looking westward, cast it into the river.
This was in preparation for Nabu’s arrival from Barsippa to
take part in the New Year’s festival. The high priest was for-
bidden to see any part of this magic ritual j the magician and
sword bearer must both leave the city and remain in the fields
until the twelfth day, when the festival was finished.

At three and a third hours after sunrise the high priest came
out of Marduk’s chapel and summoned the craftsmen, who re-
moved the golden canopy of Marduk from the treasury and
veiled the chapel of Nabu. This chapel represented the dark
season of the year when the Sun-god’s time was mostly spent in
the lower world. After a hymn on the cleansing of the temple
has been sung the high priest re-enters Marduk’s chapel, pre-
pares a table of offerings and recites a prayer, and prays that he
will be gracious to him “ that takes thy hand.” The priest
is here preparing to take the hands of Bel and conduct him
to the Akitu, or house of the New Year’s festival outside
the city. The craftsmen then carry the table to Nabu’s chapel,
who arrives presently in his ship Iddahedu.

Now the king of Babylon arrives with Nabu’s statue, washes
his hands, and comes before Bel himself, where the high priest
takes from him his sceptre, his circle and scimetar, insignia of
royal power. These are taken into the chapel and placed be-
fore Bel. By him had they been given, and to him they are
returned. For the moment the king is a commoner, and the
high priest, representative of the most high god, smote the
cheeks of the king, led him before Bel, pulled the king’s ears.


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 319

and made him kneel before the statue of Marduk-Bel. The
king then recited this prayer:

423. “ Not have I sinned, O lord of the lands, not have I been negli-
gent unto thy divinity.

Babylon have I not ruined, nor commanded its dispersion.

Not have I . . . Esagila, nor forgotten its rites.

Not have I smitten the cheeks of (my) subjects,

. . . nor caused their humiliation.

427. I have paid attention to Babylon, and not destroyed its walls.”

The high priest replied to the king for Bel and said “ fear
not for Bel would hear his prayer, magnify his kingdom, and
destroy his foes. Having thus rendered account of his steward-
ship to Bel, the king received back the insignia of his office.
The religious law of the state presumed that the high priest
had the sacred right to withhold the crown from any king who
had abused his office, but there are no inscriptions to confirm
the statement that he was ever forced to abdicate for that reason.
The high priest, however, smote the king’s cheek again, and if
the king wept he knew that Bel was pleased with him. If he
wept not he knew that Bel was displeased with the king and
that foes would come to cause his downfall.

Soon after sunset on the fifth day the high priest made a bun-
dle of forty reeds each three cubits long, dug a trench in the
temple-court and placed the bundle of reeds therein. Honey,
cream, and oil were poured upon it and a white bull was brought
to the trench. The reed bundle was set on fire. Presumably
the bull was sacrificed. In any case the bull represents the
Gudanna or “ bull of Heaven,” Taurus of the Zodiac, and
proves that this festival originated in the period when the sun
stood in Taurus at the spring equinox, that is in the period circa
3500-1900 B.c. It is unlikely that the ceremony has any refer-
ence to the slaying of the bull of Heaven by Gilgamish and
Enkidu. The king and [the high priest?] then chanted a
hymn to the “ divine bull,” and here the texts cease. The
rituals for the sixth to the eleventh days have not been recov-


320


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


ered, but it is known that the procession of all the gods, led by
Bel, to the house of the New Year’s sacrifices outside the city,
occurred on the tenth day. The great assembly of gods in the
hall of Esagila to declare fates for the ensuing year fell on
the eighth of Nisan. On the eleventh the procession returned
to Esagila,^®

Each act in the ceremony of the New Year’s festival had a
mystic meaning, and a Tablet of the series in which these
meanings were explained has been recovered. Undoubtedly
the whole ritual was explained in this way, but as only small
parts of both ritual and commentary have been found and they
do not coincide, the fragment of the commentary must be
studied separately. It begins with a reference to a trench over
which a priest performed a ceremony. Apparently something
was thrown into the trench, which meant the . . . which
[Ninurta] cast into the Deep {apsu) and entrusted to the Anun-
naki. The text also refers to a fire that was made, which sym-
bolized some valiant deed of Marduk in his infancy. Then
the hurling of firebrands is referred to, and they who hurled
them represented the gods, his fathers and brothers, when
they heard of [his birth?]. The gods kissed something,
which meant Marduk as the Mother-goddess Ninlil lifted and
kissed him in his infancy. A fire was kindled beneath an oven
and a sheep placed on it j this meant Kingu, husband of Tiamat,
whom Marduk burned. They lit firebrands at the oven, and
these meant the merciless arrows from the quiver of Bel, which,
as they were shot, carried terror and smote the mighty one,
with blood and gore were they stained, sprinkling the moun-
tains (with blood). The mountains meant the gods, his fathers
and brothers, who bound in their midst the wicked Zu and
Asakku.

In the ceremony the king lifted a weapon above his head and
burned a she-goatj that meant Marduk who lifted weapons
above his head and consumed in fire the sons of Enlil and Anu.
Here again the myth of the casting of the dragons into fire ap-


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 321

pears in the ceremony, but not in the epic. The sons of Enlil
and Anu refer to some unknown myth. One text refers to
seven Asakku dragons, sons of Anu, who were conquered by
Ninurta. The king shattered a vessel, which meant that Mar-
duk bound Tiamat(?). The king tossed the roasted bread of
the priest, which symbolized how Marduk and Nabu [seized? ]
the hand(?) of . . . and Anu bound and broke him. The
king took his place at a certain station in the ritual and some-
thing was put into his hand as a psalmist sang a hymn, “ God-
dess the Radiant ”j this meant Marduk’s feet were set in Ea
and the planet Venus before him tarried.^® This part of the
ritual describes some constellation of Marduk, whose feet
stood in some constellation of Ea, and Venus stood in it.
The king tossed something which meant the heart of Anu
when he took his way, referring perhaps to the episode
in the epic where Anshar sent Anu against Tiamat and he
fled.

In the ritual a cavalryman, who [carries] a sweet fig and
holds a ... in his hand, and who brings it in to the god,
shewing the fig to the god and king, meant him whom they sent
to Enlil, whom they bound and whose hand Nergal took.
Here the ceremony refers to some myth in which Ninurta(?)
bound a dragon and sent him to his father Enlil, by whom he
was handed over to the god of the underworld. Someone en-
tered Esagila, and shewed the weapons in his hands to Marduk
and Zarbanit} they kissed him, and blessed him. The meaning
of this act is not explained. Eunuchs shouted, made clamour
in the plain, hurling firebrands, emitting loud cries, lifted each
other up, and acted distractedly 5 these symbolized those who
against Enlil and Anu made uproar, and poured out their terror
upon them, but whose . . . they (the gods) severed and
[cast] into the Apsu. Only half of this Tablet is preserved
and nothing can be gleaned from the few remaining signs con-
cerning episodes of the myths enacted in pantomime in the New
Year’s festival.


322


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


On the eleventh day when Marduk returned to Esagila the
hymn, “ Oh lord, when thou enterest thy temple, may thy
temple say to thee ‘ Rest,’ ” was sung. The prayer appeals to
the cities, temples, and the gods to say to Marduk, “ Rest, O
lord.” The New Year’s festival in Assyria was only a replica of
the same series of pantomimes at Babylon j but in Assyria the
name of the god Ashur displaced the name Marduk. The Epic
of Creation and the Zagmuk, or New Year’s festival, are based
upon a solar myth. Marduk the Sun-god returned from his
long sojourn in the lower world, triumphed over darkness, and
brought light to the world. On this myth the priesthood at
Babylon based a new pantomime, which portrayed the death
and resurrection of Bel, drawn, by analogy, from the myth of
the annual death and resurrection of Tammuz, god of vegeta-
tion. The descent of Marduk to the lower world must have
been familiar in Babylonian religion j it is mentioned in the Ira
myth where Marduk set his face to the land where none go,
the home of the Anunnaki.*^ The myth of the death and
resurrection of Bel is preserved only in the commentaries on
the meanings of each act in the ceremony, and consequently its
contents must be reconstructed from this framework j the fol-
lowing analysis does not provide a very clear narrative of the
legend if a text of it really existed.*® The principal commen-
taries available are all in the ceremony at Ashur, but a few
fragments from the original Marduk pantomime at Babylon
have been recovered, in copies from Nineveh. In West Semitic
religion traces of the same legend are found at Tyre, where
there was a tomb of Melqartj *” at Aphaca near Gebal there
was a tomb of Adonis, called also Bel ( jSoXos ) by Hesychius,
and another on the river Belus near Akko, called the memorial
of Memnon. No rituals representing the death, burial in a
tomb, and the resurrection from the tomb have been found on
West Semitic soil similar to the vivid enactment of each event
in this ceremony concerning Bel-Marduk at Babylon. That
the myth and ritual were well known throughout Syria, Phoe-


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 323

nicia, and Palestine, at least in certain mystic and Gnostic cults,
is certain.

Strabo mentions the tomb of Bel as one of the striking fea-
tures of Babylon, and Xerxes dug into it and found a glass
coffin and corpse laid in oil. Alexander was commanded by his
seers to rebuild this tomb. These legends reveal the fact that
in the Greek period the stage tower of Babylon was taken for
the tomb of Bel, which only emphasizes the influence of the
legend and ceremony under discussion. The texts as preserved
begin with some act interpreted to mean that Bel was im-
prisoned in the lower world, and a messenger hastens saying:
“Who shall bring him forth? ” Nabu(?) comes from Bar-
sippa to seek after his father (Marduk) who is bound. Men
ran in the streets saying: “ Where is he held? ” and Marduk’s
wife prayed to the Moon-god saying: “ Give life to Bel.” She
comes to the gate of the tomb seeking him, and she finds there
“twins,” probably angels guarding the tomb. Certain cele-
brants make wailing j for the gods had bound him and he per-
ished from among the living. They had caused him to descend
to the house of bondage. Reference is made to the wounds of
Bel and his blood. A goddess(?) descends to seek for him.

There is then an obscure reference to a son of the god Ashur,
i.e.j Nabu son of Marduk, who went not with him saying: “ I
am not a sinner, and I shall not be wounded 5 for the ... of
Ashur (Marduk) have revealed my judgments and declared
my judgments.” Nabu, son of the slain Bel, here refers to the
sinner who had been condemned to die with Bel. Now this son
of Bel becomes the guard over his “ city prison,” that is in the
lower world. This has surely a connection with the theory
that Nabu represents the sun during the period of the year,
when the nights are longer than the days. The head of a
sheep(?) is tied to the door of the temple of Beltis, which
symbolized the head of a sinner whom they slew with Bel.

In the ceremony Nabu returned to Barsippa, [after] Bel
went to the lower world j the city then fell into tumult and there


324 SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY

was fighting therein. Reed pigsties were placed in the way of
Nabu as he came from Barsippa to adore Belj he stood over
Bel, looking at himj that symbolized the malefactor who is
with Bel. The part played by Nabu is extremely obscure, but
he is clearly described as one who has some connection with the
slain sinner. Priests of incantation walked before Nabu, reciting
an incantation; they symbolized Bel’s people who wail before
him. A magus went before Beltis; he stood for the messen-
ger who wept before her and brought her the sad news of Bel’s
descent to the lower world, saying: “ they have carried him to
the mountain (lower world),” and she descended, saying: “ Oh
my brother, my brother. . . .” The magus brought garments
to the Beltis of Erech, which symbolized the raiment taken
from Bel. The inclusion of Beltis of Erech or Ishtar in this
pantomime proves that it is really based upon the older cult
of Tammuz and Ishtar. There is then a ceremony with a gar-
ment {serhu) with which the dead Bel seems to have been
clothed, and milk with which Ishtar of Nineveh fed Marduk
in his infancy. Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, is said to have
been nourished by the goddess queen of Nineveh, at whose
breasts he was suckled. The Epic of Creation, narrating the
mighty deeds of the dead Bel, was then sung, and the high
priest wailed saying: “ What was his sin'? ” Marduk from his
tomb prayed to Sin and Shamash for life, represented in the
pantomime by someone looking to Heaven and praying.

Bel’s ascent from the lower world is now symbolized by
some person, and one text speaks of his ascent from the house
of bondage, whither he had been sent by judgments imposed
upon him. There is further reference to mad racing in the
cities in the month Nisan, and Bel’s clothing and sandals, which
had been brought to the temple of his wife Beltis of Babylon.
The acts of the ceremony, as set down and explained in the
commentary, do not follow in logical order; for after Bel’s
resurrection the text mentions his chariot which speeds to
the house of the New Year’s festival without its master. The


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 325

celebrants broke into Bel’s tomb and struggled before it. The
celebration of the death and resurrection of Bel cannot be de-
scribed with any approach to accuracy owing to the fragmen-
tary sources, but some of the salient facts can be obtained from
them. It is clear that he was condemned, slain with a male-
factor, imprisoned in a tomb, descended to the lower world,
and rose again. This is one of those inexplicable and illogical
consequences of the occult religious mind of Babylonia. Bel,
the victorious god, conqueror of the powers of Chaos, creator
of the world, was tried, condemned, and sent to the lower
world by the gods, his fathers and brothers, whom he had de-
livered. It can be explained only by the uncontrollable tend-
ency of the Babylonian priesthood to place upon Marduk the
roles of all the principal gods. The cult of the dying god Tam-
muz had been throughout the long history of Sumer, Accad,
and Babylonia the one which held the greatest attraction for all
men. Not in war nor in the valour even of the triumphant Mar-
duk did men really place their trust and their hope, but in the
sufferings of the martyr Tammuz, ever victorious over death,
ever restoring a perishing world. The mild and patient Tam-
muz was greater than the god of fire and sword, though he had
created the Heavens with his hands and founded the Earth
upon the bosom of the Deep. All these things the speculative
priests of Babylon knew, and they were zealous for their god.
He must also become Tammuz the martyr, victorious over
death, and so they thought to secure for him the adoration and
love of humanity hitherto bestowed upon the dying god.


CHAPTER X

THE DESCENT OF ISHTAR TO ARALLU

I SHTAR, Accadian rendering of the Sumerian Innini, was
commonly regarded as the sister of the dying god Tammuz.
The myth of Tammuz, his annual descent to Arallu or the
lower world, the descent of his sister Innini to recover the lost
god, and his resurrection, gave rise to the most important cult
of Sumero-Babylonian religion. The myth of Innini’s descent
to Arallu forms a separate series of poems in Sumerian and
Accadian texts and is rarely referred to in the numerous litur-
gies and songs of the wailings for Tammuz. Of the older Su-
merian poems which describe her descent to Arallu extensive
fragments have now been recovered.^ So far as the sequence of
events in the narrative can be given from published material
the Sumerian legend was as follows.

Tiamat gave him the Tablets of Fate, fastened them to his
breast, and so Kingu at once took up his supreme authority
among the sons of Tiamat and said:


“ Open ye your mouths; verily it shall quench Gibil (the Fire-god).
He who is strong in conflict shall humiliate might.”

Marduk, the new champion of the gods of order, is frequently
referred to as the Fire-god. So also was Ninurta, prototype
of Marduk, in original Sumerian mythology.

(Tablet II.) Tiamat now prepared to wage war and avenge
Apsu. Ea, as usual, was the first of the gods to hear of the
preparations of the dragons of Chaos.

6. “ Painfully he became faint, like one that lapses into silence he sat
down.

The days lengthened and when his anger cooled.

To Anshar, his father, he pursued his way.”


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 297

Ea repeated to Anshar the whole plot, saying: “Tiamat who
gave birth to us, has cursed us. She hath called together a
host, angrily raging. All the gods have turned away unto
her, except those whom thou hast created.” Ea describes to
Anshar the nine monsters, “ eleven in all,” and how Kingu
had become her husband and leader of the dragons. Anshar
smote his loins and bit his lips. He urged Ea to lead the
gods to battle; for had he not already destroyed Mummu
and Apsu? But none of the gods was less warlike than the
wise Ea and he refused the combat. Apparently the curse
which subdued Apsu would be ineffective against the armed
dragons and Kingu possessed of the Tablets of Fate. This was
the work for those of the sword and not of magic.

Anshar then appealed to Anu, who proceeded at once against
Tiamat. He fled in terror from before her, and as he fled he
said to her:

“ My hand is too weak to bind thee by myself.”

Anshar lapsed into silence, moaned, and assembled all of the
gods, the Anunnaki.

89. “ Their lips were closed, they sat as one wailing.

‘ Not any god proceeds [unto battle.]

From the presence of Tiamat not one escapes [with his life].’ ”

Anshar sat pondering as he presided over the assembly and
now bethought himself of Marduk, “ the scourge of conflict,”
“avenger of his father.” Marduk would avenge his father
Ea’s humiliation, even as Ninurta had done for his father Enlil.
A passage referring to the same situation in a lost Sumerian
myth has the following address of Enlil to Ninurta:

“ Ninurta, the lord, the fierce storm, the slayer of the wicked, my son
the avenger.

Where battle rages surely shall be thy companion.”

And so Ea summoned his son Marduk before the assembly,
urged him to consider the matter and to enter into the presence


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


298

of Anshar. Before that august presence stood the youthful
champion of the threatened gods, and said:

108. “ Anshar, remain not dumb; open thy lips.

Verily I will go; I will cause to be attained the fulness of thy
heart.

Who by name has brought battle against thee? ”

And Anshar replied:

“ My son, it is Tiamat, a woman ; she will come against thee with
weapons.”

Marduk assured Anshar that straightway he should tread
upon the neck of Tiamat, to which Anshar replied:

1 16. “ My son wise in all understanding.

Cause Tiamat to cease by the pure incantation.

The chariot of storms drive quickly.

Her helpers will not tarry for her; turn her back.”

Marduk, however, demands his price, and here the complicity
of the Babylonian schoolmen is again naively revealed. The
god of Babylon did not have the status of a great god in the
Sumerian pantheon. They now explained how he attained
this dignity, at least to their satisfaction, an effort which ex-
cited the scorn of the priests of the old cults. Marduk exacts
from Anshar the promise to convene the assembly of gods and
reconsider his “fate,” if he binds Tiamat and preserves their
lives.

126. “ In Ubshukkinaku seat yourself together gladly.

If my mouth be opened may I decree fates even as you.

And whatsoever I create shall change not.

May the speech of my lips not return and be of no avail.”

(Tablet III.) Anshar summoned his messenger Gaga and
sent him to Lahmu and Lahamu, commanding him to summon
all the gods to a banquet. He is told to describe to Lahmu and
Lahamu the whole plot of Tiamat. Gaga hears from Anshar
the long tale about the creation of the nine dragons and the


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 299

advent of Kingu as their leader, how Anu had fled before Tia-
mat and Ea feared and turned back. Gaga is instructed to say
that Marduk had volunteered to slay Tiamat if he be raised to
the rank of a great god.

Gaga came to Lahmu and Lahamu, kneeled and kissed the
ground before them, and repeated the story of Tiamat’s
preparations to them. Marduk’s demand is put before them.

125. “When Lahha [Lahmu] and Lahamu heard this they cried
loudly.

The totality of the Igigi wailed bitterly;

‘ Why have they become hostile, until they have conceived this
device ?

We knew not of the deed of Tiamat.’ ”

Here the gods of the upper world are correctly described as the
Igigi, in distinction from the gods of the nether sea and the
lower world.

The gods assembled and departed to Ubshukkinaku, as-
sembly hall of Anshar.

132. “They kissed one another and convened in assembly.

They conversed together as they were seated at the banquet.
They ate bread and prepared wine.

135. The sweet drink put far away their cares.

As they drank liquor their bodies became satiated.

Much they babbled and their mood was exalted.

For Marduk their avenger they decreed his fate.”

(Tablet IV.) Although Heaven and Earth had not yet
been created and the power of Chaos still presided over the dis-
orderly primordial abyss, the illogical statement that the gods
found food and wine for a hilarious feast troubled not the
myth-makers of Babylon. In this cheerful mood the gods
summoned Marduk before them and said:

5. “Thou hast become honoured among the great gods.

Thy fate is unparalleled, thy commandment is like Anu’s.

From this day shall thy word not be changed.

To exalt and to humble — this is in thy hand.”


300


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


They gave him kingship of universal power and admitted him
to their assembly. To test his qualification as possessor of the
power to determine “ fate ” {shimtu) they placed a garment
in their midst, and said “ command ‘ to destroy and to make.’ ”
He commanded that the garment be destroyed and at his word
it was destroyed j he commanded that it be remade and it was
remade. The gods saw that he had attained the power of a
great divinity, he possessed the ability to decree “ fate”; they
rejoiced and said, “ Marduk is king.” They gave him the
insignia of kingship, sceptre, throne, and hatchet, and said:

31. “ Go and cut off the breath of life of Tiamat.

May the winds bear away her blood to a secret place.”

He made ready bow and arrow and took a toothed-sickle in his
right hand. Forked lightning he held before his face. Bow
and quiver hung at his side.

The representations of his combat with the Mushussu (see
Fig. 57) correspond faithfully with the text, except that here
Marduk has forked lightning in both hands. The weapon
translated by “toothed-sickle” is seen on numerous designs
of Marduk’s combats, for example Figs. 84, 86; a seal
cylinder dedicated to Marduk by Mardukzakirshum, king of
Babylonia (ninth century) shews him with an exaggerated
design of the long-handled scimetar in his right hand (Fig.
90). The forepart of Mushussu appears at his feet, and
he stands on the waters of the sea whose dragons he had
conquered.

He made a net to enmesh Tiamat, and caused the four winds
to come that she escape not, the south, north, east, and west
winds. He created the Seven Winds, and took his quiver the
“ Cyclone,” and drove in his chariot of the storm. The names
of the animals of his four span were “ The Destroyer,” “ The
Merciless,” “ The Stormer,” “ The Swift-pacing.” Sharp
were their teeth, bearing poison. He was clad in a kaunakes,
and a sheen of flames surrounded his head. He advanced






Fig. 90. Marduk and Mushussu. Cylinder Seal from
Babylon. Ninth Century b.c.



302


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


against Tiamat holding a charm of red paste (?) in his lips, and
bore on his wrist the “ Plant of extinguishing poison.”

He drew nigh and peered into her inward parts, and saw the
open jaws of Kingu her husband, and his confidence faltered,
his mind became distracted, and his movements disordered.
The gods, who had gathered to witness the combat, were faint
with despair. Tiamat cast her curse at him and said:

73. “ Thou hast been honoured to the place of lord of the gods who
rise up for thee.”

Bel seized his quiver, and thus challenged her:

77. “ Lo thou art come up, thou hast been lifted up on high.

Thy heart has prompted thee to summon to conflict.

81. Thou hast exalted Kingu unto marriage.

Thou hast made his decree greater than the decrees of Anu.
[Against] Anshar, king of the gods, thou hast sought after evil.
Against the gods, my fathers, thou hast established thy wickedness.
85. Let thy host be equipped and thy weapons be girded on.

Stand thou by and let us, me and thee, make battle.”

When Tiamat heard this challenge her body shook with ragej
she recited an incantation and uttered a curse. The weapons
clashed in the great struggle between light and darkness. Bel
spread his net, which Anu had given him, and enmeshed her.
He let loose the Imhullu wind in her face. As Tiamat opened
her mouth to devour him, the Imhullu wind blew into her, the
raging winds filled her belly. His arrow tore her belly, sev-
ered her inwards, and rent asunder her heart. He bound her
and stood upon her corpse. Her host of dragons scattered and
fled in terror. They sought to save their souls alive but were
trapped and bound.

1 12. “ Into a net were they thrown and in the snare they sat down.

They stood in secret chambers, being filled with lamentation.”

All of the eleven dragons were bound and cast into prison.
Henceforth they became gods of the lower world. They were


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 303

also identified with various constellations by the astronomers.
Kingu also was bound and handed over to Nergal, god of
Arallu. Marduk seized the Tablets of Fate from Kingu’s
breast, sealed them with a seal, and fastened them to his own
breast.

Marduk now returned to the corpse of Tiamat. He split
her skull, severed her arteries, and the north-wind carried her
blood to a hidden place, a legend which may possibly explain
the origin of the name “Red Sea.” The connection with the
myth of Tishpak and the slaying of the Labbu (an older myth)
is unmistakable. Tishpak held his seal or talisman before him
or wore it at his throat when he attacked the Labbu, and the
blood of the Labbu ran for more than three years.

He split her into two parts, and with half of her he made the
Heavens. He drew out her skin and caused watchmen to
take charge of it. He directed them not to let her waters
come forth.

“ He set over against (the Heavens) the abode of Nudimmud on
the face of the Deep.

Bel measured the dimension of the Deep (Apsu).

144. A vast abode its counterpart he fixed, that is Esharra.

He caused Anu, Enlil, and Ea to occupy their abodes.”

Thus Marduk made Heaven for Anu, Esharra, or earth, for
Enlil, and fixed the place of the Apsu or fresh-water sea be-
neath the earth for Ea. The canopy of Heaven was made from
the stretched-out skin of Tiamat, and he confined the waters
which cause rain above this canopy. The watchmen of Heaven
are the figures of monsters and animals in the constellations.
The Hebrew account of creation as preserved in a late docu-
ment of Genesis, Chapter I, although clearly dependent upon
this Babylonian myth (at least in phraseology), portrays the
creation in strictly monotheistic terms. Before Elohim created
Heaven and Earth, the earth was formless and confused, and
darkness lay on the face of the primeval sea (Tehom). The
wind of Eldhim hovered over the face of the waters j perhaps


304


SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY


the writer does not have in mind the Babylonian conception
of a wind-blown watery abyss, but the creative spirit of Eldhim
brooding over it. A combat between light and darkness is
wholly absent here, but survives in other mythological refer-
ences in the Old Testament, especially in Job and the Psalms.^®
Light is created at the command of God and the regular move-
ment of the sun fixed, producing day and night, even before
Heaven and Earth were created out of the Teh 5 m. This was
the work of Elohim on the first day.

The creation of Heaven on the second day reflects clearly
enough the Babylonian epic. A “ firmament ” was created to
divide the waters above it from those beneath it and God called
it “ the Heavens.” “ The waters beneath the Heavens shall
gather into one place, and dry land shall appear,” said Elohim.
The word used for firmament means “ what is spread out,”
and corresponds to the skin of Tiamat used by Marduk to con-
struct the vault of Heaven. The dry land God named “ earth ”
and the waters that gathered together He named “ seas.”

(Tablet V.) The fifth tablet, which contained a poem on as-
tronomy, the creation and movements of the planets, positions
of the constellations, and probably also the creation of animals
and plants, is almost entirely unrecovered. This poem so far
as preserved contains much astrology. In fact it begins with
Marduk’s creation of the hypsomata or stellar positions in the
Heavens, where each planet had the greatest influence upon
nature and the affairs of men. Babylonian astronomy forms an
extremely important part of their mythology, but until the
late period was pursued almost entirely for astrological pur-
poses. The text says simply that Marduk created the stations
of the great gods. The following stations or hypsomata are
known. The station of Ishtar-Venus was Pisces 5 of Sin-
Moon, Taurus 5 of Shamash-Sun, Aries j of Nergal-Mars, Capri-
corn 5 of Marduk- Jupiter, Cancer j since all these identifications,
now known from astronomical texts, agree with Greek hypso-
mata, and Greek astronomical and astrological systems were


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 305

almost entirely borrowed from Babylonia, it is presumed that
the stations of the other planets and gods identified with them
should be completed from Greek astrology} hence Ninurta-
Mars had the station Libra} Nabu-Mercury, Virgo. The reli-
gious or mythical reasons for these relations of planets to signs



Fig. 91. Constellations Corvus, Hydra, and Virgo, with Planet Mercury.
Astronomical Tablet. Persian Period


of the zodiac are unknown. The fish for some reason suggested
sexual love and ideas, and hence Pisces may have been chosen
for the planet of Ishtar. Fig. 89 shews Marduk- Jupiter in his
station west of Leo, near Cancer} his star stands just above the
head of Hydra before Leo on a monument of the eighth cen-
tury. Fig. 91 shews the planet of Nabu-Mercury in Virgo,



Fig. 92. The Pleiades, Moon in Taurus. Astronomical Tablet.
Persian Period

and to the left (west), the constellation Corvus, standing on
the tail of Hydra, the stellar Mushussu of Fig. 89. Virgo
is here represented as a goddess holding an ear of corn, the
original conception of Spica, principal star in Virgo. Fig. 92
shews the Moon-god Sin in Taurus. The Moon-god stands in
his crescent smiting a lion. To the left are the seven Pleiades.


3o6 SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY

These figures are all taken from astronomical tablets of the Se-
leucidae period, but the astrological principles are known to
have originated earlier.^^

Marduk then placed all the constellations in their places,
and these are called their “likeness,” apparently referring to
the dragons which were bound by him and cast into the lower
world. He fixed the year, designed the twelve signs of the
zodiac through which the sun passes during twelve months,
and for each month he fixed three stars. The scribe means
that, as the sun passed through each sign of the zodiac, three
stars that rose in succession heliacally during that month are
taken as the decans of that month. That is, when the sun is
in its first ten days (approximately) of any month, a promi-
nent star rising heliacally during this first decan would be the
star of the first decan of that month. They would thus be “ time
regulators,” as the Greeks called the stellar decans. There are
many other theories about the thirty-six stars which fix the
course of the sun as time regulators, but they are too intricate
and conjectural to be stated here.®^ Thus Marduk defined
the days of the year by stellar signs.

He then fixed the points at which the sun crosses the celestial
equator at the spring and autumnal equinoxes. Having fixed
the stars in the track of the sun (ecliptic), that is the way of
Anu, he fixed the southern band of stars, or the way of Ea, and
the northern band of stars, or the way of Enlil. He made gates
at the eastern and western horizons for the sun to enter and
depart. In the belly of Tiamat he placed the vault of Heaven,
and fixed the motions of the moon. Unfortunately not more
than one fifth of the fifth Tablet is preserved, and the account
of other acts of the creation is lost. The contents of the long
lacuna can be conjectured by other accounts of the creation, and
the parallel Hebrew account.

(Tablet VI.) From the fragmentary lines at the end of the
fifth Tablet, it may be assumed that the gods praised Marduk
for having created Heaven and Earth and delivered them in


THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 307

sore distress. The sixth Tablet begins with an account of the
creation of man. In the Hebrew record of Genesis i-ii.4,
which probably followed the order of events in the Epic of
Creation, the account of the creation of man is also the last
act. Marduk brought Kingu bound before Ea, his father, and
slew him. From the blood of Kingu Ea made man. Marduk
now assigns to the gods of Heaven and Earth and to the gods
of the lower world their several functions. He placed three
hundred in Heaven, and three hundred to manage the “ ways
of the Earth.”

32. “After Marduk, the king, had issued the laws of the totality of
the gods.

And for the Anunnaki of Heaven and Earth had decreed their
laws.

The Anunnaki opened their mouths
35. Saying unto Marduk, their lord;

‘ O divine light, lord who has brought about our deliverance.

What shall be our sign of deliverance before thee?

Come let us make a shrine whose name is called,

“ Thy chamber, lo it is our place of repose by night ” ; come let us
repose therein.

Come, we will found a shrine as an abode for thee.

On the day when we shall arrive we will repose therein.’ ”