{"collection":"Ancient Near East","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/ane/rbaa.htm","path":"ane/rbaa.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/ane/rbaa.htm","text":"THE RELIGION OF\nBABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA\nBY\nTHEOPHILUS G. PINCHES, LL.D.\nLecturer in Assyrian at University College, London,\nAuthor of \"The Old Testament in the Light of the\nRecords of Assyria and Babylonia\"; \"The Bronze\nOrnaments of the Palace Gates of Balewat\" etc. etc.\nPREPARER'S NOTE\nThe original text contains a number of characters that are not\navailable even in 8-bit Windows text, such as H with a breve below\nit in Hammurabi, S with a breve, S and T with a dot below them, U\nwith macron, and superscript M in Ta\u0161m\u00eatum. These have been left\nin the e-text as the base letter.\nThe 8-bit version of this text includes Windows font characters\nlike S with a caron above it (pronounced /sh/) as in \u0160ama\u0161, etc.\nThese may be lost in 7-bit versions of the text, or when viewed\nwith different fonts.\nGreek text has been transliterated within brackets \"{}\" using an\nOxford English Dictionary alphabet table. Diacritical marks have\nbeen lost.\nTHE RELIGION OF THE\nBABYLONIANS AND ASSYRIANS\nCHAPTER I\nFOREWORD\nPosition, and Period.\nThe religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians was the polytheistic\nfaith professed by the peoples inhabiting the Tigris and Euphrates\nvalleys from what may be regarded as the dawn of history until the\nChristian era began, or, at least, until the inhabitants were brought\nunder the influence of Christianity. The chronological period covered\nmay be roughly estimated at about 5000 years. The belief of the\npeople, at the end of that time, being Babylonian heathenism leavened\nwith Judaism, the country was probably ripe for the reception of the\nnew faith. Christianity, however, by no means replaced the earlier\npolytheism, as is evidenced by the fact, that the worship of Nebo and\nthe gods associated with him continued until the fourth century of the\nChristian era.\nBy whom followed.\nIt was the faith of two distinct peoples--the Sumero-Akkadians, and\nthe Assyro-Babylonians. In what country it had its beginnings is\nunknown--it comes before us, even at the earliest period, as a faith\nalready well-developed, and from that fact, as well as from the names\nof the numerous deities, it is clear that it began with the former\nrace--the Sumero-Akkadians--who spoke a non-Semitic language largely\naffected by phonetic decay, and in which the grammatical forms had in\ncertain cases become confused to such an extent that those who study\nit ask themselves whether the people who spoke it were able to\nunderstand each other without recourse to devices such as the \"tones\"\nto which the Chinese resort. With few exceptions, the names of the\ngods which the inscriptions reveal to us are all derived from this\nnon-Semitic language, which furnishes us with satisfactory etymologies\nfor such names as Merodach, Nergal, Sin, and the divinities mentioned\nin Berosus and Damascius, as well as those of hundreds of deities\nrevealed to us by the tablets and slabs of Babylonia and Assyria.\nThe documents.\nOutside the inscriptions of Babylonia and Assyria, there is but little\nbearing upon the religion of those countries, the most important\nfragment being the extracts from Berosus and Damascius referred to\nabove. Among the Babylonian and Assyrian remains, however, we have an\nextensive and valuable mass of material, dating from the fourth or\nfifth millennium before Christ until the disappearance of the\nBabylonian system of writing about the beginning of the Christian era.\nThe earlier inscriptions are mostly of the nature of records, and give\ninformation about the deities and the religion of the people in the\ncourse of descriptions of the building and rebuilding of temples, the\nmaking of offerings, the performance of ceremonies, etc. Purely\nreligious inscriptions are found near the end of the third millennium\nbefore Christ, and occur in considerable numbers, either in the\noriginal Sumerian text, or in translations, or both, until about the\nthird century before Christ. Among the more recent inscriptions--those\nfrom the library of the Assyrian king A\u0161\u0161ur-bani-\u00e2pli and the later\nBabylonian temple archives,--there are many lists of deities, with\nnumerous identifications with each other and with the heavenly bodies,\nand explanations of their natures. It is needless to say that all this\nmaterial is of enormous value for the study of the religion of the\nBabylonians and Assyrians, and enables us to reconstruct at first hand\ntheir mythological system, and note the changes which took place in\nthe course of their long national existence. Many interesting and\nentertaining legends illustrate and supplement the information given\nby the bilingual lists of gods, the bilingual incantations and hymns,\nand the references contained in the historical and other documents. A\ntrilingual list of gods enables us also to recognise, in some cases,\nthe dialectic forms of their names.\nThe importance of the subject.\nOf equal antiquity with the religion of Egypt, that of Babylonia and\nAssyria possesses some marked differences as to its development.\nBeginning among the non-Semitic Sumero-Akkadian population, it\nmaintained for a long time its uninterrupted development, affected\nmainly by influences from within, namely, the homogeneous local cults\nwhich acted and reacted upon each other. The religious systems of\nother nations did not greatly affect the development of the early\nnon-Semitic religious system of Babylonia. A time at last came,\nhowever, when the influence of the Semitic inhabitants of Babylonia\nand Assyria was not to be gainsaid, and from that moment, the\ndevelopment of their religion took another turn. In all probably this\naugmentation of Semitic religious influence was due to the increased\nnumbers of the Semitic population, and at the same period the Sumero-\nAkkadian language began to give way to the Semitic idiom which they\nspoke. When at last the Semitic Babylonian language came to be used\nfor official documents, we find that, although the non-Semitic divine\nnames are in the main preserved, a certain number of them have been\ndisplaced by the Semitic equivalent names, such as \u0160ama\u0161 for the\nsun-god, with Kittu and M\u00ea\u0161aru (\"justice and righteousness\") his\nattendants; Nab\u00fa (\"the teacher\" = Nebo) with his consort Ta\u0161m\u00eatu (\"the\nhearer\"); Addu, Adad, or Dadu, and Rammanu, Ramimu, or Ragimu = Hadad\nor Rimmon (\"the thunderer\"); B\u00eal and B\u00ealtu (Beltis = \"the lord\" and\n\"the lady\" /par excellence/), with some others of inferior rank. In\nplace of the chief divinity of each state at the head of each separate\npantheon, the tendency was to make Merodach, the god of the capital\ncity Babylon, the head of the pantheon, and he seems to have been\nuniversally accepted in Babylonia, like A\u0161\u0161ur in Assyria, about 2000\nB.C. or earlier.\nThe uniting of two pantheons.\nWe thus find two pantheons, the Sumero-Akkadian with its many gods,\nand the Semitic Babylonian with its comparatively few, united, and\nforming one apparently homogeneous whole. But the creed had taken a\nfresh tendency. It was no longer a series of small, and to a certain\nextent antagonistic, pantheons composed of the chief god, his consort,\nattendants, children, and servants, but a pantheon of considerable\nextent, containing all the elements of the primitive but smaller\npantheons, with a number of great gods who had raised Merodach to be\ntheir king.\nIn Assyria.\nWhilst accepting the religion of Babylonia, Assyria nevertheless kept\nherself distinct from her southern neighbour by a very simple device,\nby placing at the head of the pantheon the god A\u0161\u0161ur, who became for\nher the chief of the gods, and at the same time the emblem of her\ndistinct national aspirations--for Assyria had no intention whatever\nof casting in her lot with her southern neighbour. Nevertheless,\nAssyria possessed, along with the language of Babylonia, all the\nliterature of that country--indeed, it is from the libraries of her\nkings that we obtain the best copies of the Babylonian religious\ntexts, treasured and preserved by her with all the veneration of which\nher religious mind was capable,--and the religious fervour of the\nOriental in most cases leaves that of the European, or at least of the\nordinary Briton, far behind.\nThe later period in Assyria.\nAssyria went to her downfall at the end of the seventh century before\nChrist worshipping her national god A\u0161\u0161ur, whose cult did not cease\nwith the destruction of her national independence. In fact, the city\nof A\u0161\u0161ur, the centre of that worship, continued to exist for a\nconsiderable period; but for the history of the religion of Assyria,\nas preserved there, we wait for the result of the excavations being\ncarried on by the Germans, should they be fortunate enough to obtain\ntexts belonging to the period following the fall of Nineveh.\nIn Babylonia.\nBabylonia, on the other hand, continued the even tenor of her way.\nMore successful at the end of her independent political career than\nher northern rival had been, she retained her faith, and remained the\nunswerving worshipper of Merodach, the great god of Babylon, to whom\nher priests attributed yet greater powers, and with whom all the other\ngods were to all appearance identified. This tendency to monotheism,\nhowever, never reached the culminating point--never became absolute--\nexcept, naturally, in the minds of those who, dissociating themselves,\nfor philosophical reasons, from the superstitious teaching of the\npriests of Babylonia, decided for themselves that there was but one\nGod, and worshipped Him. That orthodox Jews at that period may have\nfound, in consequence of this monotheistic tendency, converts, is not\nby any means improbable--indeed, the names met with during the later\nperiod imply that converts to Judaism were made.\nThe picture presented by the study.\nThus we see, from the various inscriptions, both Babylonian and\nAssyrian--the former of an extremely early period--the growth and\ndevelopment, with at least one branching off, of one of the most\nimportant religious systems of the ancient world. It is not so\nimportant for modern religion as the development of the beliefs of the\nHebrews, but as the creed of the people from which the Hebrew nation\nsprang, and from which, therefore, it had its beginnings, both\ncorporeal and spiritual, it is such as no student of modern religious\nsystems can afford to neglect. Its legends, and therefore its\nteachings, as will be seen in these pages, ultimately permeated the\nSemitic West, and may in some cases even had penetrated Europe, not\nonly through heathen Greece, but also through the early Christians,\nwho, being so many centuries nearer the time of the\nAssyro-Babylonians, and also nearer the territory which they anciently\noccupied, than we are, were far better acquainted than the people of\nthe present day with the legends and ideas which they possessed.\nCHAPTER II\nTHE RELIGION OF THE BABYLONIANS AND ASSYRIANS\nThe Sumero-Akkadians and the Semites.\nFor the history of the development of the religion of the Babylonians\nand Assyrians much naturally depends upon the composition of the\npopulation of early Babylonia. There is hardly any doubt that the\nSumero-Akkadians were non-Semites of a fairly pure race, but the\ncountry of their origin is still unknown, though a certain\nrelationship with the Mongolian and Turkish nationalities, probably\nreaching back many centuries--perhaps thousands of years--before the\nearliest accepted date, may be regarded as equally likely. Equally\nuncertain is the date of the entry of the Semites, whose language\nultimately displaced the non-Semitic Sumero-Akkadian idioms, and\nwhose kings finally ruled over the land. During the third millennium\nbefore Christ Semites, bearing Semitic names, and called Amorites,\nappear, and probably formed the last considerable stratum of tribes of\nthat race which entered the land. The name Martu, the Sumero-Akkadian\nequivalent of Amurru, \"Amorite\", is of frequent occurrence also before\nthis period. The eastern Mediterranean coast district, including\nPalestine and the neighbouring tracts, was known by the Babylonians\nand Assyrians as the land of the Amorites, a term which stood for the\nWest in general even when these regions no longer bore that name. The\nBabylonians maintained their claim to sovereignty over that part as\nlong as they possessed the power to do so, and naturally exercised\nconsiderable influence there. The existence in Palestine, Syria, and\nthe neighbouring states, of creeds containing the names of many\nBabylonian divinities is therefore not to be wondered at, and the\npresence of West Semitic divinities in the religion of the Babylonians\nneed not cause us any surprise.\nThe Babylonian script and its evidence.\nIn consequence of the determinative prefix for a god or a goddess\nbeing, in the oldest form, a picture of an eight-rayed star, it has\nbeen assumed that Assyro-Babylonian mythology is, either wholly or\npartly, astral in origin. This, however, is by no means certain, the\ncharacter for \"star\" in the inscriptions being a combination of three\nsuch pictures, and not a single sign. The probability therefore is,\nthat the use of the single star to indicate the name of a divinity\narises merely from the fact that the character in question stands for\n/ana/, \"heaven.\" Deities were evidently thus distinguished by the\nBabylonians because they regarded them as inhabitants of the realms\nabove--indeed, the heavens being the place where the stars are seen, a\npicture of a star was the only way of indicating heavenly things. That\nthe gods of the Babylonians were in many cases identified with the\nstars and planets is certain, but these identifications seem to have\ntaken place at a comparatively late date. An exception has naturally\nto be made in the case of the sun and moon, but the god Merodach, if\nhe be, as seems certain, a deified Babylonian king, must have been\nidentified with the stars which bear his name after his worshippers\nbegan to pay him divine honours as the supreme deity, and naturally\nwhat is true for him may also be so for the other gods whom they\nworshipped. The identification of some of the deities with stars or\nplanets is, moreover, impossible, and if \u00caa, the god of the deep, and\nAnu, the god of the heavens, have their representatives among the\nheavenly bodies, this is probably the result of later development.[*]\n[*] If there be any historical foundation for the statement that\nMerodach arranged the sun, the moon, the planets, and the stars,\nassigning to them their proper places and duties--a tradition\nwhich would make him the founder of the science of astronomy\nduring his life upon earth--this, too, would tend to the\nprobability that the origin of the gods of the Babylonians was not\nastral, as has been suggested, but that their identification with\nthe heavenly bodies was introduced during the period of his reign.\nAncestor and hero-worship. The deification of kings.\nThough there is no proof that ancestor-worship in general prevailed at\nany time in Babylonia, it would seem that the worship of heroes and\nprominent men was common, at least in early times. The tenth chapter\nof Genesis tells us of the story of Nimrod, who cannot be any other\nthan the Merodach of the Assyro-Babylonian inscriptions; and other\nexamples, occurring in semi-mythological times, are /En-we-dur-an-ki/,\nthe Greek Edoreschos, and /Gilgame\u0161/, the Greek Gilgamos, though\nAelian's story of the latter does not fit in with the account as given\nby the inscriptions. In later times, the divine prefix is found before\nthe names of many a Babylonian ruler--Sargon of Agad\u00e9,[*] Dungi of Ur\n(about 2500 B.C.), Rim-Sin or Eri-Aku (Arioch of Ellasar, about 2100\nB.C.), and others. It was doubtless a kind of flattery to deify and\npay these rulers divine honours during their lifetime, and on account\nof this, it is very probable that their godhood was utterly forgotten,\nin the case of those who were strictly historical, after their death.\nThe deification of the kings of Babylonia and Assyria is probably due\nto the fact, that they were regarded as the representatives of God\nupon earth, and being his chief priests as well as his offspring (the\npersonal names show that it was a common thing to regard children as\nthe gifts of the gods whom their father worshipped), the divine\nfatherhood thus attributed to them naturally could, in the case of\nthose of royal rank, give them a real claim to divine birth and\nhonours. An exception is the deification of the Babylonian Noah,\nUt-napi\u0161tim, who, as the legend of the Flood relates, was raised and\nmade one of the gods by Aa or Ea, for his faithfulness after the great\ncatastrophe, when he and his wife were translated to the \"remote place\nat the mouth of the rivers.\" The hero Gilgame\u0161, on the other hand, was\nhalf divine by birth, though it is not exactly known through whom his\ndivinity came.\n[*] According to Nabonidus's date 3800 B.C., though many\nAssyriologists regard this as being a millennium too early.\nThe earliest form of the Babylonian religion.\nThe state of development to which the religious system of the\nBabylonians had attained at the earliest period to which the\ninscriptions refer naturally precludes the possibility of a\ntrustworthy history of its origin and early growth. There is no doubt,\nhowever, that it may be regarded as having reached the stage at which\nwe find it in consequence of there being a number of states in ancient\nBabylonia (which was at that time like the Heptarchy in England) each\npossessing its own divinity--who, in its district, was regarded as\nsupreme--with a number of lesser gods forming his court. It was the\nadding together of all these small pantheons which ultimately made\nthat of Babylonia as a whole so exceedingly extensive. Thus the chief\ndivinity of Babylon, as has already been stated, as Merodach; at\nSippar and Larsa the sun-god \u0160ama\u0161 was worshipped; at Ur the moon-god\nSin or Nannar; at Erech and D\u00ear the god of the heavens, Anu; at Muru,\nEnnigi, and Kakru, the god of the atmosphere, Hadad or Rimmon; at\n\u00caridu, the god of the deep, Aa or \u00caa; at Niffur[*] the god Bel; at\nCuthah the god of war, Nergal; at Dailem the god Ura\u0161; at Ki\u0161 the god\nof battle, Zagaga; Lugal-Amarda, the king of Marad, as the city so\ncalled; at Opis Zakar, one of the gods of dreams; at Agad\u00e9, Nineveh,\nand Arbela, I\u0161tar, goddess of love and of war; Nina at the city Nina\nin Babylonia, etc. When the chief deities were masculine, they were\nnaturally all identified with each other, just as the Greeks called\nthe Babylonian Merodach by the name of Zeus; and as Zer-pan\u00eetum, the\nconsort of Merodach, was identified with Juno, so the consorts, divine\nattendants, and children of each chief divinity, as far as they\npossessed them, could also be regarded as the same, though possibly\ndistinct in their different attributes.\n[*] Noufar at present, according to the latest explorers. Layard\n(1856) has Niffer, Loftus (1857) Niffar. The native spelling is\nNoufer, due to the French system of phonetics.\nHow the religion of the Babylonians developed.\nThe fact that the rise of Merodach to the position of king of the gods\nwas due to the attainment, by the city of Babylon, of the position of\ncapital of all Babylonia, leads one to suspect that the kingly rank of\nhis father \u00caa, at an earlier period, was due to a somewhat similar\ncause, and if so, the still earlier kingship of Anu, the god of the\nheavens, may be in like manner explained. This leads to the question\nwhether the first state to attain to supremacy was D\u00ear, Anu's seat,\nand whether D\u00ear was succeeded by \u00caridu, of which city \u00caa was the\npatron--concerning the importance of Babylon, Merodach's city, later\non, there is no doubt whatever. The rise of Anu and \u00caa to divine\noverlordship, however, may not have been due to the political\nsupremacy of the cities where they were worshipped--it may have come\nabout simply on account of renown gained through religious enthusiasm\ndue to wonders said to have been performed where they were worshipped,\nor to the reported discovery of new records concerning their temples,\nor to the influence of some renowned high-priest, like En-we-dur-an-ki\nof Sippar, whose devotion undoubtedly brought great renown to the city\nof his dominion.\nWas Animism its original form?\nBut the question naturally arises, can we go back beyond the\nindications of the inscriptions? The Babylonians attributed life, in\ncertain not very numerous cases, to such things as trees and plants,\nand naturally to the winds, and the heavenly bodies. Whether they\nregarded stones, rocks, mountains, storms, and rain in the same way,\nhowever, is doubtful, but it may be taken for granted, that the sea,\nwith all its rivers and streams, was regarded as animated with the\nspirit of \u00caa and his children, whilst the great cities and\ntemple-towers were pervaded with the spirit of the god whose abode\nthey were. Innumerable good and evil spirits were believed in, such as\nthe spirit of the mountain, the sea, the plain, and the grave. These\nspirits were of various kinds, and bore names which do not always\nreveal their real character--such as the /edimmu/, /utukku/, /\u0161\u00eadu/,\n/a\u0161akku/ (spirit of fevers), /namtaru/ (spirit of fate), /\u00e2l\u00fb/\n(regarded as the spirit of the south wind), /gallu/, /rabisu/,\n/labartu/, /labasu/, /ahhazu/ (the seizer), /lilu/ and /lilithu/ (male\nand female spirits of the mist), with their attendants.\nAll this points to animism as the pervading idea of the worship of the\npeoples of the Babylonian states in the prehistoric period--the\nattribution of life to every appearance of nature. The question is,\nhowever, Is the evidence of the inscriptions sufficient to make this\nabsolutely certain? It is hard to believe that such intelligent\npeople, as the primitive Babylonians naturally were, believed that\nsuch things as stones, rocks, mountains, storms, and rain were, in\nthemselves, and apart from the divinity which they regarded as\npresiding over them, living things. A stone might be a /b\u00eet \u00eeli/ or\nbethel--a \"house of god,\" and almost invested with the status of a\nliving thing, but that does not prove that the Babylonians thought of\nevery stone as being endowed with life, even in prehistoric times.\nWhilst, therefore, there are traces of a belief similar to that which\nan animistic creed might be regarded as possessing, it must be\nadmitted that these seemingly animistic doctrines may have originated\nin another way, and be due to later developments. The power of the\ngods to create living things naturally makes possible the belief that\nthey had also power to endow with a soul, and therefore with life and\nintelligence, any seemingly inanimate object. Such was probably the\nnature of Babylonian animism, if it may be so called. The legend of\nTiawthu (Tiawath) may with great probability be regarded as the\nremains of a primitive animism which was the creed of the original and\ncomparatively uncivilised Babylonians, who saw in the sea the producer\nand creator of all the monstrous shapes which are found therein; but\nany development of this idea in other directions was probably cut\nshort by the priests, who must have realised, under the influence of\nthe doctrine of the divine rise to perfection, that animism in general\nwas altogether incompatible with the creed which they professed.\nImage-worship and Sacred Stones.\nWhether image-worship was original among the Babylonians and Assyrians\nis uncertain, and improbable; the tendency among the people in early\ntimes being to venerate sacred stones and other inanimate objects. As\nhas been already pointed out, the {diopetres} of the Greeks was\nprobably a meteorite, and stones marking the position of the Semitic\nbethels were probably, in their origin, the same. The boulders which\nwere sometimes used for boundary-stones may have been the\nrepresentations of these meteorites in later times, and it is\nnoteworthy that the Sumerian group for \"iron,\" /an-bar/, implies that\nthe early Babylonians only knew of that metal from meteoric ironstone.\nThe name of the god Nirig or \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu (Ninip) is generally written\nwith the same group, implying some kind of connection between the two\n--the god and the iron. In a well-known hymn to that deity certain\nstones are mentioned, one of them being described as the \"poison-\ntooth\"[*] coming forth on the mountain, recalling the sacred rocks at\nJerusalem and Mecca. Boundary-stones in Babylonia were not sacred\nobjects except in so far as they were sculptured with the signs of the\ngods.[\u2020] With regard to the Babylonian bethels, very little can be\nsaid, their true nature being uncertain, and their number, to all\nappearance, small. Gifts were made to them, and from this fact it\nwould seem that they were temples--true \"houses of god,\" in fact--\nprobably containing an image of the deity, rather than a stone similar\nto those referred to in the Old Testament.\n[*] So called, probably, not because it sent forth poison, but on\naccount of its likeness to a serpent's fang.\n[\u2020] Notwithstanding medical opinion, their phallic origin is doubtful.\nOne is sculptured in the form of an Eastern castellated fortress.\nIdols.\nWith the Babylonians, the gods were represented by means of stone\nimages at a very early date, and it is possible that wood was also\nused. The tendency of the human mind being to attribute to the Deity a\nhuman form, the Babylonians were no exception to the rule. Human\nthoughts and feelings would naturally accompany the human form with\nwhich the minds of men endowed them. Whether the gross human passions\nattributed to the gods of Babylonia in Herodotus be of early date or\nnot is uncertain--a late period, when the religion began to\ndegenerate, would seem to be the more probable.\nThe adoration of sacred objects.\nIt is probable that objects belonging to or dedicated to deities were\nnot originally worshipped--they were held as divine in consequence of\ntheir being possessed or used by a deity, like the bow of Merodach,\nplaced in the heavens as a constellation, etc. The cities where the\ngods dwelt on earth, their temples, their couches, the chariot of the\nsun in his temple-cities, and everything existing in connection with\ntheir worship, were in all probability regarded as divine simply in so\nfar as they belonged to a god. Sacrifices offered to them, and\ninvocations made to them, were in all likelihood regarded as having\nbeen made to the deity himself, the possessions of the divinity being,\nin the minds of the Babylonians, pervaded with his spirit. In the case\nof rivers, these were divine as being the children and offspring of\nEnki (Aa or \u00caa), the god of the ocean.\nHoly places.\nIn a country which was originally divided into many small states, each\nhaving its own deities, and, to a certain extent, its own religious\nsystem, holy places were naturally numerous. As the spot where they\nplaced Paradise, Babylonia was itself a holy place, but in all\nprobability this idea is late, and only came into existence after the\nlegends of the creation and the rise of Merodach to the kingship of\nheaven had become elaborated into one homogeneous whole.\nAn interesting list.\nOne of the most interesting documents referring to the holy places of\nBabylonia is a tiny tablet found at Nineveh, and preserved in the\nBritish Museum. This text begins with the word Tiawthu \"the sea,\" and\ngoes on to enumerate, in turn, Tilmun (identified with the island of\nBahrein in the Persian Gulf); Engurra (the Abyss, the abode of Enki or\n\u00caa), with numerous temples and shrines, including \"the holy house,\"\n\"the temple of the seer of heaven and earth,\" \"the abode of Zer-\npan\u00eetum,\" consort of Merodach, \"the throne of the holy place,\" \"the\ntemple of the region of Hades,\" \"the supreme temple of life,\" \"the\ntemple of the ear of the corn-deity,\" with many others, the whole list\ncontaining what may be regarded as the chief sanctuaries of the land,\nto the number of thirty-one. Numerous other similar and more extensive\nlists, enumerating every shrine and temple in the country, also exist,\nthough in a very imperfect state, and in addition to these, many holy\nplaces are referred to in the bilingual, historical, and other\ninscriptions. All the great cities of Babylonia, moreover, were sacred\nplaces, the chief in renown and importance in later days being the\ngreat city of Babylon, where \u00ca-sagila, \"the temple of the high head,\"\nin which was apparently the shrine called \"the temple of the\nfoundation of heaven and earth,\" held the first place. This building\nis called by Nebuchadnezzar \"the temple-tower of Babylon,\" and may\nbetter be regarded as the site of the Biblical \"Tower of Babel\" than\nthe traditional foundation, \u00ca-zida, \"the everlasting temple,\" in\nBorsippa (the Birs Nimroud)--notwithstanding that Borsippa was called\nthe \"second Babylon,\" and its temple-tower \"the supreme house of\nlife.\"\nThe Tower of Babel.\nThough quite close to Babylon, there is no doubt that Borsippa was a\nmost important religious centre, and this leads to the possibility,\nthat its great temple may have disputed with \"the house of the high\nhead,\" \u00ca-sagila in Babylon, the honour of being the site of the\nconfusion of tongues and the dispersion of mankind. There is no doubt,\nhowever, that \u00ca-sagila has the prior claim, it being the temple of the\nsupreme god of the later Babylonian pantheon, the counterpart of the\nGod of the Hebrews who commanded the changing of the speech of the\npeople assembled there. Supposing the confusion of tongues to have\nbeen a Babylonian legend as well as a Hebrew one (as is possible) it\nwould be by command of Merodach rather than that of Nebo that such a\nthing would have taken place. \u00ca-sagila, which is now the ruin known as\nthe mount of Amran ibn Ali, is the celebrated temple of Belus which\nAlexander and Philip attempted to restore.\nIn addition to the legend of the confusion of tongues, it is probable\nthat there were many similar traditions attached to the great temples\nof Babylonia, and as time goes on, and the excavations bring more\nmaterial, a large number of them will probably be recovered. Already\nwe have an interesting and poetical record of the entry of Bel and\nBeltis into the great temple at Niffer, probably copied from some\nancient source, and Gudea, a king of Laga\u0161 (Telloh), who reigned about\n2700 B.C., gives an account of the dream which he saw, in which he was\ninstructed by the gods to build or rebuild the temple of Nin-Girsu in\nhis capital city.\n\u00ca-sagila according to Herodotus.\nAs the chief fane in the land after Babylon became the capital, and\nthe type of many similar erections, \u00ca-sagila, the temple of Belus,\nmerits just a short notice. According to Herodotus, it was a massive\ntower within an enclosure measuring 400 yards each way, and provided\nwith gates of brass, or rather bronze. The tower within consisted of a\nkind of step-pyramid, the stages being seven in number (omitting the\nlowest, which was the platform forming the foundation of the\nstructure). A winding ascent gave access to the top, where was a\nchapel or shrine, containing no statue, but regarded by the\nBabylonians as the abode of the god. Lower down was another shrine, in\nwhich was placed a great statue of Zeus (Bel-Merodach) sitting, with a\nlarge table before it. Both statue and table are said to have been of\ngold, as were also the throne and the steps. Outside the sanctuary (on\nthe ramp, apparently) were two altars, one small and made of gold,\nwhereon only unweaned lambs were sacrificed, and the other larger, for\nfull-grown victims.\nA Babylonian description.\nIn 1876 the well-known Assyriologist, Mr. George Smith, was fortunate\nenough to discover a Babylonian description of this temple, of which\nhe published a /pr\u00e9cis/. According to this document, there were two\ncourts of considerable extent, the smaller within the larger--neither\nof them was square, but oblong. Six gates admitted to the temple-area\nsurrounding the platform upon which the tower was built. The platform\nis stated to have been square and walled, with four gates facing the\ncardinal points. Within this wall was a building connected with the\ngreat /zikkurat/ or tower--the principal edifice--round which were\nchapels or temples to the principal gods, on all four sides, and\nfacing the cardinal points--that to Nebo and Ta\u0161m\u00eet being on the east,\nto Aa or \u00caa and Nusku on the north, Anu and Bel on the south, and the\nseries of buildings on the west, consisting of a double house--a small\ncourt between two wings, was evidently the shrine of Merodach (Belos).\nIn these western chambers stood the couch of the god, and the golden\nthrone mentioned by Herodotus, besides other furniture of great value.\nThe couch was given as being 9 cubits long by 4 broad, about as many\nfeet in each case, or rather more.\nThe centre of these buildings was the great /zikkurat/, or temple-\ntower, square on its plan, and with the sides facing the cardinal\npoints. The lowest stage was 15 /gar/ square by 5 1/2 high (Smith, 300\nfeet by 110), and the wall, in accordance with the usual Babylonian\ncustom, seems to have been ornamented with recessed groovings. The\nsecond stage was 13 /gar/ square by 3 in height (Smith, 260 by 60\nfeet). He conjectured, from the expression used, that it had sloping\nsides. Stages three to five were each one /gar/ (Smith, 20 feet) high,\nand respectively 10 /gar/ (Smith, 200 feet), 8 1/2 /gar/ (170 feet),\nand 7 /gar/ (140 feet) square. The dimensions of the sixth stage are\nomitted, probably by accident, but Smith conjectures that they were in\nproportion to those which precede. His description omits also the\ndimensions of the seventh stage, but he gives those of the sanctuary\nof Belus, which was built upon it. This was 4 /gar/ long, 3 1/2 /gar/\nbroad, and 2 1/2 /gar/ high (Smith, 80 x 70 x 50 feet). He points out,\nthat the total height was, therefore, 15 /gar/, the same as the\ndimensions of the base, i.e., the lowest platform, which would make\nthe total height of this world-renowned building rather more than 300\nfeet above the plains.\nOther temple-towers.\nTowers of a similar nature were to be found in all the great cities of\nBabylonia, and it is probable that in most cases slight differences of\nform were to be found. That at Niffer, for instance, seems to have had\na causeway on each side, making four approaches in the form of a\ncross. But it was not every city which had a tower of seven stages in\naddition to the platform on which it was erected, and some of the\nsmaller ones at least seem to have had sloping or rounded sides to the\nbasement-portion, as is indicated by an Assyrian bas-relief. Naturally\nsmall temples, with hardly more than the rooms on the ground floor,\nwere to be found, but these temple-towers were a speciality of the\ncountry.\nTheir origin.\nThere is some probability that, as indicated in the tenth chapter of\nGenesis, the desire in building these towers was to get nearer the\nDeity, or to the divine inhabitants of the heavens in general--it\nwould be easier there to gain attention than on the surface of the\nearth. Then there was the belief, that the god to whom the place was\ndedicated would come down to such a sanctuary, which thus became, as\nit were, the stepping-stone between heaven and earth. Sacrifices were\nalso offered at these temple-towers (whether on the highest point or\nnot is not quite certain), in imitation of the Chald\u00e6an Noah,\nUt-napi\u0161tim, who, on coming out of the ark, made an offering /ina\nzikkurat \u0161ad\u00ea/, \"on the peak of the mountain,\" in which passage, it is\nto be noted, the word /zikkurat/ occurs with what is probably a more\noriginal meaning.\nCHAPTER III\nTHE BABYLONIAN STORY OF THE CREATION\nThis is the final development of the Babylonian creed. It has already\nbeen pointed out that the religion of the Babylonians in all\nprobability had two stages before arriving at that in which the god\nMerodach occupied the position of chief of the pantheon, the two\npreceding heads having been, seemingly, Anu, the god of the heavens,\nand \u00caa or Aa, also called Enki, the god of the abyss and of deep\nwisdom. In order to show this, and at the same time to give an idea of\ntheir theory of the beginning of things, a short paraphrase of the\ncontents of the seven tablets will be found in the following pages.\nAn Embodiment of doctrine.\nAs far as our knowledge goes, the doctrines incorporated in this\nlegend would seem to show the final official development of the\nbeliefs held by the Babylonians, due, in all probability, to the\npriests of Babylon after that city became the capital of the federated\nstates. Modifications of their creed probably took place, but nothing\nseriously affecting it, until after the abandonment of Babylon in the\ntime of Seleucus Nicator, 300 B.C. or thereabouts, when the deity at\nthe head of the pantheon seems not to have been Merodach, but Anu-B\u00eal.\nThis legend is therefore the most important document bearing upon the\nbeliefs of the Babylonians from the end of the third millennium B.C.\nuntil that time, and the philosophical ideas which it contains seem to\nhave been held, in a more or less modified form, among the remnants\nwho still retained the old Babylonian faith, until the sixth century\nof the present era, as the record by Damascius implies. Properly\nspeaking, it is not a record of the creation, but the story of the\nfight between Bel and the Dragon, to which the account of the creation\nis prefixed by way of introduction.\nWater the first creator.\nThe legend begins by stating that, when the heavens were unnamed and\nthe earth bore no name, the prim\u00e6val ocean was the producer of all\nthings, and Mummu Tiawath (the sea) she who brought forth everything\nexisting. Their waters (that is, of the prim\u00e6val ocean and of the sea)\nwere all united in one, and neither plains nor marshes were to be\nseen; the gods likewise did not exist, even in name, and the fates\nwere undetermined--nothing had been decided as to the future of\nthings. Then arose the great gods. Lahmu and Lahame came first,\nfollowed, after a long period, by An\u0161ar and Ki\u0161ar, generally\nidentified with the \"host of heaven\" and the \"host of earth,\" these\nbeing the meanings of the component parts of their names. After a\nfurther long period of days, there came forth their son Anu, the god\nof the heavens.\nThe gods.\nHere the narrative is defective, and is continued by Damascius in his\n/Doubts and Solutions of the First Principles/, in which he states\nthat, after Anos (Anu), come Illinos (Ellila or Bel, \"the lord\" /par\nexcellence/) and Aos (Aa, Ae, or \u00caa), the god of Eridu. Of Aos and\nDauk\u00e9 (the Babylonian Aa and Damkina) is born, he says, a son called\nBelos (Bel-Merodach), who, they (apparently the Babylonians) say, is\nthe fabricator of the world--the creator.\nThe designs against them.\nAt this point Damascius ends his extract, and the Babylonian tablet\nalso becomes extremely defective. The next deity to come into\nexistence, however, would seem to have been Nudimmud, who was\napparently the deity Aa or \u00caa (the god of the sea and of rivers) as\nthe god of creation. Among the children of Tauth\u00e9 (Tiawath) enumerated\nby Damascius is one named Moumis, who was evidently referred to in the\ndocument at that philosopher's disposal. If this be correct, his name,\nunder the form of Mummu, probably existed in one of the defective\nlines of the first portion of this legend--in any case, his name\noccurs later on, with those of Tiawath and Apsu (the Deep), his\nparents, and the three seem to be compared, to their disadvantage,\nwith the progeny of Lahmu and Lahame, the gods on high. As the ways of\nthese last were not those of Tiawath's brood, and Apsu complained that\nhe had no peace by day nor rest by night on account of their\nproceedings, the three representatives of the chaotic deep, Tiawath,\nApsu, and Mummu, discussed how they might get rid the beings who\nwished to rise to higher things. Mummu was apparently the prime mover\nin the plot, and the face of Apsu grew bright at the thought of the\nevil plan which they had devised against \"the gods their sons.\" The\ninscription being very mutilated here, its full drift cannot be\ngathered, but from the complete portions which come later it would\nseem that Mummu's plan was not a remarkably cunning one, being simply\nto make war upon and destroy the gods of heaven.\nTiawath's preparations.\nThe preparations made for this were elaborate. Restlessly, day and\nnight, the powers of evil raged and toiled, and assembled for the\nfight. 'Mother Hubur,\" as Tiawath is named in this passage, called her\ncreative powers into action, and gave her followers irresistible\nweapons. She brought into being also various monsters--giant serpents,\nsharp of tooth, bearing stings, and with poison filling their bodies\nlike blood; terrible dragons endowed with brilliance, and of enormous\nstature, reared on high, raging dogs, scorpion-men, fish-men, and many\nother terrible beings, were created and equipped, the whole being\nplaced under the command of a deity named Kingu, whom she calls her\n\"only husband,\" and to whom she delivers the tablets of fate, which\nconferred upon him the godhead of Anu (the heavens), and enabled their\npossessor to determine the gates among the gods her sons.\nKingu replaces Absu.\nThe change in the narrative which comes in here suggests that this is\nthe point at which two legends current in Babylonia were united.\nHenceforward we hear nothing more of Apsu, the begetter of all things,\nTiawath's spouse, nor of Mummu, their son. In all probability there is\ngood reason for this, and inscriptions will doubtless ultimately be\nfound which will explain it, but until then it is only natural to\nsuppose that two different legends have been pieced together to form a\nharmonious whole.\nTiawath's aim.\nAs will be gathered from the above, the story centres in the wish of\nthe goddess of the powers of evil and her kindred to retain creation--\nthe forming of all living things--in her own hands. As Tiawath means\n\"the sea,\" and Apsu \"the deep,\" it is probable that this is a kind of\nallegory personifying the productive power seen in the teeming life of\nthe ocean, and typifying the strange and wonderful forms found\ntherein, which were symbolical, to the Babylonian mind, of chaos and\nconfusion, as well as of evil.\nThe gods hear of the conspiracy.\nAa, or \u00caa, having learned of the plot of Tiawath and her followers\nagainst the gods of heaven, naturally became filled with anger, and\nwent and told the whole to An\u0161ar, his father, who in his turn gave way\nto his wrath, and uttered cries of the deepest grief. After\nconsidering what they would do, An\u0161ar applied to his son Anu, \"the\nmighty and brave,\" saying that, if he would only speak to her, the\ngreat dragon's anger would be assuaged, and her rage disappear. In\nobedience to this behest, Anu went to try his power with the monster,\nbut on beholding her snarling face, feared to approach her, and turned\nback. Nudimmud was next called upon to become the representative of\nthe gods against their foe, but his success was as that of Anu, and it\nbecame needful to seek another champion.\nAnd choose Merodach as their champion.\nThe choice fell upon Merodach, the Belus (Bel-Merodach) of Damascius's\nparaphrase, and at once met with an enthusiastic reception. The god\nasked simply that an \"unchangeable command\" might be given to him--\nthat whatever he ordained should without fail come to pass, in order\nthat he might destroy the common enemy. Invitations were sent to the\ngods asking them to a festival, where, having met together, they ate\nand drank, and \"decided the fate\" for Merodach their avenger,\napparently meaning that he was decreed their defender in the conflict\nwith Tiawath, and that the power of creating and annihilating by the\nword of his mouth was his. Honours were then conferred upon him;\nprincely chambers were erected for him, wherein he sat as judge \"in\nthe presence of his fathers,\" and the rule over the whole universe was\ngiven to him. The testing of his newly acquired power followed. A\ngarment was placed in their midst:\n\"He spake with his mouth, and the garment was destroyed,\nHe spake to it again, and the garment was reproduced.\"\nMerodach proclaimed king.\nOn this proof of the reality of the powers conferred on him, all the\ngods shouted \"Merodach is king!\" and handed to him sceptre, throne,\nand insignia of royalty. An irresistible weapon, which should shatter\nall his enemies, was then given to him, and he armed himself also with\nspear or dart, bow, and quiver; lightning flashed before him, and\nflaming fire filled his body. Anu, the god of the heavens, had given\nhim a great net, and this he set at the four cardinal points, in order\nthat nothing of the dragon, when he had defeated her, should escape.\nSeven winds he then created to accompany him, and the great weapon\ncalled /Abubu/, \"the Flood,\" completed his equipment. All being ready,\nhe mounted his dreadful, irresistible chariot, to which four steeds\nwere yoked--steeds unsparing, rushing forward, rapid in flight, their\nteeth full of venom, foam-covered, experienced in galloping, schooled\nin overthrowing. Being now ready for the fray, Merodach fared forth to\nmeet Tiawath, accompanied by the fervent good wishes of \"the gods his\nfathers.\"\nThe fight with Tiawath.\nAdvancing, he regarded Tiawath's retreat, but the sight of the enemy\nwas so menacing that even the great Merodach (if we understand the\ntext rightly) began to falter. This, however, was not for long, and\nthe king of the gods stood before Tiawath, who, on her side, remained\nfirm and undaunted. In a somewhat long speech, in which he reproaches\nTiawath for her rebellion, he challenges her to battle, and the two\nmeet in fiercest fight. To all appearance the type of all evil did not\nmake use of honest weapons, but sought to overcome the king of the\ngods with incantations and charms. These, however, had not the\nslightest effect, for she found herself at once enclosed in Merodach's\nnet, and on opening her mouth to resist and free herself, the evil\nwind, which Merodach had sent on before him, entered, so that she\ncould not close her lips, and thus inflated, her heart was\noverpowered, and she became a prey to her conqueror. Having cut her\nasunder and taken out her heart, thus destroying her life, he threw\nher body down and stood thereon. Her followers then attempted to\nescape, but found themselves surrounded and unable to get forth. Like\ntheir mistress, they were thrown into the net, and sat in bonds, being\nafterwards shut up in prison. As for Kingu, he was raised up, bound,\nand delivered to be with Ugga, the god of death. The tablets of fate,\nwhich Tiawath had delivered to Kingu, were taken from him by Merodach,\nwho pressed his seal upon them, and placed them in his breast. The\ndeity An\u0161ar, who had been, as it would seem, deprived of his rightful\npower by Tiawath, received that power again on the death of the common\nfoe, and Nudimmud \"saw his desire upon his enemy.\"\nTiawath's fate.\nThe dismemberment of Tiawath then followed, and her veins having been\ncut through, the north wind was caused by the deity to carry her blood\naway into secret places, a statement which probably typifies the\nopening of obstructions which prevent the rivers flowing from the\nnorth from running into the southern seas, helped thereto by the north\nwind. Finally her body was divided, like \"a /ma\u0161d\u00ea/-fish,\" into two\nparts, one of which was made into a covering for the heavens--the\n\"waters above the firmament\" of Genesis i. 7.\nMerodach orders the world anew.\nThen came the ordering of the universe anew. Having made a covering\nfor the heavens with half the body of the defeated Dragon of Chaos,\nMerodach set the Abyss, the abode of Nudimmud, in front, and made a\ncorresponding edifice above--the heavens--where he founded stations\nfor the gods Anu, Bel, and Ae. Stations for the great gods in the\nlikeness of constellations, together with what is regarded as the\nZodiac, were his next work. He then designated the year, setting three\nconstellations for each month, and made a station for Nibiru--\nMerodach's own star--as the overseer of all the lights in the\nfirmament. He then caused the new moon, Nannaru, to shine, and made\nhim the ruler of the night, indicating his phases, one of which was on\nthe seventh day, and the other, a /\u0161abattu/, or day of rest, in the\nmiddle of the month. Directions with regard to the moon's movements\nseem to follow, but the record is mutilated, and their real nature\nconsequently doubtful. With regard to other works which were performed\nwe have no information, as a gap prevents their being ascertained.\nSomething, however, seems to have been done with Merodach's net--\nprobably it was placed in the heavens as a constellation, as was his\nbow, to which several names were given. Later on, the winds were bound\nand assigned to their places, but the account of the arrangement of\nother things is mutilated and obscure, though it can be recognised\nthat the details in this place were of considerable interest.\nThe creation of man.\nTo all appearance the gods, after he had ordered the universe and the\nthings then existing, urged Merodach to further works of wonder.\nTaking up their suggestion, he considered what he should do, and then\ncommunicated to his father Ae his plan for the creation of man with\nhis own blood, in order that the service and worship of the gods might\nbe established. This portion is also unfortunately very imperfect, and\nthe details of the carrying out of the plan are entirely wanting.\nBerosus' narrative fills the gap.\nIt is noteworthy that this portion of the narrative has been preserved\nby Abydenus, George the Syncellus, and Eusebius, in their quotations\nfrom Berosus. According to this Chald\u00e6an writer, there was a woman\nnamed Omoroca, or, in Chald\u00e6an, Thalatth (apparently a mistake for\nThauatth, i.e. Tiawath), whose name was equivalent to the Greek\nThalassa, the sea. It was she who had in her charge all the strange\ncreatures then existing. At this period, Belus (Bel-Merodach) came,\nand cut the woman asunder, forming out of one half the earth, and of\nthe other the heavens, at the same time destroying all the creatures\nwhich were within her--all this being an allegory, for the whole\nuniverse consists of moisture, and creatures are constantly generated\ntherein. The deity then cut off his own head, and the other gods mixed\nthe blood, as it gushed out, with the earth, and from this men were\nformed. Hence it is that men are rational, and partake of divine\nknowledge.\nA second creation.\nThis Belsus, \"who is called Zeus,\" divided the darkness, separated the\nheavens from the earth, and reduced the universe to order. The animals\nwhich had been created, however, not being able to bear the light,\ndied. Belus then, seeing the void thus made, ordered one of the gods\nto take off his head, and mix the blood with the soil, forming other\nmen and animals which should be able to bear the light. He also formed\nthe stars, the sun, the moon, and the five planets. It would thus seem\nthat there were two creations, the first having been a failure because\nBelus had not foreseen that it was needful to produce beings which\nshould be able to bear the light. Whether this repetition was really\nin the Babylonian legend, or whether Berosus (or those who quote him)\nhas merely inserted and united two varying accounts, will only be\nknown when the cuneiform text is completed.\nThe concluding tablet.\nThe tablet of the fifty-one names completes the record of the tablets\nfound at Nineveh and Babylon. In this Merodach receives the titles of\nall the other gods, thus identifying him with them, and leading to\nthat tendency to monotheism of which something will be said later on.\nIn this text, which is written, like the rest of the legend, in\npoetical form, Merodach is repeatedly called /Tutu/, a mystic word\nmeaning \"creator,\" and \"begetter,\" from the reduplicate root /tu/ or\n/utu/--which was to all appearances his name when it was desired to\nrefer to him especially in that character. Noteworthy in this portion\nis the reference to Merodach's creation of mankind:--\nLine 25. \"Tuto: Aga-azaga (the glorious crown)--may he make the crowns\nglorious.\n26. The lord of the glorious incantation bringing the dead to\nlife;\n27. He who had mercy on the gods who had been overpowered;\n28. Made heavy the yoke which he had laid on the gods who were\nhis enemies,\n29. (And) to redeem(?) them, created mankind.\n30. 'The merciful one,' 'he with whom is salvation,'\n31. May his word be established, and not forgotten,\n32. In the mouth of the black-headed ones[*] whom his hands have\nmade.\"\n[*] I.e. mankind.\nMan the redeemer.\nThe phrase \"to redeem them\" is, in the original, /ana padi-\u0161unu/, the\nverb being from /pad\u00fb/, \"to spare,\" \"set free,\" and if this rendering\nbe correct, as seems probable, the Babylonian reasons for the creation\nof mankind would be, that they might carry on the service and worship\nof the gods, and by their righteousness redeem those enemies of the\ngods who were undergoing punishment for their hostility. Whether by\nthis Tiawath, Apsu, Mummu, Kingu, and the monsters whom she had\ncreated were included, or only the gods of heaven who had joined her,\nthe record does not say. Naturally, this doctrine depends entirely\nupon the correctness of the translation of the words quoted. Jensen,\nwho first proposed this rendering, makes no attempt to explain it, and\nsimply asks: \"Does 'them' in 'to redeem(?) them' refer to the gods\nnamed in line 28 or to mankind and then to a future--how meant?--\nredemption? Eschatology? Zimmern's 'in their place' unprovable.\nDelitzsch refrains from an explanation.\"\nThe bilingual account of the creation. Aruru aids Merodach.\nWhilst dealing with this part of the religious beliefs of the\nBabylonians, a few words are needed concerning the creation-story\nwhich is prefixed to an incantation used in a purification ceremony.\nThe original text is Sumerian (dialectic), and is provided with a\nSemitic translation. In this inscription, after stating that nothing\n(in the beginning) existed, and even the great cities and temples of\nBabylonia were as yet unbuilt, the condition of the world is briefly\nindicated by the statement that \"All the lands were sea.\" The renowned\ncities of Babylonia seem to have been regarded as being as much\ncreations of Merodach as the world and its inhabitants--indeed, it is\napparently for the glorification of those cities by attributing their\norigin to Merodach, that the bilingual account of the creation was\ncomposed.. \"When within the sea there was a stream\"--that is, when the\nveins of Tiawath had been cut through--\u00caridu (probably = Paradise) and\nthe temple \u00ca-sagila within the Abyss were constructed, and after that\nBabylon and the earthly temple of \u00ca-sagila within it. Then he made the\ngods and the Annunnaki (the gods of the earth), proclaimed a glorious\ncity as the seat of the joy of their hearts, and afterwards made a\npleasant place in which the gods might dwell. The creation of mankind\nfollowed, in which Merodach was aided by the goddess Aruru, who made\nmankind's seed. Finally, plants, trees, and the animals, were\nproduced, after which Merodach constructed bricks, beams, houses, and\ncities, including Niffer and Erech with their renowned temples.\nWe see here a change in the teaching with regard to Merodach--the gods\nare no longer spoken of as \"his fathers,\" but he is the creator of the\ngods, as well as of mankind.\nThe order of the gods in the principal lists.\nIt is unfortunate that no lists of gods have been found in a\nsufficiently complete state to allow of the scheme after which they\nwere drawn up to be determined without uncertainty. It may,\nnevertheless, be regarded as probable that these lists, at least in\nsome cases, are arranged in conformity (to a certain extent) with the\nappearance of the deities in the so-called creation-story. Some of\nthem begin with Anu, and give him various names, among them being\nAn\u0161ar and Ki\u0161ar, Lahmu and Lahame, etc. More specially interesting,\nhowever, is a well-known trilingual list of gods, which contains the\nnames of the various deities in the following order:--\nEXTRACTS FROM THE TRILINGUAL LIST\n/Obverse/\nSumer. Dialect Sumer. Standard Common Explanation\n(Semit. or Sumer.)\n1. Dimmer Dingir \u00celu God.\n2. U-ki En-ki \u00ca-a \u00caa or Aa.\n3. Ga\u0161an(?)-ki Nin-ki Dawkina Dauk\u00e9, the consort of \u00caa.\n4. Mu-ul-lil En-lil-la B\u00eal The God Bel.\n5. E-lum A-lim B\u00eal\n6. Ga\u0161an(?)-lil Nin-lil-la dam-bi sal Bel's consort.\n7. U-lu-a Ni-rig \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu The god of Niffer.\n8. U-lib-a Ni-rig \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu\n9-12 have \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu's consort, sister, and attendant.\n13. U-\u0161ab-sib En-\u0161ag-duga Nusku Nusku\n14-19 have two other names of Nusku, followed by three names of his\nconsort. A number of names of minor divinities then follow. At\nline 43 five names of \u00caa are given, followed by four of\nMerodach:--\n48. U-bi-lu-lu En-bi-lu-lu Marduk Merodach\n49. U-Tin-dir ki En-Tin-dir ki Marduk Merodach as \"lord of Babylon.\"\n50. U-dimmer-an-kia En-dinger-an-kia Marduk Merodach as \"lord god of heaven and earth.\"\n51. U-ab-\u0161ar-u En-ab-\u0161ar-u Marduk Merodach, apparently as \"lord of the 36,000 steers.\"\n52. U-bar-gi-si Nin-bar-gi-si Zer-pan\u00eetum Merodach's consort.\n53. Ga\u0161an-abzu Nin-abzu dam-bi sal \"the Lady of the Abyss,\" his consort.\nThe remainder of the obverse is mutilated, but gave the names of Nebo\nin Sumerian, and apparently also of Ta\u0161m\u00eatum, his consort. The\nbeginning of the reverse also is mutilated, but seems to have given\nthe names of the sun-god, \u0160ama\u0161, and his consort, followed by those of\nK\u00eettu and M\u00ea\u0161arum, \"justice and righteousness,\" his attendants. Other\ninteresting names are:\n/Reverse/\n8. U-libir-si En-ubar-si Dumu-zi Tammuz\n9. Sir-tumu Sir-du ama Dumuzi-gi the mother of Tammuz\n12. Ga\u0161an-anna Innanna I\u0161tar I\u0161tar (Venus) as \"lady of heaven.\"\n20. Nin-si-anna Innanna mul I\u0161tar the star (the planet Venus).\n21. Nin Nin-tag-taga Nanaa a goddess identified with I\u0161tar.\n23. U-\u0161ah Nina-\u0161ah Pap-sukal the gods' messenger.\n24. U-banda Lugal-banda Lugal-banda\n26. U-Mersi Nin-Girsu Nin-Girsu the chief god of Laga\u0161.\n27. Ma-sib-sib Ga-tum-duga Bau Bau, a goddess identified with Gula.\nFour non-Semitic names of Gula follow, of which that in line 31 is the\nmost interesting:--\n31. Ga\u0161an-ti-dibba Nin-tin-guua Gula \"the lady saving from death.\"\n33. Ga\u0161an-ki-gal Ere\u0161-ki-gala Allatu Persephone.\n36. U-mu-zi-da Nin-gi\u0161-zi-da Nin-gi\u0161-zida \"the lord of the everlasting tree.\"\n37. U-urugal Ne-eri-gal Nerigal Nergal.\n42. Mulu-hursag Galu-hursag Amurru the Amorite god.\n43. Ga\u0161an-gu-edina Nin-gu-edina (apparently the consort of Amurru).\nIn all probability this list is one of comparatively late date, though\nits chronological position with regard to the others is wholly\nuncertain--it may not be later, and may even be earlier, than those\nbeginning with Anu, the god of the heavens. The important thing about\nit is, that it begins with /\u00eelu/, god, in general, which is written,\nin the standard dialect (that of the second column) with the same\ncharacter as that used for the name of Anu. After this comes Aa or \u00caa,\nthe god of the earth, and his consort, followed by En-lilla, the older\nBel--Illinos in Damascius. The name of \u00caa is repeated again in line 43\nand following, where he is apparently re-introduced as the father of\nMerodach, whose names immediately follow. This peculiarity is also\nfound in other lists of gods and is undoubtedly a reflection of the\nhistory of the Babylonian religion. As this list replaces Anu by\n/\u00eelu/, it indicates the rule of Enki or \u00caa, followed by that of\nMerodach, who, as has been shown, became the chief divinity of the\nBabylonian pantheon in consequence of Babylon having become the\ncapital of the country.\nCHAPTER IV\nTHE PRINCIPAL GODS OF THE BABYLONIANS AND ASSYRIANS\nAnu.\nThe name of this divinity is derived from the Sumero-Akkadian /ana/,\n\"heaven,\" of which he was the principal deity. He is called the father\nof the great gods, though, in the creation-story, he seems to be\ndescribed as the son of An\u0161ar and Ki\u0161ar. In early names he is\ndescribed as the father, creator, and god, probably meaning the\nsupreme being. His consort was Anatu, and the pair are regarded in the\nlists as the same as the Lahmu and Lahame of the creation-story, who,\nwith other deities, are also described as gods of the heavens. Anu was\nworshipped at Erech, along with I\u0161tar.\nEa.\nIs given as if it were the /Semitic/ equivalent of /Enki/, \"the lord\nof the earth,\" but it would seem to be really a Sumerian word, later\nwritten /Ae/, and certain inscriptions suggest that the true reading\nwas /Aa/. His titles are \"king of the Abyss, creator of everything,\nlord of all,\" the first being seemingly due to the fact that Aa is a\nword which may, in its reduplicate form, mean \"waters,\" or if read\n/\u00caa/, \"house of water.\" He also, like Anu, is called \"father of the\ngods.\" As this god was likewise \"lord of deep wisdom,\" it was to him\nthat his son Merodach went for advice whenever he was in doubt. On\naccount of his knowledge, he was the god of artisans in general--\npotters, blacksmiths, sailors, builders, stone-cutters, gardeners,\nseers, barbers, farmers, etc. This is the Aos (a form which confirms\nthe reading Aa) of Damascius, and the Oannes of the extracts from\nBerosus, who states that he was \"a creature endowed with reason, with\na body like that of a fish, and under the fish's head another head,\nwith feet below, like those of a man, with a fish's tail.\" This\ndescription applies fairly well to certain bas-reliefs from Nimroud in\nthe British Museum. The creature described by Berosus lived in the\nPersian Gulf, landing during the day to teach the inhabitants the\nbuilding of houses and temples, the cultivation of useful plants, the\ngathering of fruits, and also geometry, law, and letters. From him,\ntoo, came the account of the beginning of things referred to in\nchapter III. which, in the original Greek, is preceded by a\ndescription of the composite monsters said to have existed before\nMerodach assumed the rule of the universe.\nThe name of his consort, Damkina or Dawkina, probably means \"the\neternal spouse,\" and her other names, /Ga\u0161an-ki/ (Sumerian dialectic)\nand /Nin-ki/ (non-dialectic), \"Lady of the earth,\" sufficiently\nindicates her province. She is often mentioned in the incantations\nwith \u00caa.\nThe forsaking of the worship of \u00caa as chief god for that of Merodach\nseems to have caused considerable heartburning in Babylonia, if we may\njudge from the story of the Flood, for it was on account of his\nfaithfulness that Utnipi\u0161tim, the Babylonian Noah, attained to\nsalvation from the Flood and immortality afterwards. All through this\nadventure it was the god \u00caa who favoured him, and afterwards gave him\nimmortality like that of the gods. There is an interesting Sumerian\ntext in which the ship of \u00caa seems to be described, the woods of which\nits various parts were formed being named, and in it, apparently, were\nEnki (\u00caa), Damgal-nunna (Damkina), his consort, Asari-lu-duga\n(Merodach), In-ab (or Ine\u0161), the pilot of \u00caridu (\u00caa's city), and\nNin-igi-nagar-sir, \"the great architect of heaven\":--\n\"May the ship before thee bring fertility,\nMay the ship after thee bring joy,\nIn thy heart may it make joy of heart . . . .\"\n\u00caa was the god of fertility, hence this ending to the poetical\ndescription of the ship of \u00caa.\nBel.\nThe deity who is mentioned next in order in the list given above is\nthe \"older Bel,\" so called to distinguish him from Bel-Merodach. His\nprincipal names were /Mullil/ (dialectic) or /En-lilla/[*] (standard\nspeech), the /Illinos/ of Damascius. His name is generally translated\n\"lord of mist,\" so-called as god of the underworld, his consort being\n/Ga\u0161an-lil/ or /Nan-lilla/, \"the lady of the mist,\" in Semitic\nBabylonian /B\u00ealtu/, \"the Lady,\" par excellence. Bel, whose name means\n\"the lord,\" was so called because he was regarded as chief of the\ngods. As there was considerable confusion in consequence of the title\nBel having been given to Merodach, Tiglath-pileser I. (about 1200\nB.C.) refers to him as the \"older Bel\" in describing the temple which\nhe built for him at A\u0161\u0161ur. Numerous names of men compounded with his\noccur until the latest times, implying that, though the favourite god\nwas Merodach, the worship of Bel was not forgotten, even at Babylon--\nthat he should have been adored at his own city, Niffur, and at Dur-\nKuri-galzu, where Kuri-galzu I. built a temple for \"Bel, the lord of\nthe lands,\" was naturally to be expected. Being, like \u00caa, a god of the\nearth, he is regarded as having formed a trinity with Anu, the god of\nheaven, and \u00caa, the god of the deep, and prayer to these three was as\ngood as invoking all the gods of the universe. Classification of the\ngods according to the domain of their power would naturally take place\nin a religious system in which they were all identified with each\nother, and this classification indicates, as Jastrow says, a deep\nknowledge of the powers of nature, and a more than average\nintelligence among the Babylonians--indeed, he holds it as a proof\nthat, at the period of the older empire, there were schools and\nstudents who had devoted themselves to religious speculation upon this\npoint. He also conjectures that the third commandment of the Law of\nMoses was directed against this doctrine held by the Babylonians.\n[*] Ordinarily pronounced /Illila/, as certain glosses and Damascius's\n/Illinos/ (for /Illilos/) show.\nBeltis.\nThis goddess was properly only the spouse of the older Bel, but as\n/B\u00ealtu/, her Babylonian name, simply meant \"lady\" in general (just as\n/B\u00eal/ or /b\u00ealu/ meant \"lord\"), it became a title which could be given\nto any goddess, and was in fact borne by Zer-pan\u00eetum, I\u0161tar, Nanaa,\nand others. It was therefore often needful to add the name of the city\nover which the special /B\u00ealtu/ presided, in order to make clear which\nof them was meant. Besides being the title of the spouse of the older\nBel, having her earthly seat with him in Niffur and other less\nimportant shrines, the Assyrians sometimes name B\u00ealtu the spouse of\nA\u0161\u0161ur, their national god, suggesting an identification, in the minds\nof the priests, with that deity.\n\u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu or Nirig.[*]\nWhether /\u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu/ be a translation of /Nirig/ or not, is uncertain,\nbut not improbable, the meaning being \"primeval lord,\" or something\nsimilar, and \"lord\" that of the first element, /ni/, in the Sumerian\nform. In support of this reading and rendering may be quoted the fact,\nthat one of the descriptions of this divinity is /a\u0161sarid \u00eelani\n\u00e2h\u00ea-\u0161u/, \"the eldest of the gods his brothers.\" It is noteworthy that\nthis deity was a special favourite among the Assyrians, many of whose\nkings, to say nothing of private persons, bore his name as a component\npart of theirs. In the bilingual poem entitled /Ana-kime gimma/\n(\"Formed like Anu\"), he is described as being the son of Bel (hence\nhis appearance after Bel in the list printed above), and in the\nlikeness of Anu, for which reason, perhaps, his divinity is called\n\"Anuship.\" Beginning with words praising him, it seems to refer to his\nattitude towards the gods of hostile lands, against whom, apparently,\nhe rode in a chariot of the sacred lapis-lazuli. Anu having endowed\nhim with terrible glory, the gods of the earth feared to attack him,\nand his onrush was as that of a storm-flood. By the command of Bel,\nhis course was directed towards \u00ca-kur, the temple of Bel at Niffur.\nHere he was met by Nusku, the supreme messenger of Bel, who, with\nwords of respect and of praise, asks him not to disturb the god Bel,\nhis father, in his seat, nor make the gods of the earth tremble in\nUp\u0161ukennaku (the heavenly festival-hall of the gods), and offers him a\ngift.[\u2020] It will thus be seen that \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu was a rival to the older\nBel, whose temple was the great tower in stages called \u00ca-kura, in\nwhich, in all probability, \u00ca-\u0161u-me-du, the shrine of \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu, was\nlikewise situated. The inscriptions call him \"god of war,\" though,\nunlike Nergal, he was not at the same time god of disease and\npestilence. To all appearance he was the god of the various kinds of\nstones, of which another legend states that he \"determined their\nfate.\" He was \"the hero, whose net overthrows the enemy, who summons\nhis army to plunder the hostile land, the royal son who caused his\nfather to bow down to him from afar.\" \"The son who sat not with the\nnurse, and eschewed(?) the strength of milk,\" \"the offspring who did\nnot know his father.\" \"He rode over the mountains and scattered\nseed--unanimously the plants proclaimed his name to their dominion,\namong them like a great wild bull he raises his horns.\"\n[*] /\u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu/ is the reading which I have adopted as the Semitic\nBabylonian equivalent of the name of this divinity, in consequence\nof the Aramaic transcription given by certain contract-tablets\ndiscovered by the American expedition to Niffer, and published by\nProf. Clay of Philadelphia.\n[\u2020] The result of this request is not known, in consequence of the\ndefective state of the tablets.\nMany other interesting descriptions of the deity Nirig (generally read\nNin-ip) occur, and show, with those quoted here, that his story was\none of more than ordinary interest.\nNusku.\nThis deity was especially invoked by the Assyrian kings, but was in no\nwise exclusively Assyrian, as is shown by the fact that his name\noccurs in many Babylonian inscriptions. He was the great messenger of\nthe gods, and is variously given as \"the offspring of the abyss, the\ncreation of \u00caa,\" and \"the likeness of his father, the first-born of\nBel.\" As Gibil, the fire-god, has likewise the same diverse parentage,\nit is regarded as likely that these two gods were identical. Nusku was\nthe god whose command is supreme, the counsellor of the great gods,\nthe protector of the Igigi (the gods of the heavens), the great and\npowerful one, the glorious day, the burning one, the founder of\ncities, the renewer of sanctuaries, the provider of feasts for all the\nIgigi, without whom no feast took place in \u00ca-kura. Like Nebo, he bore\nthe glorious spectre, and it was said of him that he attacked mightily\nin battle. Without him the sun-god, the judge, could not give\njudgment.\nAll this points to the probability, that Nusku may not have been the\nfire-god, but the brother of the fire-god, i.e. either flame, or the\nlight of fire. The sun-god, without light, could not see, and\ntherefore could not give judgment: no feast could be prepared without\nfire and its flame. As the evidence of the presence of the shining\norbs in the heavens--the light of their fires--he was the messenger of\nthe gods, and was honoured accordingly. From this idea, too, he became\ntheir messenger in general, especially of Bel-Merodach, the younger\nBel, whose requests he carried to the god \u00caa in the Deep. In one\ninscription he is identified with Nirig or \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu, who is described\nabove.\nMerodach.\nConcerning this god, and how he arose to the position of king of all\nthe gods of heaven, has been fully shown in chapter III. Though there\nis but little in his attributes to indicate any connection with \u0160ama\u0161,\nthere is hardly any doubt that he was originally a sun-god, as is\nshown by the etymology of his name. The form, as it has been handed\ndown to us, is somewhat shortened, the original pronunciation having\nbeen /Amar-uduk/, \"the young steer of day,\" a name which suggests that\nhe was the morning sun. Of the four names given at the end of chapter\nIII., two--\"lord of Babylon,\" and \"lord god of heaven and earth,\"--may\nbe regarded as expressing his more well-known attributes. /En-ab-\u0161ar-\nu/, however, is a provisional, though not impossible, reading and\nrendering, and if correct, the \"36,000 wild bulls\" would be a\nmetaphorical way of speaking of \"the 36,000 heroes,\" probably meaning\nthe gods of heaven in all their grades. The signification of /En-\nbilulu/ is unknown. Like most of the other gods of the Babylonian\npantheon, however, Merodach had many other names, among which may be\nmentioned /Asari/, which has been compared with the Egyptian Osiris,\n/Asari-lu-duga/, \"/Asari/ who is good,\" compared with Osiris Unnefer;\n/Namtila/, \"life\", /Tutu/, \"begetter (of the gods), renewer (of the\ngods),\" /\u0160ar-azaga/, \"the glorious incantation,\" /Mu-azaga/, \"the\nglorious charm,\" and many others. The last two refer to his being the\ngod who, by his kindness, obtained from his father \u00caa, dwelling in the\nabyss, those charms and incantations which benefited mankind, and\nrestored the sick to health. In this connection, a frequent title\ngiven to him is \"the merciful one,\" but most merciful was he in that\nhe spared the lives of the gods who, having sided with Taiwath, were\nhis enemies, as is related in the tablet of the fifty-one names. In\nconnection with the fight he bore also the names, \"annihilator of the\nenemy,\" \"rooter out of all evil,\" \"troubler of the evil ones,\" \"life\nof the whole of the gods.\" From these names it is clear that Merodach,\nin defeating Tiawath, annihilated, at the same time, the spirit of\nevil, Satan, the accuser, of which she was, probably, the Babylonian\ntype. But unlike the Saviour in the Christian creed, he saved not only\nman, at that time uncreated, but the gods of heaven also. As \"king of\nthe heavens,\" he was identified with the largest of the planets,\nJupiter, as well as with other heavenly bodies. Traversing the sky in\ngreat zigzags, Jupiter seemed to the Babylonians to superintend the\nstars, and this was regarded as emblematic of Merodach shepherding\nthem--\"pasturing the gods like sheep,\" as the tablet has it.\nA long list of gods gives as it were the court of Merodach, held in\nwhat was apparently a heavenly /\u00ca-sagila/, and among the spiritual\nbeings mentioned are /Min\u00e2-\u00eekul-b\u00eali/ and /Min\u00e2-i\u0161t\u00ee-b\u00eali/, \"what my\nlord has eaten,\" and \"what has my lord drunk,\" /Nadin-m\u00ea-gati/, \"he\nwho gives water for the hands,\" also the two door-keepers, and the\nfour dogs of Merodach, wherein people are inclined to see the four\nsatellites of Jupiter, which, it is thought, were probably visible to\ncertain of the more sharp-sighted stargazers of ancient Babylonia.\nThese dogs were called /Ukkumu/, /Akkulu/, /Ik\u0161suda/, and /Iltebu/,\n\"Seizer,\" \"Eater,\" \"Grasper,\" and \"Holder.\" Images of these beings\nwere probably kept in the temple of \u00ca-sagila at Babylon.\nZer-pan\u00eetum.\nThis was the name of the consort of Merodach, and is generally read\nSarp(b)anitum--a transcription which is against the native orthography\nand etymology, namely, \"seed-creatress\" (Zer-ban\u00eetum). The meaning\nattributed to this word is partly confirmed by another name which\nLehmann has pointed out that she possessed, namely, /Erua/ or /Aru'a/,\nwho, in an inscription of Antiochus Soter (280-260 B.C.) is called\n\"the queen who produces birth,\" but more especially by the\ncircumstance, that she must be identical with Aruru, who created the\nseed of mankind along with Merodach. Why she was called \"the lady of\nthe abyss,\" and elsewhere \"the voice of the abyss\" (/Me-abzu/) is not\nknown. Zer-pan\u00eetum was no mere reflection of Merodach, but one of the\nmost important goddesses in the Babylonian pantheon. The tendency of\nscholars has been to identify her with the moon, Merodach being a\nsolar deity and the meaning \"silvery\"--/Sarpanitum/, from /sarpu/, one\nof the words for \"silver,\" was regarded as supporting this idea. She\nwas identified with the Elamite goddess named Elagu, and with the\nLahamum of the island of Bahrein, the Babylonian Tilmun.\nNebo and Ta\u0161m\u00eatum.\nAs \"the teacher\" and \"the hearer\" these were among the most popular of\nthe deities of Babylonia and Assyria. Nebo (in Semitic Babylonian\nNab\u00fb) was worshipped at the temple-tower known as \u00ca-zida, \"the ever-\nlasting house,\" at Borsippa, now the Birs Nimroud, traditionally\nregarded as the site of the Tower of Babel, though that title, as has\nalready been shown, would best suit the similar structure known as\n\u00ca-sagila, \"the house of the high head,\" in Babylon itself. In\ncomposition with men's names, this deity occurs more than any other,\neven including Merodach himself--a clear indication of the estimation\nin which the Babylonians and Assyrians held the possession of\nknowledge. The character with which his name is written means, with\nthe pronunciation of /ak/, \"to make,\" \"to create,\" \"to receive,\" \"to\nproclaim,\" and with the pronunciation of /me/, \"to be wise,\" \"wisdom,\"\n\"open of ear,\" \"broad of ear,\" and \"to make, of a house,\" the last\nprobably referring to the design rather than to the actual building.\nUnder the name of /Dim-\u0161ara/ he was \"the creator of the writing of the\nscribes,\" as /Ni-zu/, \"the god who knows\" (/zu/, \"to know\"), as\n/Mermer/, \"the speeder(?) of the command of the gods\"--on the Sumerian\nside indicating some connection with Addu or Rimmon, the thunderer,\nand on the Semitic side with \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu, who was one of the gods'\nmessengers. A small fragment in the British Museum gave his attributes\nas god of the various cities of Babylonia, but unfortunately their\nnames are lost or incomplete. From what remains, however, we see that\nNebo was god of ditching(?), commerce(?), granaries(?), fasting(?),\nand food; it was he who overthrew the land of the enemy, and who\nprotected planting; and, lastly, he was god of Borsippa.\nThe worship of Nebo was not always as popular as it became in the\nlater days of the Babylonian empire and after its fall, and Jastrow is\nof opinion that Hammurabi intentionally ignored this deity, giving the\npreference to Merodach, though he did not suppress the worship. Why\nthis should have taken place is not by any means certain, for Nebo was\na deity adored far and wide, as may be gathered from the fact that\nthere was a mountain bearing his name in Moab, upon which Moses--also\nan \"announcer,\" adds Jastrow--died. Besides the mountain, there was a\ncity in Moab so named, and another in Jud\u00e6a. That it was the\nBabylonian Nebo originally is implied by the form--the Hebrew\ncorresponding word is /nabi/.\nHow old the worship of Ta\u0161m\u00eatum, his consort, is, is doubtful, but her\nname first occurs in a date of the reign of Hammurabi. Details\nconcerning her attributes are rare, and Jastrow regards this goddess\nas the result of Babylonian religious speculations. It is noteworthy\nthat her worship appears more especially in later times, but it may be\ndoubted whether it is a product of those late times, especially when\nwe bear in mind the remarkable seal-impression on an early tablet of\n3500-4500 B.C., belonging to Lord Amherst of Hackney, in which we see\na male figure with wide-open mouth seizing a stag by his horns, and a\nfemale figure with no mouth at all, but with very prominent ears,\nholding a bull in a similar manner. Here we have the \"teacher\" and the\n\"hearer\" personified in a very remarkable manner, and it may well be\nthat this primitive picture shows the idea then prevailing with regard\nto these two deities. It is to be noted that the name of Ta\u0161m\u00eatum has\na Sumerian equivalent, namely, /Kurnun/, and that the ideograph by\nwhich it is represented is one whose general meaning seems to be \"to\nbind,\" perhaps with the additional signification of \"to accomplish,\"\nin which case \"she who hears\" would also be \"she who obeys.\"\n\u0160ama\u0161 and his consort.\nAt all times the worship of the sun in Babylonia and Assyria was\nexceedingly popular, as, indeed, was to be expected from his\nimportance as the greatest of the heavenly bodies and the brightest,\nwithout whose help men could not live, and it is an exceedingly\nnoteworthy fact that this deity did not become, like Ra in Egypt, the\nhead of the pantheon. This place was reserved for Merodach, also a\nsun-god, but possessing attributes of a far wider scope. \u0160ama\u0161 is\nmentioned as early as the reign of \u00ca-anna-tum, whose date is set at\nabout 4200 B.C., and at this period his Semitic name does not,\nnaturally, occur, the character used being /Utu/, or, in its longer\nform, /Utuki/.\nIt is worthy of note that, in consequence of the Babylonian idea of\nevolution in the creation of the world, less perfect beings brought\nforth those which were more perfect, and the sun was therefore the\noffspring of Nannara or Sin, the moon. In accordance with the same\nidea, the day, with the Semites, began with the evening, the time when\nthe moon became visible, and thus becomes the offspring of the night.\nIn the inscriptions \u0160ama\u0161 is described as \"the light of things above\nand things below, the illuminator of the regions,\" \"the supreme judge\nof heaven and earth,\" \"the lord of living creatures, the gracious one\nof the lands.\" Dawning in the foundation of the sky, he opened the\nlocks and threw wide the gates of the high heavens, and raised his\nhead, covering heaven and earth with his splendour. He was the\nconstantly righteous in heaven, the truth within the ears of the\nlands, the god knowing justice and injustice, righteousness he\nsupported upon his shoulders, unrighteousness he burst asunder like a\nleather bond, etc. It will thus be seen, that the sun-god was the\ngreat god of judgment and justice--indeed, he is constantly alluded to\nas \"the judge,\" the reason in all probability being, that as the sun\nshines upon the earth all day long, and his light penetrates\neverywhere, he was regarded as the god who knew and investigated\neverything, and was therefore best in a position to judge aright, and\ndeliver a just decision. It is for this reason that his image appears\nat the head of the stele inscribed with Hammurabi's laws, and legal\nceremonies were performed within the precincts of his temples. The\nchief seats of his worship were the great temples called \u00ca-babbara,\n\"the house of great light,\" in the cities of Larsa and Sippar.\nThe consort of \u0160ama\u0161 was Aa, whose chief seat was at Sippar, side by\nside with \u0160ama\u0161. Though only a weak reflex of the sun-god, her worship\nwas exceedingly ancient, being mentioned in an inscription of\nMan-i\u0161tusu, who is regarded as having reigned before Sargon of Agad\u00e9.\nFrom the fact that, in one of the lists, she has names formed by\nreduplicating the name of the sun-god, /Utu/, she would seem once to\nhave been identical with him, in which case it may be supposed that\nshe personified the setting sun--\"the double sun\" from the magnified\ndisc which he presents at sunset, when, according to a hymn to the\nsetting sun sung at the temple at Borsippa, Aa, in the Sumerian line\nKur-nirda, was accustomed to go to receive him. According to the list\nreferred to above, Aa, with the name of Burida in Sumerian, was more\nespecially the consort of \u0160a-zu, \"him who knows the heart,\" one of the\nnames of Merodach, who was probably the morning sun, and therefore the\nexact counterpart of the sun at evening.\nBesides \u0160ama\u0161 and Utu, the latter his ordinary Sumerian name, the sun-\ngod had several other non-Semitic names, including /Gi\u0161nu/,[*] \"the\nlight,\" /Ma-banda-anna/, \"the bark of heaven,\" /U-\u00ea/, \"the rising\nsun,\" /Mitra/, apparently the Persian Mithra; /Ume-\u0161ima\u0161/ and Nahunda,\nElamite names, and Sahi, the Kassite name of the sun. He also\nsometimes bears the names of his attendants Kittu and M\u00ea\u0161aru, \"Truth\"\nand \"Righteousness,\" who guided him upon his path as judge of the\nearth.\n[*] It is the group expressing this word which is used for \u0160ama\u0161 in\nthe name of \u0160ama\u0161-\u0161um-uk\u00een (Saosduchinos), the brother of A\u0161\u0161ur-\nbani-\u00e2pli (Assurbanipal). The Greek equivalent implies the\npronunciation /\u0160awa\u0161/, as well as /\u0160ama\u0161/.\nTammuz and I\u0161tar.\nThe date of the rise of the myth of Tammuz is uncertain, but as the\nname of this god is found on tablets of the time of Lugal-anda and\nUru-ka-gina (about 3500 B.C.), it can hardly be of later date than\n4000 B.C., and may be much earlier. As he is repeatedly called \"the\nshepherd,\" and had a domain where he pastured his flock, Professor\nSayce sees in Tammuz \"Daonus or Daos, the shepherd of Pantibibla,\"\nwho, according to Berosus, ruled in Babylonia for 10 /sari/, or 36,000\nyears, and was the sixth king of the mythical period. According to the\nclassic story, the mother of Tammuz had unnatural intercourse with her\nown father, being urged thereto by Aphrodite whom she had offended,\nand who had decided thus to avenge herself. Being pursued by her\nfather, who wished to kill her for this crime, she prayed to the gods,\nand was turned into a tree, from whose trunk Adonis was afterwards\nborn. Aphrodite was so charmed with the infant that, placing him in a\nchest, she gave him into the care of Persephone, who, however, when\nshe discovered what a treasure she had in her keeping, refused to part\nwith him again. Zeus was appealed to, and decided that for four months\nin the year Adonis should be left to himself, four should be spent\nwith Aphrodite, and four with Persephone, and six with Aphrodite on\nearth. He was afterwards slain, whilst hunting, by a wild boar.\nNothing has come down to us as yet concerning this legend except the\nincident of his dwelling in Hades, whither I\u0161tar, the Babylonian\nVenus, went in search of him. It is not by any means unlikely,\nhowever, that the whole story existed in Babylonia, and thence spread\nto Ph\u0153nicia, and afterwards to Greece. In Ph\u0153nicia it was adapted to\nthe physical conditions of the country, and the place of Tammuz's\nencounter with the boar was said to be the mountains of Lebanon,\nwhilst the river named after him, Adonis (now the Nahr Ibrahim), which\nran red with the earth washed down by the autumn rains, was said to be\nso coloured in consequence of being mingled with his blood. The\ndescent of Tammuz to the underworld, typified by the flowing down of\nthe earth-laden waters of the rivers to the sea, was not only\ncelebrated by the Ph\u0153nicians, but also by the Babylonians, who had at\nleast two series of lamentations which were used on this occasion, and\nwere probably the originals of those chanted by the Hebrew women in\nthe time of Ezekiel (about 597 B.C.). Whilst on earth, he was the one\nwho nourished the ewe and her lamb, the goat and her kid, and also\ncaused them to be slain--probably in sacrifice. \"He has gone, he has\ngone to the bosom of the earth,\" the mourners cried, \"he will make\nplenty to overflow for the land of the dead, for its lamentations for\nthe day of his fall, in the unpropitious month of his year.\" There was\nalso lamentation for the cessation of the growth of vegetation, and\none of these hymns, after addressing him as the shepherd and husband\nof I\u0161tar, \"lord of the underworld,\" and \"lord of the shepherd's seat,\"\ngoes on to liken him to a germ which has not absorbed water in the\nfurrow, whose bud has not blossomed in the meadow; to the sapling\nwhich has not been planted by the watercourse, and to the sapling\nwhose root has been removed. In the \"Lamentations\" in the Manchester\nMuseum, I\u0161tar, or one of her devotees, seems to call for Tammuz,\nsaying, \"Return, my husband,\" as she makes her way to the region of\ngloom in quest of him. Ere\u0161-\u00ea-gala, \"the lady of the great house\"\n(Persephone), is also referred to, and the text seems to imply that\nI\u0161tar entered her domain in spite of her. In this text other names are\ngiven to him, namely, /Tumu-giba/, \"son of the flute,\" /Ama-elaggi/,\nand /\u0160i-umunnagi/, \"life of the people.\"\nThe reference to sheep and goats in the British Museum fragment\nrecalls the fact that in an incantation for purification the person\nusing it is told to get the milk of a yellow goat which has been\nbrought forth in the sheep-fold of Tammuz, recalling the flocks of the\nGreek sun-god Helios. These were the clouds illuminated by the sun,\nwhich were likened to sheep--indeed, one of the early Sumerian\nexpressions for \"fleece\" was \"sheep of the sky.\" The name of Tammuz in\nSumerian is Dumu-zi, or in its rare fullest form, Dumu-zida, meaning\n\"true\" or \"faithful son.\" There is probably some legend attached to\nthis which is at present unknown.\nIn all probability I\u0161tar, the spouse of Tammuz, is best known from her\ndescent into Hades in quest of him when with Persephone (Ere\u0161-ki-gal)\nin the underworld. In this she had to pass through seven gates, and an\narticle of clothing was taken from her at each, until she arrived in\nthe underworld quite naked, typifying the teaching, that man can take\nnothing away with him when he departs this life. During her absence,\nthings naturally began to go wrong upon the earth, and the gods were\nobliged to intervene, and demand her release, which was ultimately\ngranted, and at each gate, as she returned, the adornments which she\nhad left were given back to her. It is uncertain whether the husband\nwhom she sought to release was set free, but the end of the\ninscription seems to imply that I\u0161tar was successful in her mission.\nIn this story she typifies the faithful wife, but other legends show\nanother side of her character, as in that of Gilgame\u0161, ruler of her\ncity Erech, to whom she makes love. Gilgame\u0161, however, knowing the\ncharacter of the divine queen of his city too well, reproaches her\nwith her treatment of her husband and her other lovers--Tammuz, to\nwhom, from year to year, she caused bitter weeping; the bright\ncoloured Allala bird, whom she smote and broke his wings; the lion\nperfect in strength, in whom she cut wounds \"by sevens\"; the horse\nglorious in war, to whom she caused hardship and distress, and to his\nmother Silili bitter weeping; the shepherd who provided for her things\nwhich she liked, whom she smote and changed to a jackal; I\u0161ullanu, her\nfather's gardener, whom she tried, apparently, to poison, but failing,\nshe smote him, and changed him to a statue(?). On being thus reminded\nof her misdeeds, I\u0161tar was naturally angry, and, ascending to heaven,\ncomplained to her father Anu and her mother Anatu, the result being,\nthat a divine bull was sent against Gilgame\u0161 and Enki-du, his friend\nand helper. The bull, however, was killed, and a portion of the animal\nhaving been cut off, Enki-du threw it at the goddess, saying at the\nsame time that, if he could only get hold of her, he would treat her\nsimilarly. Apparently I\u0161tar recognised that there was nothing further\nto be done in the matter, so, gathering the hand-maidens, pleasure-\nwomen and whores, in their presence she wept over the portion of the\ndivine bull which had been thrown at her.\nThe worship of I\u0161tar, she being the goddess of love and war, was\nconsiderably more popular than that of her spouse, Tammuz, who, as\namong the western Semitic nations, was adored rather by the women than\nthe men. Her worship was in all probability of equal antiquity, and\nbranched out, so to say, in several directions, as may be judged by\nher many names, each of which had a tendency to become a distinct\npersonality. Thus the syllabaries give the character which represents\nher name as having also been pronounced /Innanna/, /Ennen/, and /Nin/,\nwhilst a not uncommon name in other inscriptions is /Ama-Innanna/,\n\"mother I\u0161tar.\" The principal seat of her worship in Babylonia was at\nErech, and in Assyria at Nineveh--also at Arbela, and many other\nplaces. She was also honoured (at Erech and elsewhere) under the\nElamite names of Ti\u0161pak and \u0160u\u0161inak, \"the Susian goddess.\"\nNina.\nFrom the name /Nin/, which I\u0161tar bore, there is hardly any doubt that\nshe acquired the identification with Nina, which is provable as early\nas the time of the Laga\u0161ite kings, Lugal-anda and Uru-ka-gina. As\nidentified with Aruru, the goddess who helped Merodach to create\nmankind, I\u0161tar was also regarded as the mother of all, and in the\nBabylonian story of the Flood, she is made to say that she had\nbegotten man, but like \"the sons of the fishes,\" he filled the sea.\nNina, then, as another form of I\u0161tar, was a goddess of creation,\ntypified in the teeming life of the ocean, and her name is written\nwith a character standing for a house or receptacle, with the sign for\n\"fish\" within. Her earliest seat was the city of Nina in southern\nBabylonia, from which place, in all probability, colonists went\nnorthwards, and founded another shrine at Nineveh in Assyria, which\nafterwards became the great centre of her worship, and on this account\nthe city was called after her Ninaa or Ninua. As their tutelary\ngoddess, the fishermen in the neighbourhood of the Babylonian Nina and\nLaga\u0161 were accustomed to make to her, as well as to Innanna or I\u0161tar,\nlarge offerings of fish.\nAs the masculine deities had feminine forms, so it is not by any means\nimprobable that the goddesses had masculine forms, and if that be the\ncase, we may suppose that it was a masculine counterpart of Nina who\nfounded Nineveh, which, as is well known, is attributed to Ninos, the\nsame name as Nina with the Greek masculine termination.\nNin-Gursu.\nThis deity is principally of importance in connection with the ancient\nBabylonian state of Laga\u0161, the home of an old and important line of\nkings and viceroys, among the latter being the celebrated Gudea, whose\nstatues and inscribed cylinders now adorn the Babylonian galleries of\nthe Louvre at Paris. His name means \"Lord of Girsu,\" which was\nprobably one of the suburbs, and the oldest part, of Laga\u0161. This deity\nwas son of En-lila or B\u00eal, and was identified with Nirig or \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu.\nTo all appearance he was a sun-deity. The dialectic form of his name\nwas /U-Mersi/, of which a variant, /En-Mersi/, occurs in an\nincantation published in the fourth volume of the /Cuneiform\nInscriptions of Western Asia/, pl. 27, where, for the Sumerian \"Take a\nwhite kid of En-Mersi,\" the Semitic translation is \"of Tammuz,\"\nshowing that he was identified with the latter god. In the second\nvolume of the same work Nin-Girsu is given as the pronunciation of the\nname of the god of agriculturalists, confirming this identification,\nTammuz being also god of agriculture.\nBau.\nThis goddess at all times played a prominent part in ancient\nBabylonian religion, especially with the rulers before the dynasty of\nHammurabi. She was the \"mother\" of Laga\u0161, and her temple was at\nUru-azaga, a district of Laga\u0161, the chief city of Nin-Girsu, whose\nspouse she was. Like Nin-Girsu, she planted (not only grain and\nvegetation, but also the seed of men). In her character of the goddess\nwho gave life to men, and healed their bodies in sickness, she was\nidentified with Gula, one of those titles is \"the lady saving from\ndeath\". Ga-tum-duga, whose name probably means \"making and producing\ngood,\" was also exceedingly popular in ancient times, and though\nidentified with Bau, is regarded by Jastrow has having been originally\ndistinct from her.\nEre\u0161-ki-gal or Allatu.\nAs the prototype of Persephone, this goddess is one of much importance\nfor comparative mythology, and there is a legend concerning her of\nconsiderable interest. The text is one of those found at Tel-el-\nArmana, in Egypt, and states that the gods once made a feast, and sent\nto Ere\u0161-ki-gal, saying that, though they could go down to her, she\ncould not ascend to them, and asking her to send a messenger to fetch\naway the food destined for her. This she did, and all the gods stood\nup to receive her messenger, except one, who seems to have withheld\nthis token of respect. The messenger, when he returned, apparently\nrelated to Ere\u0161-ki-gal what had happened, and angered thereat, she\nsent him back to the presence of the gods, asking for the delinquent\nto be delivered to her, that she might kill him. The gods then\ndiscussed the question of death with the messenger, and told him to\ntake to his mistress the god who had not stood up in his presence.\nWhen the gods were brought together, that the culprit might be\nrecognised, one of them remained in the background, and on the\nmessenger asking who it was who did not stand up, it was found to be\nNerigal. This god was duly sent, but was not at all inclined to be\nsubmissive, for instead of killing him, as she had threatened, Ere\u0161-\nki-gal found herself seized by the hair and dragged from her throne,\nwhilst the death-dealing god made ready to cut off her head. \"Do not\nkill me, my brother, let me speak to thee,\" she cried, and on his\nloosing his hold upon her hair, she continued, \"thou shalt be my\nhusband, and I will be thy wife--I will cause you to take dominion in\nthe wide earth. I will place the tablet of wisdom in thine hand--thou\nshalt be lord, I will be lady.\" Nerigal thereupon took her, kissed\nher, and wiped away her tears, saying, \"Whatever thou hast asked me\nfor months past now receives assent.\"\nEre\u0161-ki-gal did not treat her rival in the affections of Tammuz so\ngently when I\u0161tar descended to Hades in search of the \"husband of her\nyouth.\" According to the story, not only was I\u0161tar deprived of her\ngarments and ornaments, but by the orders of Ere\u0161-ki-gal, Namtar smote\nher with disease in all her members. It was not until the gods\nintervened that I\u0161tar was set free. The meaning of her name is \"lady\nof the great region,\" a description which is supposed to apply to\nHades, and of which a variant, Ere\u0161-ki-gal, \"lady of the great house,\"\noccurs in the Hymns to Tammuz in the Manchester Museum.\nNergal.\nThis name is supposed to mean \"lord of the great habitation,\" which\nwould be a parallel to that of his spouse Ere\u0161-ki-gal. He was the\nruler of Hades, and at the same time god of war and of disease and\npestilence. As warrior, he naturally fought on the side of those who\nworshipped him, as in the phrase which describes him as \"the warrior,\nthe fierce storm-flood overthrowing the land of the enemy.\" As pointed\nout by Jastrow, he differs from Nirig, who was also a god of war, in\nthat he symbolises, as god of disease and death, the misery and\ndestruction which accompany the strife of nations. It is in\nconsequence of this side of his character that he appears also as god\nof fire, the destroying element, and Jensen says that Nerigal was god\nof the midday or of the summer sun, and therefore of all the\nmisfortunes caused by an excess of his heat.\nThe chief centre of his worship was Cuthah (/Kut\u00fb/, Sumerian /Gudua/)\nnear Babylon, now represented by the mounds of Tel Ibrahim. The\nidentity with the Greek Aries and the Roman Mars is proved by the fact\nthat his planet was /Mu\u0161tabarr\u00fb-m\u00fbtanu/, \"the death-spreader,\" which\nis probably the name of Mars in Semitic Babylonian.\nAmurru.\nAlthough this is not by any means a frequent name among the deities\nworshipped in Babylonia, it is worthy of notice on account of its\nbearing upon the date of the compilation of the tablet which has been\ntaken as a basis of this list of gods. He was known as \"Lord of the\nmountains,\" and his worship became very popular during the period of\nthe dynasty to which Hammurabi belonged--say from 2200 to 1937 B.C.,\nwhen Amurru was much combined with the names of men, and is found both\non tablets and cylinder-seals. The ideographic manner of writing it is\n/Mar-tu/, a word that is used for /Amurru/, the land of the Amorites,\nwhich stood for the West in general. Amorites had entered Babylonia in\nconsiderable numbers during this period, so that there is but little\ndoubt that his popularity was largely due to their influence, and the\ntablet containing these names was probably drawn up, or at least had\nthe Semitic equivalents added, towards the beginning of that period.\nSin or Nannara.\nThe cult of the moon-god was one of the most popular in Babylonia, the\nchief seat of his worship being at Uru (now Muqayyar) the Biblical Ur\nof the Chaldees. The origin of the name Sin is unknown, but it is\nthought that it may be a corruption of Zu-ena, \"knowledge-lord,\" as\nthe compound ideograph expressing his name may be read and translated.\nBesides this compound ideograph, the name of the god Sin was also\nexpressed by the character for \"30,\" provided with the prefix of\ndivinity, an ideograph which is due to the thirty days of the month,\nand is thought to be of late date. With regard to Nannar, Jastrow\nexplains it as being for Narnar, and renders it \"light-producer.\" In a\nlong hymn to this god he is described in many lines as \"the lord,\nprince of the gods, who in heaven alone is supreme,\" and as \"father\nNannar.\" Among his other descriptive titles are \"great Anu\" (Sum. /ana\ngale/, Semitic Bab. /Anu rab\u00fb/)--another instance of the\nidentification of two deities. He was also \"lord of Ur,\" \"lord of the\ntemple Gi\u0161nu-gala,\" \"lord of the shining crown,\" etc. He is also said\nto be \"the mighty steer whose horns are strong, whose limbs are\nperfect, who is bearded with a beard of lapis-stone,[*] who is filled\nwith beauty and fullness (of splendour).\"\n[*] Probably of the colour of lapis only, not made of the stone\nitself.\nBesides Babylonia and Assyria, he was also worshipped in other parts\nof the Semitic east, especially at Harran, to which city Abraham\nmigrated, scholars say, in consequence of the patron-deity being the\nsame as at Ur of the Chaldees, where he had passed the earlier years\nof his life. The Mountain of Sinai and the Desert of Sin, both bear\nhis name.\nAccording to king Dungi (about 2700 B.C.), the spouse of Sin or\nNannara was Nin-Uruwa, \"the lady of Ur.\" Sargon of Assyria (722-705\nB.C.) calls her Nin-gala.\nAddu or Rammanu.\nThe numerous names which Hadad bears in the inscriptions, both non-\nSemitic and Semitic, testify to the popularity which this god enjoyed\nat all times in Babylonia. Among his non-Semitic names may be\nmentioned Mer, Mermer, Muru, all, it may be imagined, imitative. Addu\nis explained as being his name in the Amorite language, and a variant\nform, apparently, which has lost its first syllable, namely, Dadu,\nalso appears--the Assyrians seem always to have used the\nterminationless form of Addu, namely, Adad. In all probability Addu,\nAdad, and Dadu are derived from the West Semitic Hadad, but the other\nname, Rammanu, is native Babylonian, and cognate with Rimmon, which is\nthus shown by the Babylonian form to mean \"the thunderer,\" or\nsomething similar. He was the god of winds, storms, and rain, feared\non account of the former, and worshipped, and his favour sought, on\naccount of the last. In his name Birqu, he appears as the god of\nlightning, and Jastrow is of opinion, that he is sometimes associated\non that account with \u0160ama\u0161, both of them being (although in different\ndegrees) gods of light, and this is confirmed by the fact that, in\ncommon with the sun-god, he was called \"god of justice.\" In the\nAssyrian inscriptions he appears as a god of war, and the kings\nconstantly compare the destruction which their armies had wrought with\nthat of \"Adad the inundator.\" For them he was \"the mighty one,\ninundating the regions of the enemy, lands and houses,\" and was prayed\nto strike the land of the person who showed hostility to the Assyrian\nking, with evil-working lightning, to throw want, famine, drought, and\ncorpses therein, to order that he should not live one day longer, and\nto destroy his name and his seed in the land.\nThe original seat of his worship was Muru in South Babylonia, to which\nthe patesi of Girsu in the time of Ibi-Sin sent grain as an offering.\nIts site is unknown. Other places (or are they other names of the\nsame?) where he was worshipped were Ennigi and Kakru. The consort of\nAddu was \u0160ala, whose worship was likewise very popular, and to whom\nthere were temples, not only in Babylonia and Assyria, but also in\nElam, seemingly always in connection with Addu.\nA\u0161\u0161ur.\nIn all the deities treated of above, we see the chief gods of the\nBabylonian and Assyrian pantheon, which were worshipped by both\npeoples extensively, none of them being specifically Assyrian, though\nworshipped by the Assyrians. There was one deity, however, whose name\nwill not be found in the Babylonian lists of gods, namely, A\u0161\u0161ur, the\nnational god of Assyria, who was worshipped in the city of A\u0161\u0161ur, the\nold capital of the country.\nFrom this circumstance, it may be regarded as certain, that A\u0161\u0161ur was\nthe local god of the city whose name he bore, and that he attained to\nthe position of chief god of the Assyrian pantheon in the same way as\nMerodach became king of the gods in Babylonia--namely, because A\u0161\u0161ur\nwas the capital of the country. His acceptance as chief divinity,\nhowever, was much more general than that of Merodach, as temples to\nhim were to be found all over the Assyrian kingdom--a circumstance\nwhich was probably due to Assyria being more closely united in itself\nthan Babylonia, causing his name to arouse patriotic feelings wherever\nit might be referred to. This was probably partly due to the fact,\nthat the king in Assyria was more the representative of the god than\nin Babylonia, and that the god followed him on warlike expeditions,\nand when engaged in religious ceremonies--indeed, it is not by any\nmeans improbable that he was thought to follow him wherever he went.\nOn the sculptures he is seen accompanying him in the form of a circle\nprovided with wings, in which is shown sometimes a full-length figure\nof the god in human form, sometimes the upper part only, facing\ntowards and drawing his bow against the foe. In consequence of its\ngeneral appearance, the image of the god has been likened to the sun\nin eclipse, the far-stretching wings being thought to resemble the\nlong streamers visible at the moment of totality, and it must be\nadmitted as probable that this may have given the idea of the symbol\nshown on the sculptures. As a sun-god, and at the same time not the\ngod \u0160ama\u0161, he resembled the Babylonian Merodach, and was possibly\nidentified with him, especially as, in at least one text, B\u00ealtu\n(B\u00ealtis) is described as his consort, which would possibly identify\nA\u0161\u0161ur's spouse with Zer-pan\u00eetum. The original form of his name would\nseem to have been Au\u0161ar, \"water-field,\" probably from the tract where\nthe city of A\u0161\u0161ur was built. His identification with Merodach, if that\nwas ever accepted, may have been due to the likeness of the word to\nAsari, one of that deity's names. The pronunciation A\u0161\u0161ur, however,\nseems to have led to a comparison with the An\u0161ar of the first tablet\nof the Creation-story, though it may seem strange that the Assyrians\nshould have thought that their patron-god was a deity symbolising the\n\"host of heaven.\" Nevertheless, the Greek transcription of An\u0161ar,\nnamely, /Assoros/, given by Damascius, certainly strengthens the\nindications of the ideograph in this matter. Delitzsch regards the\nword A\u0161\u0161ur, or A\u0161ur, as he reads it, as meaning \"holy,\" and quotes a\nlist of the gods of the city of Nineveh, where the word A\u0161\u0161ur occurs\nthree times, suggesting the exclamation \"holy, holy, holy,\" or \"the\nholy, holy, holy one.\" In all probability, however, the repetition of\nthe name three times simply means that there were three temples\ndedicated to A\u0161\u0161ur in the cities in question.[*] Jastrow agrees with\nDelitzsch in regarding A\u0161ur as another form of A\u0161ir (found in early\nCappadocian names), but he translates it rather as \"overseer\" or\n\"guardian\" of the land and the people--the terminationless form of\n/a\u0161iru/, which has this meaning, and is applied to Merodach.\n[*] Or there may have been three shrines to A\u0161\u0161ur in each temple\nreferred to.\nAs the use of the characters /An-\u0161ar/ for the god A\u0161\u0161ur only appears\nat a late date (Jastrow says the eighth century B.C.), this would seem\nto have been the work of the scribes, who wished to read into the name\nthe earlier signification of An\u0161ar, \"the host of heaven,\" an\nexplanation fully in accord with Jastrow's reasonings with regard to\nthe nature of the deity. As he represented no personification or power\nof nature, he says, but the general protecting spirit of the land, the\nking, the army, and the people, the capital of the country could be\ntransferred from A\u0161\u0161ur to Calah, from there back to A\u0161\u0161ur, and finally\nto Nineveh, without affecting the position of the protecting god of\nthe land in any way. He needed no temple--though such things were\nerected to him--he had no need to fear that he should suffer in esteem\nby the preference for some other god. As the embodiment of the spirit\nof the Assyrian people the personal side of his being remained to a\ncertain extent in the background. If he was the \"host of heaven,\" all\nthe deities might be regarded as having their being in him.\nSuch was the chief deity of the Assyrians--a national god, grafted on\nto, but always distinct from, the rest of the pantheon, which, as has\nbeen shown, was of Babylonian origin, and always maintained the\ncharacteristics and stamp of its origin.\nThe spouse of A\u0161\u0161ur does not appear in the historical texts, and her\nmention elsewhere under the title of B\u00ealtu, \"the lady,\" does not allow\nof any identification being made. In one inscription, however,\nA\u0161\u0161uritu is called the goddess, and A\u0161\u0161ur the god, of the star Sib-zi-\nanna, identified by Jensen with Regulus, which was apparently the star\nof Merodach in Babylonia. This, however, brings us no nearer, for\nA\u0161\u0161uritu would simply mean \"the Assurite (goddess).\"\nThe minor divinities.\nAmong the hundreds of names which the lists furnish, a few are worthy\nof mention, either because of more than ordinary interest, or in\nconsequence of their furnishing the name of some deity, chief in its\nlocality, but identified elsewhere with one of the greater gods.\nAa.--This may be regarded either as the god \u00caa (though the name is\nwritten differently), or as the sun-god assuming the name of his\nconsort; or (what is, perhaps, more probable) as a way of writing A'u\nor Ya'u (the Hebrew Jah), without the ending of the nominative. This\nlast is also found under the form /Aa'u/, /ya'u/, /yau/, and /ya/.\nAbil-addu.--This deity seems to have attained a certain popularity in\nlater times, especially among immigrants from the West. As \"the son of\nHadad,\" he was the equivalent of the Syrian Ben-Hadad. A tablet in New\nYork shows that his name was weakened in form to /Ablada/.\nAku, the moon-god among the heavenly bodies. It is this name which is\nregarded as occurring in the name of the Babylonian king Eri-Aku,\n\"servant of the moon-god,\" the biblical Arioch (Gen. xiv.).\nAmma-an-ki, \u00caa or Aa as lord of heaven and earth.\nAmna.--A name only found in a syllabary, and assigned to the sun-god,\nfrom which it would seem that it is a form of the Egyptian Ammon.\nAnunitum, the goddess of one of the two Sippars, called Sippar of\nAnunitum, who was worshipped in the temple \u00ca-ulma\u0161 within the city of\nAgad\u00e9 (Akkad). Sayce identifies, on this account, these two places as\nbeing the same. In a list of stars, Anunitum is coupled with\n\u0160inunutum, which are explained as (the stars of) the Tigris and\nEuphrates. These were probably names of Venus as the morning and\nevening (or evening and morning) star.\nApsu.--The deep dissociated from the evil connection with Tiawath, and\nregarded as \"the house of deep wisdom,\" i.e. the home of the god \u00caa or\nAa.\nAruru.--One of the deities of Sippar and Aruru (in the time of the\ndynasty of Hammurabi called Ya'ruru), of which she was the chief\ngoddess. Aruru was one of the names of the \"lady of the gods,\" and\naided Merodach to make the seed of mankind.\nB\u00eal.--As this name means \"lord,\" it could be applied, like the\nPh\u0153nician Baal, to the chief god of any city, as B\u00eal of Niffur, B\u00eal of\nHursag-kalama, B\u00eal of Aratta, B\u00eal of Babylon, etc. This often\nindicates also the star which represented the chief god of a place.\nB\u00ealtu.--In the same way B\u00ealtu, meaning \"lady,\" meant also the chief\ngoddess of any place, as \"Aruru, lady of the gods of Sippar of Aruru,\"\n\"Nin-mah, lady of the gods of \u00ca-mah,\" a celebrated temple within\nBabylon, recently excavated by the Germans, \"Nin-hur-saga, lady of the\ngods of K\u00ea\u0161,\" etc.\nBunene.--A god associated with \u0160ama\u0161 and I\u0161tar at Sippar and\nelsewhere. He \"gave\" and \"renewed\" to his worshippers.\nDagan.--This deity, whose worship extends back to an exceedingly early\ndate, is generally identified with the Ph\u0153nician Dagon. Hammurabi\nseems to speak of the Euphrates as being \"the boundary of Dagan,\" whom\nhe calls his creator. In later inscriptions the form Daguna, which\napproaches nearer to the West Semitic form, is found in a few personal\nnames. The Ph\u0153nician statues of this deity showed him with the lower\npart of his body in the form of a fish (see 1 Sam. v. 4). Whether the\ndeities clothed in a fish's skin in the Nimroud gallery be Dagon or\nnot is uncertain--they may be intended for \u00caa or Aa, the Oannes of\nBerosus, who was represented in this way. Probably the two deities\nwere regarded as identical.\nDamu.--a goddess regarded as equivalent to Gula by the Babylonians and\nAssyrians. She was goddess of healing, and made one's dreams happy.\nDumu-zi-abzu, \"Tammuz of the Abyss.\"--This was one of the six sons of\n\u00caa or Aa, according to the lists. His worship is exceedingly ancient,\nand goes back to the time of E-anna-tum of Laga\u0161 (about 4000 B.C.).\nWhat connection, if any, he may have with Tammuz, the spouse of I\u0161tar,\nis unknown. Jastrow apparently regards him as a distinct deity, and\ntranslates his name \"the child of the life of the water-deep.\"\nElali.--A deity identified with the Hebrew Helal, the new moon. Only\nfound in names of the time of the Hammurabi dynasty, in one of which\nhe appears as \"a creator.\"\nEn-nugi is described as \"lord of streams and canals,\" and \"lord of the\nearth, lord of no-return.\" This last description, which gives the\nmeaning of his name, suggests that he was one of the gods of the realm\nof Ere\u0161-ki-gal, though he may have borne that name simply as god of\nstreams, which always flow down, never the reverse.\nGibil.--One of the names of the god of fire, sometimes transcribed\nGirru by Assyriologists, the meaning apparently being \"the fire-\nbearer\" or \"light-bearer.\" Girru is another name of this deity, and\ntranslates an ideographic group, rendered by Delitzsch \"great\" or\n\"highest decider,\" suggesting the custom of trial by ordeal. He was\nidentified with Nirig, in Semitic \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu.\nGu\u0161qi-banda or Kuski-banda, one of the names of \u00caa, probably as god of\ngold-workers.\nI\u0161um, \"the glorious sacrificer,\" seemingly a name of the fire-god as a\nmeans whereby burnt offerings were made. N\u00fbr-I\u0161um, \"light of I\u0161um,\" is\nfound as a man's name.\nK\u00e2awanu, the planet Saturn.\nLagamal.--A god identified with the Elamite Lagamar, whose name is\nregarded as existing in Chedorlaomer (cf. Gen. xiv. 2). He was the\nchief god of Mair, \"the ship-city.\"\nLugal-Amarada or Lugal-Marad.--This name means \"king of Marad,\" a city\nas yet unidentified. The king of this place seems to have been\nNerigal, of whom, therefore, Lugal-Marad is another name.\nLugal-banda.--This name means \"the powerful king,\" or something\nsimilar, and the god bearing it is supposed to be the same as Nerigal.\nHis consort, however, was named Nin-sun (or Nin-gul).\nLugal-Du-azaga, \"the king of the glorious seat.\"--The founder of\n\u00caridu, \"the good city within the Abyss,\" probably the paradise (or a\nparadise) of the world to come. As it was the aim of every good\nBabylonian to dwell hereafter with the god whom he had worshipped upon\nearth, it may be conjectured that this was the paradise in the domain\nof \u00caa or Aa.\nMama, Mami.--Names of \"the lady of the gods,\" and creatress of the\nseed of mankind, Aruru. Probably so called as the \"mother\" of all\nthings. Another name of this goddess is Ama, \"mother.\"\nMammitum, Mamitum, goddess of fate.\nMur, one of the names of Addu or Rammanu (Hadad or Rimmon).\nNan\u00e2 or Nanaa was the consort of Nebo at Borsippa, but appears as a\nform of I\u0161tar, worshipped, with Anu her father, at Erech.\nNin-aha-kuku, a name of \u00caa or Aa and of his daughter as deity of the\nrivers, and therefore of gardens and plantations, which were watered\nby means of the small canals leading therefrom. As daughter of \u00caa,\nthis deity was also \"lady of the incantation.\"\nNin-azu, the consort of Ere\u0161-ki-gal, probably as \"lord physician.\" He\nis probably to be identified with Nerigal.\nNin-igi-nagar-si, a name somewhat more doubtful as to its reading than\nthe others, designates \u00caa or Aa as \"the god of the carpenter.\" He\nseems to have borne this as \"the great constructor of heaven\" or \"of\nAnu.\"\nNin-mah, chief goddess of the temple \u00ca-mah in Babylon. Probably to be\nidentified with Aruru, and therefore with Zer-pan\u00eetum.\nNin-\u0161ah, a deity whose name is conjectured to mean \"lord of the wild\nboar.\" He seems to have been a god of war, and was identified with\nNirig or \u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu and Pap-sukal.\nNin-sirsir, \u00caa as the god of sailors.\nNin-sun, as pointed out by Jastrow, was probably the same as I\u0161tar or\nNan\u00e2 of Erech, where she had a shrine, with them, in \u00ca-anna, \"the\nhouse of Anu.\" He renders her name \"the annihilating lady,\"[*]\n\"appropriate for the consort of a sun-god,\" for such he regards Lugal-\nbanda her spouse. King Sin-gasid of Erech (about 3000 B.C.) refers to\nher as his mother.\n[*] This is due to the second element of the name having, with another\npronunciation, the meaning of \"to destroy.\"\nNun-urra.--\u00caa, as the god of potters.\nPap-sukal.--A name of Nin-\u0161ah as the \"divine messenger,\" who is also\ndescribed as god \"of decisions.\" Nin-\u0161ah would seem to have been one\nof the names of Pap-sukal rather than the reverse.\nQarradu, \"strong,\" \"mighty,\" \"brave.\"--This word, which was formerly\ntranslated \"warrior,\" is applied to several deities, among them being\nB\u00eal, Nergal, Nirig (\u00canu-r\u00ea\u0161tu), and \u0160ama\u0161, the sun-god.\nRagimu and Ramimu, names of Rimmon or Hadad as \"the thunderer.\" The\nsecond comes from the same root as Rammanu (Rimmon).\n\u0160uqamunu.--A deity regarded as \"lord of watercourses,\" probably the\nartificial channels dug for the irrigation of fields.\nUra-gala, a name of Nerigal.\nUra\u0161, a name of Nirig, under which he was worshipped at Dailem, near\nBabylon.\nZagaga, dialectic Zamama.--This deity, who was a god of war, was\nidentified with Nirig. One of this titles was /b\u00eal parakki/, \"lord of\nthe royal chamber,\" or \"throne-room.\"\nZaraqu or Zariqu.--As the root of this name means \"to sprinkle,\" he\nwas probably also a god of irrigation, and may have presided over\nceremonial purification. He is mentioned in names as the \"giver of\nseed\" and \"giver of a name\" (i.e. offspring).\nThese are only a small proportion of the names found in the\ninscriptions, but short as the list necessarily is, the nature, if not\nthe full composition, of the Babylonian pantheon will easily be\nestimated therefrom.\nIt will be seen that besides the identifications of the deities of all\nthe local pantheons with each other, each divinity had almost as many\nnames as attributes and titles, hence their exceeding multiplicity. In\nsuch an extensive pantheon, many of the gods composing it necessarily\noverlap, and identification of each other, to which the faith, in its\nprimitive form, was a stranger, were inevitable. The tendency to\nmonotheism which this caused will be referred to later on.\nThe gods and the heavenly bodies.\nIt has already been pointed out that, from the evidence of the\nBabylonian syllabary, the deities of the Babylonians were not astral\nin their origin, the only gods certainly originating in heavenly\nbodies being the sun and the moon. This leads to the supposition that\nthe Babylonians, bearing these two deities in mind, may have asked\nthemselves why, if these two were represented by heavenly bodies, the\nothers should not be so represented also. Be this as it may, the other\ndeities of the pantheon were so represented, and the full planetary\nscheme, as given by a bilingual list in the British Museum, was as\nfollows:\nAku Sin the moon Sin\nBi\u0161ebi \u0160ama\u0161 the sun \u0160ama\u0161\nDapinu Umun-sig-\u00eaa Jupiter Merodach\nZib[*] Dele-bat Venus I\u0161tar\nLu-lim Lu-bat-sag-u\u0161 Saturn Nirig (acc. to Jensen)\nBibbu Lubat-gud Mercury Nebo\nSimutu Mu\u0161tabarru Mars Nergal\nm\u00fbtanu\nAll the above names of planets have the prefix of divinity, but in\nother inscriptions the determinative prefix is that for \"star,\"\n/kakkabu/.\n[*] This is apparently a Sumerian dialectic form, the original word\nhaving seemingly been Zig.\nMoon and Sun.\nUnfortunately, all the above identifications of the planets with the\ndeities in the fourth column are not certain, namely, those\ncorresponding with Saturn, Mercury, and Mars. With regard to the\nothers, however, there is no doubt whatever. The reason why the moon\nis placed before the sun is that the sun, as already explained, was\nregarded as his son. It was noteworthy also that the moon was\naccredited with two other offspring, namely, M\u00e2\u0161u and M\u00e2\u0161tu--son and\ndaughter respectively. As /m\u00e2\u0161u/ means \"twin,\" these names must\nsymbolise the two halves, or, as we say, \"quarters\" of the moon, who\nwere thus regarded, in Babylonian mythology, as his \"twin children.\"\nJupiter and Saturn.\nConcerning Jupiter, who is in the above called Dapinu (Semitic), and\nUmun-sig-\u00eaa (Sumerian), it has already been noted that he was called\nNibiru--according to Jensen, Merodach as he who went about among the\nstars \"pasturing\" them like sheep, as stated in the Babylonian story\nof the Creation (or Bel and the Dragon). This is explained by him as\nbeing due to the comparatively rapid and extensive path of Jupiter on\nthe ecliptic, and it would seem probable that the names of Saturn,\n/K\u00e2awanu/ and /Sag-u\u0161/ (the former, which is Semitic Babylonian,\nmeaning \"steadfast,\" or something similar, and the latter, in\nSumerian, \"head-firm\" or \"steadfast\"--\"phlegmatic\"), to all appearance\nindicate in like manner the deliberation of his movements compared\nwith those of the planet dedicated to the king of the gods.\nVenus at sunrise and sunset.\nA fragment of a tablet published in 1870 gives some interesting\nparticulars concerning the planet Venus, probably explaining some as\nyet unknown mythological story concerning her. According to this, she\nwas a female at sunset, and a male at sunrise; I\u0161tar of Agad\u00e9 (Akad or\nAkkad) at sunrise, and I\u0161tar of Erech at sunset: I\u0161tar of the stars at\nsunrise, and the lady of the gods at sunset.\nAnd in the various months.\nI\u0161tar was identified with Nin-si-anna in the first month of the year\n(Nisan = March-April), with the star of the bow in Ab (August-\nSeptember), etc. In Sebat (January-February) she was the star of the\nwater-channel, Ik\u00fb, which was Merodach's star in Sivan (May-June), and\nin Marcheswan her star was Rabbu, which also belonged to Merodach in\nthe same month. It will thus be seen, that Babylonian astronomy is far\nfrom being as clear as would be desired, but doubtless many\ndifficulties will disappear when further inscriptions are available.\nStars identified with Merodach.\nThe same fragment gives the celestial names of Merodach for every\nmonth of the year, from which it would appear, that the astrologers\ncalled him Umun-sig-\u00eaa in Nisan (March-April), Dapinu in Tammuz (June-\nJuly), Nibiru in Tisri (September-October), \u0160arru (the star Regulus),\nin Tebet (December-January), etc. The first three are names by which\nthe planet Jupiter was known.\nAs for the planets and stars, so also for the constellations, which\nare identified with many gods and divine beings, and probably contain\nreferences, in their names and descriptions, to many legends. In the\nsixth tablet of the Creation-series, it is related of Merodach that,\nafter creating the heavens and the stations for Anu, B\u00eal, and Ae,\n\"He built firmly the stations of the great gods--\nStars their likeness--he set up the /Lumali/,\nHe designated the year, he outlined the (heavenly) forms.\nHe set for the twelve months three stars each,\nFrom the day when the year begins, . . . for signs.\"\nAs pointed out by Mr. Robert Brown, jr., who has made a study of these\nthings, the \"three stars\" for each month occur on one of the remains\nof planispheres in the British Museum, and are completed by a tablet\nwhich gives them in list-form, in one case with explanations. Until\nthese are properly identified, however, it will be impossible to\nestimate their real value. The signs of the Zodiac, which are given by\nanother tablet, are of greater interest, as they are the originals of\nthose which are in use at the present time:--\nMonth Sign Equivalent\nNisan (Mar.-Apr.) The Labourer The Ram\nIyyar (Apr.-May) /Mulmula/ and the Bull of heaven The Bull\nSivan (May-June) /Sib-zi-anna/ and the great Twins The Twins\nTammuz (June-July) /Allul/ or /Nagar/ The Crab\nAb (July.-Aug.) The Lion (or dog) The Lion\nElul (Aug.-Sep.) The Ear of corn(?) The ear of Corn (Virgo)\nTisri (Sep.-Oct.) The Scales The Scales\nMarcheswan (Oct.-Nov.) The Scorpion The Scorpion\nChisleu (Nov.-Dec.) /Pa-bil-sag/ The Archer\nTebet (Dec.-Jan.) /Sahar-ma\u0161/, the Fish-kid The Goat\nSebat (Jan.-Feb.) /Gula/ The Water-bearer\nAdar (Feb.-Mar.) The Water Channel and the Tails The Fishes\nParallels in Babylonian legends.\nThe \"bull of heaven\" probably refers to some legend such as that of\nthe story of Gilgame\u0161 in his conflict with the goddess I\u0161tar when the\ndivine bull was killed; /Sib-zi-anna/, \"the faithful shepherd of\nheaven,\" suggests that this constellation may refer to Tammuz, the\ndivine shepherd; whilst \"the scorpion\" reminds us of the scorpion-men\nwho guarded the gate of the sun (\u0160ama\u0161), when Gilgame\u0161 was journeying\nto gain information concerning his friend Enki-du, who had departed to\nthe place of the dead. Sir Henry Rawlinson many years ago pointed out\nthat the story of the Flood occupied the eleventh tablet of the\nGilgame\u0161 series, corresponding with the eleventh sign of the Zodiac,\nAquarius, or the Water-bearer.\nOther star-names.\nOther names of stars or constellations include \"the weapon of\nMerodach's hand,\" probably that with which he slew the dragon of\nChaos; \"the Horse,\" which is described as \"the god Z\u00fb,\" Rimmon's\nstorm-bird--Pegasus; \"the Serpent,\" explained as Ere\u0161-ki-gal, the\nqueen of Hades, who would therefore seem to have been conceived in\nthat form; \"the Scorpion,\" which is given as /I\u0161hara t\u00e2ntim/, \"I\u0161hara\nof the sea,\" a description difficult to explain, unless it refer to\nher as the goddess of the Ph\u0153nician coast. Many other identifications,\nexceedingly interesting, await solution.\nHow the gods were represented. On cylinder-seals.\nMany representations of the gods occur, both on bas-reliefs, boundary-\nstones, and cylindrical and ordinary seals. Unfortunately, their\nidentification generally presents more or less difficulty, on account\nof the absence of indications of their identity. On a small cylinder-\nseal in the possession of the Rev. Dr. W. Hayes Ward, Merodach is\nshown striding along the serpentine body of Tiawath, who turns her\nhead to attack him, whilst the god threatens her with a pointed weapon\nwhich he carries. Another, published by the same scholar, shows a\ndeity, whom he regards as being Merodach, driven in a chariot drawn by\na winged lion, upon whose shoulders stands a naked goddess, holding\nthunderbolts in each hand, whom he describes as Zer-pan\u00eetum. Another\ncylinder-seal shows the corn-deity, probably Nisaba, seated in\nflounced robe and horned hat, with corn-stalks springing out from his\nshoulders, and holding a twofold ear of corn in his hand, whilst an\nattendant introduces, and another with a threefold ear of corn\nfollows, a man carrying a plough, apparently as an offering. On\nanother, a beautiful specimen from Assyria, I\u0161tar is shown standing on\nan Assyrian lion, which turns his head as if to caress her feet. As\ngoddess of war, she is armed with bow and arrows, and her star is\nrepresented upon the crown of her tiara.\nOn boundary-stones, etc.\nOn the boundary-stones of Babylonia and the royal monoliths of Assyria\nthe emblems of the gods are nearly always seen. Most prominent are\nthree horned tiaras, emblematic, probably, of Merodach, Anu, and B\u00eal\n(the older). A column ending in a ram's head is used for \u00caa or Ae, a\ncrescent for Sin or Nannar, the moon-god; a disc with rays for \u0160ama\u0161,\nthe sun-god; a thunderbolt for Rimmon or Hadad, the god of thunder,\nlightning, wind, and storms; a lamp for Nusku, etc. A bird, perhaps a\nhawk, stood for Utu-gi\u0161gallu, a deity whose name has been translated\n\"the southern sun,\" and is explained in the bilingual inscriptions as\n\u0160ama\u0161, the sun-god, and Nirig, one of the gods of war. The emblem of\nGal-alim, who is identified with the older B\u00eal, is a snarling dragon's\nhead forming the termination of a pole, and that of Dun-a\u0161aga is a\nbird's head similarly posed. On a boundary-stone of the time of\nNebuchadnezzar I., about 1120 B.C., one of the signs of the gods shows\na horse's head in a kind of shrine, probably the emblem of Rimmon's\nstorm-bird, Z\u00fb, the Babylonian Pegasus.\nOther divine figures.\nOne of the finest of all the representations of divinities is that of\nthe \"Sun-god-stone,\" found by Mr. Hormuzd Rassam at Abu-habbah (the\nancient Sippar), which was one of the chief seats of his worship. It\nrepresents him, seated in his shrine, holding in his hand a staff and\na ring, his usual emblems, typifying his position as judge of the\nworld and his endless course. The position of Merodach as sun-god is\nconfirmed by the small lapis-lazuli relief found by the German\nexpedition at the mound known as Amran ibn 'Ali, as he also carries a\nstaff and a ring, and his robe is covered with ornamental circles,\nshowing, in all probability, his solar nature. In the same place\nanother small relief representing Rimmon or Hadad was found. His robe\nhas discs emblematical of the five planets, and he holds in each hand\na thunderbolt, one of which he is about to launch forth. Merodach is\naccompanied by a large two-horned dragon, whilst Hadad has a small\nwinged dragon, typifying the swiftness of his course, and another\nanimal, both of which he holds with cords.\nCHAPTER V\nTHE DEMONS: EXORCISMS AND CEREMONIES\nGood and evil spirits, gods and demons, were fully believed in by the\nBabylonians and Assyrians, and many texts referring to them exist.\nNaturally it is not in some cases easy to distinguish well between the\nspecial functions of these supernatural appearances which they\nsupposed to exist, but their nature is, in most cases, easily\nascertained from the inscriptions.\nTo all appearance, the Babylonians imagined that spirits resided\neverywhere, and lay in wait to attack mankind, and to each class,\napparently, a special province in bringing misfortune, or tormenting,\nor causing pain and sickness, was assigned. All the spirits, however,\nwere not evil, even those whose names would suggest that their\ncharacter was such--there were good \"liers in wait,\" for instance, as\nwell as evil ones, whose attitude towards mankind was beneficent.\nThe /utukku/. This was a spirit which was supposed to do the will of\nAnu, the god of the heavens. There was the /utukku/ of the plain, the\nmountains, the sea, and the grave.\nThe /\u00e2l\u00fb/. Regarded as the demon of the storm, and possibly, in its\norigin, the same as the divine bull sent by I\u0161tar to attack Gilgame\u0161,\nand killed by Enki-du. It spread itself over a man, overpowering him\nupon his bed, and attacking his breast.\nThe /\u00eadimmu/. This is generally, but wrongly, read /\u00eakimmu/, and\ntranslated \"the seizer,\" from /\u00eakemu/, \"to seize.\" In reality,\nhowever, it was an ordinary spirit, and the word is used for the\nwraiths of the departed. The \"evil /\u00eadimmu/\" was apparently regarded\nas attacking the middle part of a man.\nThe /gallu/. As this word is borrowed from the Sumerian /galla/, which\nhas a dialectic form, /mulla/, it is not improbable that it may be\nconnected with the word /mula/, meaning \"star,\" and suggesting\nsomething which is visible by the light it gives--possibly a will-o'-\nthe-wisp,--though others are inclined to regard the word as being\nconnected with /gala/, \"great.\" In any case, its meaning seems to have\nbecome very similar to \"evil spirit\" or \"devil\" in general, and is an\nepithet applied by the Assyrian king A\u0161\u0161ur-bani-\u00e2pli to Te-umman, the\nElamite king against whom he fought.\nThe /\u00eelu limnu/, \"evil god,\" was probably originally one of the\ndeities of Tiawath's brood, upon whom Merodach's redemption had had no\neffect.\nThe /rabisu/ is regarded as a spirit which lay in wait to pounce upon\nhis prey.\nThe /labartu/, in Sumerian /dimme/, was a female demon. There were\nseven evil spirits of this kind, who were apparently regarded as being\ndaughters of Anu, the god of the heavens.\nThe /labasu/, in Sumerian /dimmea/, was apparently a spirit which\noverthrew, that being the meaning of the root from which the word\ncomes.\nThe /\u00e2hhazu/, in Sumerian /dimme-kur/, was apparently so called as\n\"the seizer,\" that being the meaning indicated by the root.\nThe /lilu/, in Sumerian /lila/, is generally regarded as \"the night-\nmonster,\" the word being referred to the Semitic root /l\u00eel/ or /layl/,\nwhence the Hebrew /layil/, Arabic /layl/, \"night.\" Its origin,\nhowever, is Sumerian, from /lila/, regarded as meaning \"mist.\" To the\nword /lilu/ the ancient Babylonians formed a feminine, /lil\u00eethu/,\nwhich entered the Hebrew language under the form of /lilith/, which\nwas, according to the rabbins, a beautiful woman, who lay in wait for\nchildren by night. The /lilu/ had a companion who is called his\nhandmaid or servant.\nThe /namtaru/ was apparently the spirit of fate, and therefore of\ngreater importance than those already mentioned. This being was\nregarded as the beloved son of B\u00eal, and offspring of /Ere\u0161-ki-gal/ or\nPersephone, and he had a spouse named /Hu\u0161-bi-\u0161aga/. Apparently he\nexecuted the instructions given him concerning the fate of men, and\ncould also have power over certain of the gods.\nThe /\u0161\u00eadu/ were apparently deities in the form of bulls. They were\ndestructive, of enormous power, and unsparing. In a good sense the\n/\u0161\u00eadu/ was a protecting deity, guarding against hostile attacks. Erech\nand the temple \u00ca-kura were protected by spirits such as these, and to\none of them I\u0161um, \"the glorious sacrificer,\" was likened.\nThe /lamassu/, from the Sumerian /lama/, was similar in character to\nthe /\u0161\u00eadu/, but is thought to have been of the nature of a colossus--a\nwinged man-headed bull or lion. It is these creatures which the kings\nplaced at the sides of the doors of their palaces, to protect the\nking's footsteps. In early Babylonian times a god named Lama was one\nof the most popular deities of the Babylonian pantheon.\nA specimen incantation.\nNumerous inscriptions, which may be regarded as dating, in their\norigin, from about the middle of the third millennium before Christ,\nspeak of these supernatural beings, and also of others similar. One of\nthe most perfect of these inscriptions is a large bilingual tablet of\nwhich a duplicate written during the period of the dynasty of\nHammurabi (before 2000 B.C.) exists, and which was afterwards provided\nwith a Semitic Babylonian translation. This inscription refers to the\nevil god, the evil /utukku/, the /utukku/ of the plain, of the\nmountain, of the sea, and of the grave; the evil /\u0161\u00eadu/, the glorious\n/\u00e2l\u00fb/, or divine bull, and the evil unsparing wind. There was also\nthat which takes the form of a man, the evil face, the evil eye, the\nevil mouth, the evil tongue, the evil lip, the evil breath; also the\nafflicting /asakku/ (regarded as the demon of fever), the /asakku/\nwhich does not leave a man: the afflicting /namtaru/ (fate), the\nsevere /namtaru/, the /namtaru/ which does not quit a man. After this\nare mentioned various diseases, bodily pains, annoyances, such as \"the\nold shoe, the broken shoe-lace, the food which afflicts the body of a\nman, the food which turns in eating, the water which chokes in\ndrinking,\" etc. Other things to be exorcised included the spirit of\ndeath, people who had died of hunger, thirst, or in other ways; the\nhandmaid of the /lilu/ who had no husband, the prince of the /lilu/\nwho had no wife, whether his name had been recorded or unrecorded.\nThe method of exorcising the demons causing all these things is\ncurious. White and black yarn was spun, and fastened to the side and\ncanopy of the afflicted person's bed--the white to the side and the\ntop or canopy, the black to the left hand--and then, apparently, the\nfollowing words were said:--\n\"Evil /utukku/, evil /\u00e2l\u00fb/, evil /\u00eadimmu/, evil /gallu/, evil god,\nevil /rabisu/, /labartu/, /labasu/, /\u00e2hhazu/, /lilu/, /lilithu/,\nhandmaid of /lilu/, sorcery, enchantment, magic, disaster, machination\nwhich is not good--may they not set their head to his head, their hand\nto his hand, their foot to his foot--may they not draw near. Spirit of\nheaven, mayest thou exorcise, spirit of earth, mayest thou exorcise.\"\nBut this was only the beginning of the real ceremony. The god Asari-\nalim-nunna (Merodach), \"eldest son of \u00caridu,\" was asked to wash him in\npure and bright water twice seven times, and then would the evil lier-\nin-wait depart, and stand aside, and a propitious /\u0161\u00eadu/ and a\npropitious /labartu/ reside in his body. The gates right and left\nhaving been thus, so to say, shut close, the evil gods, demons, and\nspirits would be unable to approach him, wherever he might be. \"Spirit\nof heaven, exorcise, spirit of earth, exorcise.\" Then, after an\ninvocation of \u00car\u00ea\u0161-ki-gal and I\u0161um, the final paragraph was\npronounced:--\n\"The afflicted man, by an offering of grace\nIn health like shining bronze shall be made bright.\nAs for that man,\n\u0160ama\u0161 shall give him life.\nMerodach, first-born son of the Abyss,\nIt is thine to purify and glorify.\nSpirit of heaven, mayest thou exorcise, spirit of\nearth, mayest thou exorcise.\"\nRites and ceremonies.\nAs may be expected, the Babylonians and Assyrians had numerous rites\nand ceremonies, the due carrying out of which was necessary for the\nattainment of the grace demanded, or for the efficacy of the thanks\ntendered for favours received.\nPerhaps the oldest ceremony recorded is that which Ut-napi\u0161tim, the\nChald\u00e6an Noah, made on the /zikkurat/ or peak of the mountain after\nthe coming forth from the ship which had saved him and his from the\nFlood. The Patriarch's description of this ceremony is short:--\n\"I sent forth to the four winds, I poured out a libation\nI made an offering on the peak of the mountain:\nSeven and seven I set incense-vases there,\nInto their depths I poured cane, cedar, and scented wood(?).\nThe gods smelled a savour,\nThe gods smelled a sweet savour,\nThe gods gathered like flies over the sacrificer.\"\nFollowing in the footsteps of their great progenitor, the Babylonians\nand Assyrians became a most pious race, constantly rendering to their\ngods the glory for everything which they succeeded in bringing to a\nsuccessful issue. Prayer, supplication, and self-abasement before\ntheir gods seem to have been with them a duty and a pleasure:--\n\"The time for the worship of the gods was my heart's delight,\nThe time of the offering to I\u0161tar was profit and riches,\"\nsings Ludlul the sage, and all the people of his land were one with\nhim in that opinion.\nIt is noteworthy that the offering of the Chald\u00e6an Noah consisted of\nvegetable produce only, and there are many inscriptions referring to\nsimilar bloodless sacrifices, and detailing the ritual used in\nconnection therewith. Sacrifices of animals, however, seem to have\nbeen constantly made--in any case, offerings of cattle and fowl, in\nlist-form, are fairly numerous. Many a cylinder-seal has a\nrepresentation of the owner bringing a young animal--a kid or a lamb--\nas an offering to the deity whom he worshipped, and in the\ninscriptions the sacrifice of animals is frequently referred to. One\nof the bilingual texts refers to the offering of a kid or some other\nyoung animal, apparently on behalf of a sick man. The text of this,\nwhere complete, runs as follows:--\n\"The fatling which is the 'head-raiser' of mankind--\nHe has given the fatling for his life.\nHe has given the head of the fatling for his head,\nHe has given the neck of the fatling for his neck,\nHe has given the breast of the fatling for his breast.\"\nWhether human sacrifices were common or not is a doubtful point. Many\ncylinder-seals exist in which the slaying of a man is depicted, and\nthe French Assyriologist Menant was of opinion that they represented a\nhuman offering to the gods. Hayes Ward, however, is inclined to doubt\nthis explanation, and more evidence would seem, therefore, to be\nneeded. He is inclined to think that, in the majority of cases, the\ndesigns referred to show merely the victims of divine anger or\nvengeance, punished by the deity for some misdeed or sin, either\nknowingly or unknowingly committed.\nIn the Assyrian galleries of the British Museum, A\u0161\u0161ur-nasir-\u00e2pli,\nking of Assyria, is several times shown engaged in religious\nceremonies--either worshipping before the sacred tree, or about to\npour out, apparently, a libation to the gods before departing upon\nsome expedition, and priests bringing offerings, either animal or\nvegetable, are also represented. A\u0161\u0161ur-ban\u00ee-\u00e2pli, who is identified\nwith \"the great and noble Asnapper,\" is shown, in bas-reliefs of the\nAssyrian Saloon, pouring out a thank-offering over the lions which he\nhas killed, after his return from the hunt.\nCHAPTER VI\nPROBLEMS WHICH THE STUDY OFFERS\nMonotheism.\nAs the matter of Babylonian monotheism has been publicly touched upon\nby Fried. Delitzsch in his \"Babel und Bibel\" lectures, a few words\nupon that important point will be regarded in all probability as\nappropriate. It has already been indicated that the giving of the\nnames of \"the gods his fathers\" to Merodach practically identified\nthem with him, thus leading to a tendency to monotheism. That tendency\nis, perhaps, hinted at in a letter of A\u0161\u0161ur-ban\u00ee-\u00e2pli to the\nBabylonians, in which he frequently mentions the Deity, but in doing\nso, uses either the word /\u00eelu/, \"God,\" Merodach, the god of Babylon,\nor B\u00eal, which may be regarded as one of his names. The most important\ndocument for this monotheistic tendency, however (confirming as it\ndoes the tablet of the fifty-one names), is that in which at least\nthirteen of the Babylonian deities are identified with Merodach, and\nthat in such a way as to make them merely forms in which he manifested\nhimself to men. The text of this inscription is as follows:--\n\". . . is Merodach of planting.\nLugal-aki-. . . is Merodach of the water-course.\nNirig is Merodach of strength.\nNergal is Merodach of war.\nZagaga is Merodach of battle.\nB\u00eal is Merodach of lordship and domination.\nNebo is Merodach of trading(?).\nSin is Merodach the illuminator of the night.\n\u0160ama\u0161 is Merodach of righteous things.\nAddu is Merodach of rain.\nTi\u0161pak is Merodach of frost(?).\nSig is Merodach of green things(?).\n\u0160uqamunu is Merodach of the irrigation-channel.\"\nHere the text breaks off, but must have contained several more similar\nidentifications, showing how at least the more thoughtful of the\nBabylonians of old looked upon the host of gods whom they worshipped.\nWhat may be the date of this document is uncertain, but as the\ncolophon seems to describe it as a copy of an older inscription, it\nmay go back as far as 2000 years B.C. This is the period at which the\nname /Yaum-\u00eelu/ \"Jah is God,\" is found, together with numerous\nreferences to /\u00eelu/ as the name for the one great god, and is also,\nroughly, the date of Abraham, who, it may be noted, was a Babylonian\nof Ur of the Chaldees. It will probably not be thought too venturesome\nto say that his monotheism was possibly the result of the religious\ntrend of thought in his time.\nDualism.\nDamascius, in his valuable account of the belief of the Babylonians\nconcerning the Creation, states that, like the other barbarians, they\nreject the doctrine of the one origin of the universe, and constitute\ntwo, Tauth\u00e9 (Tiawath) and Apason (Apsu). This twofold principle,\nhowever, is only applicable to the system in that it makes of the sea\nand the deep (for such are the meanings of the two words) two\npersonages--the female and the male personifications of prim\u00e6val\nmatter, from which all creation sprang, and which gave birth to the\ngods of heaven themselves. As far as the physical constituents of\nthese two principals are concerned, their tenets might be described as\nhaving \"materialistic monism\" as their basis, but inasmuch as they\nbelieved that each of these two principals had a mind, the description\n\"idealistic monism\" cannot be applied to it--it is distinctly a\ndualism.\nAnd Monism.\nDivested of its idealistic side, however, there would seem to be no\nescape from regarding the Babylonian idea of the origin of things as\nmonistic.[*] This idea has its reflection, though not its\nreproduction, in the first chapter of Genesis, in which, verses 2, 6,\nand 7, water is represented as the first thing existing, though not\nthe first abode of life. This divergency from the Babylonian view was\ninevitable with a monotheistic nation, such as the Jews were,\nregarding as they did the Deity as the great source of everything\nexisting. What effect the moving of the Spirit of God upon the face of\nthe waters (v.2) was supposed by them to have had, is uncertain, but\nit is to be noted that it was the land (vv. 11, 12) which first\nbrought forth, at the command of God.\n[*] Monism. The doctrine which holds that in the universe there is\nonly a single element or principle from which everything is\ndeveloped, this single principle being either mind (/idealistic\nmonism/) or matter (/materialistic monism/). (Annandale.)\nThe future life.\nThe belief in a future life is the natural outcome of a religious\nbelief such as the Babylonians, Assyrians, and many of the surrounding\nnations possessed. As has been shown, a portion of their creed\nconsisted in hero-worship, which pre-supposes that the heroes in\nquestion continued to exist, in a state of still greater power and\nglory, after the conclusion of their life here upon earth.\n\"The god B\u00eal hates me--I cannot dwell in this land, and in the\nterritory of B\u00eal I cannot set my face. I shall descend then to the\nAbyss; with Aa my lord shall I constantly dwell.\" It is with these\nwords that, by the counsel of the god Aa, Ut-napi\u0161tim explained to\nthose who questioned him the reason why he was building the ship or\nark which was to save him and his from the Flood, and there is but\nlittle doubt that the author of the story implied that he announced\nthereby his approaching death, or his departure to dwell with his god\nwithout passing the dread portals of the great leveller. This belief\nin the life beyond the grave seems to have been that which was current\nduring the final centuries of the third millennium before Christ--when\na man died, it was said that his god took him to himself, and we may\ntherefore suppose, that there were as many heavens--places of\ncontentment and bliss--as there were gods, and that every good man was\nregarded as going and dwelling evermore with the deity which he had\nworshipped and served faithfully during his lifetime.\nGilgame\u0161, the half-divine king of Erech, who reigned during the half-\nmythical period, on losing his friend and counsellor, Enki-du, set out\nto find him, and to bring him back, if possible, from the underworld\nwhere he was supposed to dwell. His death, however, had not been like\nthat of an ordinary man; it was not Namtaru, the spirit of fate, who\nhad taken him, nor a misfortune such as befalls ordinary men, but\nNerigal's unsparing lier-in-wait--yet though Nerigal was the god of\nwar, Enki-du had not fallen on the battlefield of men, but had been\nseized by the earth (apparently the underworld where the wicked are is\nmeant) in consequence, seemingly, of some trick or trap which had been\nlaid for him.\nThe gods were therefore prayed, in turn, to bring him back, but none\nof them listened except \u00caa, who begged him of Nerigal, whereupon the\nlatter opened the entrance to the place where he was--the hole of the\nearth--and brought forth \"the spirit (/utukku/) of Enki-du like mist.\"\nImmediately after this come the words, \"Tell, my friend, tell, my\nfriend--the law of the land which thou sawest, tell,\" and the answer,\n\"I will not tell thee, friend, I will not tell thee--if I tell thee\nthe law of the land which I saw, . . . sit down, weep.\" Ultimately,\nhowever, the person appealed to--apparently the disembodied Enki-du--\nreveals something concerning the condition of the souls in the place\nof his sojourn after death, as follows:--\n\"Whom thou sawest [die] the death(?) [of][*] . . . [I see]--\nIn the resting-place of . . . reposing, pure waters he drinketh.\nWhom in the battle thou sawest killed, I see--\nHis father and his mother raise his head,\nAnd his wife upon [him leaneth?].\nWhose corpse thou hast seen thrown down in the plain, I see--\nHis /edimmu/ in the earth reposeth not.\nWhose /edimmu/ thou sawest without a caretaker, I see--\nThe leavings of the dish, the remains of the food,\nWhich in the street is thrown, he eateth.\"\n[*] (?)\"The death of the righteous,\" or something similar?\nIt is naturally difficult to decide in a passage like this, the\ndifference existing between a man's /utukku/ and his /edimmu/, but the\nprobability is, that the former means his spiritual essence, whilst\nthe latter stands for the ghostly shadow of his body, resembling in\nmeaning the /ka/ of the Egyptians. To all appearance the abode\ndescribed above is not the place of the punishment of the wicked, but\nthe dwelling of those accounted good, who, if lucky in the manner of\ntheir death, and the disposal of their bodies, enjoyed the highest\nhappiness in the habitation of the blest. The other place, however, is\notherwise described (it occurs in the account of I\u0161tar's descent into\nHades, and in the seventh tablet of the Gilgame\u0161 series--the latter\ndiffering somewhat):--\n\"Upon the land of No-return, the region of . . .,\n[Set] Istar, daughter of Sin, her ear.\nThe daughter of Sin set then her ear . . .\nUpon the house of gloom, the seat of Irkalla--[*]\nUpon the house whose entrance hath no exit,[\u2020]\nUpon the path whose way hath no return,\nUpon the house whose enterers are deprived of light,\nWhere dust is their nourishment, their food mud,\nLight they see not, in darkness they dwell,\nClothed also, like a bird, in a dress of feathers.\nUpon the door and bolt the dust hath blown.\"\n[*] One of the names of Nergal.\n[\u2020] Or \"whose enterer goeth not forth.\"\nSeven gates gave access to this place of gloom, and the porter, as he\nlet the visitor in, took from her (the goddess I\u0161tar in the narrative)\nat each an article of clothing, until, at the last, she entered quite\nnaked, apparently typifying the fact that a man can take nothing with\nhim when he dieth, and also, in this case, that he has not even his\ngood deeds wherewith to clothe himself, for had they outweighed his\nevil ones, he would not have found himself in that dread abode.\nOn the arrival of I\u0161tar in Hades, Er\u00ea\u0161-ki-gal commanded Namtaru, the\ngod of fate, to smite I\u0161tar with disease in all her members--eyes,\nsides, feet, heart, and head. As things went wrong on the earth in\nconsequence of the absence of the goddess of love, the gods sent a\nmessenger to effect her release. When he reached the land of No-\nreturn, the queen of the region threatened him with all kinds of\ntorments--the food of the gutters of the city were to be his food, the\noil-jars of the city (naptha?) his drink, the gloom of the castle his\nresting-place, a stone slab his seat, and hunger and thirst were to\nshatter his strength. These were evidently the punishments inflicted\nthere, but as the messenger threatened was a divine one, they were\nprobably not put into execution, and he obtained his demand, for I\u0161tar\nwas set free, receiving back at each gate, in reverse order, the\nclothing and ornaments which had been taken from her when she had\ndescended thither. It is uncertain whether Tammuz, for whom she had\ngone down, was set free also, but as he is referred to, it is not\nimprobable that this was the case.\nWORKS BEARING UPON THE RELIGION OF THE BABYLONIANS AND ASSYRIANS\nHibbert Lectures, 1887. The Religion of the Ancient Babylonians, by\nProfessor A. H. Sayce.\nThe Religious Ideas of the Babylonians, by the Author, 1895 (Journal\nof the Victoria Institute, also separately).\nThe Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, by Morris Jastrow, jun., 1898.\n(German edition, vol. i. 1905, vol. ii. in progress.)\nBabylonian Religion and Mythology, by L. W. King, M.A., 1899.\nGifford Lectures, 1902. Religions of Egypt and Babylonia, by Professor\nA. H. Sayce.\nThe O.T. in the Light of the Records of Assyria and Babylonia, by the\nAuthor, 1903. (The portions referring to Babylonian Mythology.)\nThe Hymns to Tammuz in the Manchester Museum, Owens College, by the\nAuthor, 1904.\nARTICLES UPON THE ASSYRIAN AND BABYLONIAN DEITIES,\nAND THE RELIGION OF THREE NATIONS, IN\nDictionary of the Bible, edited by Dr. James Hastings, and\nEncyclop\u00e6dia Biblica, edited by Professor Cheyne.","title":"The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria","type":"page"}