Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Jobs Worldwide & Bottom prices, cheaper then Amazon & FB
( 17.905.982 jobs/vacatures worldwide)
Beat the recession - crisis, order from country of origin, at bottom prices! Cheaper then from Amazon and from FB ads!
Become Careerjet affiliate
406
« on: July 13, 2019, 04:35:58 PM »
https://archive.org/details/mythologyofallra12gray/page/246INDO-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
407
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:47:15 PM »
https://archive.org/details/mythologyofallra06gray/page/n19PLATE I DURGA The wife of Siva, in her dread aspect, slays the Asura Mahisa. Standing in an attitude of triumph on the demon, who, as his name implies, is in the shape of a buffalo, she drags his soul (symbolized in human form) from him. From a Javanese lava sculpture, probably from Prambanan, in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. See p. ii8. THE MYTHOLOGY OF ALL RACES IN THIRTEEN VOLUMES LOUIS HERBERT GRAY, A.M., PH.D., Editor GEORGE FOOT MOORE, A.M., D.D., LL.D., Consulting Editor INDIAN BY A. BERRIEDALE KEITH D.C.L., D.LiTT. BY ALBERT J. CARNOY Ph.D., Litt.D. VOLUME VI BOSTON MARSHALL JONES COMPANY M DCCCC XVII THE ^-iW VOIJ.K Asros, LfiNoS: A>n) Copyright, 1917 By Marshall Jones Company Entered at Stationers' Hall, London All rights reserved Printed in January, 1917 PRIKTED IN TEIE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY THE UNIVERSITY PRESS CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS BOUND BY THE BOSTON BOOKBINDING COMPANY CONTENTS INDIAN Author's Preface 5 Transcription and Pronunciation 9 Introduction . 11 Chapter I. The Rgveda — Gods of Sky and Air .... 15 II. The Rgveda — Gods of Earth, Demons, and Dead 41 III. The Mythology of the Brahmanas .... 73 IV. The Great Gods of the Epic 103 V. Minor Epic Deities and the Dead .... 131 VI. The Mythology of the Puranas 162 VII. Buddhist Mythology in India and Tibet ... 187 VIII. The Mythology of the Jains 220 IX, The Mythology of Modern Hinduism . . . 230 IRANIAN Author's Preface 253 Transcription and Pronunciation 257 Introduction •. 259 Chapter I. Wars of Gods and Demons 263 II. Myths of Creation 275 III. The Primeval Heroes 293 IV. Legends of Yima 304 V. Traditions OF THE Kings AND Zoroaster . . . 320 • VI. The Life to Come 344 VII. Conclusion 348 Notes, Indian ^SS Notes, Iranian 360 Bibliography, Indian 371 Bibliography, Iranian 395 V ILLUSTRATIONS FULL PAGE ILLUSTRATIONS PLATE FACING PAGE I Durga — Photogravure Frontispiece II Idol Car 22 III Surya . 26 IV Indra — Coloured 34 V Apsarases — Coloured 60 VI Brahma — Coloured 78 VII Kala-Siva 82 VIII A. Tortures of Hell 100 B. Tortures of Hell 100 IX Trimurti 108 X Marriage of Siva and Parvati 118 XI Birth of Brahma — Coloured 120 XII Varahavatara 122 XIII Laksmi — Coloured 124 XIV Krsna 126 XV Hanuman 128 XVI Garuda 140 XVII Vasuki 154 XVIII Yaksi 156 XIX Kubera 158 XX Visnu Slays the Demons — Coloured 164 XXI Laksmi 170 XXII Ganesa 182 XXIII The Great Buddha — Coloured 188 XXIV The Buddha and Sujata — Coloured 190 XXV The Buddha on the Lotus 192 XXVI Temptation of the Buddha — Coloured 196 viii ILLUSTRATIONS PLATE FACING PAGE XXVII Avalokitesvara 202 XXVIII Tirthakara 220 XXIX DilwSra Temple •. 226 XXX Shrine of Bhiimiya 234 XXXI Bhairon 238 XXXII Iranian Deities on Indo-Scythian Coins 260 1. Mithra 2. Apam Napat 3. Mah 4. Vata or Vayu 5. Khvarenanh 6. Atar 7. Vanainti (Uparatat) 8. Verethraghna XXXIII I. Typical Representation of Mithra 264 2. Scenes from the Life of Alithra XXXIV Iranian Deities on Indo-Scythian and Sassanian |, Coins 272 ^ I. Tishtrya 2. Khshathra Vairya "" ., 3. Ardokhsho '^ 4. Asha Vahishta 5. Ahura Mazda 6. Fire Altar 7. Fire Altar 8. Fravashi XXXV Ancient Fire Temple near Isfahan 284 XXXVI I. Mithra Born from the Rock 288 2. Alithra Born from the Rock XXXVII The Simurgh — Coloured 290 XXXVIII Tahmurath Combats the Demons — Coloured . . 302 XXXIX I. Dahhak (Azhi Dahaka) — Coloured 310 2. Jamshid on His Throne — Coloured XL Rustam and the White Demon — Coloured ... 328 XLI The Death of Suhrab — Coloured 332 XLII Kai Kaus Attempts to Fly to Heaven — Coloured 336 ILLUSTR.\TIOXS PLATE XLIII Gushtasp Kills a Dragon — Coloured . . . XLIV Sculpture Supposed to Represent Zoroaster IX FACING PAGE 340 342 ILLUSTRATIONS IX THE TEXT FIGURE PAGE 1 Agni 42 2 The Churning of the Ocean 104 3 The Propitiation of Uma, or Devi 117 4 The Narasirhha ("Man-Lion") Avatar of Visnu .... 123 5 The Matsya ("Fish") Avatar of Visnu 167 INDIAN MYTHOLOGY BY A. BERRIEDALE KEITH, D.C.L., D.Lirr. REGIUS PROFESSOR OF SANSCRIT AND COMPARATIVE PHILOLOGY EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY TO THE MEMORY OF Field Marshal The Right Honourable EARL KITCHENER OF KHARTOUM K.G., K.P., O.M., G.C.B., G.C.S.I., G.C.M.G., G.C.I.E., LL.D. LORD RECTOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH (19I4-I916) AUTHOR'S PREFACE THE mythology of India claims unique interest by virtue of its unparalleled length of life. It is true that not even the discoveries at Boghaz Kyoi render it prudent for us to place the Rgveda at an earlier period than 1500 B.C., and in part at least that collection may come from three centuries later, so that as contrasted with the dates of Egyptian and Babylonian records the earliest monument of Aryan mythology is comparatively recent. In mass of content and in value for mythology, however, these cannot compare with the Rgveda. Of still more importance is the fact that from the period of the J^gveda to the present day, a space of some thirty-five hundred years, we have a mythology which is in constant but organic development. The high mythic systems of Teuton, Celt, and Slav, of Greek and Roman, have perished before the onslaught of a loftier faith and survive in little else than folk-lore. In India, on the contrary, though foreign invasion has often swept over the north-west of the land, though Islam has annexed souls as well as territories, though Christianity (especially in the south) has contributed elements to the faith of the people, still it remains true that the religion and the mythology of the land are genuinely their own and for this reason have in them- selves the constant potency of fresh growth. Moreover, amidst the ceaseless change which is the heritage of human things, there is relative stability in the simpler thoughts of the human mind, and as in many parts of India the peasant still labours with the implements and in the mode of his ancestors in periods far remote, so his mind frames the same hypotheses to account for those phenomena of nature which in India more than else- where determine irrevocably his weal or his woe. 6 AUTHOR'S PREFACE The rich variety of the mythology, despite its attraction for the student of the history of myths, renders the task of concise exposition one of pecuUar difficulty. For the mythology of the present day available material is enormous: each part of the vast area of India has its own abundant store of myth and tradition, and to give detail for this period would be impossible. The same consideration applies with but slightly lessened force for the earlier epochs: the Veda, the epics, the Purdnas, the literature of the Buddhists and of the Jains, each present data in lavish abundance. It has been necessary, therefore, to cir- cumscribe narrowly the scope of the subject by restricting the treatment to that mythology which stands in close connexion with religion and which conveys to us a conception of the manner in which the Indian pictured to himself the origin of the world and of life, the destiny of the universe and of the souls of man, the gods and the evil spirits who supported or menaced his existence. Gods and demons were very present to the mind of the Indian then as they are today, and they are inextricably involved in innumerable stories of folk-lore, of fairy tale, and of speculation as to the origin of institutions and customs. The task of selecting such myths as will best illustrate the nature of the powers of good and evil is one in which we cannot hope for complete success; and the problem is rendered still more hard by the essential vagueness of many of the figures of Indian mythology: the mysticism of Indian concep- tion tends ever to a pantheism alien to the clear-cut creations of the Hellenic imagination. The difficult task of selecting suitable illustrations has been shared with the editor of this series. Dr. Louis H, Gray, of whose valuable assistance in this and other matters I desire to express my most sincere appreciation; and my friend Pro- fessor Charles R. Lanman, of Harvard University, has gener- ously lent us valuable volumes from his private library. Dr. Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, with his wonted generosity and devotion to the cause of promoting the knowledge of Indian AUTHOR'S PREFACE 7 art, not merely accorded permission for the reproduction of illustrations from his Rajput Paintings (published by the Oxford University Press), but placed at my disposal the resources of his admirable Visvakarma^ a kindness for which I am deeply grateful. To the India Society and the Oxford University Press I am indebted for permission to reproduce illustrations from Lady Herringham's splendid copies of the Ajanta frescoes, published by the Press for the Society, Messrs. W. Griggs and Sons, of Hanover Street, Peckham, London, S. E., have been good enough to permit the reproduction of certain illustrations from their Journal of Indian Art; and I owe to the generosity of the India Office the photographs which Messrs. Griggs and Sons have made for me from negatives In the collection of that Department. Lieut.-Col. A. H. Milne, of Cults, Aber- deenshire, Scotland, kindly permitted the photographing of one of the pieces of his rich collection; the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston and the Peabody Museum in Salem, Mass., have been no less generous than he; and Mrs. Louis H. Gray placed her expert knowledge at our service In seeing the vol- ume through the press. To my wife I owe thanks for help and criticism. A. BERRIEDALE KEITH. University of Edinburgh, 22 September, 19 16. TRANSCRIPTION AND PRONUNCIATION THE system of transcription followed is that used by the Royal Asiatic Society and accords closely with the one adopted in the Grundriss der indo-arischen Philologie und Altertumskuiide. The pronunciation is much as in English, but c is pronounced as ch, and g is always hard; the characters repre- sented by kh, gh, ch, jh, th, dh, th, dh, ph, bh have the h sounded half-separately, somewhat as in pot-hook, madhouse, hap- hazard, etc. Of the letters distinguished by diacritical marks t, th, d, dh, and n are pronounced very much like the ordinary dentals; s is sounded as sh, and i as sh or s; the s is always hard, never soft like z. The letter r denotes the vowel sound of r and is pronounced approximately like ri; and similarly / is almost like li. The letters n and n denote a nasal assimilated to the following sound, guttural and palatal respectively, and m indicates a nasal sound which corresponds very roughly to ng. The "visarga," h, was probably pronounced like the Scottish or German ch. The vowels e (pronounced like a in fate) and o, which represent an original ai and au, are always long. The vowel a is pronounced somewhat in the manner of the u in English hut; other vowels have the same value as in Italian. INTRODUCTION THE earliest record of Indian mythology is contained in the ^gveda, or "Hymn Veda," a series of ten books of hymns celebrating the chief Vedic gods. The exact motives of the collection are uncertain, but it is clear that in large measure the hymns represent those used in the Soma sacrifice, which formed a most important part of the worship of the gods in the ritual of the subsequent period. It is now recognized that the religion and mythology contained in this collection are not primitive in character and that they represent the result of a long period of development of sacred poetry. Thus it is that the gods who form the subject of this poetry often appear ob- scure in character, though in the great majority of cases it is clear that the myths related of them refer to physical happen- ings. The date of the Rgveda is much disputed and admits of no definite determination; it may be doubted whether the old- est poetry contained in it is much earlier than 1200 B.C., but it is not probable that it was composed later than 800 B.C., even in its most recent portions. Both in its mythology and in its composition the Rgveda is clearly older than the other three Vedas, the Sdmaveda, the Yajurveda, and the Atharvaveda — the "Chant Veda," the "Formula Veda," and the "Veda of the Atharvan Priests" — and, in point of date, these three stand much on a level with the Brdhmanas, or explanatory prose texts which are attached to or form part of them. In them are to be found many specu- lations of a more advanced kind than those of the Rgveda^ yet at the same time the Atharvaveda contains a mass of popular religion which has been taken up and worked over by the same priestly classes to whose activity the other texts are due. It 12 INTRODUCTION must, therefore, be recognized that the Rgveda gives only an Imperfect Impression of Indian mythology and that. In a sense, It is the work of an aristocracy; but at the same time it is im- possible to regard the Atharvaveda as a direct complement of the Rgveda and as giving the popular side of the Rgvedic reli- gion. The Atharvaveda was probably not reduced to Its present form much, If at all, earlier than 500 B.C., and the popular worship included in it is one which Is at once separated by a considerable period In time from that of the Rgveda and is pre- sented to us, not In Its primitive form, but as It was taken up by the priests. The other Vedas and the Brdhmanas may be referred roughly to a period which runs from 800 to 600 B.C. To the Brdhmanas are attached, more or less closely, treatises called Aranyakas ("Silvan"), which were to be studied by oral tradition in the solitude of the forests, and Upanisads, treatises of definitely philosophical content, whose name is de- rived from the "session" of the pupils around their teacher. The oldest of these works probably date from before 500 B.C. On the other hand, the Sutras, or rules regarding the sacrifice both In Its more elaborate and In Its more domestic forms, and regulations concerning custom and law give Incidental infor- mation as to the more popular side of religion. The Sutras, at any rate, and possibly even the Brdhmanas, in their later portions, are contemporaneous with the begin- nings of the two great epics of India, the Mahdbhdrata and the Rdmdyana. The first composition of these works as real epics, made up from ballads and other material, may be assigned to the fourth century b.c, and It Is probable that the Rdmdyana was practically complete before the Christian era. In the case of the Mahdbhdrata, however, there is no doubt that the orig- inal heroic epic has been overwhelmed by a vast mass of relig- ious, philosophical, and didactic matter, and that it was not practically complete before the sixth century a.d., though most of it probably may be dated In the period from 200 B.C. to 200 A.D. These works reveal, to an extent which cannot be INTRODUCTION 13 paralleled in the texts of the preceding periods, the religion of the warrior class and of the people generally. It cannot be as- sumed that the religion thus described is a later development, in point of time, than the Vedic religion, so far as the chief features of this religion are concerned; but much of the myth- ology is clearly a working over of the tales reported in the period of the Brdhmanas, of which, in so far, the epic period is a legitimate successor. The epic period is followed by that of the Purdnas, which show undoubted signs of the development of the religion and mythology of the epics. No doubt the material in these texts is often old, and here and there narratives are preserved in a form anterior to that now seen in the Mahdbhdrata. Yet, on the whole, it is probable that no Purdna antedates 600 a.d., and there is little doubt that portions of some of them are much later, falling within the last few centuries. Nor, indeed, is there any definite check to the continuance of this literature: at least two of the Purdnas have no definite texts, and any author, without fear of positive contradiction, is at liberty to compose a poem in honour of a place of worship or of pilgrimage, and to call it a portion of either of these Purdnas. This is the literature which, to the present day, contains the authorita- tive sacred texts of Hindu myth and worship. Yet it is essen- tially priestly and learned, and the popular religion which it embodies has been elaborated and confused, so that it is neces- sary, for a clear view of modern Hindu mythology, to supple- ment the account of the Purdnas with records taken from the actual observation of the practices of modern India. Besides the main stream of Hindu mythology there are im- portant currents in the traditions of the Buddhists and the Jains. Buddhism has left but faint traces of its former glories in India itself; undoubtedly from about 500 B.C. to 700 a.d. it must be ranked among the greatest of Indian religions, and in the school of the Mahayana, or "Great Vehicle," it de- veloped an elaborate mythology which displays marked orig- 14 INTRODUCTION inal features. In comparison with Buddhism Jainism has added little to the mythology of India, but in its own way it has de- veloped many themes of Indian mythology, with the main doctrines of which it remains in much closer contact than does Buddhism. The subject, therefore, divides itself, in accordance with the literary sources upon which any treatment must be based, into seven divisions: I. The Period of the Ilgveda (Chapters I and II) ; II. The Period of the Brdhmanas (Chapter III) ; III. The Period of the Epics (Chapters IV and V); IV. The Period of the Purdnas (Chapter VI) ; V. The Mythology of Buddhism (Chapter VII) ; VI. The Mythology of Jainism (Chapter VIII); VII. The Mythology of Modern India (Chapter IX).
408
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:42:02 PM »
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
409
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:40:47 PM »
16. The passage is first addressed to Gilgamish by Siduri, Tablet X, col. i, end entirely lost; by Ursanapi, X, col. iii. 2—7, where most of the lines are preserved in fragmentary condition; by Utnapishtim, end of X, col. iv, entirely lost. A fragment, 34193, Thompson [d], PI. 42 belongs to one of these three interviews and is longer than the one be- tween Ursanapi and Gilgamish. Following Thompson, ibid., p. 56, I place it with the interview between Siduri and Gilgamish if there is space for it at the end of Tablet X, col. i.
17. a-dur-ma mu-ta ap-la-ah a-raf-pu-ud sir a. Restored from
Tablet X, col. iii. 25; v. 17; ii. 7, a-du-ur?
18. See Langdon [e], pp. 210—2.
19. C. F. Fossey, Journal Asiatique, 1922, pp. 27—9, thinks that it is an expression for “sailors.” From the passages in which it occurs su-ut ahne must refer to attendants of Ursanapi, and persons who were hostile to Gilgamish. See Tablet X, col. ii. 35, where they are referred to as as \tu\-ti?-, also col. ii. 38, and note 23.
20. Either a translation or an epithet of su-ut abne.
21. See p. 212.
22. The Assyrian version, which gives two successive addresses of Ursanapi, X, col. ii. 39—50; iii. 1—7, has interpolated the second ad- dress from the Siduri episode. Also Gilgamish’s reply, iii. 8—31, is con- sequently interpolated.
23. i.e., the su-ut abne. See also p. 213.
24. About one hundred feet.
25. Probably a kind of ship.
26. qablu, mrdXe., = sibbu, RA vi. 131, AO 3555, rev. 14; cf. Ebeling, KAR No. 168, rev. ii. 12.
27. karu — karu, and u-sak-\sid elippa\\'\. Cf. Ebeling, KAR No. 196, rev. ii. 58.
28. See pp. 211 (Siduri); 214 (Ursanapi).
29. See pp. 212 (to Siduri); 214 (to Ursanapi).
30. lullu-amelu e-dil; see Langdon [c], p. 95 n. 3; [e] p. 36, 1 . 9.
31. The text first published by Paul Haupt, Das Babylonische Nim- rodefos, and by Thompson [d], Plates 34-43.
32. On the Sargon and Nur-Dagan myth see CAR i. 406; E. F. Weidner, Der Zug Sargons von Akkad nach Kleinasien, Boghazkoi- studien. Heft 6, pp. 57—99.
33. The lines of the Flood myth are numbered after the text in Thompson [d]. Plates 44-54.
34. A parallel text, H. V. Hilprecht, Earliest Version of the Flood Story, p. 48, 1 . 9 has, “ With a strong covering cover it.”
35. The sar is 3600, and pitch is regularly measured by the gur or
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
406
about fifty-two gallons. The scribe does not say what measure is meant. If the gur is intended, the amount would be 1,123,200 gallons!
36. East of the Tigris, near the Lower Zab river and in the latitude of the Assyrian capital Ashur.
37. See pp. 139-40.
38. ammakt, “ Instead of,” is proved by RA xviii. 167, 11 . 21 flF.
39. V. Scheil, RA xxiii. 42, rev. 3—5.
40. Aelian. Nat. Animal.^ vi. 51 5 G. Kaibel, Comicorum Graecorum FragmentOy p. 1 50, fragment 9 of Dinolochus. References and trans- lation by J. U. Powell.
41. Mr. Powell, who called my attention to all these passages in Greek authors, gave me a literal translation of Nicander, Theriacuy 343— 358; he cites also A. C. Pearson, Sophocles^ Fragments y ii. 31 if. I have given only a shortened account, taken from Powell’s translation.
42. A fragment of an old Babylonian version from Nippur, by H. V. Hilprecht; see note 34; another from an Assyrian version, Paul Haupt, Das Babylomsche Nimrod EfoSy p. 131. For literature see Gressmann, pp. 199-200.
43. Seep. 37.
44. There is general agreement in assigning the following verses of Genesis to the old Yawistic account. Minor details are omitted here. Chapter vi. 5-8 vii. 1-5 -j- 12 + 17*’ + 22-3 viii. 6-13 -f- 20- 22. For details see J. Skinner, GenestSy pp. 150—158; G. R. Driver, Genesisy^ pp. 65— 108.
45. If this statement be correct, then Genesis vii. 7— lO must be from the hand of a redactor, but based on the so-called P source. These verses are entirely omitted in my discussion. Verse 10 if taken from P would prove that this source also contained the period of seven days between the warning and the coming of the Flood.
46. See p. 204.
47. See p. 134.
48. The meaning “ rainbow ” assigned to antiranna and marratu by many scholars is false.
Chapter VII •
1. This was my view, OECT ii. 12, n. 3.
2. They are all from Nippur, and three of them are discussed in PBS X. 124—5. duplicate of my text, ibid.y No. 5, is published by Chiera, No. 38. Chiera has also found another text, ibid.y No. 39, which is similar to my text, BE xxxi. No. 55, and proves that also H. Radau, Miscellaneous Sumenan TextSy No. 12, belongs to this epic. It is now clear that the Sumerian original was an extensive composition.
NOTES
407
3. See BE xxxi. No. 55, 11 . 6—7, and Chiera, ibid.y No. 39, 11 . 2—3. For seals which shew Gilgamish slaying a winged monster, see Dela- porte , PI. 8, T. 51; T. 74.
4. See p. 102.
5. For Tammuz with Gilgamish, see PBS x. part 2, No. 16, rev. ii. 14-15; RA xiii, 1 13 III, 2.
6. P. Haupt, Das Babylonische NimrodefoSy No. 53 and E. Ebeling, KAR No. 227, obv. ii, 7 fl.
7. See C. F. Fossey, Bab. v. 16, 1 . 145; Ebeling, KAR No. 434, 1 . 5.
8. Langdon , p. 20.
9. See Weidner [c], p. 86 and Ebeling, KAR No. 227, obv. ii. 46.
10. See PBS X. 178, n. 2.
11. Deimel, ii. No. 69, viii. 12.
12. See p. 192.
13. A seal of the same period from Kish, JRAS 1930, PI. xi. No. 2.
14. See p. 29.
15. See Landsberger, i. 325.
16. Poetical phrase for “ Erech of the wide public squares.”
17. This is now clear from R. C. Thompson’s new edition of the Epic, see ibid.y p. 9, n. 6. For the mythological character of this ancient goddess, see S. Langdon, BE xxxi. 14, n. I.
18. S. Langdon, PBS x. 212, 11 . 17—23.
19. ibid.y 11. 24-36,
20. Genesis xxxii. 25—33.
21. V. Scheil, in RA xiii. 6.
22. Hosea xii. 4—5.
23. See Delaporte [a]. No. 25 1; Ward [a]. No. 461. On Dela- porte, [c], PI. 70, No. il, Gilgamish, here represented with horned headdress, seizes Enkidu by the tail. A curious seal, J. Menant, Cata- logue des Cylindres Orientaux ... de la Hayey PL i. No. 5, may rep- resent at least two different scenes of this episode. Here Enkidu has no bull parts, but the tail is preserved on the central scene.
24. M. Jastrow and A. T. Clay, An Old Babylonian Version of the Gilgamish Eficy col. iii.
25. Jastrow-Clay, ibid.y 11 . 249—275.
26. At this point I follow an order differing from Thompson [d]. Pis. 14—19. I take K. 8586 and S. 1040 to belong to Tablet IV, and S. 2132 -f" K. 3588 to belong to Tablet V.
27. KUB iv. No. 12. Copy by E. F. Weidner. Translations by A. Ungnad, E. Ebeling, and R. C. Thompson. For literature, see Thompson [d], p. 79.
28. If K. 8586 is Tablet IV, obv. ii, and S. 1040, obv. iii, there is a gap in the text of nearly one hundred lines, until the narrative can be followed toward the end of rev. ii. = K. 8591, PI. 15 in Thompson [d].
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
408
29. The order of the narrative here depends upon the assumption that S. 2132 and K. 3588 belong to the fifth tablet.
30. Edited by J. Friedrich, ZA xxix, 6-15. The following account and translations depend entirely upon this edition.
31. See p. 248.
32. See Combabus in Index.
33. E. Ebeling, KAR No. 57, rev. i 18; T. G. Pinches, PSBA 1909, p. 62, 1 . 21; KAR No. 357, 1 . 39.
34. Sidney Smith, Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology (Liver- pool), xi. No. 3.
35. See C. F. Fossey, Bab. v. 8, 1 . 74; 54, 1 . 55; 139, 1 . 25.
36. Sidney Smith, JRAS, 1926, p. 440. On Humbaba see also F. Thureau-Dangin, RA xxii. 23—6.
37. See p. 37.
38. So in R. C. Thompson’s new arrangement of the lines.
39. J. Friedrich, ZA xxxix. 16—21.
40. Read i-nus^ not i-ful.
41. Incorporated into Gilgamish’s replies to Siduri, Ursanapi, and Utnapishtim. See p. 212.
42. See p. 259, 11 . 39-48.
43. K. 8281, in Thompson [d], PI. 33, left side. Possible con- tinuation, after a break, of K. 8564, col. iii, followed by K. 8564, right side = col. iv?
44. See pp. 209-27.
45. See pp. 209—10.
46. That is to steady one end of the bow on the ground, the attitude of an archer in shooting with arrows.
47. See E. Ebeling, KAR No. 92, rev. 21.
48. A. Ungnad, Gtlgamtsch-Efos und Odyssee, p. 3I; article “ Kalypso ” in Pauly and Wissowa, signed [Lamer] .
49. P. Jensen, Das Gilgamos-Efos, Erster Band, Die Ursprilnge der Alt-Testamentlichen Patriarchen, Profheten und Bejreten Sagen und der N eu-Testamentlichen J esu-SageUy Strassburg, 1906; Zweiter Band, Die Israelitischen Gilgamish-Sagen in der Weltliteratury mit Ergdnzungshefty worin unter anderm vier Kapitel uber die Paulus-SagCy Marburg, 1928. Heft i. pp. 1-1030; Heft ii. pp. 1-730.
Chapter VIII
I. Two editions are known, the early Babylonian, written in the time of Ammizaduga, and the Assyrian edition of the seventh century. Tablet II of the old Babylonian text was first published by V. Scheil, Recueil de Travaux relatifs a la Philologie et d V Archeologie egyptiennes
NOTES
409
et assyriennes. xx. 5 5 ff . New copy by A. T. Clay, A Hebrew Deluge Story, No. I. Tablet II. This tablet probably had three columns on each side, like the edition of the Epic of Gilgamish. Tablet III of the old edition is published by Langdon [e], PI. x. Tablet I of the Assyrian ver- sion is published in CT xv. PI. 49. There is no complete critical edition of these fragments. CT xv. 49 is edited by P. Jensen, KB vi. 274—287, and old version. Tablet II, ibid., 288-291. Dhorme [a], pp. 128-139; 1 20-1 25. A. T. Clay, ibid., pp. 58—69.
2. References to the columns follow CT xv. 49 (here).
3. That is, looked enviously at the weighing scales, as they pur- chased food.
4. It is not possible to regard Bu. 91—5—9, 269 in Langdon [e], PI. X as part of Clay, ibid.. No. I. If this were so then the account of Mami’s creation of man would come before the story of the Flood is finished, in the old edition.
5. Form of Atarhasis in the old Accadian texts.
6. Text D. T. 42, in P. Haupt, Nimrod Efos, p. 131. Literature in P. Jensen, KB vi. p. 254; Dhorme [a], p. 126.
7. See p. 1 12.
Chapter IX
1. See Fig. 55 and Otto Weber. Altonentalische Siegelbilder, pp. 85-6.
2. See the design of Hydra on a late astronomical tablet from Warka. E. F. Weidner, AOF iv. PI. v. No. 2. The resemblance to the customary style of drawing this monster is unmistakable. It occurs much earlier on a monument of Merodachbaladan, King, L. W. , PI. xlii.
3. The excavations at Babylon yielded almost no engraved seals. See Koldewey, p. 262. One of these represents Marduk with four wings, and holding two (natural) lions by their hind legs.
4. See also Delaporte [c], PI. 86, Nos. 13—14; W. H. Ward, Cylinders in the J. Pierfont Morgan Collection, No. 152.
5. Delaporte [a]. No. 333; Weber, ibid.. Nos. 307, 308; Dela- porte [c], PI. 87, Nos. 4, 7—9.
6. Weber, ibid.. Nos. 301, 302, 303, 304, 305; W. H. Ward, Cylinders in the J. Pierfont Morgan Collection, Nos. 150, 155.
7. Delaporte [c], PI. 86, No. 18; PI. 87, No. 2.
8. Assyrian Sculptures, Kleinmann, Pis. 83—4. Ward, p. 197.
9. See also Ward, Nos. 583-585; Delaporte [c], PI. 86, No. 17; [a], 321; 331-
10. As for example, Delaporte [a], 318.
410
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
11. J. Menant, Cylindres Onentaux de la Haye, No. 32.
12. Delaporte [c], PI. 89, No. 17.
13. Delaporte [a], 319.
14. RA vi. 95; stela of Gudea. W. H. Ward, ibid.y No. 368 d.
15. See Langdon [h], 118, n. 7.
16. E. Unger in Reallexicon der V orgeschichte, viii. Tafel 63A, and A. Jeremias, Handbuch der Altorientalischen Geisteskultury p. 351. See Unger, ibid., p. 213.
17. It is probable that CT xvi. 19, 21 should be read ug-ga = \^la-^ab-bu.
18. Probable meaning of lines 19-22 in S. Geller, ATU i. 278.
19. See AJSL xlii. 1 16, 1 . 22; I2I, 1 . lO; 122, 1 . 9.
20. The text of the Labbu myth is published by L. W. King, CT XV. Pis. 33-4. Edited by P. Jensen, KB vi. 44-7; F. Hrozny, Mythen von dem Gotte Ninrag, pp. 106—114; E. Ebeling, in Gressmann, pp. 138-9, with other literature by H. Zimmern, L. W. King, and A. Ungnad.
21. The literature on this epic is great, but only two editions take account of the complete material, E. Ebeling, Das Babylonische Welt- schdfjungslied (1921) and Langdon [a] (1923). A new transla- tion by Ebeling, in Gressmann, pp. 108-129. New fragments of Tab- lets I and VI were published in Langdon (1927), pp. 88-101.
22. Langdon , p. 28.
23. CT xvii. 42, 15—25, written lahmi.
24. A new variant, Thompson [d], PI. 29, Rm. 504, has “god Ea,” for “ he ”; but Langdon , 90, 68, has “ and that one uttered a cry of pain,” referring to Apsu.
25. See p. 68.
26. See p. 282.
27. F. Thureau-Dangin, RA xvi. 144-156.
28. JRAS 1925, p. 493, 11 . 14-15.
29. See pp. 133-4.
30. There is no word ruqqu in Accadian meaning “ to make secure,” suggesting an idea of solidity as the root meaning, and if my reading of line 139 of Tablet IV of the epic, mas-ku “skin,” is right, the Hebrew word must correspond to it, conveying the meaning of some- thing spread out or hammered out thin. There is an Accadian word ruqqu meaning “ copper bowl.”
31. For a new proof that Libra was the “house” of Saturn, see JRAS, 1925, PI. ii. 1 . 32. On the whole subject see Langdon [a],
pp. 149-151-
32. See Langdon [a], pp. 152-3, on the theories of Weidner, Kug- ler, Lindl, and Fotheringham.
33. The theory has been elaborately defended by A. Jeremias, and
NOTES
411
his colleague Hugo Winckler, who is now dead. See A. Jeremias, Handbuch der Altonentalischen Gehteskultur^ p. 25. This writer attributes the origin of these ideas to the Sumerians, which is a risky statement. The philosophical theory that the reality of all things is the conceptions of them, first conceived by the gods, is Sumerian, but whether they held the late Babylonian theories, that things on earth also exist in Heaven as their prototypes, is not proved.
34. F. Thureau-Dangin [c], p. 136, 1 . 274.
35. See note 2.
36. See Kugler, Erganzungeriy p. 221; A. Jeremias, ibid.y 227.
37. Weidner [c], p. 70, 12.
38. The astral explanation of the seal was made by Th. Dom- bart, JSOR xiv. i— 10. Cf. AOF v. 225.
39. Line 1 15 of Tablet VI has Ligiry as CT xxv. 34 II 12; xxiv. 27, 27.
40. CT xiii. 35-38. Editions by Jensen, Dhorme, King, Zimmern, Ungnad, cited by E. Ebeling, in Gressmann, p. 130. Small duplicate by Zimmern, in ZA xxviii. 10 1. The Accadian (Neo-Babylonian) text is provided with a Sumerian translation.
41. E. Ebeling, KAR No. 4; edited by Ebeling, ZDMG Ixx. 532 flF., and Langdon [e], pp. 40—57. Translated by Ebeling, in Gressmann, pp. 134—6.
42. See pp. 190-3.
43. Genesis ii. 4'"— 25.
44. The text containing the directions for the ceremonies of the Akitu or Zagmuk festival at Babylon is edited by E. Thureau-Dangin , pp. 127—146. It is discussed in Langdon [a], pp. 20—28. The ritual and commentaries on the mystery plays form the subject of a large volume by S. A. PaUis, The Babylonian Akitu Festivaly Copenhagen, 1926.
45. For the evidence, see Langdon [a], 27; Museum Journaly 1923, p. 275, 1 . 76; CT xxxvii. pi. 10, 1 . 9.
46. Read ifr'tk. See E. F. Weidner, Handbuchy p. 76; CT xxxiii. pi. 8,1. 32.
47. See p. 140.
48. The Ashur fragments are published by E. Ebeling, KAR Nos. 143; 219; 307. The Ninevite fragments are published in Langdon [a], pp. 212—13; to K. 9138, K. 6330 has now been joined, and a new fragment, K. 6359, has been identified by Mr. Gadd. See JRASy 1930, Oct. Number.
49. See p. 52.
412
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
Chapter X
1. In PSBAy 1916, pp. 55-7, I identified one tablet (A. Poebel, PBS V. 23) of this series which contains that part of the myth where Ishtar descends through the first three gates. I did not then discover that my own text, BE xxxi. No. 33, belongs to this series and probably contains the entire story in four columns. Chiera, in his Sumenan Religious Texts, vol. i, republished my text, Constantinople Nippur Collection, No. 368, with the aid of duplicates in Philadelphia, Nos. 13908, 13932 and 12638 + 12702 + 12752. A tablet in Philadel- phia, 9800, joins my text, BE xxxi. No. 33, and completes it. None of this new material is published by Chiera, who gives only a new copy of my text as No. 53 of his Sumerian Religious Texts. See ibid., pp. 37—9. The end of the legend is contained in A. Poebel, PBS v. No. 22, of which there is an unpublished duplicate at Yale, No. 4621. All of this new material discovered by Professor Chiera is still inaccessible and consequently the information contained in this chapter must be con- sidered inadequate.
2. See Langdon [h], p. 26. The passage under discussion is nam-en mu-um-sub, BE xxxi. No. 34, 1 . 6.
3. An obscure passage. Tammuz is referred to. Cf. Ningishzida ( = Tammuz) the gussallu of the lower world, iv. Raw. 21'*' A 16.
4. See PSBA, 1916, pp. 55-7.
?. Here Chiera, i. No. 53 , rev. i. 1—4 = BE xxxi. 33, rev. i. i.
6. A. Poebel, PBS, No. 22.
7. The text is published by L. W. King, CT xv. Pis. 45—48, and a duplicate by Ebeling, KAR, No. I. There are many translations, the most recent being that by E. Ebeling, in Gressmann, pp. 206—210, where the literature is given. An English translation will be found in R. W. Rogers, Cuneiform Parallels to the Old Testament, pp. I2I— 13 1. The annotated editions are by P. Jensen and P. Dhorme.
8. See pp. 259, 265-6.
9. CT xvii. PI. 37, 1-6.
10. The poet explains the meaning of this line in lines 32—3 below.
11. The same influence was attributed to Aphrodite in Greek my- thology. P. Dhorme [a], p. 334, note 77, compares a passage in the Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite, 11 . 72-4, which reads (referring to wild animals which followed Aphrodite), “she seeing them rejoiced in her heart and sent desire into their breasts; and they all lay down two by two in shadowy dells.” Text by T. W. Allen and E. E. Sykes ( 1904).
12. Variant, “ I decree thee a fate not to be forgotten. Lo I decree thee a fate not to be forgotten forever.”
13. Poebel, PBS v. 22, lines 14-15, has, “When Innini from the lower world ascended, her ransom she gave.”
14. Bab. vi. 199-215.
NOTES
413
Chapter XI
1. Ezekiel’s vision in chapter viii is dated in the Massoretic text in 591 B.C., on the fifth day of the sixth month, that is Elul, August— September. The Septuagint has the fifth month, or Ab, July— August. But this is no evidence for the date of the Tammuz wailings. See Baudissin, p. 109.
2. See Langdon [a], p. 43, 1 . 43, “the blood of the body”; “he was slain,” p. 43, 1. 47; “he was seized,” p. 45, 1. 51; “they caused him to be felled,” p. 47, 1. 62.
3. Langdon [g], p. 308, 11 . 5—12; p. 274, 1 . I ; F. Hauft Anni- versary Volumcy p. 17 1, 1 . 7, p. 173, 1 . 15. For suduy suda = katiluy “slayer,” see CT xix. 17, B 18.
4. See RA xii. 42.
5. The best article on St. George, which includes the discovery of his tomb by the English army in 1917, is by H. Leclercq, “ Georges (Saint),” Dtctionaire d^Archeologie Chrettenne. None of the articles on St. George make any reference to the numerous Arabic sources con- cerning the St. George legends.
410
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:40:02 PM »
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.
411
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:39:04 PM »
187. "^ 13 ^ in Zakir Aramaic stele, Pognon, pp. 156—178; Dhorme, RA viii. 98. The form Be-ir also occurs, Schroeder, KAV No. 72, 11. lO-ll; ii. 567, 1. 33.
188. Frank , pp. 30—32; Unger, in Ebert, Reallexicon der V or- geschichte, iv. 2. 416. See Fig. 5 i, fourth register, symbol on left.
189. CT XV. 15.
190. Jensen, KB vi. 46-51.
191. matam la usnes, from nesu, “ to live.”
192. Cooke, p. 159, 11 . 2-3.
193. So is the name written correctly, Exod. xv. 2. Yahweh = Adonai in the other verses is a later and usual form, rendered Jehovah in the versions.
194. Numbers xxi. 14.
195. Josh. X. 13; 2 Sam. i. 18.
196. So RV on 2 Sam. i. 18, but “bow” stands alone here and is probably the first word or title of a lost song.
197. Jashar, “ the just,” Accadian isaru is a title of Nergal in ‘^Ishar- padda, OECT i. 30, No. 8; Weidner , ii. 17, 14.
198. Driver and Gray, p. 37, 11 . 2—3.
199. I Sam. ix. 17.
200. Harvard Excavations at Samaria. See Cowley, JRAS, 1920, p. 182; Driver, ZATW, 1928, pp. 7-25; Harper, No. 633, rev. 3.
20 1 . There is no reason to suppose that there was an Israelitic dynasty at Hamath in Northern Syria at this period.
202. So Winckler , p. 102, 1 . 33; p. 178, 1 . 53. Without deter- minative for “ god,” p. 170, 1 . 8. A variant is I-lu-bi-’-di, 6, 23, i. 6., El of the Aramaic pantheon replaces Yaw, as in the Heb. Elyaqim was changed to Yoyaqim, 2 Kings xxiii. 34.
203. Title of a deity.
204. Cowley reads fassim “ Ya’u ”; Ungnad [a], Jahu or Jaho.
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
388
205. Any attempt to derive the word from a triliteral root is mislead- ing, for it is not the original name. Many take it to mean “ he who causes to fall (fire from Heaven) ” ; see Eisler in OrientaVistische Studien F. Hommel gewidmet, ii. 36. Margoliouth, pp. 20—21, believes that the name was known in Arabia and pronounced Yah, Probably the word Jehovah arose from Yaw, Yahv, to carry the vowels of Adonai, and has no other meaning.
206. Gressmann, No. 363.
207. Cooke, p. 1158, 1 . 2; p. 173, 1 . 22.
208. VAB iv. 260, 11 . 33-5.
209. Cooke, p. 171, No. 62, I, 19; p. 180, No. 63, i.
210. Harper, No. 633, 7. Another interpretation by Schiffer , i. 27.
21 1. See for Anat-Yaw or Astarte-Yaw, etc., at Gaza, Babelon, viii. 6, and p. 48, Nos. 327-8.
212. Beer, “ Rescheph,” in Pauly-Wissowa and Vincent, “ Le Ba’al Cananeen de Beisan,” RB, 1928, pp. 512-543, hold this view definitely.
213. Torrey, JAOS xxix. 192, “Land of Reshep.”
214. Cooke, No. 30; Chabot, No. 1213.
215. PSBA, 1900, p. 271.
216. In the name "'’Sulmanu-asaridu = Shalmanassar.
217. Cooke, No. 7; Hoffmann, ZA xi. 246.
218. Schroeder, KAV, No. 63, 7.
219. Rost, Tiglathpileser, in. 73 , 1 . lO.
220. Gen. xiv. 18; Ps. Ixxvi. 3, Shal-em in Hebrew.
221. Langdon, in SO i. 97—100.
222. Knudtzon, p. 290, 16; 74, 31.
223. On coins of Aelia Capitolina (Jerusalem), second century, A.D., the baetyl of the Sun-god, sometimes decorated by an eagle, symbol of the sun, is drawn on a chariot with four horses. This chariot symbol, etc., may be an importation from other Palestinian cities, or a direct survival of the cult of El-Shalman there.
224. Cooke, p. 361, No. 5, and Plate xi.
225. Vincent, RB^ 1928, p. 531, n. 3, and Plate xxv.
226. See p, 30.
227. Langdon, Bab., p. 144, Plate ii.
228. Vincent, RB, 1928, pp. 514—532.
229. Cooke, No. I.
230. See Egyftian Mythology, p. lOl, in this Series, vol. xii.
231. Also in Arabia, see p. 3.
232. The style of the script and the use of the ideogram ERI-KI before Si-du-ni are characteristic of the style at Sidon in this period.
233. Clercq, p. 386 bis, 386 ter, Plate xxxiii.
NOTES
389
234. Vincent, Plate xxv. 6; Gressman, No. 348.
235. Vincent, p. 530.
236. CIS i. 91, 93, 90, 89, 94 = Cooke, Nos. 25, 27, 24.
237. CIS i. 89.
238. Cooke, No. 30.
239. The vowels are entirely uncertain.
240. See Langdon, IRAS, 1921, p. 573; Zimmern, KAT^, P-478 ; Macmillan, BA v. 583, 1 . ii, etc.
241. CT xxv. B 36, 30; XXXV. B 24.
242. So with Zimmern, after Jensen, KAT^, p. 415, n. 2. Cronus of classical mythology, who was identified with El of the Phoenicians, is also called umoris et frigoris deus, “ god of wet and cold.”
243. My opinion is that the word should be read Mukkil, “ the devourer.”
244. The Israelites practised this sacrifice as late as the times of Jeremiah. Cf. Jer. xxxii. 35; 2 Kings xxiii. lO.
245. So first Rowe, MI xix. 155.
246. Schroeder, KAV No. 63, col. ii. 1 . 37, and cf. No. 42, col. i, 1 . 32 = No. 43, col. i, 1 . 13.
247. Cooke, No. 10, 11 . 2—3; CIS i. 8; at Carthage, 250, 3.
248. In cuneiform, time of Asarhaddon, Winckler [a], ii. 12, 14, has been read Mi-il-gi-su by Winckler, and Mi-il-kar-ti by Johns, MV AG ^ 1908, p. 13. I collated this passage, RA xxvi. 191, 14. The reading is Mi-il-ik-qarti, where the Phoenician word for “ city ” is written with the Sumerian ideogram URU (alu), “city.”
249. At Shashmi near Tyre, Knudtzon, p. 203, 1 . 3; p. 123, 1 . 37.
250. ihtd., pp. 1324-5; p. 1563; Johns , p. 234, 4.
251. afx^poffu Trerpe, late Greek for ambrosiae fetrae.
252 [Sa] memroumos, who is also called in Greek Hypsuranius. Ousoos is probably Esau, and the legend may be based on Jacob and Esau. Ous 5 os, however, is commonly identified with the ancient name of Tyre on the mainland, Uzu, Usu, Usu. See Knudtzon, p. 1247.
253. See Baudissin, p. 172.
254. Josephus, Ant.y viii. 5. 3.
255. Berard, BEFAR Ixvii. 254 ff.
256. In Cyprus, Babelon, Plate xix, 8, ll; xviii. 21 ; at Issus in Cilicia, Plate iii. 17.
257. CIS i. 246.
258. JRAS Centennial volume, 1924, p. 69, 1 . 8. See also below, p. 60.
259. ibid.f p. 104.
260. Baudissin, p. 285.
261. See Cooke, No. 10, 1 . 3, “ Messengers of Melk-Astarte and the servants of Ba‘al Hamman,” from Ma‘sub, near Tyre.
390
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
262. CIS pp. 247, 1 . 5; 248, 1 . 4; 249, 1 . 4.
263. Sed-yathon son of Ger-Sed, Cooke, No. 31.
264. C /5 i. 236, 1. 5; 818, 1. 6.
265. Shamem, “Heavens,” and rum, “high,” for Ba'al Shamen- rum (Canaanitish), “ High lord of the Heavens.”
266. Greek translation of lost Phoenician names.
267. See the god Kulla of Babylonia.
268. For this temple and chariot see Jahrbuch des kais. deutschen Arch. Inst.y 1901, Plate v, and for the coin R Archy 1903, p. 368, n. 3.
269. See E. Meyer, “ Egalabal,” in Roscher.
270. See p. 44.
271. Babelon, p. 322, No. 2201.
272. Called J by critics; Gen. x. 8—12.
273. Apparently an error for Kullaba, after Jensen.
274. *^Pisangunuku (usually Nergal) is the name of Ninurta at Kul- lab. So restore CT xxv. PL 14, 23.
275. The name has never been explained successfully.
276. King [a], p. 257, 9.
277. Tadmar occurs as early as the twelfth century.
278. Also in the Aramaic inscriptions the name Bel is often written Bol at Palmyra.
279. Malak-Bel is the name peculiar to the tribe Banu Taimi. Dus- saud, R Arch i. 206, n. 4 (1904).
280. Zeus Keraunios or Keraunos is the translation of Ba‘al-Shamin, “ Lord of the Heavens,” which is certainly a title of the Thunder-god, and not of Shamash, ZDMG xv. 617.
281. So Dussaud, RA i. 144 (1903).
282. Cf. King , p. 17, col. vi. 3; Langdon [f], p. 228, 43.
283. Berger, Clermont-Ganneau, Levy, Lidzbarski, Cooke.
284. This inferred by the title Sukkalluy and by his being son of Bel- Marduk.
285. Levy, REJ xliii.
286. So Hoffmann, ZA xi. 247.
287. Winckler [a], ii. 12, 1 . 10 ; RA xxvi. 191. 1 . 10.
288. Lidzbarski , p. 240, as NPr.
289. Used as a APr, king of the Elamites, Tallquist [a], p. 183, eighth century, b.c.
290. Qausgabri is the name of a king of Edom in the seventh cen- tury, Tallquist [a], p. 184. The deity is surely Arabian, and found only in Arabic NPrOy as Qais, Qus.
291. Assuming that malak is not a noun formation for “ king,” but stands for mala'ky “ messenger,” the view accepted above, the NPr Ba‘al-maluku at Arwad in Northern Phoenicia (Streck, ii. 20, 84, 92) would be a case of vowel assimilation, malaku> maluku. The alterna-
NOTES 391
tive view that malak and maluk have the same meaning as malik must be considered. See Zimmern, KAT^ pp. 471—2.
292. Waddington, No. 1875a, cf. Dussaud, R Arch i. 144 (1903).
293. Layard, MAIBL xx. part 2, Plates i, ii; Dussaud, R Arch i.
376 ff.
294. It is this side which has the Palmyrene inscription.
295. Beneath is the Latin inscription Soli sanctissimo^ etc.
296. Dussaud has undoubtedly given the correct interpretation of this monument, loc. cit.
297. Layard, Plate iii.
298. Adad as son of Enlil, Langdon [g], p. 280, 1 . 15.
299. See Langdon JSOR v. 100.
300. In the treaty of Esarhaddon with the king of Tyre, Winckler [a], ii. 12.
301. Euting, Berlin Academy, p. 671, No. 2 (1885).
302. Or “ lord of eternity.”
303. Cooke, p. 296, n. i.
304. Near Tyre, Cooke, No. 9.
305. CIS ii. 163, 176.
306. Cooke, No. 39.
307. Dussaud, Raffort in NAMS x. 173, 397, etc.
308. S. Lidzbarski [a], i. 243 ff.
309. KBo i. I, rev. 54; i. 2, rev. 30; 3, rev. 23.
310. bel same, KBo i. 2, rev. 18; i. i, rev. 40.
31 1. Cooke, No. 122.
312. See Cumont’s cautious article, “ Balsamin,” in Pauly- Wissowa.
313. Cowley, pp. 204 ff.
314. Conybeare, in Charles, ii. 725.
315. The insertion of h is explained by some scholars as due to analogy with biliteral plurals with lengthened stem, Brockelmann, i. 455 -
316. Original tighir, RA xxii. 46, No. I, rev. I, 2.
317. Langdon, OECT vii. 5, No. 33.
318. RA xvi. 49 ff.
319. See p. 44.
320. Cooke, No. 61,1. 2; 62, 1 . 22; p. 165.
321. Nielsen, MV AG, 1916, p. 256; 1909, p. 367.
322. Called “Lord of Gebal ” on an Egyptian monument, where he is represented as Aman (Sun-god) with the Lady of Gebal as Isis, CRAI, 1921, p. 165.
323. Genesis xiv, 18-22. See p. 45.
324. If this word is based on a Phoenician plural for “ gods,” it must be assumed that the triliteral form eloah belongs also to that Semitic dialect. It is the regular Hebrew plural. Aramaic elhin.
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
392
325. Shaddai is peculiar to Hebrew and of unknown derivation. LXX “ All mighty.” Shaddai in El-shaddai may be compared with NPr Ilu-sadu-ni^ “ God is our mountain,” i.e. “ defence ” ; Sin- sadu-ni, “ Sin is my mountain.” In Assyrian §adu-nadin-ahi (Johns , p. 446), §adu stands for a deity, and Saddai, “My mountains,” “ my defence,” would be a title of El, or any deity, borrowed from Semitic nomenclature.
326. CT xxiv. 31, 11 . 74-5.
327. Craig, RT pp. 57, 1 . 21; 58, 1 . 24.
328. Thureau-Dangin [c], p. 67, 1 . 26.
329. On a bust of Osorkon I, Syria, vi. 109.
330. Hill [a], Phoenicia, p. 945 Cooke, p. 350.
331. Hill [a], p. 96.
332. ibid., p. 93; Babelon, p. 194.
333. Cooke, No. 3, I.
334. Paraphrase of the text, which has always Cronos not El. See Cory, p. 15.
335. Meissner, Figs. 15, 16.
336. Contenau, Bab., ix; Tablettes de Kerkouk, p. 78, No. 128.
337. Zimmern, in Frank , p. 39, and Fig. 51.
338. Contenau, pp. 70-71.
339. Pss. xvii, 8, xxxvi. 7.
340. Ruth ii. 12. See Pss. Ivii. i, Ixi. 4.
341. apirt], Sanchounyathon, in Cory, p. lO.
342. Seen. 335.
343. De hide et Osiride, Chap, xii ff.
344. Seep. 58.
345. Hill [a], p. 96; Babelon, p. 1 94.
346. 2 Kings xvii. 31.
347. So Levy’s interpretation, R Arch iv. 387 (1904).
348. This phrase occurs only in the literature from Boghozkeui.
349. Cooke, No. 33, 1 . 6, dim Ba‘al Sidon, “ the god Ba‘al of Sidon ”; p. 91, n. I, elim Is. In Assyria ilani, “gods,” for “god,” is used, Harper, No. 301, 1 . 7.
350. KBo iv. 10, rev. 3; v. i, obv. 56.
351. Habiru in the mixed Mitanni Assyrian population of Arrapha in the Cassite period had apparently the meaning “ wanderer,” “ immi- grant ” ; for men and women with good Assyrian names had this title then, and often sold themselves into slavery. See Chiera, JAOS xlvii. 44.
352. So Damascius and Philo.
353. i.e., a name for Eshmun, “the physician.”
354. Langdon [h], p. 34.
NOTES 393
356. NPr Eshmun-adon, Cooke, p. 55, 4; but Eshmun-adoni, p. 60, I.
357. Cooke, p. 109.
358. Langdon [g], p. 324, H. 4-5.
359. So Damascius, see Baudissin, p. 339.
360. Frazer, Adorns, pp. 27 flF. Baudissin, pp. 345 ff., rejects the theory that Adonis of Gebal and of Esmun are identical. I agree with Barton and Dussaud on this vital question. The argument that Adonis is never represented as a hunter and other special attributes of Adonis of the Lebanons are not fundamental and are surely due to local pecu- liarities.
361. Syria, viii. 120.
362. ib., iv. 185 fF. ; Monuments Plot, xxv. 248.
363. Mu-lu-mu, “ my lord,” or mu-lu-xu-ne, “ your lord,” Lang- don [g], pp. 318, 1. 20; 320, 1. 8.
364. Baudissin, pp. 74 , 94 “ 97 , 359 -
365. Efistola, Ixviii. ad Paulinum.
366. This must be taken with reserve.
367. Driver, ZATW xlvi. 24, suggests that Yaw is an ejaculation, which is probably right.
368. Baudissin, p. 333.
369. Babelon, Plate xxxii. 23. See also Hill [a], Plate Ixiii. 7 and p. cxv.
370. Boissier, [a], p. 112, 8.
371. Langdon [h], pp, ii4ff.
372. MJ xvii. 299.
373. Numbers xxi. 4-10.
374. 2 Kings xviii. 4.
375. Legrain, PBS xv. 14; see CAH, i. 405.
376. S. Smith in Gadd-Legrain, i. No. 275.
377. nagtr ^Enlil, CT xxiv. 6, 1 . 22; 22, 1 . 120; RA xx. 98.
378. Thureau-Dangin [a], i. Nos. 1167, 1316.
379. For Semitic names in the period of Ur and Isin, see Legrain, p. III.
380. e-ba-sa-(mil)-'^Da-gan (ki), Legrain, p. ill; Bab., viii. 70.
381. Scheil , face A 5, 8; 1 1, 15.
382. On names of this class, see Bauer, p. 72.
383. This Phoenician writing occurs once in late Assyrian, in the NPr Arad-'^Da-gu-na, Harper, No. 357, rev. 5.
384. Literally “ house of the mountain,” place of ordeals in Arallu. Schroeder , 42, i. 22-25.
385. ZA xxi. 248.
386. BA vi. p. 5, pp. 28, 34; RA iv. 85, 1 . 18; Thureau-Dangin , p. 238.
394
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
387. Seep. 39.
388. Thureau-Dangin, RA xvi. 150.
389. Langdon, in Weidner’s Archivy i. 6, I. 28.
390. I Sam. iv. 5.
391. Oesterley in Charles, i. 106.
392. See p. 46.
393. Knudtzon, No. 1560.
394. G. F. Moore, “ Dagon,” in EBu
395. Hill [a], Plate i. i-io; ii. 30, 31 ; Babelon, Plate xxii. 1-6.
396. Hill [a], Plate cxliv. The “ fish-man ” type of deity is com- mon on seals of the late Assyrian period, and represents Aquarius.
397. For this monument and its true meaning, see Gressmann,
ii. No. 525. This is a fish deity, as the three horns on the cowl prove, and is a minor type of Enki, Ea, Oannes, the Water-god of Sumerian mythology, Zimmern, XA xxxv. 153, n. 2. Menant, ii. 51—54, was chiefly responsible for introducing Dagon as a Fish-god into current accounts of religion.
398. For a study of this monument see Thureau-Dangin, RA xviii. 172 f.; Frank [a], pp. 5, 44 ff.
399. Woolley, JRASy 1926, p. 693 and Plate ix. No. l.
400. Some kind of ritualistic object.
401. Text in Ebeling, No. 298, obv. 15— 20.
402. Cory, p. 31.
403. See p. 56.
Chapter II
1. Langdon .
2. ibid.y Nos. 9, 29, 68, 97.
3. ibid.y No. 45.
4. ibid.y No. 68.
5. For early sign see PSBAy 1914, pp. 280— I.
6. Langdon [h], p. 120; Scheil, Recueil des travauxy xxxviii, lAou- velles notesy No. 8, p. 5.
7. Langdon [h], p. 1 18.
8. muslahhu.
9. But once in Thureau-Dangin [e], p. 155, 1 . 16, never in scholastic texts.
10. See JSOR V. 100.
11. Deimel, ii. 9—10.
1 2. See p. 65.
13. Langdon . Plates 2, No. 7; 9, No. 29; 8, No. 26; 7, No. 25; 30, No. 1 14.
NOTES
395
14. Rawlinson, ii. 59, A i. This cannot be explained away by sup- posing that the scribe has introduced an eme-sal form, as Zimmern argues, Berichten der Konig. Sack. Gesellschajt, Ixiii. 85.
15. See Langdon, Legend of EtanOy Aa, 1 . 27 and note.
16. Kugler, tbtd.y Erg'dnz.y p. 213; Weidner [c], p. 97.
17. Thureau-Dangin [c], p. 85, 1 . 30; p. 122, 1 . 15; p. 123, 1. 31.
18. Ebeling, KAR No. 307, obv. 33. For lowest Heaven as a plane of the planets, see Langdon, Legend of EtanUy p. 46, note x.
19. Charles, ii. 304.
20. ibid.y ii. 432—442.
21. See L. Heuzey, RA v. 13 1. That great interpreter of sculpture identified the god with overflowing vase with Ea, because of the seal, ibid.y fig. 6, where the fish-ram and the fish-man support the figure of the deity. The fish-ram (Capricorn) is undoubtedly Ea. Heuzey took the fish-man for Oannes (Ea). Anu with overflowing vase stands on the back of a dragon, DP i. 177, fig. 383. This is proved to be Anu by RA xxi. 196, symbol No. 4, where Anu stands on the same monster. Koldewey, p. 273, is of the same opinion.
22. The astronomical name of Aquarius ““'Gu-la, “ great star,” is identical with the regular title of Anu, “ god Gu-la.” The swallow star (Simmah), or Western Aquarius, belongs to the “ way of Anu.”
23. MJ xviii. 84—5.
24. Ebeling, KAR No. 196, rev. ii. 10—35.
25. Ishtar has this title often, Langdon , pp. 43, 95.
26. “ Calf at the teat.”
27. Ebeling, KAR No. 196, rev. i. 4—8.
28. Isaiah vi. 1—7; Ebeling, Archiv filr Gesch. der Mediziny xiv, Heft 3, p. 66.
29. PBS X. 336, n. 5.
30. Ward, Nos. 129, 203.
31. Gudea, Cyl. A, ii, 20.
32. ibid.y 10, 2.
33. Ebeling, KAR No. 375, p. 319, 11 . 44-9.
34. PBS X. 283.
35. Psalm cxlvii. 15.
36. S. Holmes, in Charles, i. 565.
37. PBS X. 150, 284.
38. See Nbtscher, pp. 56—60.
39. Ebeling, KAR No. 375, obv. ii, 40-3 = G. Reisner, SBH p. 130, 11. 32-5.
40. Texts by E. T. Harper, BA ii. 467—475; Rawlinson, iv. 14, no. I ; CT XV. 43.
41. The fragments do not contain this part of the legend. There
V — 27
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
396
was a long episode concerning Lugalbanda, the nest of Zu, his wife, and offspring in the Hashur mountains. See the Sumerian tablets, PBS V. 16, 17.
42. On bas-reliefs of Maltai, north of Nineveh, are figures of seven deities; the third represents Enlil standing on a winged lion with horns, RA xxi. 187.
43. CT xvii. 42, 11 . 15—22; Thompson [a], ii. 145; Jensen, KB vi.^ 2-3.
44. On Mummu, the word of Ea, see article “ Word ” in ERE xii. 749 ff-
45. Shurfu, iv. 70. In this role his title is Nudimmud, Nadimmud.
46. Dhorme [a], p. 96; for Ea as creator of man, ibid., p. 134, 1 . 27.
47. Weissbach, pp. 32-35.
48. JRAS, 1918, p. 437; Marduk, Son of Ea, is also the Mummu, Langdon [a], p. 200, n. 5; cf. ZA xxxvii. 90, n. 3.
49. S. Holmes in Charles, i. 549. On the doctrine of Mummu see 1918, pp. 433-49.
50. i.e., water as the first principle.
51. King [e], i. 201.
412
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:38:10 PM »
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.
413
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:37:24 PM »
DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 367
der is pierced by a cord-hole to suspend the amulet on a door or on the breast, has the text with seven names of Lamashtu in- scribed on the reverse. The obverse shews Lamme-Lamashtu, the lion-headed demoness, holding a double-headed serpent in each hand. A dog sucks at her right breast, a pig at her left breast. The magician in the rituals made a clay image of her, smote it with a sword, and buried it outside the wall. Here she is represented with a sword driven into her skull, and the ma- gician has provided her with raiment and food for her journey 5 he has sent her away to the mountains, the sea, and her dark abode in Hell. On the left may be seen a roll of clothing, a water-jar, a wine-jar standing in its support, a shoe, and a san- dal. On the right is a centipede} between Lamashtu’s legs is a scorpion, and before the ass’s head a grain sack} beside it a loaf of bread. She rides off kneeling on the back of a galloping ass} although the ass runs, it nevertheless sails in a boat, whose prow ends in a serpent’s head, and the poop in a bull’s head.®® A similar amulet with the same text is seen in Fig. 99, where Lamashtu, seizing serpents, rides away on an ass in a boat. On the left is one of the devils, who stands as her rear guard, and a priest points her way to expulsion. On the collar of this amu- let is the same scene as on the third register of Fig. 44, shew- ing the priests dressed in the “ fish-robe,” symbol of the Water- god, with two attendants. They perform the rituals for expelling the demons from the person lying on the bed, here apparently a woman in child-birth. On Fig. 44, the figure is clearly that of a bearded man. The lower register of Fig. 44 also shews the expulsion of Lamashtu, kneeling upon an ass, which gallops in a boat on the river. Her feet are those of a bird of prey. A dog sucks at each breast, recalling the words of the eighth incantation:
“ The name of Anu and Antu, of Enlil and Ninlil,
Of gate and entrances,
Of sword and seed-plough,
Of the ezil>u and his son, I cause thee to swear by,
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
If thou returnest to this house, comest hard upon the little one, Sittest on the seat where he sits,
Liftest to thy lap the babe which I lift to my lap.
O Ishtar, hold back the mouth of thy dogs.
O Nana, hold back the mouth of thy whelps.
May the sleeper, who has lain down upon a bed not awake.
Until the sun sheds its rays of morn.”
Fig. 99. Expulsion of Lamashtu. Babylonian Amulet
Curiously enough Ishtar or Innini (Irnini) and Nana, names of the virgin Mother-goddess, are frequently used for La- mashtu. Even the great goddess of healing, Ninkarrak, is also a demoness, and a man, distressed by being forced to appear before the assembly by accusers, prayed:
“ O Ninkarrak, hold back thy whelps;
In the mouth of thy mighty dogs put a gag.”
Fig. 98. Lamashtu on her Journey with Provisions
DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 369
The Greek demoness Hecate had also her dogs, and she too was identified with the goddesses Selene, Artemis, and Per- sephone. In the tenth incantation Lamashtu is described as the daughter of Anu, who received her name from the great gods 5 she is Innini, most eminent of queens, the slayer, the offensive Asakku (a demon of disease), the mighty cyclone of mankind. This incantation has been found on an amulet, which shews Lamashtu with the head of a bird of prey. Here she has a comb, spindle, and water-jar. Fig. 44 also shews the equip- ment provided for her journey — a jar, a comb, a bundle of garments, a sandal, and a shoe.*^ The third incantation began: “ Angry, raging goddess, the furious, and she is a wolf, daugh- ter of Anu.” She seizes old men, strong men, maidens, and little ones, fastens herself upon limbs, binds the muscles, in- flames the body.
The fifth incantation describes her as a pest of beasts of prey j she infests rivers, highways, walls j befouls and shrivels the trees} and drinks the blood of men. The magician must give her comb, pectoral jewels, spinning rod, sandals, and water- pouch for her thirst} and must fill her scrip with dainties. The afflicted man prays:
“ Like a mule of the field ride away to thy hill.”
The seventh incantation speaks of a sail-boat made for her to depart. The eighth incantation describes how she slew infants} she cries to the women:
“ Bring me your sons, I will suckle them.
In the mouths of your daughters I will put my teat.”
t)f special interest for the character of Lamashtu as she was borrowed by the Greeks under the Sumerian titles Lamia and Gello is the twelfth incantation:
“ She has been made great, the daughter of Anu, suckler of the feeble ones.
Her palms are a trap, her bosom . . .
A devourer, a howler, a foe, a robber.
370
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
A devastator, a plunderer, is the daughter of Anu. She attacks the womb of the pregnant.
She snatches the babe from the nurses.
She suckles, carries off,^® and goes away.
Great are her weapons, her sinews are . . .
Her head is that of a lion, her teeth the teeth of an ass. Her lips are a spray, pouring out vomit.
She descended every mountain.
She shrieks like a lion.
Howls like a mad dog.
From threshold to threshold she howls.”
Marduk saw her evil work and told his father Ea how Lamashtu oppresses the feeble. Ea ordered Marduk to use his incantation, to give her a comb, spindle, and oil-bag, and send
her on her way. The ritual prescribes that each of the thirteen in- cantations be recited over a part of the body, beginning from the head and ending with the feet. The first in- cantation was recited over the patient’s head, the second over the neck, the third over the right hand, the fourth over the left hand, and so on, ending with right and left foot. Two amulets with similar representations of Lamashtu, her provisions for travel, the figures of the seven devils and the demons in her train, carry an incantation different from any of the thirteen on the standard ritual. Fig. i OO shews one of these amulets j here again a sword has been driven into her head. Before her stands one of her
Fig. 100. Seven Devils and Lamashtu. Babylonian Amulet
DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 371
attendant demons, and in the right upper corner is the horrible head of Pazuzu, “ Lord of the wind-demons.” The incanta- tion describes Lamashtu as she who disturbs sleep and sends nightmares, precisely as in the eighth incantation of the series mentioned above (p. 369). This same incantation occurs on two amulets which represent Lamashtu with serpents, standing upon a crouching bull.^® On Fig. 44 the wind-demon is seen behind Lamashtu in the fourth register, and the entire reverse is occupied by a large image in deep bas-relief of this demon Pazuzu, who peeps over the top, grinning at the calamities which Lamia has brought upon mankind.
Fig. loi shews the four-winged demon of the winds, a monster with half human, half canine head, and wide grinning mouth. The hands are those of a savage wild animal, the legs terminate in talons of a bird of prey, and are covered with feathers. The monster has a scorpion tail. Three similar figures of this demon of the winds are known. They all have a ring attached solidly to the top of the head, and stand on a support, so that they may be suspended or set in any appro- priate place to defend the home against his wicked attacks.®® A curious figurine of Pazuzu in crouching position is also known, the body covered with scales, as is the bas-relief figure on the back of Fig. 44.®^ Only one of these has an inscription giving the name “ (god) Pazuzu, son of (god) Hanpa, lord of the wicked wind-demons (/z 7 ^),” and it mentions the west wind.
More often this wind-demon is represented either on bas- reliefs with Lamashtu as on Figs. 44, 98, 99, or by the head only in the round as seen in Fig. 102, which bears an inscrip- tion: “Thou art mighty, high, mountain-infesting, controller of all winds, raging, angry, who approachest in wrath, angry
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
372
wind, whose onslaught is terrible, thou commander of the (four) regions, devastating the beautiful hills.” Inscriptions on similar heads also describe this demon as a raging wind, descending on river and desert, spreading abroad fever and cold, smiting man and woman, and when it blows disease falls upon the pale-faced people.®^ The inscription on one of them names the demon as “ (god) Pazuzu, son of (god) Hanpa, lord of the lilcy the wicked god.”
The demons are ordinarily referred to as seven in Sumerian and Accadian inscriptions, and they are figured on bas-reliefs
as seven animal-headed mon- sters. In the texts which describe them, usually under the title the wicked utukku,'* the number is indefinite, and usually more than seven. The list referred to above (p. 362) has twelve. To these may be added Namtaru,
Mamit, “ the curse,” and many others. They are also said to be seven times seven in number and evil winds that rage, horses that grew up in the mountain of the lower world, throne-bearers of
Fig. 102. Head of Pazuzu
gal, god of Inferno. There is an obvious Inconsistency in the Babylonian conception of the seven devils. The second register of Fig. 44 shews them in this order with reference to the animal nature of their heads — panther, lion, dog, sheep, wild ram, bird of prey, serpent. On Fig. 99, they are antelope, serpent, bird, fox, wolf, wild ram, panther. A similar amulet has the seven devils as fox, sheep, antelope, bird, wild ram, serpent, panther.
A Sumerian text describes them as follows:
‘‘ fate,” Asakku, “ the plague,”
DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 373
“ They are rushing storms, evil gods,
Merciless shedu who were created on the bulwark of Heaven.
They are makers of trouble.
They maintain wickedness, who daily enter for wickedness, who attack to commit murder.
Among the seven, firstly there is the south wind.
The second is the great viper, whose wide open mouth [^slayeth] every man.
The third is an angry panther, whose mouth knows no mercy.
The fourth is the terrible adder which . . .
The fifth is the raging lion which knows not how to retreat.
The sixth is an onrushing . . . which against god and king . . .
The seventh is the north wind, evil wind which wrathfuUy . . .
Seven are they, messengers of Anu the king.”
It is clear that the Sumerians and Babylonians believed these evil spirits to belong to the divine order j they have no place for dualism in their system. In late Judaism and in early Christianity the belief in Satan, incarnation of all the demons of a long past Semitic mythology as a being of independent creation, according to modern scholars, is due entirely to Per- sian Influence. When the author of the first Book of Enoch attributed the cause of all evil in the world to the “ sons of Elohim,” who married the daughters of men (see p. 357), and described them as fallen angels, he introduced into the history of Semitic mythology and theology a new principle. This movement began in the second century b.c. The chief of the demons, Belial, became the chief enemy of God in Jewish Apocalyptic literature, and Satan was held to be lord of the material world. All things worldly belong to him, and he is interpreted by modern scholars to be of independent origin and opposed to the deity of the spiritual world. It is beyond the subject of this book to discuss the gradual growth and sudden appearance of this supposed dualism in Judaism and Chris- tianity. In a word, Semitic mythology now yields place to the- ology in large measure. The ancient mythology of the Semitic races had now run its course j it continued to exercise marked influence upon the subsequent development of Judaism, Chris-
374
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
tianity, and Islam, particularly in demonology, under the new and more exalted position which the demons and Satan had at- tained by the introduction of the Persian dualistic principle.®® It should be noted, however, that Satan as the enemy of God and as the Anti-Christ in the new theology of Christianity is not new. The demons of Babylonian mythology also oppose “ god and king.” (See p. 373.) They are said to be the ene- mies of all the gods, although the texts repeatedly state that they were created by Anu, father of all the gods. For this tolerance of the gods, their creation of evil beings, and their permission to let them pursue their nefarious warfare against man and beast, plain and hills, trees and plants, the Sumerians and Babylonians had an explanation entirely consistent with monism. The demons are the scourge of the gods, and no man can suffer at their hands if he ensures himself properly by di- vine protection. And when he is the victim of the demons, the gods in their mercy provide their consecrated priests with di- vine power to drive them back to their tenebrous abodes.
Finally a warning against the acceptance of the principle of dualism in late Judaism and Christianity must be stated. Al- though Persian dualism is almost universally admitted by his- torians of Judaism and early Christianity, there are no passages in Jewish literature or in the New Testament to confirm irre- fragably the confidence with which Judaism and Christianity have been condemned of dualism. In the final pages of this book the modern results of scholarship on the last two centuries before Christ, the New Testament period, and the succeeding centuries of Talmudic literature, have been stated. They are not the views of the writer of this book. Satan as the foe of god, the Anti-Christ, and lord of the material world, is not necessarily independent of “ God the Father ” of Christian theology and creeds, or of the Jewish rabbinical writers. There is no more inconsistency here than in Babylonian mythology.
NOTES
:
1
~nftr
NOTES
Chapter I
1. Langdon [d], i. 7. In the early inscriptions the word is A-ga-de, but in later Babylonian the gentilic adjective is ak-ka-du-u.
2. On the dynasty of Accad, see CAHy i. 402-423.
3. See OECT ii. lo-ii.
4. See Langdon [h], pp. 1 71— 174.
5. See the NPr ““Dungi-sa-am-si, Genouillac, ii. 17, No. 728. In this NPvy however, Samsi, “ my Sun,” is hardly anything more than the word for “ Sun.” It is the earliest known phonetic writing of the Semitic word.
6. In NPr Ummi-"'^§amsi (si), CT ii. plates 23, 28.
7. In NPra Samsu-ditana, Samsu-iluna, Samsu-erah, Bauer, p. 38.
8. For the South Arabian pantheon the following works should be consulted: Nielsen [a], pp. 177— 250; W. Fell, “ Sudarabische Studien,” ZMDG liv. 231—259 (1900); Margoliouth, Relations be- tween Arabs and Israelites. A good map of Sabaea, Ma‘in, and Hadra- mut will be found with F. Hommel’s account of “ Explorations in Arabia,” pp. 693—793 of Hilprecht.
9. In Fig. 2 the sun is represented by a simple cross, based upon the more usual four-pointed star. See also Delaporte , Plate 51, No. 10, and Langdon, JRAS, 1927, pp. 44-46. In early Babylonian sym- bolism the sun is also represented by a disk. For Fig. 3, see Anzani, Riv. Ital. Num.y xxxix. 22 (1926).
10. For a Sabaean inscription discovered at Warka, ancient Su- merian Erech in Sumer, see Loftus, pp. 233—4. For the recently dis- covered South Arabian inscriptions at Koweit, see GJ lix. 321—34. Three inscriptions of this kind were excavated at Ur. See E. Burrows, JRASy 1927, pp. 795 ff.
11. Nielsen [a], i. 214—218.
12. The ordinary Sumerian ideogram for Sin is en-zu, which, like other ideograms, such as zu-ab = afsuy “ nether sea,” gal- usuM = usumgalluy “ dragon,” was pronounced in inverse order zu-en. This is proved by the orthography of Cappadocian tablets in which NPra, which contain the name of Sin, have regularly Zu-in, Su-en. See ZDMG Ixxiv. 218; ZA xxxviii. 244. In an early Acca- dian inscription from Ur the word is written ““Zu-en, Gadd and Legrain, No. 1 1 . All doubt concerning this reading is removed by the writing
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
378
of the name of the Assyrian month Arah-Su-en and variant Arah-’’“Sin, Ebeling, KAJIy Nos. 57, 29; 32, 22. In a text dated ninth year of Gimil-Sin of Ur, the NPr Ur-'*Si-na proves that the Sumerians and Accadians pronounced this word Sin. See C. E. Keiser, YOS iv. No. 39, 4. In an early Sumerian hymn the word is written zu-e-na, A. Poebel, ZA xxxvii. 174.
13. Osiander, ZDMG xix. 238 (1865), 11 . 2-5. Here ‘Athtar is called his father. Parallel passages have Ilmuqah for Sin, ibid.y p. 242. The name Sin occurs on two monuments. See Nielsen, MV AG, 1909, P- 359 -
14. From Egyptian sources it is possible to argue that the Sinaitic plateau was a centre of moon worship from early times. On the rock inscriptions from Magharah, in the western part of the Sinaitic peninsula, the Egyptian Moon-god Thoth is portrayed observing Cheops (fourth dynasty, early in the third millennium) smiting the inhabitants of this region, Gardiner and Peet, Plates 2, 3, No. 7. Again on a monument of the fifth dynasty from Magharah, ibid.y Plate 6, No. 10, the god is apparently figured, and he occurs there again with Hathor in the reign of Amenemmes III, Plate 10, No. 23, early part of the second millennium. There seems to be no explanation for this unless moon worship was con- nected with this area from remote antiquity.
15. Son of Jeconiah, I Chron. hi. 18. See Cheyne, EBi col. 4453.
16. Genesis xiv. 2. The Greek has here Sennar, and the name is, therefore, doubtful. But “ Sin (is) father ” is a good Semitic NPr. See Jensen, ZA vii. 177, note i. See 2 Kings xxiii. 5, where the ordi- nary Semitic word for “ moon,” jdreahy is used. Also Deut. xvii. 3, Jeremiah viii. 2.
17. Job xxxi. 26, 27. The act of adoration referred to is that of throwing a kiss to the statue of a deity, common in Sumer, Babylonia, and Greece. See “ Gesture in Sumerian and Babylonian prayer,” JRAS, I 9 I 9 > PP- 531 ff-
18. This is also the theory of Nielsen [a], p. 218. On the early Arabian pantheon, see Wellhausen, Reste arabischen Heidentums ; Dus- saud [a], in which the religion of the North Arabian inhabitants of the Hauran, south of Damascus, is discussed. See Krehl, p. 45.
19. On the various theories concerning a deity as father of a clan, see the discussion by Lagrange, pp. no— 118; Gray, pp. 253—255, who admits totemism in the early period of Hebrew religion, arguing from personal names taken from animals.
20. Muller and Rhodokanakis, i. 190; W. T. Pilter, PSBAy 1916, P- 154-
21. On titles of god as father, uncle (ancestor), see Bauer, p. 61. ‘Amm-yada‘, Ab-yada‘, Yada‘-ab, and perhaps Hal-yada‘, “the uncle knows,” are further examples of Himyaritic names. In Accadian of
NOTES 379
the Amoritic period, Yadah-ab, “ the father knows,” Yadah-elum, “ El knows.”
22. See Chapter XI. The use of “ brother ” and “ sister ” for these deities is derived from Sumerian. Cf. ERE ix. 171.
23. RA xiii. 8 (Scheil).
24. Sargonic period (2732 to 2549 B.C.).
25. For the early Accadian period see Ungnad [d], pp. 29—30.
414
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:35:42 PM »
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-
415
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:34:41 PM »
In this passage the names of these kings of Isin have not even the prefix of deity. They are not dead gods but men who were identified with Tammuz. It is entirely clear, therefore, that this great cult of a dying god, which was intensively practised from prehistoric times by the Sumerians, adopted by the Babylonians, Assyrians, Aramaeans, Phoenicians, Canaanites, Hebrews, and Egyptians, is based upon the belief in a martyred saint, who died and rose again, and became a god. There can be no longer any doubt concerning the fact that the god of death and resurrection of the great religions which preceded Christi- anity was originally a man Dumu-zi, “ the faithful son.” In the most archaic Sumerian inscriptions this title occurs in the name of a man Ur-dumu-zi, “ Servant of Tammuz,” without the title of a god.®^
TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR
347
For this reason Tammuz is addressed in the hymns as the ilitti bitty “ offspring of the house,” he who descended in the legitimate line of divinely appointed kings. The Gospel ac- cording to St. Matthew begins with the “ Book of the genera- tion of Jesus Christ,” in which his ancestry is recorded and traced to Abraham. In this sense the name given to Dumuzi was probably used. A passage from one of the liturgies sung at the midsummer wailings runs as follows:
“ Offspring of the house, my ravished one,
I sit wailing for thee.
0 son of the goddess Etuda,®^ I sit wailing for thee.
1 sit wailing for thee.
0 strong one, god Ububu,®® I sit wailing for thee.
1 sit wailing for thee.
0 lord, god Umunmuzida, I sit wailing for thee.
1 sit wailing for thee.
0 strong one, my god Damu, I sit wailing for thee.
1 sit wailing for thee.
0 god Isir, god of the shining eyes, I sit wailing for thee.
1 sit wailing for thee.
My face with pigment I have beautified.
My . . . with cedar ointment I have beautified.
My back with the garment dukaddua I have adorned.
My head with a radiant crown I have adorned.
O thou child, let thy heart repose, thy soul repose.”
Here Innini his sister weeps for the departed Tammuz, as the legitimate descendant of royal Sumerian lineage. In the evolution of the myth and cult of Tammuz the human origin of this deity is almost entirely suppressed. He and his sister Innini become the children of the Water-god Enki of Eridu, and one of the longest hymns of the Tammuz liturgies begins:
“ O lord, son of the great prince in Heaven and Earth, thou art mag- nified.”
Both of these deities were assigned to the pantheon of the Water-god because in Sumer the life of the earth depended so essentially upon the rivers, their only permanent supply of
V 24
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
348
water. They are, at least in Sumer, essentially deities of irriga- tion. In the midsummer lamentations his sister, who is also described as his mother, his wife, and his lover, implores Tam- muz to rise again from “ the river.” For he was supposed to have been cast upon the Euphrates, and to have sunk beneath its waters in sign of the failing summer stream. A passage from the Tammuz liturgies reads:
“ From the river, from the river arise, rejoice.
O what for a child? From the river arise, rejoice.
O strong one, from the river arise, rejoice.
O illustrious one, from the river arise, rejoice.
O my lord, from the river arise, rejoice.
O Damn, from the river arise, rejoice.”
A similar passage occurs in another liturgy:
“ O thou with woe overfull, O shepherd.
From the river arise, be appeased.
O what for a child? From the river arise, be appeased.
O Damu, from the river arise, be appeased.
Thou priest of lustration, from the river arise, be appeased.
O Isir, from the river arise, be appeased.”
These lines are spoken by his sister Innini who then describes to him how she has adorned herself for his return from the lower world.
“ ‘ My side is the cedar, my breast the cypress.
O offspring of the house, my ... is the . . . cedar,
Yea the cedar and the pine.
The dark produce of Dilmun.
My face with pigment I have beautified.
My head with a radiant crown I have adorned.
My . . . with cedar ointment I have beautified.
My back with the garment dukaddua I have adorned.
O what for a child is mine? How long sleepeth he?
The sturdy one who sorrows, how long sleepeth he?
Damu who sorrows, how long sleepeth he?
Priest of lustration, who sorrows, how long sleepeth he?
O what for a child ? In the garlic he sleeps, in the garlic he was cast away.
TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR
349
The strong one, my Damn, in the garlic sleeps, in the garlic he was cast away.
In the willows he sleeps, with woe cries he is overfilled.’
To her child in the plains of Heaven she hastened.
In the plains of Heaven, in the plains of Earth she hastened.
In the plains of Earth he kept watch.
Like a herdsman he kept watch over the places of the fat cattle, Like a shepherd he kept watch over the places of the fat sheep.
Woe and wailings for the seized away.”
The lost Tammuz had been a shepherd of the sheep and the herdsman of the cattle, and now he perished with flowers and grass j in their withered leaves the Sumerians recognized the dead body of Tammuz. Ewe and her lamb languished, she- goat and her kid famished.
“ I the strong one go to the conflict, the way of no return,”
said Tammuz in one of the liturgies, and the wailing men and women replied:
“ Woe, O man, heroic Ninazu.
Woe, O man, my man, my Damu.
Woe, O man, the child Ningishzida.
Woe, O man, god Lamga, lord of the net.
Woe, O man, prince, lord of adoration.
Woe, O man, Isir, of the shining eyes.
Woe, O man, my heavenly singer.
Woe, O man, Ama-ushumgalanna.
Woe, O man, brother of the mother, the goddess Geshtinanna.
He is gone, is gone, to the bosom of the earth.
His (cup of sorrow) is overfull in the land of the dead.
With sighing for him on the day of his fall.
In the month of no peace, in his (appointed time) of the year.
On the journey that brings men to extremities.
With lament for Damu the lord
Is the hero (gone) to the far-away land unseen.
Woe for the springing verdure delayed, woe for the leafing plant which is restrained.”
The same liturgy tells how Tammuz in his infancy lay in a submerged boat, referring to his being cast as an infant upon the river, where he sank beneath the waves. In his manhood
350
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
he was drowned at harvest time. Another liturgy compares Tammuz with a tamarisk which has no water in the garden, and with plants whose foliage withers in the fields. These pas- sages reveal the origin of the Greek ceremony at the wailings of Adonis. “ The gardens of Adonis,” “ were baskets or pots filled with earth in which wheat, barley, lettuces, fennel, and various kinds of flowers were sown and tended for eight days, chiefly or exclusively by women. Fostered by the sun’s heat the plants shot up rapidly, but having no root they withered as rapidly away, and at the end of eight days were carried out with images of the dead Adonis and flung with them into the sea or into springs.”
A dialogue between Tammuz and Innini, in which the dying god, who sleeps in Arallu, is identified with the Sun-god, bears the title “A Meditation of Innini”:
“ His sister stood forth and lamented.
To the Sun-god her husband she uttered a tale of lament.
Innini, she who brings verdure in abundance.
O Innini the verdure I will restore to thee.
O brother the verdure, where is it taken?
Who has taken? who has taken?
The plants from me who has taken ?
My sister, that which is taken I restore to thee. O Innini, that which is taken I restore to thee.
O brother, the crushed, where are they gone?
Who has garnered? who has garnered?
The plants from me who has garnered?
My sister, that which is garnered I restore to thee.
O Innini, that which is garnered I restore to thee.
O brother, the garnered, where is it transported?
Whom shall I embrace, whom shall I embrace?
Thee I would embrace, yea embrace.
Thee, O my husband, I would embrace.
Him that from the flood is risen I would embrace.
Him, whom the father in the holy chamber begat, I would em^ brace.
TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR
351
Return, O lord, provide the flood, O lord, provide the flood.
O lord, rejoice my heart.
The spade labours not, but the granaries shall be heaped.”
Tammuz was, therefore, intimately connected with the Sun- god Shamash, more particularly with the type of Sun-god who became lord of the dead, Nergal. One of the hymns in the Tammuz wailings is actually addressed to Nergal,^® and, like Nergal, Tammuz had also the title “ Lord of Arallu.” This identification with the Sun-god was suggested by the fact that both descended to the lower world. When the Sumerian myth and cult of the dying god spread among the Western Semites it was wholly natural that the principal city of sun worship in Phoenicia became also the centre of the Tammuz cult. Gebal or Byblos, the home of the Phoenician Sun-god El, accepted the mystic cult of death and resurrection with enthusiasm. Aduni, “ my lord,” became the exclusive title of Tammuz here where the river which descended from the Lebanons ran yearly to the sea dyed red with the blood of Adonis. Gebal became the sacred city of West Semitic religion and bore the title “ Holy Gebal.” As Erech, home of the goddess Innini-Ishtar, became the centre of the Tammuz-Ishtar cult in Babylonia, so was Gebal the centre of the Western cult. But this myth, and the theological dogmas and mystic beliefs founded upon it, were of universal appeal and found response in the souls of all men. It is the greatest of all ancient myths and appealed to the poor and humble, to the toilers and the distressed, more than all the glamour of warlike gods who shook Heaven and Earth with their Word and founded their abodes in Heaven and the Abyss.
CHAPTER XII
THE DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS
B elief in shadowy beings which infest the air and secret places of earth is common to all religions, and is in none more emphasized than among the primitive Semites/ The Arabians said that there were forty troops of Jinn, and each troop consisted of six hundred thousand Jinn. This word is an abstract noun meaning “ the hidden.” The Jinn were said to have inhabited the earth before man, and were created from fire. Under their leader, Azazel or IblTs, they rebelled against the gods, and angels drove them to the waste places of the earth. They have the power to change their forms in the twinkling of an eye, and rarely appear visible to man, although animals can detect them. When the cock crows or the ass brays they have seen a Jinn, The Jinn have animal forms, and appear as snakes, dogs, cats, swine, and infest the waste places of the desert. They roam by night and disappear at dawn. Therefore the Arabs close every possible entrance of their houses by night, and fear to travel in the darkness. The Jinn ride abroad on animals, preferably on ostriches and foxes, a legend which possibly explains the Babylonian representa- tions of Marduk and the ostrich j see Fig. 86, where the ostrich represents one of the dragons of Chaos in late Babylonian and Assyrian mythology. Arabian mythology figures them as hor- rible hybrid monsters, half wolf and half hyena. Figure 95 shews one of the Arabian Jinn, the ghoul, as drawn for the famous explorer, C. M. Doughty, by a desert Arab, who swore by Allah to have seen her. Her voice sounded like that of a mother calling her children.
DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 353
Three monotheistic religions were born on Semitic soil, and each of them retained and even increased the emphasis on this belief in the existence of devils and evil spirits, Judaism, with its monotheistic God Yaw, retained a host of demons, evil and propitious. The Jewish treatises on magic to prevent the wicked machinations of demons, and the multitude of bowls with Aramaic, Mandaic, and Jewish charms, directed princi- pally against the horrible demoness Lilith, consti- tute a great literature in the history of Judaism in all lands and in all peri- ods to the present day,^
Christianity admitted the existence of evil and good spirits from the begin- ning, and Jesus, its Founder, recognized Sa- tan and the demons as evil spirits,® The Evan- gelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke give an account of the temptation of Jesus by Satan in the wilderness immediately after His baptism in the Jordan by John the Baptist, According to Matthew and Luke the Devil (^diabolos) had power to confer kingdoms upon Jesus, which he offered to do if He would worship him, Jesus replied: “Get thee behind me, Satan,” And so the Devil left Him and angels came to minister unto Him,^ Satan and the demons form an important aspect of Christian demonology in all periods of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Greek, and Protestant Churches,®
Mohammed, the founder of Islam, likewise admitted the existence of the hosts of Jinn and demons of pre-Islamic
354
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
Arabia,® and the subsequent history of that religion, which lays special emphasis upon Allah as the one and only God, follows much the same course in respect to demonology and morbid magical expiatory rites ^ as Judaism and Christianity. In the sacred book of Islam, the Koran {Quran), Mohammed writes that Allah had created the Jinn of subtle fire before He created man from clay. And when He ordered the angels to worship man they all obeyed save Iblis, who was cursed “ until the day of reckoning,” and became the lord of all the Satans. The Mohammedan legend was derived from a post-christian Jew- ish story told in “ The Books of Adam and Eve.” ® After Adam was created. Yaw commanded Michael and all the angels to worship God’s new creation j Satan refused, and He banished Satan or the Devil with all his angels. Henceforth they lived on earth. Belief in a personal monotheistic God failed to ban- ish demonology from any of the monotheistic religions of man- kind. It is, in fact, a debatable theory whether the demons, good and evil, are not older than the gods themselves, and magic has been claimed to be the forerunner of all the religions and mythologies of civilized nations and races.
In this book I have divided the mythology of Semitic re- ligions into two great groups — the eastern and northern my- thology, almost exclusively dominated by Sumero-Babylonian mythology, and the southern or Arabian mythology, where alone the original mythological conceptions of Semitic peoples were not suppressed or displaced by the overshadowing influ- ence of the ancient religion of Sumer, Babylonia, and Assyria. The demons and satyrs of the north and west Semitic races were, therefore, largely borrowed from Babylonia, ultimately from Sumer, as were their myths and many of their gods. Few traces of truly Hebrew demonology survive in the Old Testa- ment, although it is precisely this aspect of superstitious beliefs which remains most radically immune from more spiritual influ- ences among all races.
Sumerian mythology attributes the origin of demons to wan-
DEVILS, DEMONS, GOOD AND EVIL SPIRITS 355
dering souls of the dead, and Hebrew mythology preserves the same superstition in its references to the Rephaim or giants who inhabited Palestine before the Hebrew occupation. The legend corresponds to the Islamic myth that the Jinn, under their leader Iblis (borrowed from the Greek diabolosy Devil), oc- cupied the earth before the creation of Adam. Four Philistine giants who warred with David are described in 2 Sam^uel xxi. 15—22 as sons of the Rapha in Gath. One of them had six fingers and six toes. The Israelites under Moses, arriving in Moab east of the Dead Sea, were told of a legendary race of giants, the Emim, “ many and tall like the Anaqim ”5 both were accounted Rephaim in Canaanitish legend. Of the Am- monites north of Moab they learned from Moses that afore- time the Rephaim had also occupied that land and were known as the Zamzummim there (Deuteronomy ii. 10-21). Chedor- laomer smote the Rephaim at Ashteroth Qarnaim, and there was a famous tale in early Hebrew history concerning Og, king of Bashan, a land east of the Sea of Galilee. When the Israel- ites invaded the region north of Moab, they came upon the leg- endary troglodytes of prehistoric times. Og was the last of the Rephaim, and his iron bed was nine cubits {circa fifteen feet) long and four cubits wide (Deuteronomy iii. 3-1 1 j Joshua xii. 4, xiii. 12, 30, 31).
The word Rephaim is identical with the Hebrew and Phoe- nician word for souls of the dead who dwell in Sheol, and there can be no doubt that they are fabulous giants or demons in Semitic mythology, corresponding to the gigifn^ gidimy “ ghost,” of Sumerian mythology, and the etimmu of Accadian demonology. The Semitic verb from which Rapha, “ ghost,” plural Rephaim, is derived means “ to sink into darkness,” and is common in Accadian under the form rabu.
Another class of demon is referred to in post-exilic sections of Isaiah (xiii. 21, xxxlv. 14), the Se‘irim or “Hairy ones,” that is satyrs as goats. They are mentioned with the ostrich in a prophecy against Babylon:
356
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
“ There shall the ostriches dwell,
And satyrs dance therein.”
The ostrich was associated with demons in both Arabian and Babylonian mythology, and the post-exilic code of rituals for- bade the Hebrews to offer sacrifices to these hairy satyrs as they had done in ancient times (Leviticus xvii. 7)5 for even Reho- boam, first king of Judah, had appointed priests for these satyrs. A ceremony of expiation preserved in Leviticus (chap, xvi), ap- parently a survival from primitive Semitic customs, consisted in casting lots upon two goats {se^nirn) 5 the goat, thus chosen for Yaw, became a sin offering j the one chosen for Azazel was placed alive before Yaw that a ritual of atonement be made over it and then it be sent away to Azazel into the desert. A further note in this record says that the priest (Aaron) placed both hands upon the live goat, confessing all the sins of the people, which were thus placed upon the goat. An attendant then led it away into the wilderness bearing all the sins of Israel.
416
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:33:45 PM »
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.”
417
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:32:59 PM »
The legend begins apparently with an appeal to Innini to descend to the lower world {kur-ra ba-e-ed), for in Erech, Nippur, Kish, and Agade, “ lordship has fallen.” This refers to the death of Tammuz, who had disappeared from among men. The death of the god of vegetation involves the tempo- rary suspension of “ lordship ” on earth, a belief based upon the identification of kings with the dying god in the period in which this myth was written. The deification of kings and worship of them during their reigns were characteristic of Sumerian re- ligion in the time of the last dynasty of Ur and the succeeding dynasties of Isin and Ellasar. When the “ god-kings ” died they, like Tammuz, perished j for in life they were husbands of Ishtar, as was also Tammuz, A hymn speaks of the dead kings of Isin in a Tammuz liturgy as follows:
THE DESCENT OF ISHTAR TO ARALLU 327
“ The lord Idin-Dagan sleeps,
And the gardens of themselves restrain (their growth).
The city (weeps) for Ishme-Dagan, who slumbers,
And the gardens of themselves withhold (their fruit).
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 is in the land of weeping.” ^
The implicit belief in the divine nature of kings did not cease in Babylonia and Assyria with the disappearance of the Sumerian cults based upon the worship of deified kings, living or dead. They continued to connect them with Tammuz, and believed that the fertility of the lands was intimately connected with the life of their rulers divinely appointed by the gods.
And so Innini put on her garment shugurra^ and placed her lofty crown upon her head. She put the “ beauty of her figure ” upon herself, a description of one of her garments. She adorned herself with ornaments of lapis lazuli and put on a necklace of great lapis lazuli stones. She covered her breast with erimmati jewels, and wore golden rings on her fingers. A band of birth stones she girded on her loins.
“ O Innini, to the lower world go,”
they said, and her messenger Gashansubur stood before her, to whom she said:
“ O my faithful one, my faithful one.
My messenger of good words.
My herald of true words.
When to the lower world I descend.
To the ... of the lower world go thou. . . .”
The continuation of the narrative is contained in an unpub- lished textj when the accessible material can be again followed Innini seems to be reporting to the god Amanki, the Water-god Enki of the “ good city,” Eridu, that “ thy son dwells with those in the lower world, thy pious holy one sleeps in the dust
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
328
of the lower world ... he lies prostrate in the abode of the queen of Hell.” According to the author of these texts Innini is the daughter of the Water-god, and she continues:
“ O father Amanki, wise lord . . .
The plant of life thou knowest, the water of life thou knowest. This one restore to life for me.”
“ Innini to the lower world went.
To her messenger Gashansubur she called:
‘ Go, O Gashansubur.
This one I will make known to thee, he is named guzula* ®
Innini to the splendid palace of the underworld drew nigh.
The door of the Underworld harshly she . . .
The palace of the Lower world harshly she . . .
‘ Open the house, O watchman, open the house.
Open the house, O god Neti, open the house that I may enter.’ Neti, the great watchman of the lower world,
To the holy Innini replied:
‘ Who then art thou? ’
‘ I am the queen where the sun rises.’ ”
Innini here describes herself as the planet Venus at sunrise, to which the watchman of the gates of Arallu replied:
“ If thou art Innini where the sun rises,
Why comest thou? to the lower world [why comest thou?]
On the road where he who journeys returns not. . . .”
Here the unpublished text continued the narrative, which is partially preserved on another text.* The watchman reported Innini’s arrival to his mistress Ereshkigal, queen of Arallu. She ordered him to open the seven gates through which the dead must pass to enter Hades. At the first gate the watchman removed her crown and Innini cried out, “ Why is this? ” and received the reply:
“ Pass on, O Innini, the decrees of the lower world [are thus ordained]. Innini, the laws of the lower world are so.”
At the second gate he removed “ the beauty of her figure.” Again she cried out, “ Why is this? ” and received the same
THE DESCENT OF ISHTAR TO ARALLU 329
answer. At the third gate he removed the erimmati jewels from her neck. At the fourth gate some garment whose name is lost on the tablets was taken from her.® At the fifth gate the gold rings were taken from her hands j the text has not preserved the narrative concerning her passing the sixth and seventh gates. Unfortunately the Sumerian tablets so far as published do not contain the section which described Innini’s perilous encounter with the queen of Arallu, nor how she was rescued from the land of darkness with her brother Tammuz. A tablet of the same series describes how vegetation thrived again after Innini returned from the lower world.® For when she disappeared from among men they had not food to eat nor water to drink.
The Accadian version of this myth is completely preserved and is justly regarded as one of the best mythological poems of Babylonian literature.^ In the Sumerian version Innini (Ish- tar) and Tammuz were regarded as the daughter and son of the Water-god Enki. The Accadian version, however, has the usual astral interpretation, making her the daughter of the Moon-god.
Obverse
“ To the land of no return, the [unknown] soil,
Ishtar the daughter of Sin turned her attention.
Yea the daughter of Sin turned her attention . . .
To the house of darkness, abode of the ‘ Goddess of the Great city ’ (AUat),
5. To the house whence they who enter escape not,
To the road whose passing has no return.
To the house where they who enter thirst for light,
Where dust is their nourishment, and their bread is clay.
Light they see not, but sit in darkness.
10. Like birds they are clothed with ‘ winged garments.’ ”
This description of the lower world was taken from the old Sumerian version and is identical with the description of Arallu which Enkidu gave to his friend Gilgamish.® The ghosts of the dead are clothed like birds and fly in the shadowy spaces of
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
330
Hell. Those which escape from Arallu become demons and are described thus:
“ The bound gods rise from the grave,
The evil winds rise from the grave.” ®
The demons fly like birds, and wander over the earth until the curses of the magicians drive them again to their restless abode in the lower world. In that land dust lay thick upon door and lock, and silence reigned. When Ishtar arrived at the gate she spoke to the watchman:
14. “ O watchman, open thy gate.
Open thy gate, I will enter.
If thou openest not the gate that I enter,
I will break the door and shatter the lock.
I will break the threshold and shatter the doors.
I will cause the dead to arise that they consume the living.
The dead shall be more numerous than the living.”
This petulant goddess of love and war made the same threat to Anu in the Epic of Gilgamish, when she demanded ven- geance upon Gilgamish for unrequited love. There also she threatened to cause the dead to arise and consume the living if Anu would not create the bull of Heaven.
The watchman, abashed at her arrogance, implored her not to break down the door of the lower world, but wait at the gate until he had reported her words to Ereshkigal. He entered Arallu and said to his mistress:
26. “ This is thy sister Ishtar who stands at [the gate].
Supporter of the great music halls, troubler of the Deep before Ea [her father].”^®
When Ereshkigal heard this her face became pale as a tamarisk that is severed. Her lips turned dark as the lip of a pitched wicker wine jar, and she said:
31. “ What has her heart planned against me? What has made her soul glad in regard to me ?
This one has said, ‘ I will drink water with the Annunaki,
THE DESCENT OF ISHTx^R TO ARALLU 331
I will eat clay as bread, and drink the muddy waters as beer.
I will weep over strong men who have left wives.
35. I will weep over handmaidens who have been snatched from the bosom of their husbands.
I will weep for the feeble infants who were summoned before their time.’
Go, watchman, open thy gate for her.
Do unto her according to thy ancient custom.”
And so the watchman did accord- ing to the ancient manner by which all souls were admitted to Aralluj he bade her welcome to Cutha (Arallu),
“the land of no return shall rejoice for thee.” At the first gate he re- moved her crown, “for such were the laws of the underworld.” At the second gate he removed her ear- rings, at the third her necklace, at the fourth her breast jewels, at the fifth her waist-band studded with birthstones, at the sixth the rings of her hands and feet, at the seventh her “ shame garment.” Fig. 94, a terra-cotta plaque excavated at Kish, shews one of the many designs of Ishtar. Her crown, decorated with the usual bull’s horns characteristic of all divinities, her large pendants hung from her ears, her necklace and upper robe are clearly preserved on this monument. Her right hand holds a long thin metal rod, and in her left hand she presents the caduceus, with two serpent heads, the usual symbol of this deity of life and fertility. Her left leg, bared by the style of her robe, is set upon the back of a lion, symbol of the War- goddess.
When Ishtar descended to the land of no return Ereshkigal
V 23
Fig. 94. Terra-cotta Bas- relief OF Ishtar, Exca- vated AT THE Temple Hur- SAGKALAMA IN KiSH. OXFORD FIELD Museum Expedition
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
332
trembled before her. She summoned her messenger Namtar commanding him to imprison Ishtar in her palace and afflict her with sixty maladies, in all her members. Now Ishtar suf- fered the torments of the damned and was a prisoner in the house of the queen of Arallu.
“ After Ishtar the queen (Beltis) had descended to the lower world, The bull mounted not the cow, the ass impregnated not the she-ass. The strong man impregnated not the maid in the highway.
The strong man slept in his chamber.
The maid slept beside him.”
Ishtar, patroness of sexual love, had abandoned the earth, and desire to mate had vanished in man and beast." Papsukkal, messenger of the gods, was prostrated with sorrow. He was clothed in a mourner’s garment and was afflicted with sores. Shamash wept before Sin his father, and before Ea his tears flowed. He informed Ea how the world had become joyless after Ishtar had descended to the land of no return. Refuge of gods and men in time of trouble, Ea again intervened. He formed an image in his mind and created a person so beautiful that he was named Asu-su-namlr, “ His coming forth is bril- liant,” which may refer to his glorious birth or perhaps to his appearance. This person is described as a eunuch. Ea sent him to Ereshkigal that she might be pleased by his appearance j apparently Ea supposed that she would love this eunuch and acquiesce in his request to release Ishtar. The choice of a eunuch was made in accordance with Ishtar’s character as patroness of eunuchs who served in her cults. Ea said to Asu-su-namir:
Reverse
15. “ May Ereshkigal see thee and rejoice at thy presence.
After her heart becomes calm, her mind happy.
Cause her to swear by the life of the great gods.
Lift up thy head, turn thy attention to the leather halzlqu vessel (saying),
1 9. ‘ Ho, O my lady, let them give me the leather halziqu vessel, that I drink water therefrom.’ ”
THE DESCENT OF ISHTAR TO ARALLU 333
Here the text is abbreviated, and passes at once to Eresh- kigal’s reply to the beautiful eunuch. Ea ever employed in- cantations and oaths to accomplish his purpose. By the same recourse to magic he overpowered Apsu, husband of Tiamat, in the Epic of Creation. Although Ea’s plan secured the re- lease of Ishtar it is difficult to understand the reason for his success. Ereshkigal, upon hearing the eunuch’s request, smote her thigh and bit her finger, saying:
22. “ Thou hast presented a request not permissible.
Go, O Asusu-namir, I curse thee with a great curse.’^
Bread of the ‘ plough ’ of the city shall be thy bread.
25. The habnutu vessels of the city shall be thy drinking-place.
The shadow of the wall shall be thy station.
The thresholds shall be thy abode.
28. The drunkard and the thirsty shall smite thy cheek.”
Why the eunuch’s request for the halzlqu water-jar should have aroused the anger of the queen of Arallu is unexplained. Perhaps there was a myth concerning its having contained the water of life. The plant of life and the water of life are twice mentioned in the Sumerian version of Innini’s descent to Arallu, and there may have been a legend that the blessed among those who died ate and drank of these elements in the land of the lord and queen of the lower world. Apparently the eunuch became the substitute for Ishtar, a vicarious sacrifice for that goddess, for whom he had made the supreme sacrifice of his manhood on earth. It is not clear, however, that the eunuch was retained in Arallu. Ereshkigal then directed her messen- ger Namtar to knock at the palace of the Annunaki, the Ekal- gina or Diligina, and stamp on its thresholds of coral.
33. “Cause the Annunaki to ascend, cause them to sit on a (sic!) golden throne.”
According to this passage the Annunaki, that is Ea and the pan- theon of deities who dwell in the nether sea of fresh water, have their abode below Arallu, or the land of the dead. She also
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
334
commanded Namtar to wash Ishtar with “ water of life ” and bring her forth. The Annunaki were brought up and placed on a {sic!) golden throne, Ishtar he washed and brought before her. Namtar is then ordered to conduct Ishtar to the upper world by the seven gates.
“ Go, Namtar, conduct Ishtar.
If she give thee not her ransom (money) bring her back.
Cast upon her the fate of the dead^*
Namtar caused her to ascend by the seven gates, restoring to her at each gate the garment taken from her by the watchman.
The Accadian texts are in great confusion here and the Su- merian version for the remainder of the legend is illegible.^® In any case Tammuz still remained in Arallu. Ereshkigal in- structed her messenger Namtar:
47. “ Tammuz the husband of her youth
Wash with clean water, anoint with fine oil.
With a dazzling garment clothe him, let him play the flute of lapis lazuli.
50. May the harlots appease his soul.”
The narrative then passes to the wailing of Ishtar for her brother Tammuz. Here she has the title Belili. When she returned to earth she had assembled her treasures, and her bag was full of “ eye stones,” the name of some precious stone. She heard the wailing of her brother and smote her treasures that the jewels filled her sanctuary, as she wailed:
“ O my only brother, distress me not,
When Tammuz arises to me.
When with him arise the flute of lapis lazuli and the ring of carnelian, When with him arise the men and women wailers,
May the dead arise and smell the incense.”
This poem seems to have been recited as an incantation to recall the souls of the dead to the 'parentalia. The living per- petually kept solemn feasts for the souls of their ancestors, and their ghosts were supposed to return from Arallu to partake of
THE DESCENT OF ISHTAR TO ARALLU 335
them. The resurrection of Tammuz is, of course, assumed by the poet, but how his sister’s descent to Arallu had any effec- tive part in his rescue from death is not made clear by this poem. There was also a feast of “ all souls ” for the dead.’* Ereshkigal is the Persephone of Greek mythology and Ishtar the Aphrodite. The role which each plays in the myth of a dying god is the same in Babylonia and Greece. Tammuz, the beautiful youth loved by his sister Ishtar, who is also described as the sister of Ereshkigal, became the Adorn, “ my lord,” of West Semitic mythology. Transferred to Greek soil as Adonis, the young god who died and rose again each year became the subject of a myth obviously borrowed from this Sumero- Babylonian legend, which can be traced at least to the twenty- third century b.c. Aphrodite hid Adonis, when a babe, in a chest and gave him in charge of Persephone, queen of the lower world. But Persephone became so enamoured with his beauty that she refused to return him to Aphrodite. The goddesses disputed over him before Zeus, who decreed that he must re- main with Persephone for half of each year, and with Aphrodite for the other half.
CHAPTER XI
TAMMUZ AND ISHTAR
I N Sumerian literature the cult of the dying god Tammuz and his sister Innini, or Accadian Ishtar, occupies such an important position that it may be regarded as the principal as- pect of their mythology and religious beliefs. This god is con- sistently described as a beautiful youth and the name Tammuz has been handed down to posterity because it is the one em- ployed in the West Semitic cults borrowed from Babylonia and Assyria. Ezekiel, writing in the early part of the sixth century B.C., says that the Tammuz wailings had been introduced into the Temple at Jerusalem in his day. There he saw women wail- ing for Tammuz in the north court. ^ Wailing women mourned for the departed Tammuz or Adoni, as the Phoenicians named him, in the cults of Babylonia, Syria, Phoenicia, and Canaan. The form Tammuz has become familiar from the spelling of the Hebrew text of Ezekiel, but in Syria the name was pro- nounced Tamuz, or Thamuz. At Harran in Syria the Arabic sect known as the Ssabeans maintained the worship of this god as late as the tenth century a.d., where the name was pro- nounced Tamuz and Ta-uz. The festival of Ta-uz was also known there as the festival of the weeping women and oc- curred on the first of the month Tammuz. The women of this Harranian cult wept for Tammuz whom a king had slain, ground his bones, and scattered them to the winds. Hence during this festival the women ate nothing which had been ground in a mill. In the mythology of this cult Tammuz was said to have perished several times and to have returned to life each time for his final annihilation at the hands of the king. The Harranian Tammuz cult existed also at Babylon as late
418
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:32:04 PM »
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.
419
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:31:29 PM »
The epic here begins the mythical account of the founding in Babylon of Marduk’s temple Esagila, “Temple of the lifting of the head,” or “which lifts (high) its head,” and the origin of the New Year festival, when all the gods were assembled to his Ubshukinnaku to decree the fates for the ensuing year. The authors assume that Esagila was the first temple built on earth, an assertion which contradicted all the histori- cal and legendary records of Sumer and Accad. Only Beros- sus, himself a priest of Babylon, among historians, admitted this pretension. He it was who placed Babylon first among the antediluvian cities and suppressed Eridu of the ancient records.
The gods themselves worked with pickaxes and made bricks.
308 SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
and in the second year finished Esagila, founded on the nether sea. They built the lofty stage-tower on the nether sea, and constructed chapels for themselves in Esagila. They then assembled in the central shrine of Marduk where he addressed them:
52. “This Babylon is the abode of your dwelling-place.
Make glad sound herein. . .
And so the gods sat down to a feast with much music and drink- ing of liquor. Then laws were fixed and plans made. The places of all the gods in Heaven and Earth were arranged. The “ seven gods of fates ” fixed the fates. Marduk, here called Enlil, placed his scimetar before them. The gods saw his net and bow. Anu addressed the assembly, kissed the bow, and gave it three names. “Long wood” was its first namej the second name is lost on the Tablets j the third name was “ Bow star,” that is Canis Major, the bow of the hunter Orion. Here followed a hymn by the gods to Marduk:
82. “ His command is made surpassing. . . .
He has been exalted, he the heroic son. . . .
His supreme rule is made surpassing. . . .
85. May he shepherd the dark-headed peoples. ...
Forever without forgetting let them rehearse [his deeds].
May he establish for his fathers the great cult offerings.
May they (the people) perform their upkeep, and appoint their festivals.
May he smell incense; their food offerings may he receive.
90. As an imitation of what he made in Heaven, on Earth a . . . Shall he order and the dark-headed people shall dwell. . . .
Let mankind think of their god.”
The statement that all things on Earth are replicas of what is in Heaven is clear proof of the theories of some modern scholars.®^ For example, the constellation Iku, or Canal Star, is said to be the star of Babylon, and the heavenly pattern of Marduk’s temple Esagila. This constellation certainly in- cluded Aries and Cetus. The sun at the spring equinox stood
THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 309
in Aries, during the period 1900 b.c., to the Christian era, and its heliacal rising marked the beginning of the New Year then. The New Year’s festival at Babylon included rituals based upon the Epic of Creation, and consequently the natural identifica- tion of Babylon and its great temple would have been Aries, when the mythologists sought for a heavenly prototype. Dur- ing the celebrations of this festival, on the fourth day of Nisan the high priest stood facing the north and recited a hymn en- titled: “ O Canal star, thou Esagila, likeness of Heaven and Earth,” that is, likeness of the temple in Heaven and of the temple on Earth, and three times he praised Esa- gila by reciting this prayer. Figure 93, from a Babylonian seal cylinder, shews a de- sign which is probably based upon this astronomical myth. It represents the tower of Babylon with five stages only, whereas in the late period it had seven. This alone proves that the seal is earlier than the seventh century. A monument of Merodach- baladan, end of the eighth century, has already been cited to prove that the astral myths of the epic were known in Baby- lonian iconography before the Neo-Babylonian period.
The tower stands on a stream represented as a rope, and means that it stands on the Apsu or nether sea. The reason for its being represented as a rope is due to Babylonian philoso- phy } for the creative principle of the universe was water, or the Water-god, who is often called the tarkulluy “ rope,” or markasu, “ band of the universe.” The epic says that Esagila
Fig. 93. The Tower of Babel in Astro- nomical Myth. Cylinder Seal, Thir- teenth Century b.c.
310
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
and the stage-tower were founded on the Apsu. Before this tower stands the priest, pouring out a libation toward the tower, and holding a jar from which spring flames of incense. If this scene is astronomical, the tower would represent Aries, and the fish to the left, the constellation Pisces. The tower would also stand for the beginning of the new year, and the fish for the end of the old year. The priest would be performing the cere- mony referred to above, and singing a hymn to the heavenly tower or Aries. An astral identification for the Apsu or stream of water is unknown 5 it may perhaps be identical with the constellation of the holy city Eridu, seat of the cult of Enki, god of the Apsu. This city was identified with a group of stars, including Vela, Puppis, and part of the long constella- tion Eridanus, “ The River ” of Greek astronomy. It has been suggested that Eridanus, the huge constellation stretching across the southern Heavens below Cetus and Pisces, from Orion to Cursa, was derived from the city Eridu.®® The fox to the left (in astronomy to the west) of the fish, would be an unidentified Fox star, known to have been located there, The theory that this seal represents the astral prototypes of Babylon and its temples has its attractions, but should be accepted with caution.®® The assumption that all things on earth have their counterparts in Heaven was a belief universally accepted in Babylonia in the pre-Christian centuries and widely accepted throughout Western Asia in the Apocalyptic and Gnostic period. It gave rise to a passionate belief in “ the mansions in the skies,” and Jesus taught His disciples, “ In my Father’s house are many mansions.”
The hymn of praise sung by the gods to Marduk ends with a long eulogy of his fifty names, with laudatory comments upon the thoughts suggested by his principal titles. First of all they refer to his name Marduk, and then to Ligirsagkusassa,
“ Defender the solicitous,” “ who stood forth and her hostility was broken.”
116. “ Wide is his heart, warming is his compassion.”
THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 31 1
The next name is Lugaldimmerankia, “ Lord of the gods of Heaven and Earth,”
1 18. “We have exalted the commands of his mouth above those of the gods his fathers.
So he is lord of the gods of Heaven and Earth — all of them.”
The next name is Naridimmeranki, “ Musterer of the gods of Heaven and Earth,”
122. “ Who in Heaven and Earth founded our dwelling-place in time of distress.
Who allotted places to the Igigi and Anunnaki.
At his names may the gods tremble, may they quake in (their) dwelling-places.”
The next name is Asarludug, which his father Ann gave him,
126. “ He is the light of the gods, the mighty champion.
Who as consoling and protecting genius of the gods and the land.
In mighty combat saved our dwelling-place in time of distress.”
And secondly the six hundred gods named Asarludug the god Namtilaku, “ Life,”
130. “ Who restored the destroyed gods to be even as his own creation. The lord, who by his holy incantation gave life to the dying gods.”
And thirdly they called Asarludug the god Namru, “ The bright one,” “ who brightens our way.” The epic closes with the gods sitting in the hall of assembly at Babylon, singing and praising the names of Marduk.
In a late period the scribes added a seventh book to the epic commenting upon the fifty names of Marduk, and other gram- matical commentaries explaining the elements in these Sumerian titles have been found. These comments are idle Midrashim attached to the great creative work of their predecessors and do not afford much information concerning the meaning of the epic. This book has an epilogue stating that these fifty names
312
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
had been handed down to men by the ancients, that father must teach them to son and never be forgotten.
An account of Marduk’s creation of the world has been pre- served as an introduction to a ritual of lustration for the build- ing of a temple.^" This version begins by stating in the first eleven lines that there was a time when the temples of the gods were not yet built, reeds and trees grew not, and brick-making had not been discovered, cities and houses were not built, nor animals created. Nippur, Erech, Eridu, and the Apsu had not been built nor “ the holy temple, temple of the gods,” referring to Esagila, at Babylon. Then all the lands were sea (Tamtu- Tehom).
II. “ When the interior of the sea was a well,
Then Eridu was created and Esagila built.
Esagila, which in the Apsu Lugaldukug founded.
14. Babylon was created and Esagila completed.”
According to this version Marduk, here called Lugaldukug, “ Lord of the holy chamber,” founded Esagila “ in the midst ” of the Deep, or on the bosom of the nether sea, and the Anun- naki worked upon it together, and named it by a far-famed name, “ The holy city, abode of their happiness.” The de- pendence of this legend upon the text of the sixth book of the Epic of Creation is obvious. But now the legend has a new ac- count of creation.
17. “ Marduk constructed a reed mat- work on the face of the waters.
He created dust and poured it out upon the reed mat-work.
To cause the gods to dwell in ‘ the abode of their happiness,’
20. He created man.
Aruru created the seed of man with him.
He created the cattle, creatures with the breath of life on the plain.
He created the Tigris and the Euphrates and set them in their places.”
The text then describes the creation of grass, grain-bearing plants, the marshes, reeds, the forest, and green verdure.
THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 313
Lands, marshes, and reed thickets, cows and calves, bulls, ewes, and lambs, the sheep of the folds, gardens and forests, tame and wild goats ... for him. By the border of the sea Mar- duk raised a terrace, and brought forth the reed thickets and dry land. He then created reeds and trees, instituted brick- making, built cities, founded Nippur, Erech, and Eridu. Here the text is broken away.
Another account of creation in Sumerian, preserved in a late Assyrian copy with Accadian translation, is concerned exclu- sively with the creation of man and the divine injunctions placed upon him to direct his life.^^ The poem has a subscription which says that its contents are a mystery to be read by the wise only, and it was copied by the king’s scribe. It begins with a brief account of the condition of the world before the creation of man. In Heaven and Earth “ faithful twins ” had been all brought into being, and the Mother-goddesses had been made to thrive. The “ twins ” are probably the Igigi and Anunnaki, or all the gods of Heaven and Earth and the lower world. The Mother-goddesses refer to Ashnan and Lahar, patronesses of grain and flocks, whose creation was described in another famous Sumerian poem.^^ Earth had been created for habitation, the principles and forms of Heaven and Earth had been fixed. The gods had determined the courses of the Tigris and Eu- phrates to regulate the irrigation of the land. Then Anu, Enlil, Shamash, and Enki, together with all the great gods, assembled in their great sanctuary and said: “What shall we do now? What shall we create? ” And two of them replied to Enlil:
24. “ In Uzuma, rope of Heaven and Earth,
Let us slay two gods the craftsmen;
From their blood let us create man.
27. The tribute to the gods shall be their tribute.”
The poem then states at great length the purpose for which the gods created man. It was to establish for ever “ the boundary,” by which the text apparently means the territorial limits of the
3H
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
sacred land Sumer. It was that spade and trencher-basket be put into their hands, and that they build the temple of the gods. Their mission shall be to delimit field against field, for ever, to increase the number of temples and serve in the divine rituals. They are, alas, created to enrich the field of the Anunnaki (in the lower world). They shall fill granaries and produce abun- dance in the land. They shall keep the religious festivals and sing the litanies in which the names of the temples are given. They shall praise Enlil and his wife and Aruru, queen of the gods. Man shall have power to make his own plans, “ the skilled for the skilled, the fool for the fool.” This is one of the rare passages in which free will is even mentioned or recog- nized in cuneiform literature. Man is like corn springing from the ground. Only the stars change not eternally} they de- termine day and night and indicate the times of the festivals exactly. The poem closes with these lines: “ Anu, Enlil, Ea, and Ninmah (Aruru) created a place for man. The Grain- goddess was established in that place.”
The emphasis placed upon grain and flocks in the Sumerian myths of creation is in sharp contrast to all the known Baby- lonian sources. Hebrew mythology has an older record of the creation beginning after the manner of the Babylonian version which served as an introduction to a ritual for found- ing a temple. Here also the narrative begins by describing a time when plants and herbs of the field existed not, and the earth was parched} for Yaw had not sent rain to moisten the ground. This source also follows the same order in placing the creation of man before the creation of plants and animals. The Babylonian text makes special mention of the Tigris and Euphrates, and so does the old Hebrew account. But the leg- end of the Garden of Eden and its four rivers in the Hebrew legend does not occur in any Sumerian or Babylonian work on the creation. In Chapter V a possible Sumerian source for this story has been discussed, but it contains no reference to the Tigris and Euphrates. The introduction of the rivers Pison
THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 315
and Gihon in the Hebrew source cannot be explained by any known version of the creation myth.
The Babylonian Epic of Creation is based upon a solar myth, and intimately connected with the triumph of the vernal sun and the spring equinox. At that time the Babylonians held a great festival including mystery plays based upon the events described in the epic.^^ The series of Tablets which contained the directions for the rituals of the New Year’s festival at Babylon, which lasted from the first to the eleventh of Nisan, are not well preserved. Only those Tablets having the rituals for the second, third, fourth, and fifth days are preserved. On the second day, before sunrise, the high priest rose and bathed, drew aside the veil before Bel, and entered the sanctuary of Bel. Here he recited the following hymn.
5 . “ Bel, who in his wrath had no rival,
Bel, beneficent king, Bel of the lands.
Who restored peace unto the great gods,
Bel, who cast down the mighty ones by his glance,
O Bel of kings, light of men, assigner of portions,
10. O Bel, thine abode is Babylon, Barsippa is thy crown.
The vast Heavens are the totality of thy mind.
Bel, with thine eyes thou beholdest all things.
Thou controllest laws by thy laws.
Thou givest decrees by thy glance.
15. Thou burnest up the mighty ones by thy flame(?).
Thou bindest thy . . . with thy hands.
When thou lookest (upon them) thou hast mercy upon them. 18. Thou causest them to see the light; they rehearse thy valour.”
These lines obviously refer to episodes of the Epic of Creation ; the binding of the dragons and the assigning of functions to the gods are taken directly from it. But the hymn speaks also of Marduk’s having cast the dragons into fire and then to have had mercy upon them. There was also a tradition, which will appear in the mystery ceremonies, of Kingu’s having been cast into fire. As to Marduk’s having had mercy upon the bound gods and having caused them to see the light, the only probable
V 2 2
SEMITIC MYTHOLOGY
316
explanation is that they were given places among the stars. Every one of the nine dragons in the epic, and two, Zu and Asakku, which do not appear there, were identified with con- stellations.
The high priest opened the doors of the chapel and admitted certain orders of priests and psalmists. There follows a cere- mony in which a seal and the crown of Anu are mentioned. The seal probably refers to a talisman worn by Marduk on his neck when he attacked Tiamat, as did Tishpak when he slew the Labbu. Again the priest sang a hymn referring to the battle of Marduk with the wicked and powerful ones.
Early on the third day the high priest rose, bathed, and re- cited a prayer to Bel alone in his chapel. This prayer is entirely lost. He opened the doors for priests and psalmists, who per- formed the customary (daily) services. Three hours after sun- rise a metal-worker made two statues for the ceremony of the sixth day. Each statue was seven fingers high} one held in his left hand a serpent made of cedar, and his right hand was lifted in prayer to Nabuj the other held a scorpion in his left hand and also lifted his right hand to Nabu. They were clothed in red garments and their loins were bound with date palms. They remained in the temple of the god Sakut (Ninurta) until the sixth day. On that day a swordsman severed their heads and burnt them before Nabu. These were emblems of the serpent-dragon Mushussu and the Scorpion-man, two of the monsters originally subdued by Ninurta. The ceremony again discloses a trace of a lost myth in which the dragons were cast into fire.
On the fourth day, three hours before sunrise the high priest rose, bathed in the Euphrates, pulled aside the curtain from before Bel and Beltis, and recited a prayer to each divinity (Marduk and Zarpanit). These are prayers of praise and peti- tions for mercy upon the people of Babylon. The priest then came out of the chapel and, facing north, recited the hymn of the Canal Star, heavenly prototype of Esagila. He then ad-
THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF CREATION 317
mitted the priests and psalmists to the chapel to perform the customary (daily) services. After evening sacrifice he recited the whole of the Epic of Creation, during which the crown of Anu and the throne of Enlil were veiled. The veiling of these deities was in memory of their flight before Tiamat. The de- feat of Anu is told in the epicj the story of EnliPs defeat is taken from a lost myth.
420
« on: July 13, 2019, 03:30:49 PM »
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.’ ”
|