{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_45137/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_45137","id":"gutenberg_45137","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/45137","summary":null,"tags":["Assyro-Babylonian cults","Assyro-Babylonian religion","Category: History - Ancient","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Legends","Mythology, Assyro-Babylonian"],"text":"Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this\n      file which includes the original illustrations\n      (eight color plates and 32 other illustrations).\n      See 45137-h.htm or 45137-h.zip:\n      (https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/45137/pg45137-images.html)\n      or\n      (https://www.gutenberg.org/files/45137/45137-h.zip)\n\n\n      Images of the original pages are available through\n      Internet Archive. See\n      https://archive.org/details/mythslegendsofba00speniala\n\n\n\n\n\nMYTHS & LEGENDS OF BABYLONIA & ASSYRIA\n\nby\n\nLEWIS SPENCE F.R.A.I.\n\nAuthor of \"The Myths of Mexico and Peru\" \"The Civilization of Ancient\nMexico\" \"The Popol Vuh\" \"The Myths of the North American Indians\"\n\"Myths and Legends of Ancient Egypt\" etc.\n\nWith Eight Plates in Colour by Evelyn Paul and Thirty-Two Other\nIllustrations\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLondon\nGeorge G. Harrap & Company, Ltd.\n2 & 3 Portsmouth Street Kingsway W.C.\n1916\n\n\n\n\n[Frontispiece: Sacrificing to Bel Evelyn Paul]\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nThe purpose of this book is to provide not only a popular account of\nthe religion and mythology of ancient Babylonia and Assyria, but to\nextract and present to the reader the treasures of romance latent in\nthe subject, the peculiar richness of which has been recognized since\nthe early days of arch\u00e6ological effort in Chaldea. Unfortunately, with\nfew exceptions, writers who have made the field a special study have\nrarely been able to triumph over the limitations which so often obtrude\nin works of scholarship and research. It is true that the pages of\nRawlinson, Smith, Layard, and Sayce are enlivened at intervals with\npictures of Assyrian splendour and Babylonian glory--gleams which\nescape as the curtains which veil the wondrous past are partially\nlifted--but such glimpses are only interludes in lengthy disquisitions\nwhich too often must be tedious for the general reader.\n\nIt was such a consideration which prompted the preparation of this\nvolume. Might not a book be written which should contain the pure\ngold of Babylonian romance freed from the darker ore of antiquarian\nresearch? So far, so good. But gold in the pure state is notoriously\nunserviceable, and an alloy which renders it of greater utility may\ndetract nothing from its brilliance. Romance or no romance, in these\ndays it will not do to furnish stories of the gods without attempting\nsome definition of their nature and origin. For more than ever before\nromance and knowledge are a necessary blend in the making of a\nsatisfactory book on mythology.\n\nNevertheless, it is anticipated that it will be to the modern reader\nwho loves the romance of antiquity that this book will especially\nappeal. It is claimed that the greater part of Chaldean romance\nclusters around the wonderful mythology and religion of that land; it\nis therefore of these departments of Chaldean lore that this volume\nchiefly treats. But the history of Babylonia and Assyria has not been\nneglected. The great names in its records will be found to recur\nconstantly in these pages, in most instances accompanied by a tale or\nlegend which will illuminate the circumstances of their careers and\nserve to retain these in the mind of the reader. Nor has the Biblical\nconnexion with Chaldea been forgotten; the reader will find as he\nproceeds frequent references to the pages of the most picturesque Book\nin the world.\n\n                                                              L. S.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n\n     I.  BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA IN HISTORY AND LEGEND\n    II.  BABYLONIAN COSMOGONY\n   III.  EARLY BABYLONIAN RELIGION\n    IV.  THE GILGAMESH EPIC\n     V.  THE LATER PANTHEON OF BABYLONIA\n    VI.  THE GREAT GOD MERODACH AND HIS CULT\n   VII.  THE PANTHEON OF ASSYRIA\n  VIII.  BABYLONIAN STAR-WORSHIP\n    IX.  THE PRIESTHOOD, CULT, AND TEMPLES\n     X.  THE MAGIC AND DEMONOLOGY OF BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA\n    XI.  THE MYTHOLOGICAL MONSTERS AND ANIMALS OF CHALDEA\n   XII.  TALES OF THE BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN KINGS\n  XIII.  THE COMPARATIVE VALUE OF THE BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN RELIGIONS\n   XIV.  MODERN EXCAVATION IN BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA\n    XV.  THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS\n\n         GLOSSARY AND INDEX\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS\n\nSacrificing to Bel _(Evelyn Paul) Frontispiece_\nAssault on a City\nBasalt Stele engraved with the Text of Khammurabi's Code of Laws\nSennacherib receiving Tribute\nThe Death of Sardanapalus (_L. Chalon_)\nThe Library of King Assur-bani-pal at Nineveh (_Fernand L. Quesne_)\nDaniel interprets the Dream of Nebuchadrezzar (_Evelyn Paul_)\nGrant of Privileges to Ritti-Marduk by Nebuchadrezzar I\nBirs Nimr\u00fbd, the Tower of Babel\nThe Murder of Setapo (_Evelyn Paul_)\nThe Seven Tablets of Creation\n\"Mighty was he to look upon\" (_Evelyn Paul_)\nConflict between Merodach and Tiawath\nTypes of En-lil, the Chief God of Nippur, and of his Consort Nin-lil\nIshtar, as (1) Mother-goddess, (2) Goddess of War, (3) Goddess of Love\nThe Mother-goddess Ishtar (_Evelyn Paul_)\nAssyrian Rock Sculpture\nAssyrian Type of Gilgamesh\nUt-Napishtim makes Offering to the Gods (_Allan Stewart_)\nNebo\nHall in Assyrian Palace (_Sir Henry Layard_)\nTiglath-Pileser I directed by Ninib (_Evelyn Paul_)\nAssur-nazir-pal attended by a Winged Mythological Being\nZikkurats of the Anu-Adad at Ashur\nStage-tower at Samarra\nExcavated Ruins of the Temple of E-Sagila\nExorcising Demons of Disease\nClay Object resembling a Sheep's Liver\nEagle-headed Mythological Being\nCapture of Sarrapanu by Tiglath-Pileser II (_Evelyn Paul_)\nThe Fatal Eclipse (_M. Dovaston, R.B.A._)\nShalmaneser I pouring out the Dust of a Conquered City (_Ambrose Dudley_)\nThe Marriage Market (_Edwin Long, R.A_.)\nA Royal Hunt\nElijah prevailing over the Priests of Baal (_Evelyn Paul_)\nThe 'Black Obelisk' of Shalmaneser II\nOutline of the Mounds at Nimr\u00fbd (_Sir Henry Layard_)\nThe Palaces of Nimr\u00fbd (_James Ferguson_)\nWork of the Excavators in Babylon\nRuins of Babylon\nThe Hanging Gardens of Babylon (_M. Dovaston, R.B.A._)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I: BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA IN HISTORY AND LEGEND\n\n\nTo our fathers until well-nigh a century ago Babylon was no more than\na mighty name--a gigantic skeleton whose ribs protruded here and there\nfrom the sands of Syria in colossal ruin of tower and temple. But now\nthe grey shroud which hid from view the remains of the glow and glitter\nof her ancient splendour has to some extent been withdrawn, and through\nthe labours of a band of scholars and explorers whose lives and work\nmust be classed as among the most romantic passages in the history of\nhuman effort we are now enabled to view the wondrous panorama of human\ncivilization as it evolved in the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.\n\nThe name 'Babylon' carries with it the sound of a deep, mysterious\nspell, such a conjuration as might be uttered in the recesses of secret\ntemples. It awakens a thousand echoes in the imagination. It holds a\nmusic richer than that of Egypt. Babylon, Babylon--the sonorous charm\nof the word is as a line from some great epic. It falls on the ear of\nthe historian like distant thunder. Behind the grandeur of Rome and\nthe beauty of Greece it looms as a great and thick darkness over which\nflash at intervals streams of uncertain light as half-forgotten kings\nand priests, conquerors and tyrants, demi-gods and mighty builders pass\nthrough the gloom from obscurity to obscurity--sometimes in the full\nglare of historical recognition, but more often in the half-light and\npartially relieved dusk of uncertainty. Other shapes, again, move like\nghosts in complete and utter darkness, and these are by far the most\nnumerous of all.\n\nBut the spirit of Babylon is no soft and alluring thing eloquent of\nOriental wonders or charged with the delicious fascination of the East.\nRather is it a thing stark and strong, informed with fate and epical\nin its intense recognition of destiny. In Babylonian history there are\nbut two figures of moment--the soldier and the priest. We are dealing\nwith a race austere and stern, a race of rigorous religious devotees\nand conquerors, the Romans of the East--but not an unimaginative race,\nfor the Babylonians and Assyrians came of that stock which gave to the\nworld its greatest religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Mohammedanism,\na race not without the sense of mystery and science, for Babylon was\nthe mother of astrology and magic, and established the beginnings of\nthe study of the stars; and, lastly, of commerce, for the first true\nfinancial operations and the first houses of exchange were founded in\nthe shadows of her temples and palaces.\n\nThe boundaries of the land where the races of Babylonia and Assyria\nevolved one of the most remarkable and original civilizations in the\nworld's history are the two mighty rivers of Western Asia, the Tigris\nand Euphrates, Assyria being identical with the more northerly and\nmountainous portion, and Babylonia with the southerly part, which\ninclined to be flat and marshy. Both tracts of country were inhabited\nby people of the same race, save that the Assyrians had acquired the\ncharacteristics of a population dwelling in a hilly country and had\nbecome to some extent intermingled with Hittite and Amorite elements.\nBut both were branches of an ancient Semitic stock, the epoch of\nwhose entrance into the land it is impossible to fix. In the oldest\ninscriptions discovered we find those Semitic immigrants at strife with\nthe indigenous people of the country, the Akkadians, with whom they\nwere subsequently to mingle and whose beliefs and magical and occult\nconceptions especially they were afterward to incorporate with their\nown.\n\n\nThe Akkadians\n\nWho, then, were the Akkadians whom the Babylonian Semites came to\ndisplace but with whom they finally mingled? Great and bitter has\nbeen the controversy which has raged around the racial affinities\nof this people. Some have held that they were themselves of Semitic\nstock, others that they were of a race more nearly approaching the\nMongol, the Lapp, and the Basque. In such a book as this, the object\nof which is to present an account of the Babylonian mythology, it is\nunnecessary to follow the protagonists of either theory into the dark\nrecesses whither the conflict has led them. But the probability is that\nthe Akkadians, who are usually represented upon their monuments as a\nbeardless people with oblique eyes, were connected with that great\nMongolian family which has thrown out tentacles from its original\nhome in central Asia to the frozen regions of the Arctic, the north\nof Europe, the Turkish Empire, aye, and perhaps to America itself!\nAkkadian in its linguistic features and especially in its grammatical\nstructure shows a resemblance to the Ural-Altaic group of languages\nwhich embraces Turkish and Finnish, and this is in itself good evidence\nthat the people who spoke it belonged to that ethnic division. But the\nquestion is a thorny one, and pages, nay, volumes might be occupied in\npresenting the arguments for and against such a belief.\n\nIt was from the Akkadians, however, that the Babylonian Semites\nreceived the germs of their culture; indeed it may be avowed that this\naboriginal people carried them well on the way toward civilization. Not\nonly did they instruct the Semitic new-comers in the arts of writing\nand reading, but they strongly biased their religious beliefs, and\nso inspired them with the idea of the sanctity of their own faith\nthat the later Babylonian priesthood preserved the old Akkadian\ntongue among them as a sacred language, just as the Roman priesthood\nhas retained the use of the dead Latin speech. Indeed, the proper\npronunciation of Akkadian was an absolute necessity to the successful\nperformance of religious ritual, and it is passing strange to observe\nthat the Babylonian priests composed new religious texts in a species\nof dog-Akkadian, just as the monks of the Middle Ages composed their\nwritings in dog-Latin!--with such zeal have the religious in all ages\nclung to the cult of the ancient, the mystic and half-forgotten thing\nunknown to the vulgar.\n\nWhen we first encounter Babylonian civilization we find it grouped\nround about two nuclei, Nippur in the North and Eridu in the South.\nThe first had grown up around a sanctuary of the god En-lil, who held\nsway over the ghostly animistic spirits which at his bidding might\npose as the friends or enemies of men. A more 'civilized' deity held\nsway at Eridu, which was the home of Ea, or Oannes, the god of light\nand wisdom, who exercised his knowledge of the healing art for the\nbenefit of his votaries. From the waters of the Persian Gulf, whence\nhe rose each morning, he brought knowledge of all manner of crafts and\ntrades, arts and industries, for the behoof of his infant city, even\nthe mystic and difficult art of impressing written characters on clay.\nIt is a beautiful picture which we have from the old legend of this\nsea-born wisdom daily enlightening the life of the little white city\nnear the waters. The Semites possessed a deep and almost instinctive\nlove of wisdom. In the writings attributed to Solomon and in the rich\nand wondrous Psalms of David--those deep mines of song and sagacity--we\nfind the glories of wisdom again and again extolled. Even yet there\nare few peoples among whom the love of scholarship, erudition, and\nreligious wisdom is more cultivated for its own sake than with the Jews.\n\nThese rather different cultures of the North and South, working toward\na common centre, met and fused at a period prior to the commencement\nof history, and we even find the city of Ur, whence Abram came, a near\nneighbour of Eridu, colonized by Nippur! The culture of Eridu prevailed\nnevertheless, and its mightiest offshoot was the ultimate centre of\nEuphratean civilization--Babylon itself. The first founders of the\ncity were undoubtedly of Sumerian stock--the expression 'Sumerian'\nbeing that in vogue among modern scholars for the older 'Akkadian,' and\ntherefore interchangeable with it.\n\n\nThe Semite Conquerors\n\nIt was probably about the time of the juncture of the civilizations\nof Eridu and Nippur that the Semites entered the country. There are\nindications which lead to the belief that, as in the case of the\nSemitic immigrants in Egypt, they came originally from Arabia. The\nSemite readily accepted the Sumerian civilization which he found\nflourishing in the valley of the Euphrates, and adapted the Sumerian\nsystem of writing to his own language, in what manner will be indicated\nlater. But the Sumerians themselves were not above borrowing from\nthe rich Semitic tongue, and many of the earliest Sumerian texts we\nencounter are strongly Semitized. But although the Semites appear to\nhave filtered into Sumerian territory by way of Eridu and Ur, the\nfirst definite notices we have of their presence within it are in the\nmonuments of the more northern portion of that territory, in what is\nknown as Akkad, in the neighbourhood of Bagdad, where they founded a\nsmall kingdom in much the same manner as the Jutes founded the kingdom\nof Kent. The earliest monuments, however, come from Lagash, the modern\nTel-lo, some thirty miles north of Ur, and recount the dealings of the\nhigh-priest of that place with other neighbouring dignitaries. The\npriests of Lagash became kings, and their conquests extended beyond the\nconfines of Babylonia to Elam on the east, and southward to the Persian\nGulf.\n\n[Illustration: Assault on a City from a bas-relief representing the\nCampaigns of Sennacherib Photo W.A. Mansell and Co.]\n\nA Babylonian Conqueror\n\nBut the first great Semitic empire in Babylonia was that founded by the\nfamous Sargon of Akkad. As is the case with many popular heroes and\nmonarchs whose deeds are remembered in song and story--for example,\nPerseus, \u0152dipus, Cyrus, Romulus, and our own King Arthur--the early\nyears of Sargon were passed in obscurity. Sargon is, in fact, one of\nthe 'fatal children.' He was, legend stated, born in concealment and\nsent adrift, like Moses, in an ark of bulrushes on the waters of\nthe Euphrates, whence he was rescued and brought up by one Akki, a\nhusbandman. But the time of his recognition at length arrived, and he\nreceived the crown of Babylonia. His foreign conquests were extensive.\nOn four successive occasions he invaded Syria and Palestine, which he\nsucceeded in welding into a single empire with Babylonia. Pressing\nhis victories to the margin of the Mediterranean, he erected upon its\nshores statues of himself as an earnest of his conquests. He also\novercame Elam and northern Mesopotamia and quelled a rebellion of some\nmagnitude in his own dominions. His son, Naram-Sin, claimed for himself\nthe title of \"King of the Four Zones,\" and enlarged the empire left him\nby his father, penetrating even into Arabia. A monument unearthed by J.\nde Morgan at Susa depicts him triumphing over the conquered Elamites.\nHe is seen passing his spear through the prostrate body of a warrior\nwhose hands are upraised as if pleading for quarter. His head-dress\nis ornamented with the horns emblematic of divinity, for the early\nBabylonian kings were the direct vicegerents of the gods on earth.\n\nEven at this comparatively early time (_c_. 3800 B.C.) the resources\nof the country had been well exploited by its Semitic conquerors,\nand their absorption of the Sumerian civilization had permitted them\nto make very considerable progress in the enlightened arts. Some of\ntheir work in bas-relief, and even in the lesser if equally difficult\ncraft of gem-cutting, is among the finest efforts of Babylonian art.\nNor were they deficient in more utilitarian fields. They constructed\nroads through the most important portions of the empire, along which\na service of posts carried messages at stated intervals, the letters\nconveyed by these being stamped or franked by clay seals, bearing the\nname of Sargon.\n\n\nThe First Library in Babylonia\n\nSargon is also famous as the first founder of a Babylonian library.\nThis library appears to have contained works of a most surprising\nnature, having regard to the period at which it was instituted. One\nof these was entitled _The Observations of Bel_, and consisted of\nno less than seventy-two books dealing with astronomical matters of\nconsiderable complexity; it registered and described the appearances of\ncomets, conjunctions of the sun and moon, and the phases of the planet\nVenus, besides recording many eclipses. This wonderful book was long\nafterward translated into Greek by the Babylonian historian Berossus,\nand it demonstrates the great antiquity of Babylonian astronomical\nscience even at this very early epoch. Another famous work contained\nin the library of Sargon dealt with omens, the manner of casting them,\nand their interpretation--a very important side-issue of Babylonian\nmagico-religious practice.\n\nAmong the conquests of this great monarch, whose splendour shines\nthrough the shadows of antiquity like the distant flash of arms on a\nmisty day, was the fair island of Cyprus. Even imagination reels at the\nwell-authenticated assertion that five thousand seven hundred years ago\nthe keels of a Babylonian conqueror cut the waves of the Mediterranean\nand landed upon the shores of flowery Cyprus stern Semitic warriors,\nwho, loading themselves with loot, erected statues of their royal\nleader and returned with their booty. In a Cyprian temple De Cesnola\ndiscovered, down in the lowest vaults, a h\u00e6matite cylinder which\ndescribed its owner as a servant of Naram-Sin, the son of Sargon, so\nthat a certain degree of communication must have been kept up between\nBabylonia and the distant island, just as early Egypt and Crete were\nbound to each other by ties of culture and commerce.\n\n\nGudea\n\nBut the empire which Sargon had founded was doomed to precipitate\nruin. The seat of power was diverted southward to Ur. In the reign of\nDungi, one of the monarchs who ruled from this southern sphere, a great\nvassal of the throne, Gudea, stands out as one of the most remarkable\ncharacters in early Babylonian antiquity. This Gudea (_c_. 2700 B.C.)\nwas high-priest of Lagash, a city perhaps thirty miles north of Ur,\nand was famous as a patron of the architectural and allied arts. He\nransacked western Asia for building materials. Arabia supplied him with\ncopper for ornamentation, the Amames mountains with cedar-wood, the\nquarries of Lebanon with stone, while the deserts adjacent to Palestine\nfurnished him with rich stones of all kinds for use in decorative\nwork, and districts on the shores of the Persian Gulf with timber for\nordinary building purposes. His architectural ability is vouched for by\na plan of his palace, measured to scale, which is carved upon the lap\nof one of his statues in the Louvre.\n\nThere is no intention in this sketch to follow minutely the events in\nthe history of Babylonia and Assyria. The purpose is to depict and\ndescribe the circumstances, deeds, and times of its most outstanding\nfigures, its most typical and characteristic rulers. By following\nthis plan we hope to be better able to present the reader with a more\nfaithful and genuine picture of the civilization the myths of which\nwe are about to peruse, than if we squandered space and time in the\ndescription of the reigns of kings during whose tenure of the throne no\nevent of importance is recorded.\n\n[Illustration: Basalt Stele engraved with the Text of Khammurabi's Code\nof Laws. The scene represents the King receiving the Laws from Shamash,\nthe Sun-god--Photo W. A. Mansell and Co.]\n\n\nKhammurabi the Great\n\nLike that which preceded it, the dynasty of Ur fell, and Arabian or\nCanaanite invaders usurped the royal power in much the same manner\nas the Shepherd Kings seized the sovereignty of Egypt. A subsequent\nforeign yoke, that of Elam, was thrown off by Khammurabi, perhaps the\nmost celebrated and most popularly famous name in Babylonian history.\nThis brilliant, wise, and politic monarch did not content himself with\nmerely expelling the hated Elamites, but advanced to further conquest\nwith such success that in the thirty-second year of his reign (2338\nB.C.) he had formed Babylonia into a single monarchy with the capital\nat Babylon itself. Under the fostering care of Khammurabi, Babylonian\nart and literature unfolded and blossomed with a luxuriance surprising\nto contemplate at this distance of time. It is astonishing, too, to\nnote how completely he succeeded in welding into one homogeneous whole\nthe various elements of the empire he carved out for himself. So surely\ndid he unify his conquests that the Babylonian power as he left it\nsurvived undivided for nearly fifteen hundred years. The welfare of\nhis subjects of all races was constantly his care. No one satisfied of\nthe justice of his cause feared to approach him. The legal code which\nhe formulated and which remains as his greatest claim to the applause\nof posterity is a monument of wisdom and equity. If Sargon is to be\nregarded as the Arthur of Babylonian history surely Khammurabi is its\nAlfred. The circumstances of the lives of the two monarchs present a\ndecidedly similar picture. Both had in their early years to free their\ncountry from a foreign yoke, both instituted a legal code, were patrons\nof letters and assiduous in their attention to the wants of their\nsubjects.\n\nIf a great people has frequently evolved a legal code of sterling\nmerit there are cases on record where such an institution has served\nto make a people great, and it is probably no injustice to the Semites\nof Babylonia to say of them that the code of Khammurabi made them what\nthey were. A copy of this world-famous code was found at Susa by J. de\nMorgan, and is now in the Louvre.\n\nWhat the Babylonian chronologists called 'the First Dynasty of Babylon'\nfell in its turn, and it is claimed that a Sumerian line of eleven\nkings took its place. Their sway lasted for 368 years--a statement\nwhich is obviously open to question. These were themselves overthrown\nand a Kassite dynasty from the mountains of Elam was founded by Kandis\n(_c_. 1780 B.C.) which lasted for nearly six centuries. These alien\nmonarchs failed to retain their hold on much of the Asiatic and Syrian\nterritory which had paid tribute to Babylon and the suzerainty of\nPalestine was likewise lost to them. It was at this epoch, too, that\nthe high-priests of Asshur in the north took the title of king, but\nthey appear to have been subservient to Babylon in some degree. Assyria\ngrew gradually in power. Its people were hardier and more warlike than\nthe art-loving and religious folk of Babylon, and little by little they\nencroached upon the weakness of the southern kingdom until at length\nan affair of tragic proportions entitled them to direct interference in\nBabylonian politics.\n\n\nA Court Murder\n\nThe circumstances which necessitated this intervention are not\nunlike those of the assassination of King Alexander of Serbia and\nDraga, his Queen, that happened 3000 years later. The Kassite king\nof Babylonia had married the daughter of Assur-yuballidh of Assyria.\nBut the match did not meet with the approval of the Kassite faction\nat court, which murdered the bridegroom-king. This atrocious act met\nwith swift vengeance at the hands of Assur-yuballidh of Assyria, the\nbride's father, a monarch of active and statesmanlike qualities, the\nauthor of the celebrated series of letters to Amen-hetep IV of Egypt,\nunearthed at Tel-el-Amarna. He led a punitive army into Babylonia,\nhurled from the throne the pretender placed there by the Kassite\nfaction, and replaced him with a scion of the legitimate royal stock.\nThis king, Burna-buryas, reigned for over twenty years, and upon his\ndecease the Assyrians, still nominally the vassals of the Babylonian\nCrown, declared themselves independent of it. Not content with such a\nrevolutionary measure, under Shalmaneser I (1300 B.C.) they laid claim\nto the suzerainty of the Tigris-Euphrates region, and extended their\nconquests even to the boundaries of far Cappadocia, the Hittites and\nnumerous other confederacies submitting to their yoke. Shalmaneser's\nson, Tukulti-in-Aristi, took the city of Babylon, slew its king,\nBitilyasu, and thus completely shattered the claim of the older state\nto supremacy. He had reigned in Babylon for some seven years when he\nwas faced by a popular revolt, which seems to have been headed by his\nown son, Assur-nazir-pal, who slew him and placed Hadad-nadin-akhi on\nthe throne. This king conquered and killed the Assyrian monarch of his\ntime, Bel-kudur-uzur, the last of the old Assyrian royal line, whose\ndeath necessitated the institution of a new dynasty, the fifth monarch\nof which was the famous Tiglath-pileser I.\n\n\nTiglath-Pileser\n\nTiglath-pileser, or Tukulti-pal-E-sana, to confer on him his full\nAssyrian title, came to the throne about 1120 B.C., and soon commenced\nthe career of active conquest which was to render his name one of\nthe most famous in the warlike annals of Assyria. Campaigns in the\nUpper Euphrates against alien immigrants who had settled there were\nfollowed by the conquest of the Hittites of Subarti, in Assyrian\nterritory. Pressing northward toward Lake Van in the Kurdish country he\nsubsequently turned his arms westward and overran Malatia. Cappadocia\nand the Aram\u00e6ans of Northern Syria next felt the force of his arms, and\nhe penetrated on this occasion even to the sources of the Tigris. He\nleft behind him the character of a great warrior, a great hunter, and a\ngreat builder, restoring the semi-ruinous temples of Asshur and Hadad\nor Rimmon in the city of Asshur.\n\nIt is not until the reign of Assur-nazir-pal III (_c_. 883 B.C.) that\nwe are once more enabled to take up the thread of Assyrian history with\nany degree of certainty. In this reign artistic development appears to\nhave proceeded apace; but it cannot be said of Assur-nazir-pal that\nin him culture went hand in hand with humanity, the records of his\ncruelties being long and revolting. His successor, Shalmaneser II,\npossessed an insatiable thirst for military glory, and during his reign\nof thirty-five years overthrew a great confederacy of Syrian chiefs\nwhich included Ahab, King of Israel. He was disturbed during the latter\npart of his reign by the rebellion of his eldest son. But his second\nson, Samsi-Rammon, came to his father's assistance, and his faithful\nadherence secured him the succession to the throne in 824 B.C.\n\n\nSemiramis the Great\n\nIt was probably in the reign of this monarch that the queen known in\nlegend as Semiramis lived. It would have been wonderful indeed had\nthe magic of her name not been connected with romance by the Oriental\nimagination. Semiramis! The name sparkles and scintillates with gems\nof legend and song. Myth, magic, and music encircle it and sweep round\nit as fairy seas surround some island paradise. It is a central rose\nin the chaplet of legend, it has been enshrined in music perhaps the\nmost divine and melodious which the songful soul of Italy has ever\nconceived--yet not more beauteous than itself. Let us introduce into\nthe iron chain of Assyrian history the golden link of the legend of\nthis Helen of the East, and having heard the fictions of her greatness\nlet us attempt to remove the veils which hide her real personality\nfrom view and look upon her as she was--Sammuramat the Babylonian,\nqueen and favourite of Samsi-Rammon, who crushed the assembled armies\nof Media and Chaldea, and whose glories are engraved upon a column\nwhich, setting forth the tale of her conquests, describes her in all\nsimplicity as \"A woman of the palace of Samsi-Rammon, King of the\nWorld.\"\n\nLegend says that Ninus, King of Assyria, having conquered the\nBabylonians, proceeded toward Armenia with the object of reducing the\npeople of that country. But its politic king, Barsanes, unable to\nmeet him by armed force, made a voluntary submission, accompanied by\npresents of such magnificence that Ninus was placated. But, insatiable\nin his desire for conquest, he turned his eyes to Media, which he\nspeedily subdued. His next ambition was to bring under his rule the\nterritory between the Tanais and the Nile. This great task occupied\nhim for no less than seventeen years, by which time all Asia had\nsubmitted to him, with the single exception of Bactria, which still\nmaintained its independence. Having laid the foundations of the city\nof Nineveh, he resolved to proceed against the Bactrians. His army\nwas of dimensions truly mythical, for he was said to be accompanied\nby 7,000,000 of infantrymen, 2,000,000 of horse-soldiers, with the\naddition of 200,000 chariots equipped with scythes.\n\nIt was during this campaign, says Diodorus Siculus, that Ninus first\nbeheld Semiramis. Her precise legendary or mythical origin is obscure.\nSome writers aver that she was the daughter of the fish-goddess\nAtaryatis, or Derketo, and Oannes, the Babylonian god of wisdom, who\nhas already been alluded to. Ataryatis was a goddess of Ascalon in\nSyria, and after birth her daughter Semiramis was miraculously fed\nby doves until she was found by one Simmas, the royal shepherd, who\nbrought her up and married her to Onnes, or Menon, one of Ninus's\ngenerals. He fell by his own hand, and Ninus thereupon took Semiramis\nto wife, having profoundly admired her ever since her conduct at the\ncapture of Bactria, where she had greatly distinguished herself. Not\nlong afterward Ninus died, leaving a son called Ninyas. During her\nson's minority Semiramis assumed the regency, and the first great work\nshe undertook was the interment of her husband, whom she buried with\ngreat splendour, and raised over him a mound of earth no less than a\nmile and a quarter high and proportionally wide, after which she built\nBabylon. This city being finished, she made an expedition into Media;\nand wherever she went left memorials of her power and munificence. She\nerected vast structures, forming lakes and laying out gardens of great\nextent, particularly in Chaonia and Ecbatana. In short, she levelled\nhills, and raised mounds of an immense height, which retained her name\nfor ages. After this she invaded Egypt and conquered Ethiopia, with\nthe greater part of Libya; and having accomplished her wish, and there\nbeing no enemy to cope with her, excepting the kingdom of India, she\nresolved to direct her forces toward that quarter. She had an army of\n3,000,000 foot, 500,000 horse, and 100,000 chariots. For the passing\nof rivers and engaging the enemy by water she had procured 2000 ships,\nto be so constructed as to be taken to pieces for the advantage of\ncarriage: which ships were built in Bactria by men from Ph[oe]nicia,\nSyria, and Cyprus. With these she fought a naval engagement with\nStrabrobates, King of India, and at the first encounter sunk a thousand\nof his ships. After this she built a bridge over the river Indus, and\npenetrated into the heart of the country. Here Strabrobates engaged\nher. Being deceived by the numerous appearance of her elephants, he at\nfirst gave way, for being deficient in those animals she had procured\nthe hides of 3000 black oxen, which, being properly sewn and stuffed\nwith straw, presented the appearance of so many elephants. All this was\ndone so naturally that even the real elephants of the Indian king were\ndeceived. But the stratagem was at last discovered, and Semiramis was\nobliged to retreat, after having lost a great part of her army. Soon\nafter this she resigned the government to her son Ninyas, and died.\nAccording to some writers, she was slain by his hand.\n\nIt was through the researches of Professor Lehmann-Haupt of Berlin\nthat the true personal significance of Semiramis was recovered. Until\nthe year 1910 the legends of Diodorus and others were held to have\nbeen completely disproved and Semiramis was regarded as a purely\nmythical figure. Old Bryant in his _Antient Mythology_, published\nat the beginning of last century, proves the legendary status of\nSemiramis to his own satisfaction. He says: \"It must be confessed that\nthe generality of historians have represented Semiramis as a woman,\nand they describe her as a great princess who reigned in Babylon;\nbut there are writers who from their situation had opportunities of\nbetter intelligence, and by those she is mentioned as a deity. The\nSyrians, says Athenagoras, worshipped Semiramis, and adds that she was\nesteemed the daughter of Dercatus and the same as the Suria Dea....\nSemiramis was said to have been born at Ascalon because Atargatus was\nthere worshipped under the name of Dagon, and the same memorials were\npreserved there as at Hierapolis and Babylon. These memorials related\nto a history of which the dove was the principal type. It was upon the\nsame account that she was said to have been changed to a dove because\nthey found her always depicted and worshipped under that form.... From\nthe above I think it is plain that Semiramis was an emblem and that\nthe name was a compound of Sama-ramas, or ramis, and it signified 'the\ndivine token,' a type of providence, and as a military ensign, (for\nas such it was used) it may with some latitude be interpreted 'the\nstandard of the most High.' It consisted of the figure of a dove,\nwhich was probably encircled with the iris, as those two emblems were\noften represented together. All who went under that standard, or who\npaid any deference to that emblem, were styled Semarim or Samorim. It\nwas a title conferred upon all who had this device for their national\ninsigne.\" There is much more of this sort of thing, typical of the\nmythic science of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. It\nis easy to see how myth became busy with the name of the Assyrian\nQueen, whose exploits undoubtedly aroused the enthusiasm not only of\nthe Assyrians themselves but of the peoples surrounding them. Just as\nany great work in ancient Britain was ascribed to the agency of Merlin\nor Arthur, so such monuments as could not otherwise be accounted for\nwere attributed to Semiramis. Western Asia is monumentally eloquent\nof her name, and even the Behistun inscriptions of Darius have been\nplaced to her credit. Herodotus states that one of the gates of Babylon\nwas called after her, and that she raised the artificial banks that\nconfined the river Euphrates. Her fame lasted until well into the\nMiddle Ages, and the Armenians called the district round Lake Van,\nShamiramagerd.\n\nThere is very little doubt that her fame became mingled with that of\nthe goddess Ishtar: she possesses the same Venus-like attributes, the\ndove is her emblem, and her story became so inextricably intertwined\nwith that of the Babylonian goddess that she ultimately became a\nvariant of her. The story of Semiramis is a triumphant vindication of\nthe manner in which by certain mythical processes a human being can\nattain the rank of a god or goddess, for Semiramis was originally very\nreal indeed. A column discovered in 1909 describes her as \"a woman of\nthe palace of Samsi-rammon, King of the World, King of Assyria, King\nof the Four Quarters of the World.\" This dedication indicates that\nSemiramis, or, to give her her Assyrian title, Sammuramat, evidently\npossessed an immense influence over her husband, Samsi-rammon, and\nthat perhaps as queen-mother that influence lasted for more than one\nreign, so that the legend that after a regency of forty-two years she\ndelivered up the kingdom to her son, Ninyas, may have some foundation\nin fact. She seems to have made war against the Medes and Chaldeans.\nThe story that on relinquishing her power she turned into a dove and\ndisappeared may mean that her name, Sammuramat, was easily connected\nwith the Assyrian _summat_, the word for 'dove'; and for a person of\nher subsequent legendary fame the mythical connexion with Ishtar is\neasily accounted for.\n\n\nThe Second Assyrian Empire\n\nWhat is known as the Second Assyrian Empire commenced with the reign\nof Tiglath-pileser III, who organized a great scheme of provincial\ngovernment. This plan appears to have been the first forecast of the\nfeudal system, for each province paid a fixed tribute and provided a\nmilitary contingent.\n\nGreat efforts were made to render the army as irresistible as possible\nwith the object of imposing an Assyrian supremacy upon the entire known\nworld. Tiglath overran Armenia, defeated the Medes and Hittites, seized\nthe seaports of Ph[oe]nicia and the trade routes connecting them with\nthe centres of Assyrian commerce, and finally conquered Babylon, where\nin 729 B.C. he was invested with the sovereignty of 'Asia.' Two years\nlater he died, but his successor, Shalmaneser IV, carried on the policy\nhe had initiated. He had, however, only five years of life in which\nto do so, for at the end of that period the usurping general Sargon,\nwho laid claim to be a descendant of Sargon the Great of Akkad, seized\nthe royal power of Babylon. He was murdered in 705 B.C., and his son\nSennacherib, of Biblical fame, appears to have been unable to carry on\naffairs with the prudence or ability of his father. He outraged the\nreligious feelings of the people by razing to the ground the city of\nBabylon, because of the revolt of the citizens. The campaign he made\nagainst Hezekiah, King of Judah, was marked by a complete failure.\nHezekiah had allied himself with the Philistine princes of Ascalon and\nEkron, but when he saw his Egyptian allies beaten at the battle of\nEltekeh he endeavoured to buy off the invaders by numerous presents,\nthough without success. The wonderful deliverance of Jerusalem from the\nforces of Sennacherib, recorded in Scripture, and sung by Byron in his\n_Hebrew Melodies_, appears to have a good foundation in fact. It seems\nthat the Assyrian army was attacked and almost decimated by plague,\nwhich obliged Sennacherib to return to Nineveh, but it is not likely\nthat the phenomenon occurred in the watch of a night. Sennacherib was\neventually murdered by his two sons, who, the deed accomplished, fled\nto Armenia. Of all the Assyrian monarchs he was perhaps the most\npompous and the least fitted to rule. The great palace at Nineveh and\nthe great wall of that city, eight miles in circumference, were built\nat his command.\n\n[Illustration: Sennacherib receiving Tribute From the Palace at Nineveh\n--Photo W. A. Mansell and Co.]\n\nHis son and successor, Esar-haddon, initiated his reign by sending\nback the sacred image of Merodach to its shrine at Babylon, which city\nhe restored. He was solemnly declared king in the restored temple of\nMerodach, and during his reign both Babylonia and Assyria enjoyed\nquiet and contentment. War with Egypt broke out in 670 B.C., and the\nEgyptians were thrice defeated with heavy loss. The Assyrians entered\nMemphis and instituted a protectorate over part of the country. Two\nyears later Egypt revolted, and while marching to quell the outbreak\nEsar-haddon died on the road--his fate resembling that of Edward I,\nwho died while on his way to overcome the Scottish people, then in\nrebellion against his usurpation.\n\n\nSardanapalus the Splendid\n\nEsar-haddon was succeeded by Assur-bani-pal, known to Greek legend as\nSardanapalus. How far the legendary description of him squares with\nthe historical it is difficult to say. The former states that he was\nthe last king of Assyria, and the thirtieth in succession from Ninyas.\nEffeminate and corrupt, he seems to have been a perfect example of the\n_roi fain\u00e9ant_. The populace of the conquered provinces, disgusted\nwith his extravagances, revolted, and an army led by Arbaces, satrap\nof Medea, and Belesys, a Babylonian priest, surrounded him in Nineveh\nand threatened his life. Sardanapalus, however, throwing off his\nsloth, made such a vigorous defence that for two years the issue was\nin doubt. The river Tigris at this juncture overflowed and undermined\npart of the city wall, thus permitting ingress to the hostile army.\nSardanapalus, seeing that resistance was hopeless, collected his wives\nand treasures in his palace and then set it on fire, so that all\nperished.\n\n[Illustration: The Death of Sardanapalus.--L. Chalon--Copyright, Braun and\nCo.]\n\nIt is a strange coincidence that the fate which legend ascribes to\nSardanapalus was probably that which really overtook the brother of\nAssur-bani-pal, Samas-sum-yukin. It is likely that the self-immolation\nof Sardanapalus is merely a legendary statement of a rite well known to\nSemitic religion, which was practised at Tarsus down to the time of Dio\nChrysostom, and the memory of which survives in other Greek legends,\nespecially those of Heracles-Melcarth and Queen Dido. At Tarsus an\nannual festival was held and a pyre erected upon which the local\nHeracles or Baal was burned in effigy. This annual commemoration of\nthe death of the god in fire probably had its origin in the older rite\nin which an actual man or sacred animal was burned as representing the\ndeity. _The Golden Bough_[1] contains an instructive passage concerning\nthe myth of Sardanapalus. Sir James Frazer writes: \"There seems to\nbe no doubt that the name Sardanapalus is only the Greek way of\nrepresenting Ashurbanapal, the name of the greatest and nearly the last\nKing of Assyria. But the records of the real monarch which have come\nto light within recent years give little support to the fables that\nattached to his name in classical tradition. For they prove that, far\nfrom being the effeminate weakling he seemed to the Greeks of a later\nage, he was a warlike and enlightened monarch, who carried the arms\nof Assyria to distant lands and fostered at home the growth of science\nand letters. Still, though the historical reality of King Ashurbanapal\nis as well attested as that of Alexander or Charlemagne, it would be\nno wonder if myths gathered, like clouds, around the great figure\nthat loomed large in the stormy sunset of Assyrian glory. Now the two\nfeatures that stand out most prominently in the legends of Sardanapalus\nare his extravagant debauchery and his violent death in the flames of\na great pyre, on which he burned himself and his concubines to save\nthem from falling into the hands of his victorious enemies. It is said\nthat the womanish king, with painted face and arrayed in female attire,\npassed his days in the seclusion of the harem, spinning purple wool\namong his concubines and wallowing in sensual delights; and that in\nthe epitaph which he caused to be carved on his tomb he recorded that\nall the days of his life he ate and drank and toyed, remembering that\nlife is short and full of trouble, that fortune is uncertain, and that\nothers would soon enjoy the good things which he must leave behind.\nThese traits bear little resemblance to the portrait of Ashurbanapal\neither in life or death; for after a brilliant career of conquest the\nAssyrian king died in old age, at the height of human ambition, with\npeace at home and triumph abroad, the admiration of his subjects and\nthe terror of his foes. But if the traditional characteristics of\nSardanapalus harmonize but ill with what we know of the real monarch of\nthat name, they fit well enough with all that we know or can conjecture\nof the mock kings who led a short life and a merry during the revelry\nof the Sac\u00e6a, the Asiatic equivalent of the Saturnalia. We can hardly\ndoubt that for the most part such men, with death staring them in the\nface at the end of a few days, sought to drown care and deaden fear by\nplunging madly into all the fleeting joys that still offered themselves\nunder the sun. When their brief pleasures and sharp sufferings were\nover, and their bones or ashes mingled with the dust, what more natural\nthat on their tomb--those mounds in which the people saw, not untruly,\nthe graves of the lovers of Semiramis--there should be carved some\nsuch lines as those which tradition placed in the mouth of the great\nAssyrian king, to remind the heedless passer-by of the shortness and\nvanity of life?\"\n\nAccording to Sir James Frazer, then, the real Sardanapalus may have\nbeen one of those mock kings who led a short but merry existence before\na sacrifice ended their convivial career. We have analogous instances\nin the sacrifice of Sandan at Tarsus and that of the representative of\nthe Mexican god, Tezcatlipoca. The legend of Sardanapalus is thus a\ndistorted reminiscence of the death of a magnificent king sacrificed in\nname of a god.\n\nWhen the real Assur-bani-pal succeeded Esar-haddon as King of Assyria,\nhis brother Samas-sum-yukin was created Viceroy of Babylonia, but\nshortly after he claimed the kingship itself, revived the old Sumerian\nlanguage as the official tongue of the Babylonian court, and initiated\na revolt which shook the Assyrian empire from one end to the other.\nA great struggle ensued between the northern and southern powers,\nand at last Babylon was forced to surrender through starvation, and\nSamas-sum-yukin was put to death.\n\nAssur-bani-pal, like Sardanapalus, his legendary counterpart, found\nhimself surrounded by enemies. Having conquered Elam as well as\nBabylonia, he had to face the inroads of hordes of Scythians, who\npoured over his frontiers. He succeeded in defeating and slaying one\nof their chiefs, Dugdamme, whom in an inscription he calls a \"limb of\nSatan,\" but shortly after this he died himself. His empire was already\nin a state of decay, and had not long to stand.\n\n\nThe First Great Library\n\nBut if Assur-bani-pal was effeminate and lax in government, he was the\nfirst great patron of literature. It is to his magnificent library\nat Nineveh that we owe practically all that we have preserved of the\nliterature that was produced in Babylonia. He saw that the southern\npart of his empire was far more intellectual and cultured than Assyria,\nand he despatched numerous scribes to the temple schools of the south,\nwhere they copied extensively from their archives every description\nof literary curiosity--hymns, legends, medical prescriptions, myths\nand rituals were all included in the great library at Nineveh. These\nthrough the labours of Layard and Rassam have been restored to us. It\nis a most extraordinary instance of antiquarian zeal in an epoch which\nwe regard as not far distant from the beginnings of verifiable history.\nNearly twenty thousand fragments of brick, bearing the results of\nAssur-bani-pal's researches, are housed in the British Museum, and this\nprobably represents only a portion of his entire collection. Political\nmotives have been attributed to Assur-bani-pal in thus bringing\ntogether such a great library. It has been argued that he desired to\nmake Assyria the centre of the religious influence of the empire. This\nwould derogate greatly from the view that sees in him a king solely\nfired with the idea of preserving and retaining all that was best in\nancient Babylonian literature in the north as well as in the south,\nand having beside him for his own personal use those records which\nmany circumstances prove he was extremely desirous of obtaining. Thus\nwe find him sending officials on special missions to obtain copies of\ncertain works. It is also significant that Assur-bani-pal placed his\ncollection in a library and not in a temple--a fact which discounts\nthe theory that his collection of literature had a religious-political\nbasis.\n\n\nThe Last Kings of Assyria\n\nAfter the death of Assur-bani-pal the Scythians succeeded in\npenetrating into Assyria, through which they pushed their way as far as\nthe borders of Egypt, and the remains of the Assyrian army took refuge\nin Nineveh. The end was now near at hand. The last King of Assyria was\nprobably Sin-sar-iskin, the Sarakos of the Greeks, who reigned for some\nyears and who even tells us through the medium of inscriptions that\nhe intended to restore the ruined temples of his land. War broke out\nwith Babylonia, however, and Cyaxares, the Scythian King of Ecbatana,\ncame to the assistance of the Babylonians. Nineveh was captured by the\nScythians, sacked and destroyed, and the Assyrian empire was at an end.\n\n[Illustration: The Library of King Assur-bani-pal at Nineveh.--Fernand Le\nQuesne--By permission of Messrs Hutchinson and Co.]\n\nNebuchadrezzar\n\nBut strangely enough the older seat of power, Babylon, still flourished\nto some extent. By superhuman exertions, Nebuchadrezzar II (or\nNebuchadnezzar), who reigned for forty-three years, sent the standard\nof Babylonia far and wide through the known world. In 567 B.C. he\ninvaded Egypt. In one of his campaigns he marched against Jerusalem and\nput its king, Jehoiakim, to death, but the king whom the Babylonian\nmonarch set up in his place was deposed and the royal power vested in\nZedekiah. Zedekiah revolted in 558 B.C. and once more Jerusalem was\ntaken and destroyed, the principal inhabitants were carried captive to\nBabylon, and the city was reduced to a condition of insignificance.\nThis, the first exile of the Jews, lasted for seventy years. The story\nof this captivity and of Nebuchadrezzar's treatment of the Jewish\nexiles is graphically told in the Book of Daniel, whom the Babylonians\ncalled Belteshazzar. Daniel refused to eat the meat of the Babylonians,\nprobably because it was not prepared according to Jewish rite. He and\nhis companions ate pulse and drank water, and fared upon it better\nthan the Babylonians on strong meats and wines. The King, hearing of\nthis circumstance, sent for them and found them much better informed\nthan all his magicians and astrologers. Nebuchadrezzar dreamed dreams,\nand informed the Babylonian astrologers that if they were unable to\ninterpret them they would be cut to pieces and their houses destroyed,\nwhereas did they interpret the visions they would be held in high\nesteem. They answered that if the King would tell them his dream they\nwould show the interpretation thereof; but the King said that if they\nwere wise men in truth they would know the dream without requiring to\nbe told it, and upon some of the astrologers of the court replying\nthat the request was unreasonable, he was greatly incensed and ordered\nall of them to be slain. But in a vision of the night the secret was\nrevealed to Daniel, who begged that the wise men of Babylon be not\ndestroyed, and going to a court official he offered to interpret the\ndream. He told the King that in his dream he had beheld a great image,\nwhose brightness and form were terrible. The head of this image was of\nfine gold, the breast and arms of silver, and the other parts of brass,\nexcepting the legs which were of iron, and the feet which were partly\nof that metal and partly of clay. But a stone was cast at it which\nsmote the image upon its feet and it brake into pieces and the wind\nswept away the remnants. The stone that had smitten it became a great\nmountain and filled the whole earth.\n\nThen Daniel proceeded to the interpretation. The King, he said,\nrepresented the golden head of the image; the silver an inferior\nkingdom which would rise after Nebuchadrezzar's death; and a third of\nbrass which should bear rule over all the earth. The fourth dynasty\nfrom Nebuchadrezzar would be as strong as iron, but since the toes of\nthe image's feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so should\nthat kingdom be partly strong and partly broken. Nebuchadrezzar was so\nawed with the interpretation that he fell upon his face and worshipped\nDaniel, telling him how greatly he honoured the God who could have\nrevealed such secrets to him; and he set him as ruler over the whole\nprovince of Babylon, and made him chief of the governors over all the\nwise men of that kingdom.\n\nBut Daniel's three companions--Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego--refused\nto worship a golden image which the King had set up, and he commanded\nthat they should be cast into a fiery furnace, through which they\npassed unharmed.\n\n[Illustration: Daniel interprets the Dream of Nebuchadrezzar.--Evelyn\nPaul.]\n\nThis circumstance still more turned the heart of Nebuchadrezzar in\nthe direction of the God of Israel. A second dream which he had, he\nbegged Daniel to interpret. He said he had seen a tree in the midst\nof the earth of more than natural height, which flourished and was\nexceedingly strong, so that it reached to heaven. So abundant was the\nfruit of this tree that it provided meat for the whole earth, and so\nample its foliage that the beasts of the field had shadow under it, and\nthe fowls of the air dwelt in its midst. A spirit descended from heaven\nand called aloud, demanding that the tree should be cut down and its\nleaves and fruit scattered, but that its roots should be left in the\nearth surrounded by a band of iron and brass. Then, ordering that the\ntree should be treated as if it were a man, the voice of the spirit\ncontinued to ask that it should be wet with the dew of heaven, and that\nits portion should be with the beasts in the grass of the earth. \"Let\nhis heart be changed from a man's,\" said the voice, \"and let a beast's\nheart be given him; and let seven times pass over him.\"\n\nThen was Daniel greatly troubled. He kept silence for a space until\nthe King begged him to take heart and speak. The tree, he announced,\nrepresented Nebuchadrezzar himself, and what had happened to it in the\nvision would come to pass regarding the great King of Babylon. He would\nbe driven from among men and his dwelling would be with the beasts of\nthe field. He would be made to eat grass as oxen and be wet with the\ndew of heaven, and seven times would pass over him, till he knew and\nrecognized that the Most High ruled in the kingdom of man and gave it\nto whomsoever he desired.\n\nTwelve months after this Nebuchadrezzar was in the midst of his palace\nat Babylon, boasting of what he had accomplished during his reign,\nwhen a voice from heaven spake, saying: \"O King Nebuchadrezzar, to\nthee it is spoken, the kingdom is departed from thee,\" and straightway\nwas Nebuchadrezzar driven from man and he did eat grass as an ox and\nhis body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hair was grown like\neagle's feathers and his nails like bird's claws.\n\nAt the termination of his time of trial Nebuchadrezzar lifted his eyes\nto heaven, and praising the Most High admitted his domination over the\nwhole earth. Thus was the punishment of the boaster completed.\n\nIt has been stated with some show of probability that the judgment\nupon Nebuchadrezzar was connected with that weird disease known as\nlycanthropy, from the Greek words _lukos_, a wolf, and _anthropos_,\na man. It develops as a kind of hysteria and is characterized by a\nbelief on the part of the victim that he has become an animal. There\nare, too, cravings for strange food, and the afflicted person runs\nabout on all fours. Among primitive peoples such a seizure is ascribed\nto supernatural agency, and garlic or onion--the common scourge of\nvampires--is held to the nostrils.\n\n[Illustration: Grant of Privileges to Ritti-Marduk, a famous Babylonian\nCaptain, by Nebuchadrezzar I.--Photo W. A. Mansell and Co.]\n\nThe Last of the Babylonian Kings\n\nNabonidus (555-539 B.C.) was the last of the Babylonian kings--a man\nof a very religious disposition and of antiquarian tastes. He desired\nto restore the temple of the moon-god at Harran and to restore such\nof the images of the gods as had been removed to the ancient shrines.\nBut first he desired to find out whether this procedure would meet\nwith the approval of the god Merodach. To this end he consulted the\naugurs, who opened the liver of a sheep and drew thence favourable\nomens. But on another occasion he aroused the hostility of the god\nand incidentally of the priests of E-Sagila by preferring the sun-god\nto the great Bel of Babylon. He tells us in an inscription that when\nrestoring the temple of Shamash at Sippar he had great difficulty\nin unearthing the old foundation-stone, and that, when at last it\nwas unearthed, he trembled with awe as he read thereon the name of\nNaram-sin, who, he says, ruled 3200 years before him. But destiny lay\nin wait for him, for Cyrus the Persian invaded Babylonia in 538 B.C.,\nand after defeating the native army at Opis he pressed on to Babylon,\nwhich he entered without striking a blow. Nabonidus was in hiding, but\nhis place of concealment was discovered. Cyrus, pretending to be the\navenger of Bel-Merodach for the slights the unhappy Nabonidus had put\nupon the god, had won over the people, who were exceedingly wroth with\ntheir monarch for attempting to remove many images of the gods from\nthe provinces to the capital. Cyrus placed himself upon the throne of\nBabylon and about a year before his death (529 B.C.) transferred the\nregal power to his son, Cambyses. Assyrian-Babylonian history here\nceases and is merged into Persian. Babylonia recovered its independence\nafter the death of Darius. A king styling himself Nebuchadrezzar III\narose, who reigned for about a year (521-520 B.C.), at the end of which\ntime the Persians once more returned as conquerors. A second revolt in\n514 B.C. caused the partial destruction of the walls, and finally the\ngreat city of Babylon became little better than a quarry out of which\nthe newer city of Seleucia and other towns were built.\n\n\nThe History of Berossus\n\nIt will be of interest to examine at least one of the ancient\nauthorities upon Babylonian history. Berossus, a priest of Bel at\nBabylon, who lived about 250 B.C., compiled from native documents a\nhistory of his country, which he published in Greek. His writings have\nperished, but extracts from them have been preserved by Josephus and\nEusebius. There is a good deal of myth in Berossus' work, especially\nwhen he deals with the question of cosmology, the story of the deluge,\nand so forth; also the 'facts' which he places before us as history\ncannot be reconciled with those inscribed on the monuments. He seems\nindeed to have arranged his history so that it should exactly fill the\nassumed period of 36,000 years, beginning with the creation of man and\nending with the conquest of Babylon by Alexander the Great. Berossus\ntells of a certain Sisuthrus,[2] whose history will be recounted in\nfull in another chapter. He then relates a legend of the advent of the\nfish-man or fish-god, Oannes, from the waters of the Persian Gulf.\nIndeed he alludes to three beings of this type, who, one after another,\nappeared to instruct the Babylonians in arts and letters.\n\n\nBerossus' Account of the Deluge\n\nMore important is his account of the deluge. There is more than one\nBabylonian version of the deluge: that which is to be found in the\n_Gilgamesh Epic_ is given in the chapter dealing with that poem. As\nBerossus' account is quite as important, we shall give it in his own\nwords before commenting upon it: \"After the death of Ardates, his son\n(Sisuthrus) succeeded and reigned eighteen sari. In his time happened\nthe great deluge; the history of which is given in this manner. The\nDeity, Cronus, appeared to him in a vision; and gave him notice, that\nupon the fifteenth day of the month D\u00e6sius there would be a flood,\nby which mankind would be destroyed. He therefore enjoined him to\ncommit to writing a history of the beginning, procedure, and final\nconclusion of all things, down to the present term; and to bury these\naccounts securely in the City of the Sun at Sippara. He then ordered\nSisuthrus to build a vessel, and to take with him into it his friends\nand relations; and trust himself to the deep. The latter implicitly\nobeyed: and having conveyed on board every thing necessary to sustain\nlife, he took in also all species of animals, that either fly, or rove\nupon the surface of the earth. Having asked the Deity whither he was\nto go, he was answered, To the gods: upon which he offered up a prayer\nfor the good of mankind. Thus he obeyed the divine admonition: and the\nvessel, which he built, was five stadia in length, and in breadth two.\nInto this he put every thing which he had got ready; and last of all\nconveyed into it his wife, children, and friends. After the flood had\nbeen upon the earth, and was in time abated, Sisuthrus sent out some\nbirds from the vessel; which not finding any food, nor any place to\nrest their feet, returned to him again. After an interval of some days;\nhe sent them forth a second time: and they now returned with their feet\ntinged with mud. He made trial a third time with these birds: but they\nreturned to him no more: from whence he formed a judgment, that the\nsurface of the earth was now above the waters. Having therefore made an\nopening in the vessel, and finding upon looking out, that the vessel\nwas driven to the side of a mountain, he immediately quitted it, being\nattended with his wife, children, and the pilot. Sisuthrus immediately\npaid his adoration to the earth: and having constructed an altar,\noffered sacrifices to the gods. These things being duly performed, both\nSisuthrus, and those who came out of the vessel with him, disappeared.\nThey, who remained in the vessel, finding that the others did not\nreturn, came out with many lamentations and called continually on the\nname of Sisuthrus. Him they saw no more; but they could distinguish his\nvoice in the air, and could hear him admonish them to pay due regard\nto the gods; and likewise inform them, that it was upon account of his\npiety that he was translated to live with the gods; that his wife and\nchildren, with the pilot, had obtained the same honour. To this he\nadded, that he would have them make the best of their way to Babylonia,\nand search for the writings at Sippara, which were to be made known to\nall mankind. The place where these things happened was in Armenia. The\nremainder having heard these words, offered sacrifices to the gods;\nand, taking a circuit, journeyed towards Babylonia.\" Berossus adds,\nthat the remains of the vessel were to be seen in his time upon one\nof the Corcyrean mountains in Armenia; and that people used to scrape\noff the bitumen, with which it had been outwardly coated, and made use\nof it by way of an antidote for poison or amulet. In this manner they\nreturned to Babylon; and having found the writings at Sippara, they\nset about building cities and erecting temples; and Babylon was thus\ninhabited again.\n\n\nAnalogies with the Flood Myth\n\nIt is interesting to note that Sisuthrus, the hero of this deluge\nstory, was also the tenth Babylonian king, just as Noah was the tenth\npatriarch. The birds sent out by Sisuthrus strongly recall the raven\nand dove despatched by Noah; but there are several American myths which\nintroduce this conception.\n\nBirds and beasts in many cosmologies provide the nucleus of the new\nworld which emerges from the waters which have engulfed the old.\nPerhaps it is the beaver or the musk-rat which dives into the abyss\nand brings up a piece of mud, which gradually grows into a spacious\ncontinent; but sometimes birds carry this nucleus in their beaks. In\nthe myth under consideration they return with mud on their feet, which\nis obviously expressive of the same idea. Attempts have been made to\nshow that a great difference exists between the Babylonian and Hebrew\nstory. Undoubtedly the two stories have a common origin.\n\nThe first Babylonian version of the myth dates from about 2000 B.C.\nand its text is evidently derived from a still older tablet. It seems\nlikely that this was in turn indebted to a still more archaic version,\nwhich probably recounted the earliest type of the myth. This perhaps\nrelated how the earth and its inhabitants were not to the liking of\nthe Creator, and how he resolved to recreate the whole. The great\nocean-dragon was therefore called in to submerge the world, after which\nthe Creator re-moulded it and set the survivor and his family upon it\nas the ancestors of a new human race. It is possible also that the\ngreat sea-dragon, or serpent, which was slain by the Creator, may have\nflooded the earth with his blood as he expired: there is an Algonquin\nIndian myth to this effect. In an old cuneiform text, in fact, the\nyear of the deluge is alluded to as \"the year of the raging serpent.\"\nThe wise man who takes refuge in the ship or ark is warned by a dream\nof the forthcoming deluge. In some North American Indian myths he is\nwarned by friendly animals. The mountain, too, as a place of refuge for\nthe ark, is fairly common in myth.\n\nWe have dealt in Chapter II with the creation myth found in Berossus,\nand with this ends the part of his history which is of any importance.\n\n\nBabylonian Arch\u00e6ology\n\nUntil about the middle of the nineteenth century our knowledge of\nthe history and antiquities of Babylonia and Assyria was extremely\nscanty. The deeply interesting series of excavations which unrolled\nthe circumstances of these ancient civilizations before the almost\nincredulous eyes of learned Europe are described at length towards\nthe close of this volume. Here we may say shortly that the labours of\nLayard and Botta at Nineveh convinced antiquaries that the remains\nof a great civilization awaited discovery. Layard's excavation\nof the library of Assur-bani-pal was the first great step toward\nreconstructing the ancient life of the two kingdoms. He was followed\nby Oppert and Loftus, but the systematic excavation of the country was\nyet to be undertaken. This, as we shall see, was commenced by George\nSmith of the British Museum, but unfortunately he died on his way\nhome from the East. His work at Nineveh was taken up by Mr Hormuzd\nRassam, who succeeded in unearthing inscribed tables and bronze gates\nin bas-relief. A few years afterward Mr Rassam discovered the site of\nthe temple of the sun-god of Sippara at Abu-habba to the south-west of\nBagdad. An important find by de Sarzec was that of the diorite statues\nof Gudea, the Patesi or Ruler of Lagash, about 2700 B.C., the stone of\nwhich, according to the inscriptions upon them, had been brought from\nthe Sinaitic peninsula. The university of Pennsylvania sent Mr J.H.\nHaynes in 1889 to excavate at Nippur, where he unearthed the remains of\nthe great temple of En-lil, in the heart of which is a mound of bricks\nstamped with the names of Sargon of Akkad and his son, Naram-sin. The\nGerman expedition of 1899 explored the ruins of Babylon, the palace of\nNebuchadrezzar, and the site of Asshur.\n\n\nThe Tower of Babel\n\nMany attempts have been made to attach the legend of the confusion of\ntongues to certain ruined towers in Babylonia, especially to that of\nE-Sagila, the great temple of Merodach, and some remarks upon this most\ninteresting tale may not be out of place at this point. The myth is\nnot found in Babylonia itself, and in its best form may be discovered\nin Scripture. In the Bible story we are told that every region was of\none tongue and mode of speech. As men journeyed westward from their\noriginal home in the East, they encountered a plain in the land of\nShinar where they settled. In this region they commenced building\noperations, constructed a city, and laid the foundations of a tower,\nthe summit of which they hoped would reach to heaven itself. It would\nappear that this edifice was constructed with the object of serving as\na great landmark to the people so that they should not be scattered\nover the face of the earth, and the Lord came down to view the city and\nthe tower, and he considered that as they were all of one language this\ngave them undue power, and that what they imagined to themselves under\nsuch conditions they would be able to achieve. So the Lord scattered\nthem abroad from thence over the face of every region, and the building\nof the tower ceased and the name of it was called 'Babel,' because at\nthat place the single language of the people was confounded. Of course\nit is merely the native name of Babylon, which translated means 'gate\nof the god,' and has no such etymology as the Scriptures pretend,--the\nHebrews confusing their verb _balal_ 'to confuse or confound,' with the\nword _babel_. The story was no doubt suggested by one of the temple\ntowers of Babylon. Over and over again we find in connexion with the\nJewish religion that anything which savours of presumption or unnatural\naspiration is strongly condemned. The ambitious effort of the Tower\nof Babel would thus seem abhorrent to the Hebrews of old. The strange\nthing is that these ancient towers or _zikkurats_, as the Babylonians\ncalled them, were intended to serve as a link between heaven and earth,\njust as does the minaret of the Mahommedan mosque.\n\n[Illustration: Birs Nimr\u00fbd, the Tower of Babel From _Nippur, or\nExploration and Adventure on the Euphrates_, by J. P. Peters.--By\npermission of Messrs G.P. Putnam's Sons]\n\nThe legend of the confusion of tongues is to be traced in other\nfolk-lores than that of Babylon. It is found in Central America, where\nthe story runs that Xelhua, one of the seven giants rescued from the\ndeluge, built the great pyramid of Cholula in order to besiege heaven.\nThe structure was, however, destroyed by the gods, who cast down fire\nupon it and confounded the language of its builders. Livingstone found\nsome such myth among the African tribes around Lake Ngami, and certain\nAustralian and Mongolian peoples possess a similar tradition.\n\n\nNimrod, the Mighty Hunter\n\nIt is strange that the dispersion of tribes at Babel should be\nconnected with the name of Nimrod, who figures in Biblical as well as\nBabylonian tradition as a mighty hunter. Epiphanius states that from\nthe very foundation of this city (Babylon) there commenced an immediate\nscene of conspiracy, sedition, and tyranny, which was carried on by\nNimrod, the son of Chus the \u00c6thiop. Around this dim legendary figure\na great deal of learned controversy has raged. Before we examine his\nlegendary and mythological significance, let us see what legend and\nScripture say of him. In the Book of Genesis (chap. x, 8, _ff_.) he is\nmentioned as \"a mighty hunter before Yahweh: wherefore it is said, Even\nas Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord.\" He was also the ruler of\na great kingdom. \"The beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech,\nand Accad, and Calneh in the land of Shinar. Out of that land went\nforth Asshur\" (that is, by compulsion of Nimrod) \"and builded Nineveh,\"\nand other great cities. In the Scriptures Nimrod is mentioned as a\ndescendant of Ham, but this may arise from the reading of his father's\nname as _Cush_, which in the Scriptures indicates a coloured race. The\nname may possibly be _Cash_ and should relate to the Cassites.\n\nIt appears then that the sons of Cush or Chus, the Cassites, according\nto legend, did not partake of the general division of the human race\nafter the fall of Babel, but under the leadership of Nimrod himself\nremained where they were. After the dispersion, Nimrod built Babylon\nand fortified the territory around it. It is also said that he built\nNineveh and trespassed upon the land of Asshur, so that at last he\nforced Asshur to quit that territory.[3] The Greeks gave him the name\nof Nebrod or Nebros, and preserved or invented many tales concerning\nhim and his apostasy, and concerning the tower which he is supposed to\nhave erected. He is described as a gigantic person of mighty bearing,\nand a contemner of everything divine; his followers are represented as\nbeing equally presumptuous and overbearing. In fact he seems to have\nappeared to the Greeks very much like one of their own Titans.\n\nNimrod has been identified both with Merodach, the tutelar god of\nBabylon, and with Gilgamesh, the hero of the epic of that name, with\nOrion, and with others. The name, according to Petrie, has even been\nfound in Egyptian documents of the XXII Dynasty as 'Nemart.'\n\nNimrod seems to be one of those giants who rage against the gods, as do\nthe Titans of Greek myth and the Jotunn of Scandinavian story. All are\nin fact earth-gods, the disorderly forces of nature, who were defeated\nby the deities who stood for law and order. The derivation of the name\nNimrod may mean 'rebel.' In all his later legends, for instance, those\nof them that are related by Philo in his _De Gigantibus_ (a title which\nproves that Nimrod was connected with the giant race by tradition),\nhe appears as treacherous and untrustworthy. The theory that he is\nMerodach has no real foundation either in scholarship or probability.\nAs a matter of fact the Nimrod legend seems to be very much more\narchaic than any piece of tradition connected with Merodach, who indeed\nis a god of no very great antiquity.\n\n\nAbram and Nimrod\n\nMany Jewish legends bring Abram into relationship with Nimrod, the\nmythical King of Babylon. According to legend Abram was originally an\nidolater, and many stories are preserved respecting his conversion.\nJewish legend states that the Father of the Faithful originally\nfollowed his father Terah's occupation, which was that of making and\nselling images of clay; and that, when very young, he advised his\nfather \"to leave his pernicious trade of idolatry by which he imposed\non the world.\"\n\nThe Jewish Rabbins relate that on one occasion, his father Terah having\nundertaken a considerable journey, the sale of the images devolved on\nhim, and it happened that a man who pretended to be a purchaser asked\nhim how old he was. \"Fifty years,\" answered the Patriarch. \"Wretch that\nthou art,\" said the man, \"for adoring at that age a thing which is only\none day old!\" Abram was astonished; and the exclamation of the old man\nhad such an effect upon him, that when a woman soon after brought some\nflour, as an offering to one of the idols, he took an axe and broke\nthem to pieces, preserving only the largest one, into the hand of which\nhe put the axe. Terah returned home and inquired what this havoc meant.\nAbram replied that the deities had quarrelled about an offering which\na woman had brought, upon which the larger one had seized an axe and\ndestroyed the others. Terah replied that he must be in jest, as it was\nimpossible that inanimate statues could so act; and Abram immediately\nretorted on his father his own words, showing him the absurdity of\nworshipping false deities. But Terah, who does not appear to have been\nconvinced, delivered Abram to Nimrod, who then dwelt in the Plain of\nShinar, where Babylon was built. Nimrod, having in vain exhorted Abram\nto worship fire, ordered him to be thrown into a burning furnace,\nexclaiming--\"Let your God come and take you out.\" As soon as Haran,\nAbram's youngest brother, saw the fate of the Patriarch, he resolved to\nconform to Nimrod's religion; but when he saw his brother come out of\nthe fire unhurt, he declared for the \"God of Abram,\" which caused him\nto be thrown in turn into the furnace, and he was consumed. A certain\nwriter, however, narrates a different version of Haran's death. He says\nthat he endeavoured to snatch Terah's idols from the flames, into which\nthey had been thrown by Abram, and was burnt to death in consequence.\n\n\nA Persian Version\n\nThe Persian Mussulmans allege that the Patriarch, who was born in\nChaldea, after God had manifested himself to him, proceeded to Mecca,\nand built the celebrated Kaaba or temple there. When he returned\nhome he publicly declared himself the Prophet of God, and specially\nannounced it to Nimrod, King of Chaldea, who was a worshipper of fire.\nAbram met Nimrod at a town in Mesopotamia, called Urga, afterwards\nCaramit, and now Diarbekr, in which was a large temple consecrated\nto fire, and publicly entreated the King to renounce his idolatry and\nworship the true God. Nimrod consulted his wise men and inquired what\npunishment such a blasphemer deserved, and they advised that he should\nbe consigned to the flames. A pile of wood was ordered to be prepared\nand Abram was placed upon it, but to their astonishment it would\nnot kindle. Nimrod asked the priests the cause of this phenomenon,\nand they replied that an angel was constantly flying about the pile\nand preventing the wood from burning. The King asked how the angel\ncould be driven away, and they replied that it could only be done by\nsome dreadful rite. Their advice was followed, but the angel still\npersisted, and Nimrod at length banished Abram from his dominions.\n\nThe Mussulmans also relate that the King made war against the\nPatriarch, and when he was marching against him, he sent a person to\nhim with this message--\"O Abram! it is now time to fight; where is thy\narmy?\" Abram answered, \"It will come immediately;\" and immediately\nthere appeared an immense sun-darkening cloud of gnats, which devoured\nNimrod's soldiers to the very bones.\n\nAnother tradition is preserved in the East, specially referring to\nthe casting of Abram into a fiery furnace at Babylon by order of\nNimrod, which seems to be a corrupted story of the deliverance of\nthe three Hebrews recorded by Daniel--Nimrod merely substituted for\nNebuchadrezzar, as no evidence exists that Abram ever was at Babylon.\n\"Nimrod,\" it is said, \"in a dream saw a star rising above the horizon,\nthe light of which eclipsed that of the sun.\" The soothsayers who were\nconsulted foretold that a child was to be born in Babylon who shortly\nwould become a great prince, and that he (Nimrod) had reason to fear\nhim. Terrified at this answer, Nimrod gave orders to search for such\nan infant. Notwithstanding this precaution, however, Adna, the wife of\nAzar, one of Nimrod's guards, hid her child in a cave, the mouth of\nwhich she diligently closed, and when she returned she told her husband\nthat it had perished.\n\nAdna, in the meantime, proceeded regularly to the cave to nurse the\ninfant, but she always found him suckling the ends of his fingers, one\nof which furnished him milk and the other honey. This miracle surprised\nher, and as her anxiety for the child's welfare was thus greatly\nrelieved, and as she saw that Heaven had undertaken the care, she\nmerely satisfied herself with visiting him from time to time. She soon\nperceived that he grew as much in three days as common children do in a\nmonth, so that fifteen moons had scarcely passed before he appeared as\nif he were fifteen years of age. Adna now told her husband, Azar, that\nthe son of whom she had been delivered, and whom she had reported dead,\nwas living, and that God had provided miraculously for his subsistence.\nAzar went immediately to the cave, where he found his son, and desired\nhis mother to convey him to the city, as he was resolved to present him\nto Nimrod and place him about the court.\n\nIn the evening Adna brought him forth out of his den, and conducted\nhim to a meadow where herds of cattle were feeding. This was a sight\nentirely new to the young Abram, who was inquisitive to learn their\nnature, and was informed by his mother of their names, uses, and\nqualities. Abram continued his inquiries and desired to know who\nproduced the animals. Adna told him that all things had their Lord\nand Creator. \"Who, then,\" said he, \"brought me into the world?\" \"I,\"\nreplied Adna. \"And who is your Lord?\" asked Abram. She answered,\n\"Azar.\" \"Who is Azar's Lord?\" She told him, Nimrod. He showed an\ninclination to carry his inquiries farther, but she checked him,\ntelling him that it was not convenient to search into other matters\nbecause of danger. At last he came to the city, the inhabitants of\nwhich he perceived deeply engaged in superstition and idolatry. After\nthis he returned to his grotto.\n\nOne evening, as he was going to Babylon, he saw the stars shining,\nand among others Venus, which was adored by many. He said within\nhimself--\"Perhaps this is the God and Creator of the world;\" but\nobserving some time after that this star was set, he said--\"This\ncertainly cannot be the Maker of the universe, for it is not possible\nhe should be subject to such a change.\" Soon after he noticed the moon\nat full, and thought that this might possibly be the Author of all\nthings; but when he perceived this planet also sink beneath the horizon\nhis opinion of it was the same as in the case of Venus. At length, near\nthe city he saw a multitude adoring the rising sun, and he was tempted\nto follow their example, but having seen this luminary decline like\nthe rest, he concluded that it was not his Creator, his Lord, and his\nGod. Azar presented his son Abram to Nimrod, who was seated on a lofty\nthrone, with a number of beautiful slaves of both sexes in attendance.\nAbram asked his father who was the person so much exalted above the\nrest. Azar answered--\"The King Nimrod, whom these people acknowledge\nas their God.\" \"It is impossible,\" replied Abram, \"that he should\nbe their God, since he is not so beautiful, and consequently not so\nperfect, as the generality of those about him.\"\n\nAbram now took an opportunity of conversing with his father about the\nunity of God, which afterwards drew him into great contests with the\nprincipal men of Nimrod's court, who would by no means acquiesce in the\ntruths he declared. Nimrod, informed of these disputes, commanded him,\nas we have already mentioned, to be thrown into a burning furnace, out\nof which he came without receiving the least hurt.\n\n\nThe 'Babylonica'\n\nFragments of Babylonian history, or rather historical romance, occur in\nthe writings of early authors other than Berossus. One of these is to\nbe found in the _Babylonica_ of Iamblichus, a work embracing no less\nthan sixteen books, by a native of Chalchis in C[oe]le-Syria, who was\nmuch enamoured of the mysterious ancient life of Babylonia and Assyria,\nand who died about A.D. 333. All that remains of what is palpably a\nromance, which may have been founded upon historical probability, is an\nepitome of the _Babylonica_ by Photius, which, still further condensed,\nis as follows:\n\nAttracted by her beauty and relying on his own great power, Garmus,\nKing of Babylon, decided to marry Sinonis, a maiden of surpassing\nbeauty. She, however, was already in love with another, Rhodanes,\nand discouraged Garmus' every advance. Her attachment became known\nto the King, but did not alter his determination, and to prevent the\npossibility of any attempt at flight on the part of the lovers, he\nappointed two eunuchs, Damas and Saca, to watch their movements. The\npenalty for negligence was loss of ears and nose, and that penalty\nthe eunuchs suffered. In spite of their close vigilance the lovers\nescaped. Damas and Saca were, however, placed at the head of troops and\ndespatched to recapture the fugitives. Their relentless search was not\nthe lovers' only anxiety, for in seeking refuge with some shepherds in\na meadow, they encountered a demon--a satyr, which in the shape of a\ngoat haunted that part of the country. This demon, to Sinonis' horror,\nbegan to pay her all sorts of weird, fantastic attentions, and finally\ncompelled her and Rhodanes to abandon the protection of the shepherds\nfor the concealment offered by a cavern. Here they were discovered by\nDamas and his forces, and must have been captured but for the opportune\narrival and attack of a swarm of poisonous bees which routed the\neunuchs. When the runaways were alone again they tasted and ate some of\nthe bees' honey, and almost immediately lost consciousness. Later Damas\nagain attacked the cavern, but finding the lovers still unconscious he\nand his troops left them there for dead.\n\nIn time, however, they recovered and continued their flight into the\ncountry. A man, who afterward poisoned his brother and accused them\nof the crime, offered them sanctuary. Only the suicide of this man\nsaved them from serious trouble and probably recapture, and from\nhis house they wandered into the company of a robber. Here again\nthe troops of Damas came upon them and burned their dwelling to the\nground. In desperation the fugitives masqueraded as the ghosts of the\npeople the robber had murdered in his house. Their ruse succeeded\nand once again their pursuers were thrown off the scent. They next\nencountered the funeral of a young girl, and witnessed her apparent\nreturn to life almost at the door of the sepulchre. In this sepulchre\nSinonis and Rhodanes slept that night, and once more were believed to\nbe dead by Damas and his soldiers. Later, however, Sinonis tried to\ndispose of their grave clothes and was arrested in the act. Soracchus,\nthe magistrate of the district, decided to send her to Babylon. In\ndespair she and Rhodanes took some poison with which they had provided\nthemselves against such an emergency. This had been anticipated by\ntheir guards, however, with the result that a sleeping draught had been\nsubstituted for the poison, and some time later the lovers to their\namazement awoke to find themselves in the vicinity of Babylon. Overcome\nby such a succession of misfortunes, Sinonis stabbed herself, though\nnot fatally. Soracchus, on learning this, was moved to compassion, and\nconsented to the escape of his prisoners.\n\n[Illustration: The Murder of Setapo.--Evelyn Paul.]\n\nAfter this the lovers embarked on a new series of adventures even\nmore thrilling than those which had gone before. The Temple of Venus\n(Ishtar), situated on an island of the Euphrates, was their first\ndestination after escaping from the captivity of Soracchus. Here\nSinonis' wound was healed, and afterward they sought refuge with\na cottager, whose daughter consented to dispose of some trinkets\nbelonging to Sinonis. In doing so the girl was mistaken for Sinonis,\nand news that Sinonis had been seen in the neighbourhood was sent at\nonce to Garmus. While selling the trinkets the cottage girl had become\nso alarmed by the suspicious questions and manner of the purchasers\nthat she hurried home with all possible speed. On her way back her\ncuriosity was excited by sounds of a great disturbance issuing from\na house hard by, and on entering she was appalled to discover a man\nin the very act of taking his life after murdering his mistress.\nTerrified and sprinkled with blood she sped back to her father's\nhouse. On hearing the girl's story, Sinonis realised that the safety\nof herself and Rhodanes lay only in flight. They prepared at once to\ngo, but before starting Rhodanes kissed the peasant girl. Sinonis,\ndiscovering what he had done by the blood on his lips, became furious\nwith jealousy. In a transport of rage she tried to stab the girl, and\non being prevented rushed to the house of Setapo, a wealthy Babylonian\nof evil repute. Setapo welcomed her only too cordially. At first\nSinonis pretended to meet his mood, but as time went by she relented\nof her treatment of Rhodanes and began to cast about for some means of\nescape. As the evening wore on she plied Setapo with wine until he was\nintoxicated, then during the night she murdered him, and in the first\nearly dawn left the house. The slaves of Setapo pursued and overtook\nher, however, and committed her to custody to answer for her crime.\n\nAll Babylon rejoiced with its king over the news of Sinonis' discovery.\nSo great was Garmus' delight that he commanded that all the prisoners\nthroughout his dominions should be released, and in this general boon\nSinonis shared. Meanwhile the dog of Rhodanes had scented out the\nhouse in which the peasant girl had witnessed the suicide of the lover\nwho had murdered his mistress, and while the animal was devouring the\nremains of the woman the father of Sinonis arrived at the same house.\nThinking the mutilated body was that of his daughter he buried it,\nand on the tomb he placed the inscription: \"Here lies the beautiful\nSinonis.\" Some days later Rhodanes passed that way, and on reading the\ninscription added to it, \"And also the beautiful Rhodanes.\" In his\ngrief he would have stabbed himself had not the peasant girl who had\nbeen the cause of Sinonis' jealousy prevented him by telling him who in\nreality was buried there.\n\nDuring these adventures Soracchus had been imprisoned for allowing the\nlovers to escape, and this, added to the threat of further punishment,\ninduced him to help the Babylonian officers to trace Rhodanes. So in\na short time Rhodanes was prisoner once again, and by the command of\nGarmus was nailed to a cross. In sight of him the King danced delirious\nwith revengeful joy, and while he was so engaged a messenger arrived\nwith the news that Sinonis was about to be espoused by the King of\nSyria, into whose dominions she had escaped. Rhodanes was taken down\nfrom the cross and put in command of the Babylonian army. This seeming\nchange of fortune was really dictated by the treachery of Garmus, as\ncertain inferior officers were commanded by Garmus to slay Rhodanes\nshould he defeat the Syrians, and to bring Sinonis alive to Babylon.\nRhodanes won a sweeping victory and also regained the affection and\ntrust of Sinonis. The officers of Garmus, instead of obeying his\ncommand, proclaimed the victor king, and all ended auspiciously for the\nlovers.\n\n\nCuneiform Writing\n\nThe manner in which the ancient cuneiform writing of Babylonia and\nAssyria was deciphered and restored to the world of science and\nletters may be regarded as a great triumph of human reason. The name\n'cuneiform' is most appropriate, for each character or sign is composed\nof a wedge or combination of wedges. It is written, as most Oriental\nlanguages, from left to right. The cuneiform script was first noticed\nby a European at such a relatively early period as the year A.D. 1470,\nwhen Josaphat Barbaro, a Venetian traveller, observed it cut on the\nplatform of Rachmet in Persia. Another Italian, Pietro della Valle,\npassing that way in 1621, copied a few of the signs, which he sent back\nto Italy, and Sir John Chardin accurately reproduced an inscription\nfound at Persepolis in 1711. It was obvious that three separate\nlanguages were written in this script, and these have since been\nfound to be Persian, Babylonian, and Susian. In 1765 Niebuhr visited\nPersepolis, and in less than a month copied all the texts there, which\nwere then ready for decipherment. Returning to Denmark he occupied\nhimself with studying what he had set down at Persepolis, and divided\nthe smaller inscriptions into three classes, which he described as\nClasses I, II, and III instead of into three languages. Discovering\nthat Class I embraced only forty-two signs, he set these in order, and\nbut little subsequent addition has had to be made to them. Deciding\nthat the language of the signs was written in alphabetic characters, he\nfound himself obliged to call a halt. But two other scholars were more\nfortunate than he. Tychsen hit upon a certain diagonal sign as that\nemployed to separate words, and correctly identified the alphabetic\nsigns for 'a,' 'd,' 'u,' and 's.' Hunter of Copenhagen was more careful\nto verify his historical data than Tychsen had been, and was able to\nidentify distinctly the authors of the inscriptions before him. He,\ntoo, independently identified the oblique wedge as a separative of\nwords, and hit upon the significance of the sign for the letter 'b.'\nBut after these achievements it seemed as if little more could be done.\nIt must be remembered that up to this time no such assistance was\nvouchsafed the searchers as in the case of the Egyptian hieroglyphs,\nwhere a Greek inscription had been found side by side with an Egyptian\none.\n\n\nGrotefend\n\nBut a man of the greatest natural ingenuity was resolved to combat\nthe difficulty presented by the cuneiform script. Georg Grotefend\ntook up the task in the early years of the nineteenth century.\nBeginning with the assumption that the inscriptions represented three\nlanguages, and that one of these was ancient Persian, he took two of\nthe inscriptions which he understood to be Persian, and placing them\nside by side found that certain signs were of frequent recurrence. This\nindicated to him the possibility that their contents were similar.\nA certain word appeared very frequently in the inscriptions, but it\nseemed to have two forms, a longer and a shorter, and this Grotefend,\nadopting a suggestion of Hunter's, took to mean 'king' in the short\nform and 'kings' in the longer, the juxtaposition of the two signs\nthus being taken to signify 'king of kings.' In both the inscriptions\nstudied by Grotefend he found that this expression 'king of kings'\nwas followed by the same word, which he took to mean 'great.' But\nthere were no definite facts to support these hypotheses. Turning to\ncertain Sassanian inscriptions which had recently been deciphered,\nhe found that the expression 'great king, king of kings' inevitably\noccurred, and this strengthened his opinion that it was present in the\ninscriptions he studied. If this was so, thought he, the two texts\nunder his observation must have been set up by two different kings,\nfor the names were not the same at the beginning. Moreover the name\nwith which text No. I began appears in the third line of text No. II,\nfollowing the word supposed to be 'king,' and another which might mean\n'son.' Grotefend thus concluded that in the two inscriptions he had the\nnames of a triad of rulers, son, father, and grandfather. Applying to\nthe list of the Ach\u00e6nenian dynasty in the attempt to find three names\nwhich would suit the conditions, he selected those of Xerxes, Darius,\nand Hystaspes. Supposing the name at the beginning of inscription I to\nbe Darius, he thus considered himself to be justified in translating\ntext I as \"Darius, great king, king of kings, son of Hystaspes,\"\nand text II as \"Xerxes, great king, king of kings, son of Darius.\"\nConsidering that the Persian spelling of Darius would be Darheush,\nhe applied the letters of that name to the letters of the cuneiform\nscript. Subsequent investigation has shown that the name should have\nbeen read Daryavush, but Grotefend at least succeeded in discovering\nthe letters for 'd,' 'a,' 'r,' and 'sh.'\n\nBut this was practically the end of Grotefend's discoveries. Burnouf,\nby a careful study of Persian geographical names, managed to decipher a\nlarge number of the characters of the Persian alphabet, and Professor\nLassen of Bonn, by similar means, achieved a like end. These two\nindependent achievements raised a fierce controversy as to priority of\ndiscovery, but Lassen's system was the more perfect, as he found out\nthat the ancient Persian signs were not entirely alphabetic but were\npartially syllabic--that is, that certain signs represented syllables\ninstead of letters. This meant that Grotefend's system, which had\nbeen almost vowelless, was now to a great extent filled in with the\nnecessary vowels.\n\n\nRawlinson\n\nAt this juncture a certain Major Henry Rawlinson, a servant of the\nEast India Company, with a good knowledge of Persian, went to Persia\nfor the purpose of assisting to organize the native army there. He\nwas far away from books, and when he began to copy certain cuneiform\ntexts it was because of deep personal interest. He was quite unaware\nof the strenuous toil which had been lavished upon them in Europe and\nworked quite independently of all assistance. The strange thing is\nthat he laboured almost on the same lines as Grotefend had done. He\nsaw almost at once that he had three languages to deal with, and being\na man of great natural gifts he soon grouped the signs in a correct\nmanner. Strangely enough he applied the very same names--those of\nHystaspes, Darius, and Xerxes--to the texts as Grotefend had done, and\nfound them answer in the same manner. Turning his attention to the\ninscription of Darius at Behistun, high up in the face of the living\nwall of rock there, Rawlinson succeeded in copying part of it at great\npersonal risk. In 1838 he forwarded his translation of the first two\nparagraphs of the Persian text, containing the genealogy of Darius,\nto the Royal Asiatic Society of London. The feat made a tremendous\nsensation, and he was supplied with all the principal works on the\nsubject and much correspondence from European scholars. He was,\nhowever, patience personified, and would not publish a work he had\nwritten on the subject because he thought it better to wait until he\nhad verified his conclusions and perhaps made fresh discoveries. But in\n1840 he was despatched to Afghanistan on a political mission and did\nnot return to Bagdad for three years, and it was not until 1846 that\nhe published a series of memoirs in the _Journal_ of the Royal Asiatic\nSociety, in which he gave to the world a translation of the Persian\ntext at Behistun. It was a marvellous achievement, for, unlike those\nwho had been labouring on the subject in Europe, he was ignorant of the\nlanguages allied to Persian, yet he had surpassed all other scholars in\nhis results.\n\nBut the deciphering of the second and third languages had yet to be\nattacked. In 1844 Westergaard, working on the lines of Grotefend,\nattacked the second language. He selected the names of Darius,\nHystaspes, and Xerxes, and compared them with their equivalents in\nthe Persian texts. By this means he discovered a number of signs and\nby their aid attempted to spell out the syllables or words. Judging\nthe writing to be partly alphabetic and partly syllabic, he gave the\nname Median to the language. Morris, who had Rawlinson's copy of the\nsecond transcription of the Behistun text to work upon, deciphered\nnearly all of it. Shortly after this the language was named Susian. The\ndeciphering of the third of the three languages found at Persepolis\nwas attacked by L\u00f6wenstern, and by the Rev. Edward Hinks, an Irish\nclergyman. This language was Assyrian purely. Hinks was fearful of\nmaking blunders, and whilst he was engaged in assuring himself that\nevery step he took was not a false one, Longp\u00e9rier, published in\n1847 a translation of the entire text. He was only able to read it\nby analogy with the other texts; he could not provide the forms of\nthe Assyrian words themselves. But Rawlinson once more came to the\naid of the study, and it was shown that a large number of signs were\nideographic. This paved the way for a band of others who by their\nunited efforts succeeded in unravelling the complicated script.\n\n\nOrigin of Cuneiform\n\nThis peculiar system of writing originated in Babylonia, its inventors\nbeing the Sumerian or non-Semitic people who inhabited that country\nbefore its settlement by the Babylonians. It was developed from\npicture-writing, and indeed some of the more highly significant of\nthe pictorial signs can still be faintly traced in their cuneiform\nequivalents. This early picture-writing was inscribed on stone, but\neventually soft clay was adopted as a medium for the script, and it\nwas found that straight lines impressed upon this medium tended to the\nshape of a wedge. The pictures therefore lost their original character\nand came to be mere conventional groups of wedges. The plural was\nrepresented by doubling the sign, and a term might be intensified\nby the addition of a certain stroke: thus the sign for 'house,' if\nfour small strokes were added to it, would mean 'great house,' and so\nforth. The script was badly suited to the Assyrian language, as it\nhad not been originally designed for a Semitic tongue. It consists\nof simple syllables made up of a vowel by itself or a vowel and a\nconsonant, ideograms or signs which express an entire word, and closed\nsyllables such as _bit_ or _bal_. Again, many of the signs have more\nthan one syllabic value, and they may be used as ideograms as well as\nphonetically. As in the Egyptian script, determinatives are employed to\nindicate the class to which the word belongs: thus, a certain sign is\nplaced before the names of persons, another before territorial names,\nand a third before the names of gods and sacred beings. The date of the\nepoch in which this writing first began to be used was probably about\n4500 B.C. and it persisted until the first century B.C. The Assyrians\nemployed it from about 1500 B.C. until about the beginning of the sixth\ncentury B.C. This ancient form of writing was thus used first by the\nSumerians, then by their Babylonian and Assyrian conquerors, then by\nthose Persians who finally overthrew the Babylonian and Assyrian empire.\n\n\nThe Sacred Literature of Babylonia\n\nThe literature which this peculiar and individual script has brought\ndown to us is chiefly religious, magical, epical, and legendary. The\nlast three categories are dealt with elsewhere, so that it only falls\nhere to consider the first class, the religious writings. These are\nusually composed in Semitic Babylonian without any trace of Akkadian\ninfluence, and it cannot be said that they display any especial natural\neloquence or literary distinction. In an address to the sun-god, which\nbegins nobly enough with a high apostrophe to the golden luminary of\nday, we find ourselves descending gradually into an atmosphere of\nalmost ludicrous dullness. The person praying desires the sun-god to\nfree him from the commonplace cares of family and domestic annoyances,\nenumerating spells against all of his relatives in order that they\nmay not place their 'ban' upon him. In another, written in Akkadian,\nthe penitent addresses Gubarra, Merodach, and other gods, desiring\nthat they direct their eyes kindly upon him and that his supplication\nmay reach them. Strangely enough the prayer fervently pleads that its\nutterance may _do good to the gods!_ that it may let their hearts rest,\ntheir livers be quieted, and gladden them like a father and a mother\nwho have begotten children. This is not so strange when we come to\nconsider the nature of these hymns, many of which come perilously near\nthe border-line of pure magic--that is, they closely resemble spells.\nWe find, too, that those which invoke the older deities such as Gibi\nthe fire-god, are more magical in their trend than those addressed to\nthe later gods when a higher sense of religious feeling had probably\nbeen evolved. Indeed, it does not seem too much to say that some of\nthese early hymns may have served the purpose of later incantations.\nMost of those 'magical' hymns appear to have emanated from that\nextremely ancient seat of religion, Eridu, and are probably relics of\nthe time when as yet magic and religion were scarcely differentiated in\nthe priestly or the popular mind.\n\n\nHymn to Adar\n\nA fine hymn to Adar describes the rumbling of the storm in the abyss,\nthe 'voice' of the god:\n\n     The terror of the splendour of Anu in the midst of heaven.\n\nThe gods, it is said, urge Adar on, he descends like the deluge, the\nchampion of the gods swoops down upon the hostile land. Nusku, the\nmessenger of Mul-lil, receives Adar in the temple and addresses words\nof praise to him:\n\n     Thy chariot is as a voice of thunder.\n     To the lifting of thy hands is the shadow turned.\n     The spirits of the earth, the great gods, return to the winds.\n\nMany of the hymns assist us to a better understanding of the precise\nnature of the gods, defining as they do their duties and offices and\neven occasionally describing their appearance. Thus in a hymn to Nebo\nwe note that he is alluded to as \"the supreme messenger who binds all\nthings together,\" \"the scribe of all that has a name,\" \"the lifter up\nof the stylus supreme,\" \"director of the world,\" \"possessor of the\nreed of augury,\" \"traverser of strange lands,\" \"opener of wells,\"\n\"fructifier of the corn,\" and \"the god without whom the irrigated\nland and the canal are unwatered.\" It is from such texts that the\nmythologist is enabled to piece together the true significance of many\nof the deities of ancient peoples.\n\nA hymn to Nusku in his character of fire-god is also descriptive and\npicturesque. He is alluded to as \"wise prince, the flame of heaven,\"\n\"he who hurls down terror, whose clothing is splendour,\" \"the forceful\nfire-god,\" \"the exalter of the mountain peaks,\" and \"the uplifter of\nthe torch, the enlightener of darkness.\"\n\nSuch descriptive hymns are the most valuable assets possible in the\nhands of the judicious student of myth or comparative religion.\n\n\n[1] Vol. iii, p. 167. Second Edition. (By kind permission of Messrs\nMacmillan and Co.)\n\n[2] Ut-Napishtim.\n\n[3] This passage has, however, been interpreted by some Biblical\nscholars to mean that \"Nimrod went out of this land into Asshur\" (or\nAssyria) \"and built Nineveh.\" See Bryant, _Antient Mythology_, vol. vi,\npp. 191-2-3.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II: BABYLONIAN COSMOGONY\n\n\nThe Babylonian Myth of Creation\n\nFew creation myths are more replete with interest than those which\nhave literary sanction. These are few in number, as, for example, the\ncreation story in Genesis, those to be found in Egyptian papyri, and\nthat contained in the _Popol Vuh_ of the Maya of Central America. In\nsuch an account we can trace the creation story from the first dim\nconception of world-shaping to the polished and final effort of a\npriestly caste to give a theological interpretation to the intentions\nof the creative deity; and this is perhaps more the case with the\ncreation myth which had its rise among the old Akkadian population of\nBabylonia than with any other known to mythic science. In the account\nin Genesis of the framing of the world it has been discovered that\ntwo different versions have been fused to form a single story; the\ncreation tale of the _Popol Vuh_ is certainly a composite myth; and\nsimilar suspicions may rest upon the analogous myths of Scandinavia and\nJapan. But in the case of Babylonia we may be convinced that no other\ninfluences except those of the races who inhabited Babylonian territory\ncould have been brought to bear upon this ancient story, and that\nalthough critical examination has proved it to consist of materials\nwhich have been drawn from more than one source, yet these sources are\nnot foreign, and they have not undergone sophistication at the hands of\nany alien mythographer or interpolator.\n\n[Illustration: The Seven Tablets of Creation.--Photo W. A. Mansell and\nCo.]\n\nIt would seem that this Babylonian cosmogony was drawn from various\nsources, but it appears to be contained in its final form in what\nare known as the Seven Tablets of Creation, brought from the library\nof Assur-bani-pal at Nineveh and now in the British Museum. These\nhave from time to time been supplemented by later finds, but we may\ntake it that in this record we have the final official development of\nBabylonian belief, due to the priests of Babylon, after that city had\nbecome the metropolis of the empire. The primary object of the Seven\nTablets was to record a terrific fight between Bel and the Dragon,\nand the account of the creation is inserted by way of introduction.\nIt is undoubtedly the most important find dealing with Babylonian\nreligion that has as yet come to light. Before we advance any critical\nspeculations respecting it, let us set forth the story which it has to\ntell.\n\nAs in so many creation myths we find chaotic darkness brooding over a\nwaste of waters; heaven and earth were not as yet. Naught existed save\nthe primeval ocean, Mommu Tiawath,[1] from whose fertile depths came\nevery living thing. Nor were the waters distributed, as in the days of\nman, into sea, river, or lake, but all were confined together in one\nvast and bottomless abyss. Neither did god or man exist: their names\nwere unknown and their destinies undetermined. The future was as dark\nas the gloom which lay over the mighty gulf of chaos. Nothing had been\ndesigned or debated concerning it.\n\n\nThe Birth of the Gods\n\nBut there came a stirring in the darkness and the great gods arose.\nFirst came Lahmu and Lahame; and many epochs later, Ansar and Kisar,\ncomponent parts of whose names signify 'Host of Heaven' and 'Host of\nEarth.' These latter names we may perhaps accept as symbolical of the\nspirits of heaven and of earth respectively. Many days afterward came\nforth their son Anu, god of the heavens.\n\nAt this point it should be explained that the name Tiawath affords a\nparallel to the expression _T'hom_ or 'deep' of the Old Testament.\nPractically the same word is used in Assyrian in the form _Tamtu_, to\nsignify the 'deep sea.'[2] The reader will recall that it was upon\nthe face of the deep that the spirit of God brooded, according to the\nfirst chapter of Genesis. The word and the idea which it contains are\nequally Semitic, but strangely enough it has an Akkadian origin. For\nthe conception that the watery abyss was the source of all things\noriginated with the worshippers of the sea-god Ea at Eridu. They termed\nthe deep _apsu_, or a 'house of knowledge' wherein their tutelar god\nwas supposed to have his dwelling, and this word was of Akkadian\ndescent. This _apsu_, or 'abyss,' in virtue of the animistic ideas\nprevailing in early Akkadian times, had become personalized as a\nfemale who was regarded as the mother of Ea. She was known by another\nname as well as that of Apsu, for she was also entitled Zigarun, the\n'heaven,' or the 'mother that has begotten heaven and earth'; and\nindeed she seems to have had a form or variant in which she was an\nearth-goddess as well. But it was not the existing earth or heaven that\nshe represented in either of her forms, but the primeval abyss, out of\nwhich both of these were fashioned.\n\nAt this point the narrative exhibits numerous defects, and for a\ncontinuation of it we must apply to Damascius, the last of the\nNeoplatonists, who was born in Damascus about A.D. 480, and who is\nregarded by most Assyriologists as having had access to valuable\nwritten or traditional material. He was the author of a work entitled\n_Doubts and Solutions of the First Principles_, in which he states\nthat Anu was followed by Bel (we retain the Babylonian form of the\nnames rather than Damascius' Greek titles), and Ea the god of Eridu.\n\"From Ea and Dawkina,\" he writes, \"was born a son called Belos or\nBel-Merodach, whom the Babylonians regarded as the creator of the\nworld.\" From Damascius we can learn nothing further, and the defective\ncharacter of the tablet does not permit us to proceed with any degree\nof certainty until we arrive at the name of Nudimmud, which appears to\nbe simply a variant of the name of Ea. From obscure passages it may be\ngenerally gleaned that Tiawath and Apsu, once one, or rather originally\nrepresenting the Babylonian and Akkadian forms of the deep, are now\nregarded as mates--Tiawath being the female and Apsu, once female, in\nthis case the male. These have a son, Moumis or Mummu, a name which at\none time seems to have been given to Tiawath, so that in these changes\nwe may be able to trace the hand of the later mythographer, who, with\nless skill and greater levity than is to be found in most myths, has\ntaken upon himself the responsibility of manufacturing three deities\nout of one. It may be that the scribe in question was well aware that\nhis literary effort must square with and placate popular belief or\npopular prejudice, and in no era and at no time has priestly ingenuity\nbeen unequal to such a task, as is well evidenced by many myths which\nexhibit traces of late alteration. But in dwelling for a moment on\nthis question, it is only just to the priesthood to admit that such\nchanges did not always emanate from them, but were the work of poets\nand philosophers who, for \u00e6sthetic or rational reasons, took it upon\nthemselves to recast the myths of their race according to the dictates\nof a nicer taste, or in the interests of 'reason.'\n\n\nA Darksome Trinity\n\nThese three, then, Tiawath, Apsu, and Mummu, appear to have formed\na trinity, which bore no good-will to the 'higher gods.'[3] They\nthemselves, as deities of a primeval epoch, were doubtless regarded\nby the theological opinion of a later day as dark, dubious, and\nunsatisfactory. It is notorious that in many lands the early, elemental\ngods came into bad odour in later times; and it may be that the\nAkkadian descent of this trio did not conduce to their popularity with\nthe Babylonian people. Be that as it may, alien and aboriginal gods\nhave in all times been looked upon by an invading and conquering race\nwith distrust as the workers of magic and the sowers of evil, and even\nalthough a Babylonian name had been accorded one of them, it may not\nhave been employed in a complimentary sense. Whereas the high gods\nregarded those of the abyss with distrust, the darker deities of chaos\ntook up an attitude towards the divinities of light which can only be\ncompared to the sarcastic tone which Milton's Satan adopts against\nthe Power which thrust him into outer darkness. Apsu was the most\nironical of all. There was no peace for him, he declared, so long as\nthe new-comers dwelt on high: their way was not his way, neither was it\nthat of Tiawath, who, if Apsu represented sarcasm deified, exhibited a\nfierce truculence much more overpowering than the irony of her mate.\nThe trio discussed how they might rid themselves of those beings who\ndesired a reign of light and happiness, and in these deliberations\nMummu, the son, was the prime mover. Here again the Tablets fails us\nsomewhat, but we learn sufficient further on to assure us that Mummu's\nproject was one of open war against the gods of heaven.\n\nIn connexion with this campaign, Tiawath made the most elaborate\npreparations along with her companions. She laboured without ceasing.\nFrom the waters of the great abyss over which she presided she called\nforth the most fearful monsters, who remind us strongly of those\nagainst which Horus, the Egyptian god of light, had to strive in his\nwars with Set. From the deep came gigantic serpents armed with stings,\ndripping with the most deadly poison; dragons of vast shape reared\ntheir heads above the flood, their huge jaws armed with row upon row of\nformidable teeth; giant dogs of indescribable savagery; men fashioned\npartly like scorpions; fish-men, and countless other horrible beings,\nwere created and formed into battalions under the command of a god\nnamed Kingu, to whom Tiawath referred as her 'only husband' and to whom\nshe promised the rule of heaven and of fate when once the detested gods\nof light are removed by his mighty arm.\n\nThe introduction of this being as the husband of Tiawath seems to point\neither to a fusion of legends or to the interpolation of some passage\npopular in Babylonian lore. At this juncture Apsu disappears, as does\nMummu. Can it be that at this point a scribe or mythographer took up\nthe tale who did not agree with his predecessor in describing Tiawath,\nApsu, and Mummu, originally one, as three separate deities? This would\nexplain the divergence, but the point is an obscure one, and hasty\nconclusions on slight evidence are usually doomed to failure. To resume\nour narrative, Tiawath, whoever her coadjutors, was resolved to retain\nin her own hands the source of all living things, that great deep over\nwhich she presided.\n\nBut the gods of heaven were by no means lulled into peaceful security,\nfor they were aware of the ill-will which Tiawath bore them. They\nlearned of her plot, and great was their wrath. Ea, the god of water,\nwas the first to hear of it, and related it to Ansar, his father,\nwho filled heaven with his cries of anger. Ansar betook himself to\nhis other son, Anu, god of the sky. \"Speak to the great dragon,\" he\nurged him; \"speak to her, my son, and her anger will be assuaged and\nher wrath vanish.\" Duly obedient, Anu betook himself to the realm of\nTiawath to reason with her, but the monster snarled at him so fiercely\nthat in dread he turned his back upon her and departed. Next came\nNudimmud to her, but with no better success. At length the gods decided\nthat one of their number, called Merodach, should undertake the task\nof combating Tiawath the terrible. Merodach asked that it might be\nwritten that he should be victorious, and this was granted him. He\nwas then given rule over the entire universe, and to test whether or\nnot the greatest power had passed to him a garment was placed in the\nmidst of the gods and Merodach spoke words commanding that it should\ndisappear. Straightway it vanished and was not. Once more spake the\ngod, and the garment re-appeared before the eyes of the dwellers in\nheaven. The portion of the epic which describes the newly acquired\nglories of Merodach is exceedingly eloquent. We are told that none\namong the gods can now surpass him in power, that the place of their\ngathering has become his home, that they have given him the supreme\nsovereignty, and they even beg that to them who put their trust in him\nhe will be gracious. They pray[4] that he may pour out the soul of\nthe keeper of evil, and finally they place in his hands a marvellous\nweapon with which to cut off the life of Tiawath. \"Let the winds carry\nher blood to secret places,\" they exclaimed in their desire that the\nwaters of this fountain of wickedness should be scattered far and wide.\nMighty was he to look upon when he set forth for the combat. His great\nbow he bore upon his back; he swung his massive club triumphantly. He\nset the lightning before him; he filled his body with swiftness; and\nhe framed a great net to enclose the dragon of the sea. Then with a\nword he created terrible winds and tempests, whirlwinds, storms, seven\nin all, for the confounding of Tiawath. The hurricane was his weapon,\nand he rode in the chariot of destiny. His helm blazed with terror and\nawful was his aspect. The steeds which were yoked to his chariot rushed\nrapidly towards the abyss, their mouths frothing with venomous foam.\nFollowed by all the good wishes of the gods, Merodach fared forth that\nday.\n\n[Illustration: \"Mighty was he to look upon.\"--Evelyn Paul.]\n\nSoon he came to Tiawath's retreat, but at sight of the monster he\nhalted, and with reason, for there crouched the great dragon, her scaly\nbody still gleaming with the waters of the abyss, flame darting from\nher eyes and nostrils, and such terrific sounds issuing from her widely\nopen mouth as would have terrified any but the bravest of the gods.\nMerodach reproached Tiawath for her rebellion and ended by challenging\nher to combat. Like the dragons of all time, Tiawath appears to have\nbeen versed in magic and hurled the most potent incantations against\nher adversary. She cast many a spell. But Merodach, unawed by this,\nthrew over her his great net, and caused an evil wind which he had sent\non before him to blow on her, so that she might not close her mouth.\nThe tempest rushed between her jaws and held them open; it entered her\nbody and racked her frame. Merodach swung his club on high, and with\na mighty blow shattered her great flank and slew her. Down he cast\nher corpse and stood upon it; then he cut out her evil heart. Finally\nhe overthrew the host of monsters which had followed her, so that at\nlength they trembled, turned, and fled in headlong rout. These also he\ncaught in his net and \"kept them in bondage.\" Kingu he bound and took\nfrom him the tablets of destiny which had been granted to him by the\nslain Tiawath, which obviously means that the god of a later generation\nwrenches the power of fate from an earlier hierarchy, just as one\nearthly dynasty may overthrow and replace another. The north wind bore\nTiawath's blood away to secret places, and at the sight Ea, sitting\nhigh in the heavens, rejoiced exceedingly. Then Merodach took rest and\nnourishment, and as he rested a plan arose in his mind. Rising, he\nflayed Tiawath of her scaly skin and cut her asunder. We have already\nseen that the north wind bore her blood away, which probably symbolises\nthe distribution of rivers over the earth.[5] Then did Merodach\ntake the two parts of her vast body, and with one of them he framed\na covering for the heavens. Merodach next divided the upper from the\nlower waters, made dwellings for the gods, set lights in the heaven,\nand ordained their regular courses.\n\nAs the tablet poetically puts it, \"he lit up the sky establishing\nthe upper firmament, and caused Anu, Bel, and Ea to inhabit it.\" He\nthen founded the constellations as stations for the great gods, and\ninstituted the year, setting three constellations for each month, and\nplacing his own star, Nibiru, as the chief light in the firmament.\nThen he caused the new moon, Nannaru, to shine forth and gave him the\nrulership of the night, granting him a day of rest in the middle of\nthe month. There is another mutilation at this point, and we gather\nthat the net of Merodach, with which he had snared Tiawath, was placed\nin the heavens as a constellation along with his bow. The winds also\nappear to have been bound or tamed and placed in the several points\nof the compass; but the whole passage is very obscure, and doubtless\ninformation of surpassing interest has been lost through the mutilation\nof the tablet.\n\nWe shall probably not be far in error if we regard the myth of the\ncombat between Merodach and Tiawath as an explanation of the primal\nstrife between light and darkness. Among the most primitive peoples,\nthe solar hero has at one stage of his career to encounter a grisly\ndragon or serpent, who threatens his very existence. In many cases\nthis monster guards a treasure which mythologists of a generation ago\nalmost invariably explained as that gold which is spread over the sky\nat the hour of sunset. The assigning of solar characteristics to all\nslayers of dragons and their kind was a weakness of the older school of\nmythology, akin to its deductions based on philological grounds; but\nsuch criticism as has been directed against the solar theory--and it\nhas been extensive--has not always been pertinent, and in many cases\nhas been merely futile. In fact the solar theory suffered because of\nthe philological arguments with which it was bound up, and neither\ncritics nor readers appeared to discriminate between these. But we\nshould constantly bear in mind that to attempt to elucidate or explain\nmyths by any one system, or by one hard and fast hypothesis, is futile.\nOn the other hand nearly all systems which have yet attempted to\nelucidate or disentangle the terms of myth are capable of application\nto certain types of myth. The dragon story is all but universal: in\nChina it is the monster which temporarily swallows the sun during\neclipse; in Egypt it was the great serpent Apep, which battled with\nRa and Horus, both solar heroes; in India it is the serpent Vritra,\nor Ahi, who is vanquished by Indra; in Australia and in some parts of\nNorth America a great frog takes the place of the dragon. In the story\nof Beowulf the last exploit of the hero is the slaying of a terrible\nfire-breathing dragon which guards a hidden treasure-hoard; and\nBeowulf receives a mortal wound in the encounter. In the Volsung Saga\nthe covetous Faffnir is turned into a dragon and is slain by Sigurd.\nThese must not be confounded with the monsters which cause drought and\npestilence. It is a sun-swallowing monster with which we have here to\ndeal.\n\n[Illustration: Conflict between Merodach and Tiawath.--Photo W. A.\nMansell and Co.]\n\nThe tablets here allude to the creation of man; the gods, it is\nstated, so admired the handiwork of Merodach, that they desired to\nsee him execute still further marvels. Now the gods had none to\nworship them or pay them homage, and Merodach suggested to his father,\nEa, the creation of man out of his divine blood. Here once more the\ntablets fail us, and we must turn to the narrative of the Chaldean\nwriter Berossus, as preserved by no less than three authors of the\nclassical age. Berossus states that a certain woman Thalatth (that is,\nTiawath) had many strange creatures at her bidding. Belus (that is,\nBel-Merodach) attacked and cut her in twain, forming the earth out\nof one half and the heavens out of the other, and destroying all the\ncreatures over which she ruled. Then did Merodach decapitate himself,\nand as his blood flowed forth the other gods mingled it with the earth\nand formed man from it. From this circumstance mankind is rational, and\nhas a spark of the divine in it. Then did Merodach divide the darkness,\nseparate the heavens from the earth, and order the details of the\nentire universe. But those animals which he had created were not able\nto bear the light, and died. A passage then occurs which states that\nthe stars, the sun and moon, and the five planets were created, and it\nwould seem from the repetition that there were two creations, that the\nfirst was a failure, in which Merodach had, as it were, essayed a first\nattempt, perfecting the process in the second creation. Of course it\nmay be conjectured that Berossus may have drawn from two conflicting\naccounts, or that those who quote him have inserted the second passage.\n\nThe Sumerian incantation, which is provided with a Semitic translation,\nadds somewhat to our knowledge of this cosmogony. It states that in the\nbeginning nothing as yet existed, none of the great cities of Babylonia\nhad yet been built, indeed there was no land, nothing but sea. It\nwas not until the veins of Tiawath had been cut through that paradise\nand the abyss appear to have been separated and the gods created by\nMerodach. Also did he create _annunaki_ or gods of the earth, and\nestablished a wondrous city as a place in which they might dwell.\nThen men were formed with the aid of the goddess Aruru, and finally\nvegetation, trees, and animals. Then did Merodach raise the great\ntemples of Erech and Nippur. From this account we see that instead of\nMerodach being alluded to as the son of the gods, he is regarded as\ntheir creator. In the library of Nineveh was also discovered a copy\nof a tablet written for the great temple of Nergal at Cuthah. Nergal\nhimself is supposed to make the statement which it contains. He tells\nus how the hosts of chaos and confusion came into being. At first,\nas in the other accounts, nothingness reigned supreme, then did the\ngreat gods create warriors with the bodies of birds, and men with the\nfaces of ravens. They founded them a city in the ground, and Tiawath,\nthe great dragon, did suckle them. They were fostered in the midst of\nthe mountains, and under the care of the 'mistress of the gods' they\ngreatly increased and became heroes of might. Seven kings had they,\nwho ruled over six thousand people. Their father was the god Benani,\nand their mother the queen, Melili. These beings, who might almost be\ncalled tame gods of evil, Nergal states that he destroyed.[6] Thus\nall accounts agree concerning the original chaotic condition of the\nuniverse. They also agree that the powers of chaos and darkness were\ndestroyed by a god of light.\n\nThe creation tablets are written in Semitic and allude to the great\ncircle of the gods as already fully developed and having its full\ncomplement. Even the later deities are mentioned in them. This means\nthat it must be assigned to a comparatively late date, but it possesses\nelements which go to show that it is a late edition of a much earlier\ncomposition--indeed the fundamental elements in it appear, as has been\nsaid, to be purely Akkadian in origin, and that would throw back the\ndate of its original form to a very primitive period indeed. It has, as\nwill readily be seen, a very involved cosmogony. Its characteristics\nshow it to have been originally local, and of course Babylonian,\nin its secondary origin, but from time to time it was added to, so\nthat such gods as were at a later date adopted into the Babylonian\npantheon might be explained and accounted for by it; but the legend\nof the creation arising in the city of Babylon, the local folk-tale\nknown and understood by the people, was never entirely shelved by the\nmore consequential and polished epic, which was perhaps only known\nand appreciated in literary and \u00e6sthetic circles, and bore the same\nrelation to the humbler folk-story that Milton's _Paradise Lost_ bears\nto the medieval legends of the casting out of Satan from heaven.\n\nAlthough it is quite easy to distinguish influences of extreme\nantiquity in the Babylonian creation myth, it is clear that in the\nshape in which it has come down to us it has been altered in such a\nmanner as to make Merodach reap the entire credit of Tiawath's defeat\ninstead of En-lil, or the deity who was his predecessor as monarch of\nthe gods. Jastrow holds that the entire cosmological tale has been\nconstructed from an account of a conflict with a primeval monster and\na story of a rebellion against Ea; that these two tales have become\nfused, and that the first is again divisible into three versions,\noriginating one at Uruk and the other two at Nippur at different\nepochs. The first celebrates the conquest of Anu over Tiawath, the\nsecond exalts Ninib as the conqueror, and the third replaces him by\nEn-lil. We thus see how it was possible for the god of a conquering or\npopular dynasty to have a complete myth made over to him, and how at\nlast it was competent for the mighty Merodach of Babylon to replace an\nentire line of deities as the central figure of a myth which must have\nbeen popular with untold generations of Akkadian and Babylonian people.\n\n\nType of Babylonian Cosmology\n\nWe must now consider the precise nature of the Babylonian cosmology and\nits place among other creation myths. Like the cosmological efforts\nof most primitive or barbarian peoples it does not partake of the\ncharacter of a creation myth so much as an account of an evolution\nfrom chaos and the establishment of physical laws. The primitive mind\ncannot grasp the idea of the creation of something out of nothing, and\nthe Babylonians and Akkadians did not differ in this respect from other\nraces in the same stage of development. In whatever direction we look\nwhen examining the cosmologies of barbarian or semi-civilized peoples,\nwe find a total inability to get behind and beyond the idea that the\nmatter of creation lay already to the hand of the creative agency, and\nthat in order to shape a world it had but to draw the material therefor\nfrom the teeming deep or the slain body of a hostile monster. Not only\ndoes the idea of creating land and water out of nothingness seem absurd\nto the primitive mind, but man as well must be framed from dust, mud,\nclay, or the blood of the creative god himself. Yet Merodach was able\nto bring a garment out of nothingness and to return it thither by\nmerely speaking a word! Why, then, did not the theology which admitted\nthe possibility of such a phenomenon carry out its own conception to\na logical conclusion and own the likelihood of the god's ability to\ncreate an entire universe in the self-same manner? Perhaps the step was\ntoo bold for an individual to take in the face of an entire theological\ncollege, and in any case what would seem a perfectly feasible act of\nmagic to the theologians of Babylon when applied to a garment might\nnot serve for application to the making of the earth and all that is\ntherein. The cosmology of Babylon is therefore on a par with those of\nScandinavia, China, and many North American Indian tribes, nor does it\nreach so high an imaginative level as those of ancient Egypt, India,\nor the Maya of Central America, in some of which the vocal command of\na god is sufficient to bring about the creation of the earth and the\nwaters surrounding it.\n\nThe making of the sun, the moon, and the other heavenly bodies is, as\nwill be more fully shown later, of great importance in Babylonian myth.\nThe stars appear to have been attached to the firmament of heaven as\nto a cloth. Across this the sun passed daily, his function being to\ninspect the movements of the other heavenly bodies. The moon, likewise,\nhad her fixed course, and certain stars were also supposed to move\nacross the picture of the night with greater or less regularity. The\nheavens were guarded at either end by a great gateway, and through one\nof these the sun passed after rising from the ocean, whilst in setting\nhe quitted the heavens by the opposite portal.\n\nThe terrestrial world was imagined as a great hollow structure resting\non the 'deep.' Indeed, it would seem to have been regarded as an island\nfloating on an abyss of waters. This conception of the world of earth\nwas by no means peculiar to the Babylonians, but was shared by them\nwith many of the nations of antiquity.\n\nAs emanating from the blood of Merodach himself, man was looked upon\nas directly of heavenly origin. An older tradition existed to the\neffect that Merodach had been assisted in the creation of mankind\nby the goddess Aruru, who figures in the Gilgamesh epic as the\ncreatress of Eabani out of a piece of clay. We also find an ancient\nbelief current that humanity owed its origin to the god Ea, but when\nMerodach displaced this god politically, he would, of course, 'take\nover' his entire record and creative deeds as well as his powers and\nsovereignties. At Nippur Bel was looked up to as the originator of man.\nBut these beliefs probably obtained in remoter times, and would finally\nbe quenched by the advance to full and unquestioned power of the great\ngod Merodach.\n\n\nConnexion with the Jonah Legend\n\nSome mythologists see in the story of Jonah a hidden allusion to the\ncircumstances of Babylonian cosmology. Jonah, as we remember, was\nsummoned to Nineveh to prophesy against it, but proceeding instead\nto Joppa (the scene of the later myth of Perseus and Andromeda) the\nship in which he set sail was storm-tossed, and he himself advised\nthe sailors to cast him overboard. They did so, and \"a great fish\"\nswallowed him. This 'fish,' it has been claimed, is merely a marine\nform of Tiawath, the dragon of chaos, and the three days and nights\nwhich Jonah remains inside it are \"the winter months.\"[7] This does\nnot seem very clear. Hercules in like manner descended into the\nbelly of a fish and emerged again after three days, according to the\nPh[oe]nicians. The name of Jonah may be compared with that of Oannes\nor Ea. The love-god, in the Hindu _Vishnu Purana_, thrown into the\nsea, is swallowed by a fish, like the ring of Gyges. Was there a local\nsea-monster at Joppa, a variant of Tiawath, and is it the same in the\nJonah myth as that in the tale of Perseus? A tawny fountain at Joppa\nwas thought to derive its colour from the blood of the sea-monster\nslain by Perseus, says Pausanias. Was then the monster who lay in wait\noff Joppa, Tiawath the goddess of darkness, and was Jonah none other\nthan Ea or Oannes, her mortal foe, the god of light, whom she would\nmythologically swallow during the sere months of winter?\n\n\n[1] Another spelling is Tiamat.\n\n[2] Sayce, _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 374.\n\n[3] Of whom we now hear for the first time.\n\n[4] In many mythologies we find the gods praying and sacrificing to\none another, and even to deities presumably higher than themselves\nand unknown to man or only guessed at by him. Thus the Vedic gods are\nconstantly sacrificing one to the other, and there are many American\ninstances of this worship of god by god.\n\n[5] See Pinches, _The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria_, p. 39.\n\n[6] This account has been claimed as a weak version of that part of the\ncreation story which deals with the creation of the host of the abyss.\nThe fact that Nergal states that he destroyed these monsters might\njustify us in believing that the myth was on this occasion so edited as\nto provide the monarch with an opportunity for boasting.\n\n[7] _Bible Folk Lore_, London, 1884. Anonymous.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III: EARLY BABYLONIAN RELIGION\n\n\nThe Beginnings of Babylonian Religion\n\nThe true beginning of a religion is that epoch in its history when it\nsucceeds, by reason of local or national circumstances and environment\nand by racial genius, in raising itself from those purely animistic\ninfluences which are characteristic of early faith and from which all\ngreat religions have emerged, if they have not been able entirely to\nfree themselves from associations which by reason of their antiquity\nand the hold they achieve on the mind of humanity are particularly\ndifficult to cast off. Thus a sense of nationality and the attainment\nof a high standard of righteousness assisted in shaping Jewish\nreligion. The necessity for military efficiency and therefore of\nsacrifice to the gods was moulding a real if terrible religion in\nancient Mexico when the invading Spaniards ended the hideous masque of\ntragedy. Insight and meditation lent an air of ethical exaltation to\nthe Vedic religion of India. Thus in a manner peculiarly its own, and\naccording to the trend of its particular genius, did each race evolve a\nsuitable religion from an original animistic basis.\n\nIf we are to discover the foundations of any system or cult, however,\nif we are to excavate the soil religious as we would the soil\narch\u00e6ological in the hope of coming upon the basis of any particular\nfaith, we must undertake the work in a manner as thorough as that\nof the antiquary who, pick in hand, delves his way to the lowest\nfoundations of palace or temple. The earliest Babylonian religious\nideas--that is, subsequent to the entrance of that people into the\ncountry watered by the Tigris and Euphrates--were undoubtedly coloured\nby those of the non-Semitic Sumerians whom they found in the country.\nThey adopted the alphabet of that race, and this affords strong\npresumptive evidence that the immigrant Semites, as an unlettered\npeople, would naturally accept much if not all of the religion of the\nmore cultured folk whom they found in possession of the soil.\n\nThere is no necessity in this place to outline the nature of animistic\nbelief at any length. This has been done in so many other volumes of\nthis series and in such detail that it is sufficient to state here\nsuccinctly that animism is a condition of thought or belief in which\nman considers everything in the universe along with himself to be the\npossessor of 'soul,' 'spirit,' or at least volition. Thus, the wind,\nwater, animals, the heavenly bodies, all live, move, and have their\nbeing, and because of his fear of or admiration for them, man placates\nor adores them until at length he almost unconsciously exalts them into\na condition of godhead. Have we any reason to think that the ancient\nSemites of Babylonia regarded the universe as peopled by gods or\ngodlings of such a type? The proofs that they did so are not a few.\n\n\nSpirits and Gods\n\nSpirits swarmed in ancient Babylonia, as the reader will observe when\nhe comes to peruse the chapter dealing with the magical ideas of the\nrace. And here it is important to note that the determinative or\nsymbolic written sign for 'spirit' is the same as that for 'god.' Thus\nthe god and the spirit must in Babylonia have had a common descent.\nThe manner in which we can distinguish between a god and a spirit,\nhowever, is simple. Lists of the 'official' gods are provided in the\nhistorical texts, whereas spirits and demons are not included therein.\nBut this is not to say that no attempt had been made to systematize\nthe belief in spirits in Babylonia, for just as the great gods of the\nuniverse were apportioned their several offices, so were the spirits\nallotted almost exactly similar powers. Thus the _Annunaki_ were\nperhaps regarded as the spirits of earth and the _Igigi_ as spirits\nof heaven. So, at least, are they designated in an inscription of\nRammannirari I. The grouping evidently survived from animistic times,\nwhen perhaps the spirits which are embraced in these two classes were\nthe only 'gods' of the Babylonians or Sumerians, and from whose ranks\nsome of the great gods of future times may have been evolved. In any\ncase they belong to a very early period in the Babylonian religion and\nplay no unimportant part in it almost to the end. The god Anu, the\nmost ancient of the Babylonian deities, was regarded as the father of\nboth companies, but other gods make use of their services. They do\nnot appear to be well disposed to humanity. The Assyrian kings were\nwont to invoke them when they desired to inculcate a fear of their\nmajesty in the people, and from this it may be inferred that they were\nobjects of peculiar fear to the lower orders of the population--for\nthe people often cling to the elder cults and the elder pantheons\ndespite the innovations of ecclesiastical politicians, or the religious\neccentricities of kings. There can, however, be no doubt as to the\ntruly animistic character of early Babylonian religion. Thus in the\nearly inscriptions one reads of the spirits of various kinds of\ndiseases, the spirit of the south wind, the spirits of the mist, and\nso forth. The _bit-ili_ or sacred stones marking the residence of a god\nwere probably a link between the fetish and the idol, remaining even\nafter the fully developed idol had been evolved.\n\n\nWas Babylonian Religion Semitic in Type?\n\nIt has already been stated that the religion of ancient Babylon was\nprobably greatly influenced by those non-Semitic people whom the\nSemitic Babylonians found occupying the country when they entered\nit. The question then arises (and it is one of high importance), how\nfar did the religion of ancient Babylonia and Assyria partake of the\ncharacter of that group of religions which has been called 'Semitic.'\nThe classical pronouncement upon this phase of the subject is probably\nthat of the late Professor Robertson Smith, who in his _Religion of the\nSemites_ (p. 13) says[1]: \"The preponderating opinion of Assyriologists\nis to the effect that the civilization of Assyria and Babylonia was\nnot purely Semitic, and that the ancient population of these parts\ncontained a large pre-Semitic element, whose influence is especially to\nbe recognized in religion and in the sacred literature of the cuneiform\nrecords. If this be so, it is plain that the cuneiform material must\nbe used with caution in our enquiry into the type of traditional\nreligion characteristic of the ancient Semites. That Babylonia is the\nbest starting-point for a comparative study of the sacred beliefs and\npractices of the Semitic peoples, is an idea which has lately had some\nvogue, and which at first sight appears plausible on account of the\ngreat antiquity of the monumental evidence. But, in matters of this\nsort, ancient and primitive are not synonymous terms; and we must not\nlook for the most primitive form of Semitic faith in a region where\nsociety was not primitive. In Babylonia, it would seem, society and\nreligion alike were based on a fusion of two races, and so were not\nprimitive but complex. Moreover, the official system of Babylonian and\nAssyrian religion, as it is known to us from priestly texts and public\ninscriptions, bears clear marks of being something more than a popular\ntraditional faith; it has been artificially moulded by priestcraft and\nstatecraft in much the same way as the official religion of Egypt;\nthat is to say, it is in great measure an artificial combination, for\nimperial purposes, of elements drawn from a number of local worships.\nIn all probability the actual religion of the masses was always much\nsimpler than the official system; and in later times it would seem\nthat, both in religion and in race, Assyria was little different from\nthe adjacent Aram\u00e6an countries. These remarks are not meant to throw\ndoubt on the great importance of cuneiform studies for the history\nof Semitic religion; the monumental data are valuable for comparison\nwith what we know of the faith and worship of other Semitic peoples,\nand peculiarly valuable because, in religion as in other matters,\nthe civilization of the Euphrates-Tigris valley exercised a great\nhistorical influence on a large part of the Semitic field.\"\n\n\nTotemism in Babylonian Religion\n\nSigns of totemism are not wanting in the Babylonian as in other\nreligious systems. Many of the gods are pictured as riding upon the\nbacks of certain animals, an almost certain indication that at one time\nthey had themselves possessed the form of the animal they bestrode.\nReligious conservatism would probably not tolerate the immediate\nabolition of the totem-shape, so this means was taken of gradually\n'shelving' it. But some gods retained animal form until comparatively\nlate times. Thus the sun-god of Kis had the form of an eagle, and we\nfind that Ishtar took as lovers a horse, an eagle, and a lion--surely\ngods who were represented in equine, aquiline, and leonine forms.\nThe fish-form of Oannes, the god of wisdom, is certainly a relic of\ntotemism. Some of the old ideographic representations of the names of\nthe gods are eloquent of a totemic connexion. Thus the name of Ea,\nthe god of the deep, is expressed by an ideograph which signifies\n'antelope.' Ea is spoken of as 'the antelope of the deep,' 'the lusty\nantelope,' and so forth. He was also, as a water-god, connected with\nthe serpent, a universal symbol of the flowing stream. The strange god\nUz, probably an Akkadian survival, was worshipped under the form of a\ngoat. The sun-god of Nippur, Adar, was connected with the pig, and was\ncalled 'lord of the swine.' Merodach may have been a bull-god. In early\nastronomical literature we find him alluded to as 'the bull of light.'\nThe storm-god Zu, as is seen by his myth, retained his bird-like form.\nAnother name of the storm-bird was Lugalbanda, patron god of the city\nof Marad, near Sippara. Like Prometheus--also once a bird-god, as is\nproved by many analogous myths--he stole the sacred fire from heaven\nfor the service and mental illumination of man.\n\n\nThe Great Gods\n\nIn the phase in which it becomes first known to us, Babylonian religion\nis neither Semitic nor Akkadian, but Semitic-Akkadian: that is, the\nelements of both religious forms are so intermingled in it that they\ncannot be distinguished one from another; but very little that is\ntrustworthy can be advanced concerning this shadowy time. Each petty\nstate (and these were numerous in early Babylonia) possessed its own\ntutelar deity, and he again had command over a number of lesser gods.\nWhen all those pantheons were added together, as was the case in later\ndays, they afforded the spectacle of perhaps the largest assembly\nof gods known to any religion. The most outstanding of these tribal\ndivinities, as they might justly be called, were Merodach, who was\nworshipped at Babylon; Shamash, who was adored at Sippar; Sin, the\nmoon-god, who ruled at Ur; Anu, who held sway over Erech and Der; Ea,\nthe Oannes of legend, whose city was Eridu; Bel, who ruled at Nippur,\nor Niffur; Nergal of Cuthah; and Ishtar, who was goddess of Nineveh.\nThe peoples of the several provinces identified their prominent\ngods one with another, and indeed when Assyria rose to rivalry with\nBabylonia, its chief divinity, Asshur, was naturally identified with\nMerodach.\n\n[Illustration: Types of En-lil, the Chief God of Nippur, and of his\nConsort, Nin-lil from _Religious Belief and Practice in Babylonia and\nAssyria_, by Professor Morris Jastrow.--By permission of Messrs G. P.\nPutnam's Sons]\n\nIn the chapter on cosmology we have seen how Merodach gained the\nlordship of heaven. It has been shown that the rise of this god to\npower was comparatively recent. Prior to the days of Khammurabi a\nrather different pantheon from that described in later inscriptions\nheld sway. In those more primitive days the principal gods appear\nto have been Bel or En-lil, Belit or Nin-lil his queen, Nin-girsu,\nEa, Nergal, Shamash, Sin, Anu, and other lesser divinities. There\nis indeed a sharp distinction between the pre- and post-Khammurabic\ntypes of religion. Attempts had been made to form a pantheon before\nKhammurabi's day, but his exaltation of Merodach, the patron of\nBabylon, to the head of the Babylonian pantheon was destined to destroy\nthese. A glance at the condition of the great gods before the days of\nKhammurabi will assist us to understand their later developments.\n\n\nBel\n\nBel, or, to give him his earlier name, En-lil, is spoken of in very\nearly inscriptions, especially in those of Nippur; of which city he was\nthe tutelar deity. He was described as the 'lord of the lower world,'\nand much effort seems to have been made to reach a definite conception\nof his position and attributes. His name had also been translated 'lord\nof mist.' The title 'Bel' had been given to Merodach by Tiglath-pileser\nI about 1200 B.C., after which he was referred to as 'the older Bel.'\nThe chief seat of his worship was at Nippur, where the name of his\ntemple, E-Kur or 'mountain-house,' came to be applied to a sanctuary\nall over Babylonia. He was also addressed as the 'lord of the storm'\nand as the 'great mountain,' and his consort Nin-lil is also alluded\nto as 'lady of the mountain.' Jastrow rightly concludes that \"there\nare substantial reasons for assuming that his original city was on the\ntop of some mountain, as is so generally the case of storm-deities....\nThere being no mountains in the Euphrates valley, however, the\nconclusion is warranted that En-lil was the god of a people whose home\nwas in a mountainous region and who brought their god with them when\nthey came to the Euphrates valley.\"[2]\n\nEn-lil is undoubtedly of the class of tempest-deities who dwell on\nmountain peaks. No text appears to have been found which alludes to him\nas of a red colour. The flashing of the lightning through the clouds\nwhich veil the mountain summits usually generates a belief in the mind\nof primitive man that the god who is concealed by the screen of vapour\nis red in hue and quick in movement. The second tablet of a text known\nas the 'crying storm' alludes to En-lil as a storm-god. Addressing\nhim it says: \"Spirit that overcomes no evildoing, spirit that has no\nmother, spirit that has no wife, spirit that has no sister, spirit that\nhas no brother, that knows no abiding place, the evil-slaying spirit\nthat devastates the fold, that wrecks the stall, that sweeps away son\nand mother like a reed. As a huge deluge it tears away dwellings,\nconsumes the provisions of the home, smites mankind everywhere,\nand wickedly drowns the harvests of the land. Devoted temples it\ndevastates, devoted men it afflicts, him that clothes himself in a\nrobe of majesty the spirit lays low with cold, him of wide pasture\nlands with hunger it lays low. When En-lil, the lord of lands, cries\nout at sunset the dreadful word goes forth unto the spacious shrine,\n'Destroy.'\"\n\nNippur, the city of En-lil, was of Sumerian origin, so we must connect\nthe earliest cult of En-lil with the Sumerian aborigines. Many of his\nlesser names point to such a conclusion. But he greatly outgrew all\nlocal circumstances, and among other things he appears to have been a\ngod who fostered vegetation. Some authorities appear to be of opinion\nthat because En-lil was regarded as a god of vegetation the change\nwas owing to his removal from a mountainous region to a more level\nneighbourhood. The truth is, it would be difficult to discover a god\nwho wielded the powers of the wind and rain who was not a patron of\nagriculture, but as he sends beneficent rains, so also may he destroy\nand devastate, as we have seen from the foregoing text. The noise of\nthe storm was spoken of as his 'word.' Probably, too, because he was\na very old god he was regarded in some localities as a creator of the\nworld. The great winged bull of Assyrian art may well often represent\nEn-lil: no symbol could better typify the tempest which the Babylonians\nregarded as rushing and rioting unrestrained over country and city,\noverturning even tower and temple with its violence, and tumbling the\nwretched reed huts of the lower caste into the dust.\n\nThe word _lil_ which occurs in the name En-lil, signifies a 'demon,'\nand En-lil may therefore mean the 'chief-demon.' This shows the very\nearly, animistic nature of the god. There appear to be other traditions\nof him as a war-god, but these are so obscure as scarcely to be worth\nnotice. In the trinity which consisted of Bel, Ea, and Anu, he is\nregarded as the 'god of the earth,' that is, the earth is his sphere,\nand he is at times addressed as 'Bel, the lord of the lands.'\n\nWe find the 'word' of the wind or storm-god alluded to in the _Popol\nVuh_ of the Kiches of Central America, where Hurakan (the deity from\nwhose name we probably get our word 'hurricane') sweeps over the face\nof the primeval deep, voicing his commands.\n\n\nBel and the Dragon\n\nThe picturesque legend of Bel and the Dragon which appears in the\nApocrypha, and which was at one time appended to the Book of Daniel,\nshows us the manner in which Bel was worshipped at Babylon, and how\nhe was supposed to take human shape, devour food, and behave very\nmuch as a man might. The legend states that the Babylonians lavished\nevery day upon the idol of Bel twelve great measures of fine flour,\nand forty sheep, and six vessels of wine. King Cyrus of Persia, who\nhad overthrown the Babylonian kingdom, went daily to worship Bel, and\nasked Daniel why he did not do likewise. The prophet replied that his\nreligion did not permit him to worship idols, but rather the living God\nwho had created the heavens and the earth.\n\n\"Then said Cyrus: 'Thinkest thou not that Bel is the living God? Seest\nthou not how much he eateth and drinketh every day?'\n\n\"Then Daniel smiled and said, 'O King, be not deceived, for he is but\nclay within and brass without, and can never eat or drink anything.'\n\n\"Cyrus was exceeding wroth, and calling for his priests said to them,\n'If ye tell me not who this is that devoureth these expenses ye shall\ndie, but if ye can show me that Bel devours them Daniel shall die, for\nhe hath spoken blasphemy against Bel;'\" and to this Daniel cheerfully\nagreed.\n\nIt would have been surprising had not the provisions vanished, because\nwe are told that the priests of Bel were threescore and ten in number\nand had numerous wives and children. So Cyrus and Daniel betook\nthemselves to the temple of Bel, and the priests asked them to bless\nthe meat and wine before Bel, and to shut the door fast and seal it\nwith the King's own signet, stating that if they came on the morrow\nthey would find that Bel had eaten up all of the provisions.\n\nBut they had taken good care to protect themselves, for they had made\na secret entrance underneath the great table in the temple which they\nused constantly, so that they might consume the good things that were\nset before the idol.\n\nAnd Cyrus did as the priests asked, setting the meat and wine before\nthe statue of Bel, but Daniel commanded his servants to bring ashes,\nwhich they strewed throughout the temple in the presence of the King;\nthen they went out and shut the door and sealed it with the King's\nsignet.\n\nAnd in the night time the priests with their wives and families entered\nthe temple by the secret way and speedily consumed the provisions.\n\nIn the morning Cyrus and Daniel betook themselves to the temple, and\nthe King broke the seals and opened the door, and when he perceived\nthat all the provisions had vanished he called out with a loud voice,\n\"Great art thou, O Bel, and with thee is no deceit at all.\"\n\nBut Daniel laughed, and barring the King's way into the temple\nrequested him to look at the pavement and mark well whose footsteps he\nsaw there.\n\nAnd Cyrus replied, \"I see the footsteps of men, women, and children.\"\n\nHe at once called the priests, who when they saw that their stratagem\nhad been discovered showed him the secret way into the temple; and in\nhis rage Cyrus slew them and delivered Bel into Daniel's power. The\nprophet speedily destroyed the idol and the temple which sheltered it.\n\nNow in that temple was a great dragon worshipped by the people of\nBabylon, and the King said to Daniel: \"Wilt thou also say that this is\nof brass, for behold! he liveth, he eateth and drinketh, therefore\nshouldest thou worship him!\"\n\nBut Daniel shook his head and said to Cyrus: \"Give me leave, O King,\nand I will slay this dragon without sword or staff.\"\n\nThen Daniel took pitch and fat and hair and boiled them all together,\nand shaped them into great pieces. These he placed in the dragon's\nmouth, and shortly the dragon burst asunder.\n\nNow the people of Babylon became greatly incensed at these doings\nand clamoured to Cyrus, asking him to deliver Daniel up to them, or\nelse they would destroy him and all belonging to him. And, continues\nthe legend, Cyrus being afraid for his crown delivered Daniel to the\npeople, who cast him into a lions' den where he remained for six days.\nSeven lions were in the den and their food was removed from them so\nthat they might be the fiercer, and the Apocrypha story, which differs\nconsiderably from that given in the sixth chapter of the Book of\nDaniel, states that the angel of the Lord took up a certain prophet\ncalled Habbacuc, who was about to carry a mess of pottage to certain\nreapers, and taking him by the hair of the head, conveyed him all the\nway from Palestine to Babylon along with the food, which he set at\nDaniel's feet. Daniel partook of the meal, and Habbacuc was conveyed\nback to Palestine in the same manner as that in which he had come.\n\nAnd on the seventh day Cyrus came to the den to mourn for Daniel, and\nwhen he looked in Daniel was there. So impressed was Cyrus with the\npower of Daniel's God that he resolved to worship Him in future, and\nseizing those who had been instrumental in casting the Hebrew prophet\ninto the den, he thrust them before the lions, and they were devoured\nin a moment.\n\n\nBeltis\n\nBeltis, or Nin-lil, the wife of En-lil, shared his authority over\nNippur, where she had a temple which went back in antiquity to the\nFirst Dynasty of Ur. As has been said, she was also called the 'lady of\nthe mountain,' and as such she had a sanctuary at Girsu, a quarter of\nLagash. In certain inscriptions she is described as 'the mother of the\ngods.' The name Beltis meant 'lady,' and as such was accorded to her as\nbeing 'the' lady, but it was afterwards given to many other goddesses.\n\n\nThe Temple of Bel\n\nIn 1876 Mr George Smith discovered a Babylonian text giving a\nremarkable account of the temple of Bel at Babylon. This temple, the\nwonder of Babylon, was founded while that city was still a place of\nno very great importance, but its fabric lasted until the days of\nHerodotus and Strabo, who have furnished us with accounts of it. The\nformer states that it consisted of eight stages or towers one above\nanother, forming a pyramid, the holy of holies being placed upon the\nhighest stage of all, the height of the entire building being about 600\nfeet--a very questionable dimension.\n\nIn the cuneiform tablet the measurements of the outer court are given\nas 1156 feet in length and 900 feet in breadth. An adjoining court,\nthat of Ishtar and Zamama, was 1056 feet by 450 feet, and had six gates\nwhich admitted worshippers to the temple--the grand gate, the gate\nof the rising sun looking eastward, the great gate, the gate of the\nColossi, flanked by enormous figures, the canal gate, and the gate of\nthe tower-view.\n\nA walled space, platform or _birut_, orientated so as to face the four\ncardinal points, is next described. Inside this stood a building the\nname of which is indecipherable. It was connected in some manner with\nthe Ziggurat or great tower, around the base of which were ranged the\ntemples of the principal gods, all of which faced one or other of the\nfour chief points of the compass.\n\nOn the eastern side of the group stood a large temple 117 feet by 67\nfeet broad, containing no less than sixteen shrines, the principal of\nwhich were sacred to Nebo, the son of Bel, and his wife Tashmit. To the\nnorth were temples to Ea and Nusku, the first 142 feet long by 50 feet\nbroad and the second a square 58 feet either way. To the south was a\nshrine to Bel and Anu 117 feet by 50 feet.\n\nThe purpose of the buildings on the western side of the great tower is\nonly to be conjectured. It is known, however, that the couch of Bel and\nhis throne of gold alluded to by Herodotus were housed in one or other\nof the buildings on this side. The couch is said to have measured 15\nfeet by 6 feet 8 inches.\n\nIn the centre towered the great Ziggurat, rising stage upon stage, its\nsides facing the cardinal points. The first stage was 300 feet square\nand 110 feet high and was ornamented with buttresses. The second was\n260 feet square and 60 feet high, the third 200 feet square and 20 feet\nhigh up to the seventh stage, which was 80 feet long, 70 feet broad,\nand 50 feet high. The entire height of the Ziggurat was thus 300 feet,\nexactly equal to the breadth of the base, or only half the height\nattributed to it by Herodotus.\n\nRegarding the possible site of this temple Mr Smith says: \"The only\nruin now existing at or near Babylon which can be supposed to represent\nthe temple of Belus is the mound and enclosure of B\u00e2bil, the ruins\ncorresponding fairly with the account of these structures in the Greek\nauthors and in the inscription. The sides of the building face the\ncardinal points, like those in the inscription; the remains of the two\nsides of the enclosure now existing indicate a circumference about\nequal to the Greek measurement, and slightly in excess of that in the\ninscription; but it must be remembered that the exact length of the\nBabylonian measures is not known, and there are different opinions even\nas to the length of the Greek stade, while the present remains of the\nwall require careful measurement to determine more exactly their length\nand the dimensions they indicate. On the other side of the Euphrates\nstands a ruin, Birs Nimr\u00fbd, also consisting of an enclosure, various\ntemples, and a temple-tower; but this represents the site of the temple\nof Nebo at Borsippa, and its angles, instead of its sides, face the\ncardinal points, while not a single one of its known dimensions agrees\nwith the corresponding point in the inscription. The mound of B\u00e2bil,\nwhich is already identified by the best authorities with the temple of\nBelus, consists now of the lower stage of the tower and the ruins of\nthe buildings round it.\"[3]\n\nYet Herodotus' account of the temple of Bel was not wholly false. He\nsays: \"It had gates of brass, and was two stadia every way, being\nquadrangular; in the middle of the temple a solid tower was built, a\nstadium in height and breadth, and on this tower was placed another,\nand another still on this, to the number of eight towers in all. The\nascent was on the outside, and was made by a winding passage round all\nthe towers; and about half up the ascent there is a landing and seats\nfor rest, where those ascending may repose; and in the highest tower\nthere is a large temple, and in the temple a large bed well furnished,\nand beside it a golden table; but there is no statue erected in it; and\nby night no one lodges in it, except a single woman of the country,\nwhom the god has selected from the rest, as say the Chald\u00e6ans, who are\nthe priests of this god.\"\n\nAn inscription was discovered and translated by Sir H.C. Rawlinson, in\nwhich King Nebuchadrezzar boasts of having repaired and completed this\ntower in honour of his god Merodach. \"Behold now the building named\n'The Stages of the Seven Spheres,' which was the wonder of Borsippa,\nhad been built by a former king. He had completed forty-two ammas (of\nthe height), but he did not finish its head. From the lapse of time it\nhad become ruined; they had not taken care of the exits of the waters,\nso the rain and wet had penetrated into the brickwork; the casing\nof burnt brick had bulged out, and the terraces of crude brick lay\nscattered in heaps. Then Merodach, my great lord, inclined my heart to\nrepair the building. I did not change its site, nor did I destroy the\nfoundation platform; but in a fortunate month, and on an auspicious\nday, I undertook the rebuilding of the crude brick terraces and the\nburnt brick casing (of the temple). I strengthened its foundations,\nand I placed a titular record in the parts that I had rebuilt. I set\nmy hand to build it up, and to finish its summit. As it had been in\nformer days, thus I exalted its head.\"\n\n\nNergal\n\nNergal was the patron god of Cuthah, eastward from Babylon. He was\na god of extremely ancient origin, and indeed the first inscription\nwhich alludes to him is dated about 2700 B.C. He is mentioned in the\nOld Testament (2 Kings xvii 30) as an idol whom the Babylonians who\nre-peopled Israel brought with them. He seems to have had a close\nconnexion with the nether world, indeed he is practically the head\nof its pantheon. He appears to have been a god of gloom and death,\nand his name may signify 'the lord of the great dwelling place,' that\nis, the grave. His city, Cuthah, may possibly have been renowned as a\nburial-place. We find him associated with pestilence and famine, but he\nhas also a solar significance. He is indeed the sun in its malevolent\nform, fierce and destroying, for in myth the sun can be evil as well as\ngood. We thus find the solar power depicted as a fierce warrior slaying\nhis thousands and tens of thousands. Again it is quite possible for a\nsolar deity to have an underworld connexion, seeing that the sun is\nsupposed to travel through that gloomy region during the night. We thus\nsee how Nergal could combine so many seemingly conflicting attributes.\nAs god of the dead he has a host of demons at his command, and it may\nbe these who do his behests in spreading pestilence and war. Where he\ngoes violent death follows in his wake. At times he is called the 'god\nof fire,' the 'raging king,' 'he who burns,' and the 'violent one,' and\nhe is identified with the fierceness of flame. In this respect he is\nnot at all unlike the Scandinavian Loki who typifies the malevolence\nof fire.\n\n\nDibarra\n\nDibarra was probably a variant of Nergal, in his guise as solar\ndestroyer. Concerning him a strange myth is recounted as follows:\n\n\"The sons of Babylon were as birds and thou their falconer. In a net\nthou didst catch them, enclose them, and destroy them, O warrior\nDibarra. Leaving the city, thou didst pass to the outside, taking on\nthe form of a lion, thou didst enter the palace. The people saw thee\nand drew their weapons.\"\n\nSo spoke Ishum, the faithful attendant of Dibarra, by way of beginning\nan account of the havoc wrought in the valley of Euphrates by the\nwar- and plague-god. \"Spare no one,\" is the gist of his commands to his\nsatellites. \"Have neither fear nor pity. Kill the young as well as the\nold and rob Babylon of all its treasures.\"\n\nAccordingly against the first city a large army was dispatched to carry\nout these instructions, and the battle with bow and sword was begun,\na strife which ended so disastrously for the soldiers and inhabitants\nthat their blood flowed \"like torrents of water through the city's\nhighways.\" This defeat the great lord Merodach was compelled to\nwitness, powerless to help or avert it. Enraged at his helplessness and\novercome with fury, he cursed his enemies until he is said to have lost\nconsciousness because of his grief.\n\nFrom this scene of devastation Dibarra turned his attention to Erech,\nappointing others of his host to mete out to this city the fate of\nBabylon. Ishtar, goddess of Erech, saw her devoted city exposed\nto plunder, pillage, and bloodshed, and had to endure the agony of\ninactivity experienced by Merodach. Nothing she could do or say would\nstay the violence of Dibarra's vengeance.\n\n\"O warrior Dibarra, thou dost dispatch the just, thou dost dispatch the\nunjust; who sins against thee thou dost dispatch, and the one who does\nnot sin against thee thou dost dispatch.\"\n\nThese words were used by Ishum, Dibarra's servant, in a subsequent\naddress to the god of war. He knew his lord's craving for battle and\nbloodshed was still unappeased, and he himself was planning a war more\nterrible than any he had yet conducted, a conflict not only world-wide\nbut which was to embrace heaven itself. So in order to gain Dibarra's\nconsent to the hideous destruction he anticipated, he continued to\npander to his war-like tendencies.\n\nSaid he: \"The brightness of Shul-panddu I will destroy, the root of the\ntree I will tear out that it no longer blossom. Against the dwelling of\nthe king of gods I will proceed.\"\n\nTo all of which the warrior-god listened with growing pleasure,\nuntil fired by his myrmidon's words he cried out in sudden fierce\nresolve--\"Sea-coast against sea-coast, Subartu against Subartu,\nAssyrian against Assyrian, Elamite against Elamite, Cassite against\nCassite, Sutaean against Sutaean, Kuthean against Kuthean, Lullubite\nagainst Lullubite, country against country, house against house, man\nagainst man. Brother is to show no mercy towards brother; they shall\nkill one another.\"\n\n\"Go, Ishum,\" he added later, \"carry out the word thou hast spoken in\naccordance with thy desire.\"\n\nAnd with alacrity Ishum obeyed, \"directing his countenance to the\nmountain of Khi-khi. This, with the help of the god Sibi, a warrior\nunequalled, he attacked and destroyed all the vineyards in the forest\nof Khashur, and finally the city of Inmarmaon. These last atrocious\nacts roused Ea, the god of humanity, and filled him with wrath,\" though\nwhat attitude he adopted towards Dibarra is not known.\n\n\"Listen all of you to my words, because of sin did I formerly plan\nevil, my heart was enraged and I swept peoples away.\"\n\nThis was Dibarra's defence when eventually he was propitiated and all\nthe gods were gathered together in council with him. Ishum at this\npoint changing his tactics urged on Dibarra the necessity for pacifying\nthe gods he had incensed.\n\n\"Appease,\" said he, \"the gods of the land who are angry. May fruits and\ncorn flourish, may mountains and seas bring their produce.\"\n\nAs he had listened to Ishum before, Dibarra listened again, and\nthe council of the gods was closed by his promising prosperity and\nprotection to those who would fittingly honour him.\n\n\"He who glorifies my name will rule the world. Who proclaims the glory\nof my power will be without rival. The singer who sings of my deeds\nwill not die through pestilence, to kings and nobles his words will\nbe pleasing. The writer who preserves them will escape from the grasp\nof the enemy, in the temple where the people proclaim my name, I will\nopen his ear. In the house where this tablet is set up, though war may\nrage and the god Sibi work havoc, sword and pestilence will not touch\nhim--he will dwell in safety. Let this song resound for ever and endure\nfor eternity. Let all lands hear it and proclaim my power. Let the\ninhabitants of all places learn to glorify my name.\"\n\n\nShamash\n\nShamash, god of the sun, was one of the most popular deities of the\nBabylonian and Assyrian pantheon. We find him mentioned first in\nthe reign of E-Anna-Tum, or about 4200 B.C. He is called the son of\nSin, the moon-god, which perhaps has reference to the fact that the\nsolar calendar succeeded the lunar in Babylonia as in practically all\ncivilizations of any advancement. The inscriptions give due prominence\nto his status as a great lord of light, and in them he is called the\n'illuminator of the regions,' 'lord of living creatures,' 'gracious one\nof the lands,' and so forth. He is supposed to throw open the gates\nof the morning and raise his head over the horizon, lighting up the\nheaven and earth with his beams. The knowledge of justice and injustice\nand the virtue of righteousness were attributed to him, and he was\nregarded as a judge between good and evil, for as the light of the\nsun penetrates everywhere, and nothing can be hidden from its beams,\nit is not strange that it should stand as the symbol for justice.\nShamash appears at the head of the inscription which bears the laws of\nKhammurabi, and here he stands as the symbol for justice. The towns at\nwhich he was principally worshipped were Sippar and Larsa, where his\nsanctuary was known as E-Babbara, or the 'shining house.' Larsa was\nprobably the older of the two centres, but from the times of Sargon,\nSippar became the more important, and in the days of Khammurabi ranked\nimmediately after Babylon. In fact it appears to have threatened the\nsupremacy of the capital to some extent, and Nabonidus, the last\nKing of Babylon, as we shall remember, offended Merodach and his\npriests by his too eager notice of Shamash. During the whole course of\nBabylonian history, however, Shamash retained his popularity, and was\nperhaps the only sun-god who was not absorbed by Merodach. One finds\nthe same phenomenon in ancient Mexico, where various solar deities did\nnot succeed in displacing or absorbing Totec, the ancient god of the\nsun _par excellence_. But Shamash succeeded in absorbing many small\nlocal sun-gods, and indeed we find his name used as that of the sun\nthroughout Semitic lands. There were several solar deities, such as\nNergal, and Ninib, whom Shamash did not absorb, probably for the reason\nthat they typify various phases of the sun. There is reason to believe\nthat in ancient times even Shamash was not an entirely beneficent solar\ndeity, but, like Nergal, could figure as a warrior on occasion. But in\nlater times he was regarded as the god who brings light and life upon\nall created things, and upon whom depends everything in nature from\nman to vegetable. His consort was Aa, who was worshipped at Sippar\nalong with him. Her cult seems to have been one of great antiquity,\nbut she does not appear to have any distinctive character of her own.\nShe was supposed to receive the sun upon his setting, and from this\ncircumstance it has been argued she perhaps represents the 'double\nsun,' from the magnified disk which he presents at sunset; but this\nexplanation is perhaps rather too much on allegorical lines. Jastrow\nthinks that she may have been evolved from the sun-god of a city on\nthe other side of the Euphrates from Sippar. \"Such an amalgamation of\ntwo originally male deities into a combination of male and female,\nstrange as it may seem to us,\" he says, \"is in keeping with the lack\nof sharp distinction between male and female in the oldest forms of\nSemitic religions. In the old cuneiform writing the same sign is used\nto indicate 'lord' or 'lady' when attached to deities. Ishtar appears\namongst the Semites both as male and female. Sex was primarily a\nquestion of strength; the stronger god was viewed as masculine, the\nweaker as feminine.\"\n\n\nEa\n\nEa was the third of the great Babylonian triad of gods, which consisted\nof Anu, En-lil, and himself. He was a god of the waters, and like Anu\nis called the 'father of the gods.' As a god of the abyss he appears to\nhave been also a deity of wisdom and occult power, thus allegorically\nassociated with the idea of depth or profundity. He was the father of\nMerodach, who consulted him on the most important matters connected\nwith his kingship of the gods. Indeed he was consulted by individuals\nof all classes who desired light to be thrown upon their crafts or\nbusinesses. Thus he was the god of artisans in general--blacksmiths,\nstone-cutters, sailors, and artificers of every kind. He was also the\npatron of prophets and seers. As the abyss is the place where the seeds\nof everything were supposed to fructify, so he appears to have fostered\nreproduction of every description. He was supposed to dwell beside Anu,\nwho inhabited the pole of the ecliptic. The site of his chief temple\nwas at Eridu, which at one time stood, before the waters receded, upon\nthe shore of the Persian Gulf. We have seen already that Ea, under his\nGreek name of Oannes, was supposed to bring knowledge and culture to\nthe people of Eridu. There are many confusing myths connected with\nhim, and he seems in some measure to enter into the Babylonian myth of\nthe deluge. Alexander Polyhistor, Apollodorus, and Eusebius, copying\nfrom Berossus, state that he rose from the sea upon his civilizing\nmission, and Abydenus says that in the time of Daon, the shepherd\nking of the city of Pantibiblon (meaning the 'city where books were\ngathered together'), \"Annedatus appeared again from the Eruthrean sea,\nin the same form as those who had showed themselves before, having the\nshape of a fish blended with that of a man. Then reigned Aedorachus of\nPantibiblon for the term of eighteen sari. In his days there appeared\nanother personage from the sea of Eruthra, like those above, having\nthe same complicated form between fish and man: his name was Odacon.\"\nFrom remarks by Apollodorus it would seem that these beings were\nmessengers from Oannes, but the whole passages are very obscure. The\nchief extract from the fragments of Berossus concerning Oannes states\nthat: \"In the first year there made its appearance from a part of the\nEruthrean sea, which bordered upon Babylonia, an animal endowed with\nreason, who was called Oannes. According to the accounts of Apollodorus\nthe whole body of the animal was like that of a fish; and had under a\nfish's head another head, and also feet below, similar to those of a\nman, subjoined to the fish's tail. His speech, too, was articulate and\nhuman; and there was a representation of him to be seen in the time of\nBerossus. This Being in the daytime used to converse with men; but took\nno food at that season; and he gave them an insight into letters and\nscience, and every kind of art. He taught them to construct houses, to\nfound temples, to compile laws, and explained to them the principles\nof geometrical knowledge. He made them distinguish the seeds of the\nearth, and showed them how to collect fruits; in short, he instructed\nthem in everything which could tend to soften manners and humanize\nmankind. From that time, so universal were his instructions, nothing\nmaterial has been added by way of improvement. When the sun set, it was\nthe custom of this Being to plunge again into the sea, and abide all\nthe night in the deep.\" After this there appeared other creatures like\nOannes, of which Berossus promises to give an account when he comes to\nthe history of the kings.\n\n\nThe Writings of Oannes\n\n\"Moreover,\" says Polyhistor, \"Oannes wrote concerning the generation\nof mankind; of their different ways of life, and of civil polity; and\nthe following is the purport of what he said: 'There was nothing but\ndarkness, and an abyss of water, wherein resided most hideous beings,\nwhich were produced of a twofold principle. Men appeared with two\nwings, some with four, and with two faces. They had one body, but two\nheads; the one of a man, the other of a woman. They were likewise in\ntheir several organs both male and female. Other human figures were\nto be seen with the legs and horns of goats. Some had horses' feet:\nothers had the limbs of a horse behind; but before were fashioned like\nmen, resembling hippocentaurs. Bulls likewise bred there with the heads\nof men; and dogs with fourfold bodies, and the tails of fishes. Also\nhorses with the heads of dogs: men too, and other animals, with the\nheads and bodies of horses, and the tails of fishes. In short, there\nwere creatures with the limbs of every species of animals. Add to\nthese, fishes, reptiles, serpents, with other wonderful animals; which\nassumed each other's shape and countenance. Of all these were preserved\ndelineations in the temple of Belus at Babylon. The person, who was\nsupposed to have presided over them, had the name of Omorca. This in\nthe Chaldaic language is Thalath; which the Greeks express _thalassa_,\nthe sea: but according to the most probable theory, it is equivalent to\n_selene_, the moon. All things being in this situation, Belus came, and\ncut the woman-creature asunder: and out of one half of her he formed\nthe earth, and of the other half the heavens. At the same time he\ndestroyed the animals in the abyss. All this, Berossus said,[4] was an\nallegorical description of nature. For the whole universe consisting of\nmoisture, and, animals being continually generated therein, the Deity\n(Belus) above-mentioned cut off his own head, upon which the other\ngods mixed the blood, as it gushed out, with the earth, and from this\nmen were formed. On this account it is, that they are rational, and\npartake of divine knowledge. This Belus, whom men call Dis, divided the\ndarkness, and separated the heavens from the earth; and reduced the\nuniverse to order. But the animals so lately created, not being able\nto bear the prevalence of light, died. Belus upon this, seeing a vast\nspace quite uninhabited, though by nature very fruitful, ordered one of\nthe gods to take off his head; and when it was taken off, they were to\nmix the blood with the soil of the earth; and from thence to form other\nmen and animals, which should be capable of bearing the light. Belus\nalso formed the stars, and the sun, and moon, together with the five\nplanets.'\"\n\nThis myth, related by Ea or Oannes regarding the creation of the world,\nbears a very close relation to that of Merodach and Tiawath, told in\nChapter II. It is not often that one finds a fish-god acting as a\nculture hero, although we find in Mexican myth a certain deity alluded\nto as the \"old fish-god of our flesh.\" Allegorical mythology would have\nseen in Ea a hero arriving from another clime in a wave-tossed vessel,\nwho had landed on the shores of the Persian Gulf, and had instructed\nthe rude inhabitants thereof in the culture of a higher civilization.\nThere is very little doubt that Ea has a close connexion in some manner\nwith the Noah legend of the deluge. For example, a Sumerian text\nexists in which it would seem as if the ship of Ea was described, as\nthe timbers of which its various parts were constructed are mentioned,\nand the refugees it saved consisted of Ea himself, Dawkina his wife,\nMerodach, and Inesh, the pilot of Eridu, along with Nin-igi-nagir-sir.\n\nOf course it would seem natural to the Babylonians to regard the\nPersian Gulf as the great abyss whence all things emanated. As\nJastrow very justly remarks: \"In the word of Ea, of a character more\nspiritual than that of En-lil, he commands, and what he plans comes\ninto existence--a wholly beneficent power he blesses the fields and\nheals mankind. His most striking trait is his love of humanity. In\nconflicts between the gods and mankind, he is invariably on the side\nof the latter. When the gods, at the instance of En-lil as the 'god\nof storms,' decide to bring on a deluge to sweep away mankind, it\nis Ea who reveals the secret to his favourite, Ut-Napishtim (Noah),\nwho saves himself, his family, and his belongings on a ship that he\nis instructed to build.\"[5] The waters personified by him are not\nthose of the turbulent and treacherous ocean, but those of irrigating\nstreams and commerce-carrying canals. He is thus very different from\nthe god En-lil, the 'lord of heaven' who possesses so many attributes\nof destruction. Ea in his benevolent way thwarts the purpose of the\nriotous god of tempest, which greatly enrages En-lil, and it has been\nthought that this myth suggests the rivalry which perhaps at one time\nexisted between the two religious centres of Eridu and Nippur, cities\nof Ea and En-lil respectively. In an eloquent manner Ea implores\nEn-lil not to precipitate another deluge, and begs that instead of\nsuch wholesale destruction man may be punished by sending lions and\njackals, or by famines or pestilences. En-lil hearkens to his speech,\nhis heart is touched, and he blesses Utnapishtim and his wife. If this\nmyth is a piece of priestcraft, it argues better relations between\nthe ecclesiastical authorities at Eridu and Nippur. Ea had many other\nnames, the chief of which, Nin-a-gal, meaning 'god of great strength,'\nalluded to his patronage of the smith's art. He was also called En-ki,\nwhich describes him as 'lord of the earth' through which his waters\nmeandered. In such a country as Babylonia earth and water are closely\nassociated, as under that soil water is always to be found at a\ndistance of a few feet: thus the interior of the earth is the domain of\nEa.\n\n\nThe Story of Adapa and the South Wind\n\nHere is the story of Adapa, the son of Ea, who, but for his obedience\nto his father's command, might have attained deification and\nimmortality.\n\nOne day when Adapa was out in his boat fishing the South Wind blew with\nsudden and malicious violence, upsetting the boat and flinging the\nfisherman into the sea. When he succeeded in reaching the shore Adapa\nvowed vengeance against the South Wind, which had used him so cruelly.\n\n\"Shutu, thou demon,\" he cried, \"I will stretch forth my hand and break\nthy wings. Thou shalt not go unpunished for this outrage!\"\n\nThe hideous monster laughed as she soared in the air above him,\nflapping her huge wings about her ungainly body. Adapa in his fury\nleapt at her, seized her wings, and broke them, so that she was no\nlonger able to fly over the broad earth. Then he went his way, and\nrelated to his father what he had done.\n\nSeven days passed by, and Anu, the lord of heaven, waited for the\ncoming of the South Wind. But Shutu came not; the rains and the floods\nwere delayed, and Anu grew impatient. He summoned to him his minister\nIlabrat.\n\n\"Wherefore doth Shutu neglect her duty?\" he asked. \"What hath chanced\nthat she travels not afield?\"\n\nIlabrat bowed low as he made answer: \"Listen, O Anu, and I will tell\nthee why Shutu flieth not abroad. Ea, lord of the deep and creator of\nall things, hath a son named Adapa, who hath crushed and broken the\nwings of thy servant Shutu, so that she is no more able to fly.\"\n\n\"If this be true,\" said Anu, \"summon the youth before me, and let him\nanswer for his crime.\"\n\n\"Be it so, O Anu!\"\n\nWhen Adapa received the summons to appear in heaven he trembled\ngreatly. It was no light thing to answer to the great gods for the\nill-usage of their servant, the demon Shutu. Nevertheless he began to\nmake preparations for his journey, and ere he set out his father Ea\ninstructed him as to how he should comport himself in the assembly of\nthe gods.\n\n\"Wrap thyself not in a vesture of gold, O my son, but clothe thee in\nthe garments of the dead. At the gates of heaven thou wilt find Tammuz\nand Gishzida guarding the way. Salute the twain with due respect, I\ncharge thee, baring thy head and showing all deference to them. If thou\ndost find favour in their eyes they will speak well of thee before Anu.\nAnd when thou standest within the precincts of heaven, don the garment\nthat is given thee to wear, and anoint thy head with the oil that\nis brought thee. But when the gods offer thee food and drink, touch\nthem not; for the food will be the 'Meat of Death,' and the drink the\n'Water of Death'; let neither pass within thy lips. Go now, my son, and\nremember these my instructions. Bear thyself with humility, and all\nwill be well.\"\n\nAdapa bade his father farewell and set out on his journey to heaven.\nHe found all as his father had predicted; Tammuz and Gishzida received\nhim at the portals of the divine dwelling, and so humble was Adapa's\nattitude that they were moved with compassion towards him. They led him\ninto the presence of Anu, and he bowed low before the great god.\n\n\"I am come in answer to thy summons,\" said he. \"Have mercy upon me, O\nthou Most High!\"\n\nAnu frowned upon him.\n\n\"It is said of thee,\" he made answer, \"that thou hast broken the wings\nof Shutu, the South Wind. What manner of man art thou, who darest\ndestroy Shutu in thy wrath? Knowest thou not that the people suffer for\nlack of nourishment; that the herb droopeth, and the cattle lie parched\non the scorching ground? Tell me why hast thou done this thing?\"\n\n\"I was out on the sea fishing,\" said Adapa, \"and the South Wind blew\nviolently, upsetting my boat and casting me into the water. Therefore I\nseized her wings and broke them. And lo! I am come to seek thy pardon.\"\n\nThen Tammuz and Gishzida, the deities whose favour Adapa had won at the\ngates of heaven, stepped forth and knelt at the feet of their king.\n\n\"Be merciful, O Anu! Adapa hath been sorely tried, and now is he truly\nhumble and repentant. Let his treatment of Shutu be forgotten.\"\n\nAnu listened to the words of Tammuz and Gishzida, and his wrath was\nturned away.\n\n\"Rise, Adapa,\" he said kindly; \"thy looks please me well. Thou hast\nseen the interior of this our kingdom, and now must thou remain in\nheaven for ever, and we will make thee a god like unto us. What sayest\nthou, son of Ea?\"\n\nAdapa bowed low before the king of the gods and thanked him for his\npardon and for his promise of godhead.\n\nAnu therefore commanded that a feast be made, and that the 'Meat of\nLife' and the 'Water of Life' be placed before Adapa, for only by\neating and drinking of these could he attain immortality.\n\nBut when the feast was spread Adapa refused to partake of the repast,\nfor he remembered his father's injunctions on this point. So he sat in\nsilence at the table of the gods, whereupon Anu exclaimed:\n\n\"What now, Adapa? Why dost thou not eat or drink? Except thou taste\nof the food and water set before thee thou canst not hope to live for\never.\"\n\nAdapa perceived that he had offended his divine host, so he hastened to\nexplain. \"Be not wroth, most mighty Anu. It is because my lord Ea hath\nso commanded that I break not bread nor drink water at thy table. Turn\nnot thy countenance from me, I beseech thee.\"\n\nAnu frowned. \"Is it that Ea feared I should seek thy life by offering\nthee deadly food? Truly he that knoweth so much, and hath schooled thee\nin so many different arts, is for once put to shame!\"\n\nAdapa would have spoken, but the lord of heaven silenced him.\n\n\"Peace!\" he said; then to his attendants--\"Bring forth a garment that\nhe may clothe himself, and oil bring also to anoint his head.\"\n\nWhen the King's command had been carried out Adapa robed himself in the\nheavenly garment and anointed his head with the oil. Then he addressed\nAnu thus:\n\n\"O Anu, I salute thee! The privilege of godhead must I indeed forego,\nbut never shall I forget the honour that thou wouldst have conferred\nupon me. Ever in my heart shall I keep the words thou hast spoken,\nand the memory of thy kindness shall I ever retain. Blame me not\nexceedingly, I pray thee. My lord Ea awaiteth my return.\"\n\n\"Truly,\" said Anu, \"I censure not thy decision. Be it even as thou\nwilt. Go, my son, and peace go with thee!\"\n\nAnd thus Adapa returned to the abode of Ea, lord of the dead, and\nthere for many years he lived in peace and happiness.\n\n\nAnu\n\nAlong with En-lil and Ea, Anu makes up the universal triad. He is\ncalled the 'father of the gods,' but appears to be descended from still\nolder deities. His name is seldom discovered in the inscriptions prior\nto the time of Khammurabi, but such notices as occur of him seem to\nhave already fixed his position as a ruler of the sky. His cult was\nspecially associated with the city of Erech. It is probable that in\nthe earliest days he had been the original Sumerian sky-father, as his\nname is merely a form of the Sumerian word for 'heaven.' This idea is\nassisted by the manner in which his name is originally written in the\ninscriptions, as the symbol signifying it is usually that employed for\n'heaven.' It is plain, therefore, that Anu was once regarded as the\nexpanse of heaven itself, just as are the 'sky-fathers' of numerous\nprimitive peoples. Several writers who deal with Anu appear to be of\nthe opinion that a god of the heavens is an 'abstraction.' \"Popular\nfancy,\" says Jastrow, \"deals with realities and with personified powers\nwhose workings are seen and felt. It would as little, therefore, have\nevolved the idea that there was a power to be identified with the\nheavens as a whole, of which the azure sky is a symbol, as it would\npersonify the earth as a whole, or the bodies of waters as a whole. It\nis only necessary to state the implications involved to recognize that\nthe conception of a triad of gods corresponding to three theoretical\ndivisions of the universe is a bit of learned speculation. It smacks\nof the school. The conception of a god of heaven fits in moreover\nwith the comparatively advanced period when the seats of the gods\nwere placed in the skies and the gods identified with the stars.\"[6]\nA merely superficial acquaintance with the nature of animism and the\nsky-myths of primitive and barbarian peoples would lead us to the\nconclusion that the opposite is the case. In Egyptian, Polynesian, and\nNorth American Indian myth the sky itself is directly personalized.\nEgyptian mythological illustration depicts the sky in female form,\nfor in Egyptian myth the sky is the mother and the earth the father\nof everything. Lang has shown that the sky-father is frequently\npersonalized as a \"magnified non-natural man\" among races which possess\nno theological schools. We do not say that the arrangement of Anu, Ea,\nand En-lil into a triad is not \"a bit of learned speculation,\" but to\nstate that early animism did not first personalize the sky and the\nearth and the sea is rash in the extreme. When Deucalion and Pyrrha in\nthe Greek myth asked the gods how they might best replenish the earth\nwith the human race, they were instructed to cast \"the bones of their\nmother\" behind them, and these bones they interpreted as the stones\nand rocks and acted accordingly. So would primitive man all the world\nover have interpreted this advice, for universally he believes the very\nsoil upon which he walks to be the great mother which produced his\nancestors, out of whose dust or clay they were formed, and who still\nnourishes and preserves him.\n\nJastrow proceeds to state that \"Anu was originally the personification\nof some definite power of nature, and everything points to this power\nhaving been the sun in the heavens. Starting from this point of view\nwe quite understand how the great illuminer of heaven should have been\nidentified with the heavens in an artificially devised theological\nsystem, just as En-lil became in this system the designation of the\nearth and of the region above the earth viewed as a whole.\"[7] The very\nfact that in the earliest times Anu was identified with the expanse of\nthe sky itself, and that the symbol used to denote him meant 'heaven,'\nis against this supposition. Again, the theory suffers from lack of\nanalogy. In what other mythology is there to be found a sky-god who\nat one time possessed a solar significance? The converse might be the\ncase. Some sky-gods have attained the solar connexion because of their\nrule over the entire expanse of the heavens, just as they have attained\nthe power of wielding lightning and the wind. But we are at a loss to\nrecall any deity originally of distinctive solar attributes who later\ntook the position of a sky-god.\n\nAnu was regarded as head of the triad and the father of En-lil. We are\ntold that the goddess Aruru first shaped man in the image of Anu, who\nmust thus have attained an anthropomorphic condition. He appears also\nto have been regarded as the conqueror of primeval chaos. His consort\nwas Anatu, probably a later feminine form of himself.\n\n\nIshtar\n\nIshtar was undoubtedly a goddess of Semitic origin and symbolized the\nfertility of the earth. She was the 'great mother' who fostered all\nvegetation and agriculture. It is probable that her cult originated at\nErech, and in the course of centuries and under many nominal changes\ndispersed itself throughout the length and breadth of western Asia\nand even into Greece and Egypt. It is probable that a number of lesser\ngoddesses, such as Nan\u00e2 and Anunit, may have become merged in the\nconception of this divinity, and that lesser local deities of the\nsame character as herself may have taken her name and assisted to\nswell her reputation. She is frequently addressed as 'mother of the\ngods,' and indeed the name 'Ishtar' became a generic designation for\n'goddess.' But these were later honours. When her cult centred at\nErech, it appears to have speedily blossomed out in many directions,\nand, as has been said, lesser cults probably eagerly identified\nthemselves with that of the great earth-mother, so that in time her\nworship became more than a Babylonian cult. Indeed, wherever people\nof Semitic speech were to be found, there was the worship of Ishtar.\nAs Ashteroth, or Astarte, she was known to Canaanites, Ph[oe]nicians,\nand Greeks, and there is some likelihood that the cult of Aphrodite\nhad also its beginnings in that of Ishtar. We shall enquire later\nwhether she can be the Esther of the Scriptures. Astrologically she was\nidentified with the planet Venus, but so numerous were the attributes\nsurrounding her taken from other goddesses with which she had become\nidentified that they threatened to overshadow her real character,\nwhich was that of the great and fertile mother. More especially did\nher identification with Nin-lil, the consort of En-lil, the storm-god,\nthreaten to alter her real nature, as in this guise she was regarded\nas a goddess of war. It is seldom that a goddess of fertility or\nlove achieves such a distinction. Gods possessing an agricultural\nsignificance are nearly always war-gods, but that is because they bring\nthe fertilizing thunder-clouds and therefore possess the lightning\narrow or spear. But Ishtar is specifically a goddess of the class of\nPersephone or Isis, and her identification with battle must be regarded\nas purely accidental. In later times in Assyria she was conceived as\nthe consort of Asshur, head of the Assyrian pantheon, in days when a\ngod or goddess who did not breathe war was of little use to a people\nlike the Assyrians, who were constantly employed in hostilities, and\nthis circumstance naturally heightened her reputation as a warlike\ndivinity. But it is at present her original character with which we are\noccupied, indeed in some texts we find that, so far from being able\nto protect herself, Ishtar and her property are made the prey of the\nsavage En-lil, the storm-god. \"His word sent me forth,\" she complains;\n\"as often as it comes to me it casts me prostrate upon my face. The\nunconsecrated foe entered my courts, placed his unwashed hands upon me,\nand caused me to tremble. Putting forth his hand he smote me with fear.\nHe tore away my robe and clothed his wife therein: he stripped off my\njewels and placed them upon his daughter. Like a quivering dove upon a\nbeam I sat. Like a fleeing bird from my cranny swiftly I passed. From\nmy temple like a bird they caused me to fly.\" Such is the plaint of\nIshtar, who in this case appears to be quite helpless before the enemy.\n\nThe myth which best illustrates her character is that which speaks of\nher journey to Aralu, the underworld.\n\n[Illustration: 1. Ishtar, the Mother-goddess.--2. Ishtar as the Goddess\nof War.--3. Ishtar, the Goddess of Love.--From _Religious Belief and\nPractice in Babylonia and Assyria_, by Professor Morris Jastrow.\n--By permission of Messrs G. P. Putnam's Sons.]\n\n\nThe Descent of Ishtar into Hades\n\nThe poem, which in its existing form consists of 137 lines in cuneiform\ncharacters, appears to be incomplete. We are not told therein what was\nthe purpose of the goddess in journeying to the 'House of No-return,'\nbut we gather from various legends and from the concluding portion\nof the poem itself that she went thither in search of her bridegroom\nTammuz, the sun-god of Eridu. The importance of the myth of Ishtar and\nTammuz lies partly in the fact that, travelling westwards to Greece by\nway of Ph[oe]nicia, it furnished a groundwork for classic myths of the\nAdonis-Attis type, which still provide mythologists with matter for\nendless speculation. The mythological significance of the poem and the\npersons it mentions will be dealt with later; the theories concerning\nthe primitive status of Tammuz and Ishtar are numerous and distinct,\nmore than one of them being sufficiently plausible to call for a\ncareful scrutiny. Consideration of the myth may therefore be deferred\ntill we have glanced at the Babylonian story itself and some of its\nprincipal variants and analogues.\n\n\nTammuz and Ishtar\n\nThe myth of Tammuz is one of high antiquity, dating possibly from\n4000 B.C. or even earlier. Both Tammuz and Ishtar were originally\nnon-Semitic, the name of the former deity being derived from the\nAkkadian Dumu-zi, 'son of life,' or 'the only son,' perhaps a\ncontraction of Dumu-zi-apsu, 'offspring of the spirit of the deep,'\nas Professor Sayce indicates. The 'spirit of the deep' is, of course,\nthe water-god Ea, and Tammuz apparently typifies the sun, though he is\nnot, as will presently be seen, a simple solar deity, but a god who\nunites in himself the attributes of various departmental divinities. An\nancient Akkadian hymn addresses Tammuz as \"Shepherd and lord, husband\nof Ishtar the lady of heaven, lord of the underworld, lord of the\nshepherd's seat;\" as grain which lies unwatered in the meadow, which\nbeareth no green blade; as a sapling planted in a waterless place; as\na sapling torn out by the root. Professor Sayce identifies him with\nthat Daonus, or Daos, whom Berossus states to have been the sixth king\nof Babylonia during the mythical period. Tammuz is the shepherd of\nthe sky, and his flocks and herds, like those of St Ilya in Slavonic\nfolk-lore, are the cloud-cattle and the fleecy vapours of the heavens.\n\nIshtar has from an early period been associated with Tammuz as his\nconsort, as she has, indeed, with Merodach and Assur and other deities.\nYet she is by no means a mere reflection of the male divinity, but\nhas a distinct individuality of her own, differing in this from all\nother Babylonian goddesses and betraying her non-Semitic origin. The\nwidespread character of the worship of Ishtar is remarkable. None of\nthe Babylonian or Assyrian deities were adopted into the pantheons\nof so many alien races. From the Persian Gulf to the pillars of\nHercules she was adored as the great mother of all living. She has\nbeen identified with Dawkina, wife of Ea, and is therefore mother of\nTammuz as well as his consort. This dual relationship may account for\nthat which appears in later myths among the Greeks, where Smyrna,\nmother of Adonis, is also his sister. Ishtar was regarded sometimes\nas the daughter of the sky-god Anu, and sometimes as the child of\nSin, the lunar deity. Her worship in Babylonia was universal, and in\ntime displaced that of Tammuz himself. The love of Ishtar for Tammuz\nrepresents the wooing of the sun-god of spring-time by the goddess\nof fertility; the god is slain by the relentless heat of summer,\nand there is little doubt that Ishtar enters Aralu in search of her\nyouthful husband. The poem we are about to consider briefly deals with\na part only of the myth--the story of Ishtar's descent into Aralu. It\nopens thus: \"To the land of No-return, the region of darkness, Ishtar,\nthe daughter of Sin, turned her ear, even Ishtar, the daughter of Sin,\nturned her ear, to the abode of darkness, the dwelling of Irkalla,\nto the house whose enterer goes not forth, to the road whence the\nwayfarer never returns, to the house whose inhabitants see no light,\nto the region where dust is their bread and their food mud; they see\nno light, they dwell in darkness, they are clothed, like the birds, in\na garment of feathers. On the door and the bolt hath the dust fallen.\"\nThe moral contained in this passage is a gloomy one for mortal man;\nhe who enters the dread precincts of Aralu goes not forth, he is\ndoomed to remain for ever in the enveloping darkness, his sustenance\nmud and dust. The mention of the dust which lies \"on door and bolt\"\nstrikes a peculiarly bleak and dreary note; like other primitive races\nthe ancient Babylonians painted the other world not definitely as a\nplace of reward or punishment, but rather as a weak reflection of the\nearth-world, a region of darkness and passive misery which must have\noffered a singularly uninviting prospect to a vigorous human being. The\ngarment of feathers is somewhat puzzling. Why should the dead wear a\ngarment of feathers? Unless it be that the sun-god, identified in some\nof his aspects with the eagle, descends into the underworld in a dress\nof feathers, and that therefore mortals who follow him must appear in\nthe nether regions in similar guise. The description above quoted of\nthe Babylonian Hades tallies with that given in dream to Eabani by the\ntemple-maiden Ukhut (Gilgamesh epic, tablet VII).\n\n\nAt the Gates of Aralu\n\nComing to the gate of Aralu, Ishtar assumes a menacing aspect, and\nthreatens to break down the door and shatter its bolts and bars if\nshe be not admitted straightway. The keeper of the gate endeavours\nto soothe the irate deity, and goes to announce her presence to\nEresh-ki-gal (Allatu), the mistress of Hades. From his words it would\nappear that Ishtar has journeyed thither in search of the waters of\nlife, wherewith to restore her husband Tammuz to life. Allatu receives\nthe news of her sister's advent with a bitter tirade, but nevertheless\ninstructs the keeper to admit her, which he proceeds to do.\n\nIshtar on entering the sombre domains is obliged to pass through seven\ngates, at each of which she is relieved of some article of dress or\nadornment (evidently in accordance with the ancient custom of Aralu),\ntill at last she stands entirely unclad. At the first gate the keeper\ntakes from her \"the mighty crown of her head\"; at the second her\nearrings are taken; at the third her necklace; at the fourth the\nornaments of her breast; at the fifth her jewelled girdle; at the sixth\nher bracelets; and at the seventh the cincture of her body. The goddess\ndoes not part with these save under protest, but the keeper of the\ngate answers all her queries with the words: \"Enter, O lady, it is the\ncommand of Allatu.\" The divine wayfarer at length appears before the\ngoddess of the underworld, who shows her scant courtesy, bidding the\nplague-demon, Namtar, smite her from head to foot with disease--in her\neyes, side, feet, heart, and head.\n\nDuring the time that Ishtar is confined within the bounds of Aralu all\nfertility on the earth is suspended, both in the animal and vegetable\nkingdoms. Knowledge of this disastrous state of affairs is conveyed to\nthe gods by their messenger, Pap-sukal, who first tells the story to\nShamash, the sun-god. Shamash weeps as he bears the matter before Ea\nand Sin, gods of the earth and the moon respectively; but Ea, to remedy\nthe sterility of the earth, creates a being called Ashushu-namir, whom\nhe dispatches to the underworld to demand the release of Ishtar. Allatu\nis greatly enraged when the demand is made \"in the name of the great\ngods,\" and curses Ashushu-namir with a terrible curse, condemning him\nto dwell in the darkness of a dungeon, with the garbage of the city for\nhis food. Nevertheless she cannot resist the power of the conjuration,\nwherefore she bids Namtar, the plague-demon, release the Annunaki, or\nearth-spirits, and place them on a golden throne, and pour the waters\nof life over Ishtar. Namtar obeys; in the words of the poem he \"smote\nthe firmly-built palace, he shattered the threshold which bore up the\nstones of light, he bade the spirits of earth come forth, on a throne\nof gold did he seat them, over Ishtar he poured the waters of life\nand brought her along.\" Ishtar is then led through the seven gates of\nArula, receiving at each the article of attire whereof she had there\nbeen deprived. Finally she emerges into the earth-world, which resumes\nits normal course. Then follow a few lines addressed to Ishtar, perhaps\nby the plague-demon or by the keeper of the gates. \"If she (Allatu)\nhath not given thee that for which the ransom is paid her, return to\nher for Tammuz, the bridegroom of thy youth. Pour over him pure waters\nand precious oil. Put on him a purple robe, and a ring of crystal\non his hand. Let Samkhat (the goddess of joy) enter the liver....\"\nThese lines indicate with sufficient clearness that Ishtar descended\ninto Hades in order to obtain the waters of life and thus revive her\nbridegroom Tammuz. The poem does not relate whether or not her errand\nwas successful, but we are left to conjecture that it was. There still\nremain a few lines of the poem, not, however, continuing the narrative,\nbut forming a sort of epilogue, addressed, it may be, to the hearers of\nthe tale. Mention is made in this portion of mourners, \"wailing men and\nwailing women,\" of a funeral pyre and the burning of incense, evidently\nin honour of the god Tammuz.\n\n\nIshtar and Persephone\n\nAs has been indicated already, the myth of Tammuz and Ishtar furnished\nthe groundwork for certain myths of classic Greece and Rome. The\nPh[oe]nician Astarte (Ashtoreth), a development of Ishtar, became in\ntime the Aphrodite of the Greeks, a deity who plays a part in the\nAdonis legend analogous to that of Ishtar in the Tammuz story. The\nname Adonis itself is derived from _Adoni_ ('my lord'), the word with\nwhich the Ph[oe]nician worshippers of Tammuz hailed the setting sun.\nThe myth of Adonis is perhaps the most nearly related of any to that\nof Tammuz, since its chief characters are acknowledged counterparts\nof those in the Babylonian legend, while the tale of Ishtar's descent\ninto Hades may be regarded as a sequel to the Greek story, or rather\nto an early Babylonian variant thereof. Briefly outlined, the story\nruns as follows: Adonis was the fruit of an unnatural union between\nthe Syrian king Theias and his daughter Smyrna (Myrrha). Theias\npursued the princess, intending to take her life for the crime, but\nthe pity of the gods turned her into a tree from which, at the end\nof ten months, Adonis was born. It is said that a boar rent open the\ntree-trunk with its tusk, and thus enabled the divine infant to see the\nlight. Aphrodite, charmed with the beauty of the child, gave him into\nthe care of Persephone, who was so enamoured of her charge that she\nafterwards refused to give him up. The goddesses appealed to Zeus, who\ndecreed that Adonis should spend six months of each year with Aphrodite\nand six with Persephone in the underworld; or, according to another\nversion, four months were to be passed with Aphrodite and four with\nPersephone, while the remaining four were to be at his own disposal. He\nwas afterwards slain by a boar sent against him by Artemis (herself, by\nthe way, a development of Ishtar). It may be remarked that Aphrodite,\nwho figures, like Ishtar, as the goddess of love and beauty, is also\nclosely associated with the nether regions, perhaps because she was\nidentified with the Babylonian goddess in her journey to Hades in\nsearch of her spouse.\n\nAkin to Adonis is the god Attis, who likewise, according to one\nversion of his myth, is slain by a boar. After his death he becomes a\npine-tree, and from his blood violets spring. He is beloved of Cybele,\nthe mother-goddess, who laments his untimely end.\n\nIn the Adonis legend there is evidence of some overlapping. Persephone,\nor Proserpine, who here corresponds to the Allatu of the Babylonian\nvariant, figures in another well-known myth as the prototype of Tammuz.\nWhen she is carried off to the netherworld by Pluto, her mother,\nCeres, will not suffer the corn to grow while her daughter remains\na prisoner. Like Ishtar in search of her spouse, the mother-goddess\nseeks her child with weeping and lamentation. Through the eating of a\npomegranate seed, Proserpine is finally obliged to pass four (or six)\nmonths of every year with her dark captor, as his consort.\n\nAnother myth which has affinities with the tale of Tammuz and Ishtar\nis the Egyptian one which deals with the quest of Isis. The god Osiris\nis slain through the machinations of his brother Set (who, being\nidentified elsewhere with a black hog, recalls the boar which slew\nAdonis and Attis), and his body, enclosed in a chest, is cast into\nthe Nile. Afterwards the chest is thrown up by the waves, and round\nit springs miraculously a tamarisk tree. Meanwhile Isis, wife and\nsister to Osiris, travels hither and thither in search of his remains,\nwhich in due time she finds. However, the chest is stolen from her by\nSet, who, taking therefrom the body of Osiris, tears the corpse into\nfourteen pieces, which he scatters broadcast through the land. Isis\nstill pursues her quest, till she has found all the portions and buried\nthem.\n\nThese tales were the mythical correlates of certain ritualistic\npractices designed to bring about the change of seasons, and other\nnatural phenomena, by means of sympathetic magic. The burden of a great\nduty falls upon the shoulders of primitive man; with his rites and\nspells and magic arts he must assist the universe in its course. His\nesoteric plays, typifying the mysterious fact of growth, are necessary\nto ensure the sprouting of the corn; his charms and incantations are\nessential even for the rising of the sun; lacking the guarantee of\nscience that one season shall follow another in its proper order,\nhe goes through an elaborate performance symbolizing the decay and\nrevival of vegetation, believing that only thus can the natural order\nbe maintained. Through the force of sympathetic magic he sees his puny\nefforts related to the mighty results which follow them.\n\nThis, then, is the origin of the ritual of the Tammuz festival, which\nmay conceivably have had an existence prior to that of the myth itself.\nThe representation of the death and resurrection of the god, whether in\nmyth or ritual, had undoubtedly a seasonal significance, wherefore the\ndate of his festival varied in the different localities. In Babylonia\nit was celebrated in June, thus showing that the deity was slain by\nthe fierce heat of the sun, burning up all the springtide vegetation.\nIshtar's sojourn in Hades would thus occupy the arid months of summer.\nIn other and more temperate climes winter would be regarded as the\nenemy of Tammuz. An interesting account of the Tammuz festival is that\ngiven by an Arabic author writing in the tenth century, and quoted by\nSir James Frazer in his _Golden Bough_. \"Tammuz (July). In the middle\nof this month is the festival of el-B\u00fbg\u00e2t, that is, of the weeping\nwomen, and this is the Ta-uz festival, which is celebrated in honour\nof the god Ta-uz. The women bewail him, because his lord slew him so\ncruelly, ground his bones in a mill, and then scattered them to the\nwind. The women (during this festival) eat nothing which has been\nground in a mill, but limit their diet to steeped wheat, sweet vetches,\ndates, raisins, and the like.\" The material for this description was\nfurnished by the Syrians of Harran. Of the curious legend attaching to\nthe mourning rites more will be said later.\n\n\nLamentations for Tammuz\n\nCharacteristic of the Tammuz ritual are the lamentations, of which\nseveral series are still extant. In later times it appears that a\ndifferent cause was assigned for the weeping of the \"wailing men and\nwailing women.\" They no longer mourned the death of Tammuz, but the\ndeparture of Ishtar into the netherworld, and so the legend of her\njourney to Aralu came to be recited in the temples. Sir James Frazer\nsuggests that the ritualistic counterpart of the Tammuz-Ishtar myth\nmay have included the pouring of water over an effigy of the god, the\npractice corresponding to the pouring of the water of life over him in\norder to bring him back to life. If this indeed formed a part of the\nTammuz ritual we may take it that it was intended as a rain-charm.\n\nLikewise the Adonia festival of the Greeks symbolized the death and\nresurrection of Adonis. This feast occupied two days; on the first day,\nimages of Adonis and Aphrodite were made and laid each on a silver\ncouch; on the second day, these images were cast by the women into the\nsea, together with 'Adonis gardens,' as they were called--pots filled\nwith earth in which cut flowers were stuck. It is believed that this\nrite was meant to signify the revival of vegetation under the influence\nof rain. The persons engaged in it indulged in such lamentations as\nwere uttered by the worshippers of Tammuz in Babylonia, tore their\nhair, and beat their breasts. The festival of Adonis fell in the\nsummer-time at Alexandria and Athens, in the spring at Byblus, while\nin Ph[oe]nicia it occurred in the season when the river Nahr Ibrahim\n(formerly called Adonis) bore down from the mountains of Lebanon the\nred earth in which the devout saw the blood of the slain Adonis.\nGolden boxes of myrrh were employed at the Adonia festival, incense\nwas burned, and pigs were sacrificed. Pigs were sacrificed also to\nOsiris, whose cult, as has been shown, had much in common with that of\nTammuz and Adonis. The Egyptian god was cast by his enemies into the\nwaters of the Nile; and it may be that this myth too had a ritualistic\ncounterpart, designed as a charm to produce rain.\n\nIt has been indicated already that the elucidations of the myth of\nIshtar's journey to Aralu are many and divergent. The variants above\nenumerated serve each to cast light on the other, and from a comparison\nof these we may succeed in arriving at a satisfactory conclusion. To\nbegin with, however, it must be remembered that when the cult of any\ndeity has reached a fairly advanced stage it is impossible to assign\nto him any one department of nature, to say that he is a sun-god, a\nrain-god, a corn-god, for he may possess the attributes of all of\nthese. In giving any god a departmental designation we are striving to\nexpress his primitive or predominant characteristics merely.\n\n[Illustration: The Mother-goddess Ishtar.--Evelyn Paul.]\n\nAn Allegorical Interpretation of the Myth\n\nA truly allegorical elucidation of the myth of Ishtar's descent into\nHades would depict Ishtar, as the goddess of fertility, seeking in the\nunderworld for her husband, the sun-god, slain by the icy breath of\nwinter. During her sojourn in the nether regions all fertility ceases\non the earth, to be resumed only when she returns as the joyful bride\nof the springtide sun. The surrender of her clothing and jewels at\nthe seven gates of Aralu represents the gradual decay of vegetation on\nthe earth, and the resumption of her garments the growing beauty and\nverdure which mark her return. Another hypothesis identifies Ishtar\nwith Dawkina, goddess of the earth, wife of Ea and therefore mother as\nwell as consort of Tammuz. According to this view Ishtar represents\nnot the fertility of the earth, but the earth itself, deprived of\nits adornments of flowers and leafage by the approach of winter, or\nvariously, by the burning heat of summer. The waters of life, with\nwhich she sprinkles and restores her husband,[8] are the revivifying\nrains which give to the sun-god his youthful vigour and glory. Against\nthis view it has been urged (_e.g._ by Sir James Frazer) that \"there is\nnothing in the sun's annual course within the temperate and tropical\nzones to suggest that he is dead for half or a third of the year, and\nalive for the other half or two-thirds.\"\n\nAlternatively it is suggested that Tammuz is a god of vegetation, and\nthat Ishtar doubles the r\u00f4le. The slaying of Tammuz and the journey\nof Ishtar would thus represent two distinct myths, each typifying\nthe decay and subsequent revival of vegetation. Other instances may\nbe recalled in which two myths of the same class have become fused\ninto one. This view, then, presents some elements of probability; not\nonly Tammuz but most of his variants appear to possess a vegetable\nsignificance, while the Ishtar type is open to interpretation on\nthe same lines. Thus Adonis is associated with the myrrh-tree, from\nwhose trunk he was born, and Osiris with the tamarisk, used in the\nritual connected with his cult, while Attis after his death became a\npine-tree. Tammuz himself was conceived of as dwelling in the midst of\na great world-tree, whose roots extended down to the underworld, while\nits branches reached to the heavens. This tree appears to have been the\ncedar, for which the ancient Babylonians had an especial reverence.\nOne feature which leads us to identify the deities of this class, both\nmale and female, with gods of vegetation is their association with the\nmoon. Osiris is regarded, and with much reason, as a moon-god; in one\nof her aspects Aphrodite is a lunar deity, while a like significance\nbelongs to Proserpine and to the Ph[oe]nician Ashtoreth. Ishtar\nherself, it is true, was never identified with the moon, which in\nBabylonia was a male divinity; yet she was associated with him as his\ndaughter. Among primitive peoples the moon is believed to exercise a\npowerful influence on vegetation, and indeed on all manner of growth\nand productivity. The association of a god with the moon therefore\nargues for him also a connexion with vegetation and fertility. It may\nbe remarked, in passing, that a lunar significance has been attached\nby some authorities to the story of Ishtar's descent into Hades, and\nto kindred myths. It is held that the sojourn of the goddess in Aralu\ntypifies a lunar eclipse, or perhaps the period between the waning of\nthe old moon and the appearance of the new. But, as has been said, the\nancient Babylonians saw in the luminary of night a male deity, so that\nany lunar characteristics pertaining to Ishtar must be regarded as of\nmerely secondary importance.\n\n\nIshtar, Tammuz, and Vegetation\n\nIf it be granted, then, that Ishtar and Tammuz are deities of\nvegetation, it is possible still further to narrow their sphere by\nassociating them particularly with the corn. Adonis and Aphrodite\nare connected with the growth of the crops. Ceres, who forbids the\ncorn to spring while her daughter is in the realm of Pluto, is\nundoubtedly a corn-mother, and Proserpine evidently partakes of\nthe same nature. Osiris was the culture-deity who introduced corn\ninto Egypt. A representation of him in the temple of Isis at Phil\u00e6\ndepicts corn-stalks growing out of his dead body--the body of Osiris\n(the grain) is torn to pieces, scattered through the land, and the\npieces buried (or planted) in the earth, when the corn sprouts from\nit. Moreover, Tammuz himself was cruelly disposed of by his lord,\nwho \"ground his bones in a mill, and then scattered them to the\nwind\"--plainly a type of the treatment meted out to the corn. An Arabic\nwriter relates that Tammuz was cruelly killed several times, but that\nhe always came to life again, a story which recalls Robert Burns' _John\nBarleycorn_, itself perhaps based on mythical matter.\n\nMay not these examples suggest an elucidation on animistic lines?\nDeities of the Tammuz type appear to symbolize the corn-grain and\nnothing more--cut down, bruised and beaten, buried in the earth, and\nfinally springing to renewed life. Who, then, are the goddesses,\nlikewise identified with the corn, who seek in the underworld for\nlover or child, endeavouring with tears to ransom the corn from the\ndark earth? Are they not the primitive corn-spirits, the indwelling\nanimistic spirits of the standing grain, doomed at the harvest to\nwander disconsolately through the earth till the sprouting of the corn\nonce more gives them an opportunity to materialize?\n\nThe stories of the mutilation and dispersion of the bodies of Tammuz\nand Osiris, and of the many deaths of the former god, furnish a basis\nfor yet another explanation of the Tammuz myth. Sir James Frazer brings\nforward the theory that the 'Lamentations' of the ancient Babylonians\nwere intended not for mourning for the decay of vegetation, but to\nbewail the cruel treatment of the grain at harvest-time, and cites in\nthis connexion the ballad of _John Barleycorn_, which, we are told, was\nbased on an early English poem, probably itself of mythological origin.\n\nIt is, however, most likely that the myth of Tammuz and Ishtar is of\na composite nature, as has already been indicated. Possibly a myth\nof the sun-god and earth-goddess has been superimposed on the early\ngroundwork of the corn-spirit seeking the corn. It would certainly seem\nthat Ishtar in her descent into Aralu typified the earth, shorn of\nher covering of vegetation. Then in time she might come to symbolize\nthe vegetation itself, or the fertility which produced it, and so\nwould gain new attributes, and new elements would enter into the myths\nconcerning her. Only by regarding her as a composite deity is it\npossible to reach an understanding of the principles underlying these\nmyths.\n\n\nIshtar and Esther\n\nWe have already questioned whether the Scripture story of Esther is in\nsome manner connected with the goddess Ishtar. Writing of the Jewish\nfeast of Purim, Sir James Frazer says (_Golden Bough_, vol. iii, p.\n153): \"From the absence of all notice of Purim in the older books of\nthe Bible, we may fairly conclude that the festival was instituted\nor imported at a comparatively late date among the Jews. The same\nconclusion is supported by the Book of Esther itself, which was\nmanifestly written to explain the origin of the feast and to suggest\nmotives for its observance. For, according to the author of the book,\nthe festival was established to commemorate the deliverance of the Jews\nfrom a great danger which threatened them in Persia under the reign\nof King Xerxes. Thus the opinion of modern scholars that the feast of\nPurim, as celebrated by the Jews, was of late date and Oriental origin,\nis borne out by the tradition of the Jews themselves. An examination\nof that tradition and of the mode of celebrating the feast renders\nit probable that Purim is nothing but a more or less disguised form\nof the Babylonian festival of the Sac\u00e6a or Zakmuk.... But further,\nwhen we examine the narrative which professes to account for the\ninstitution of Purim, we discover in it not only the strongest traces\nof Babylonian origin, but also certain singular analogies to those very\nfeatures of the Sac\u00e6an festival with which we are here more immediately\nconcerned. The Book of Esther turns upon the fortunes of two men, the\nvizier Haman and the despised Jew Mordecai, at the court of a Persian\nking. Mordecai, we are told, had given mortal offence to the vizier,\nwho accordingly prepares a tall gallows on which he hopes to see his\nenemy hanged, while he himself expects to receive the highest mark\nof the King's favour by being allowed to wear the royal crown and\nthe royal robes, and thus attired to parade the streets, mounted on\nthe King's own horse and attended by one of the noblest princes, who\nshould proclaim to the multitude his temporary exaltation and glory.\nBut the artful intrigues of the wicked vizier miscarried and resulted\nin precisely the opposite of what he had hoped and expected; for the\nroyal honours which he had looked for fell to his rival Mordecai, and\nhe himself was hanged on the gallows which he had made ready for his\nfoe. In this story we seem to detect a reminiscence, more or less\nconfused, of the Zoganes of the Sac\u00e6a, in other words, of the custom of\ninvesting a private man with the insignia of royalty for a few days,\nand then putting him to death on the gallows or the cross....\n\n\"A strong confirmation of this view is furnished by a philological\nanalysis of the names of the four personages. It seems to be now\ngenerally recognised by Biblical scholars that the name Mordecai, which\nhas no meaning in Hebrew, is nothing but a slightly altered form of\nMarduk or Merodach, the name of the chief god of Babylon, whose great\nfestival was the Zakmuk; and further, it is generally admitted that\nEsther in like manner is equivalent to Ishtar, the great Babylonian\ngoddess whom the Greeks called Astarte, and who is more familiar to\nEnglish readers as Ashtaroth. The derivation of the names of Haman\nand Vashti is less certain, but some high authorities are disposed\nto accept the view of Jensen that Haman is identical with Humman or\nHomman, the national god of the Elamites, and that Vashti is in like\nmanner an Elamite deity, probably a goddess whose name appears in\ninscriptions.\"\n\n\nLang on the Esther Story\n\nCommenting on this theory, Lang in his _Magic and Religion_ (p. 161)\nsays: \"The name Mordecai resembles Marduk, Esther is like Ishtar, Haman\nis like Humman, the Elamite god, and there is a divine name in the\ninscriptions, read as resembling 'Vashti,' and probably the name of an\nElamite goddess. Thus the human characters in Esther are in peril of\nmerging in Babylonian and Elamite gods. But, lest that should occur,\nwe ought also to remember that Mordecai was the real name of a real\nhistorical Jew of the Captivity, one of the companions of Nehemiah in\nthe return from exile to Jerusalem. Again, Esther appears to me to be\nthe crown-name of the Jewish wife of Xerxes, in the Book of Esther:\n'Hadassah, that is Esther.' In the Biblical story she conceals her\nJewish descent. Hadassah, says N\u00f6ldeke, 'is no mere invention of the\nwriter of Esther.' Hadassah is said to mean 'myrtle bough,' and girls\nare still called Myrtle. Esther appears to have been an assumed name,\nafter a royal mixed marriage. Now if a real historical Jew might be\nnamed Mordecai, which we know to be the case, a Jewess, whether in\nfact, or in this Book of Esther, which, says Dr. Jastrow, 'has of\ncourse some historical basis,' might be styled Esther.... But, if\nMordecai be, as it is, an historical name of a real Jew of the period,\nwhile Esther may be, and probably is, a name which a Jewess might bear,\nit is not ascertained that Vashti really is the name of an Elamite\ngoddess. Yet Vashti is quite essential as a goddess to Mr. Frazer's\nargument. 'The derivation,' he says, 'of the names of Haman and Vashti\nis less certain, but some high authorities are disposed to accept the\nview of Jensen that Haman is identical with Humman or Homman, the\nnational god of the Elamites, and that Vashti is in like manner an\nElamite deity, probably a goddess whose name appears in inscriptions.'\"\n\nIt is thus seen that the facts regarding these names make such an\nexplanation as is advanced by Sir James Frazer rather a hazardous one.\nHaman, according to his theory, would represent the dying god, whilst\nMordecai would play the part of the re-risen god of vegetation. Lang\nputs forward a counter-theory, and that is that Haman or Humman was\na conquering god of the Elamites, which accounts for him having been\nwhipped and hanged in derision. This Humman was, he thinks, possibly an\nElamite god of vegetation.\n\n\nNin-Girsu\n\nGirsu was a part of the city of Lagash, and the name Nin-Girsu means\n'Lord of Girsu.' Gods frequently had lordship over a city quarter, one\nof the best-known instances of this being that of Huitzilopochtli, who\nruled over that part of the city of Tenochtitlan, called Mexico, which\nafterwards gave its name to the entire community. Girsu had originally\nbeen a city itself and had become merged into Lagash, so its god was\nprobably of ancient origin. Nin-Girsu is frequently alluded to as 'the\nwarrior of Bel'--he who broke through the hostile ranks to aid the\nworshippers of the great god of the netherworld. Like many combatant\ndeities, however, he presided over local agriculture, and in this\nconnexion he was known as Shul-gur, 'Lord of the corn heaps.' He is\neven identified with Tammuz.\n\n\nBau\n\nIn ancient inscriptions, especially those of Gudea, Urbau, and\nUru-kagina, the goddess Bau is alluded to as the great mother of\nmankind, who restores the sick to health. She is called 'chief daughter\nof Anu,' and seems to play the part of a fate to some extent. She\nhas also an agricultural side to her character. Gudea was especially\ndevoted to her, and has left it on record that she \"filled him with\neloquence.\" Her temple was at Uru-Azagga, a quarter of Lagash, and as\nthe goddess of that neighbourhood she would, of course, have come into\nclose contact with Nin-Girsu. Indeed she is spoken of as his consort,\nand when Uru-Azagga became part of Lagash, Bau was promoted as tutelar\ngoddess of that city and designated 'Mother of Lagash.' She has been\nidentified with the primeval watery depths, the primitive chaos, and\nthis identification has been founded on the similarity between the name\nBau and the Hebrew _bohu_, the word for 'chaos,' but proof is wanting\nto support the conjecture. A closely allied form of her seems to be\nGa-tum-dug, a goddess who has probably a common origin with Bau, and\nwho certainly is in some manner connected with water--perhaps with the\nclouds.\n\n\nNannar\n\nNannar was the moon-god of Ur, the city whence came Abram, and with\nthat place he was connected much as was Shamash with Sippar--that is\nto say, Ur was his chief but not his only centre of adoration. Why he\ncame to have his principal seat at Ur it would be difficult to say.\nThe name Ur signifies 'light,' so it may be that a shrine dedicated to\nNannar existed upon the site of this city and constituted its nucleus.\nIn Babylonian mythology the sun was regarded as the offspring of the\nmoon, and it is easy to see how this conception arose in the minds of\na race prone to astronomical study. In all civilizations the lunar\nmethod of computing time precedes the solar. The phases of the moon are\nregarded as more trustworthy and more easily followed than the more\nobscure changes of the brighter luminary, therefore a greater degree of\nimportance was attached to the moon in very early times than to the\nsun. The moon is usually represented on Babylonian cylinders as bearing\na crescent upon his head and wearing a long, flowing beard described as\nof the colour of lapis-lazuli--much the same shade as his beams possess\nin warmer latitudes. Nannar was frequently alluded to as 'the heifer of\nAnu,' because of the horn which the moon displays at a certain phase.\nMany monarchs appear to have delighted in the upkeep and restoration of\nhis temple, among them Nur-Ramman and Sin-iddina.\n\n\nNannar in Decay\n\nBut, as happens to many gods, Nannar became confounded with some\nearthly hero--was even alluded to as a satrap of Babylonia under the\nMedian monarch Artaios--a personage unknown to history. Ctesias hands\ndown to us a very circumstantial tale concerning him as follows:[9]\n\n\"There was a Persian of the name of Parsondes, in the service of the\nking of the Medes, an eager huntsman, and an active warrior on foot\nand in the chariot, distinguished in council and in the field, and of\ninfluence with the king. Parsondes often urged the king to make him\nsatrap of Babylon in the place of Nannaros, who wore women's clothes\nand ornaments, but the king always put the petition aside, for it\ncould not be granted without breaking the promise which his ancestor\nhad made to Belesys. Nannaros discovered the intentions of Parsondes,\nand sought to secure himself against them, and to take vengeance. He\npromised great rewards to the cooks who were in the train of the king,\nif they succeeded in seizing Parsondes and giving him up. One day,\nParsondes in the heat of the chase strayed far from the king. He had\nalready killed many boars and deer, when the pursuit of a wild ass\ncarried him to a great distance. At last he came upon the cooks, who\nwere occupied in preparations for the king's table. Being thirsty,\nParsondes asked for wine; they gave it, took care of his horse, and\ninvited him to take food--an invitation agreeable to Parsondes, who\nhad been hunting the whole day. He bade them send the ass which he had\ncaptured to the king, and tell his own servants where he was. Then he\nate of the various kinds of food set before him, and drank abundantly\nof the excellent wine, and at last asked for his horse in order to\nreturn to the king. But they brought beautiful women to him, and urged\nhim to remain for the night. He agreed, and as soon as, overcome by\nhunting, wine, and love, he had fallen into a deep sleep, the cooks\nbound him and brought him to Nannaros. Nannaros reproached Parsondes\nwith calling him an effeminate man, and seeking to obtain his satrapy;\nhe had the king to thank that the satrapy granted to his ancestors had\nnot been taken from him. Parsondes replied that he considered himself\nmore worthy of the office, because he was more manly and more useful to\nthe king. But Nannaros swore by Bel and Mylitta that Parsondes should\nbe softer and whiter than a woman, called for the eunuch who was over\nthe female players, and bade him shave the body of Parsondes and bathe\nand anoint him every day, put women's clothes on him, plait his hair\nafter the manner of women, paint his face, and place him among the\nwomen who played the guitar and sang, that he might learn their arts.\nThis was done, and soon Parsondes played and sang better at the table\nof Nannaros than any of the women. Meanwhile the king of the Medes\nhad caused search to be made everywhere for Parsondes; and since he\ncould nowhere be found, and nothing could be heard of him, he believed\nthat a lion or some other wild animal had killed him when out hunting,\nand lamented for his loss. Parsondes had lived for seven years as a\nwoman in Babylon, when Nannaros caused a eunuch to be scourged and\ngrievously maltreated. This eunuch Parsondes induced by large presents\nto retire to Media and tell the king the misfortune which had come\nupon him. Then the king sent a message commanding Nannaros to give up\nParsondes. Nannaros declared that he had never seen him. But the king\nsent a second messenger, with orders to put Nannaros to death if he\ndid not surrender Parsondes. Nannaros entertained the messenger of the\nking; and when the meal was brought, 150 women entered, of whom some\nplayed the guitar, while others blew the flute. At the end of the meal,\nNannaros asked the king's envoy which of all the women was the most\nbeautiful and had played best. The envoy pointed to Parsondes. Nannaros\nlaughed long and said, 'That is the person whom you seek,' and released\nParsondes, who on the next day returned home with the envoy to the king\nin a chariot. The king was astonished at the sight of him, and asked\nwhy he had not avoided such disgrace by death. Parsondes answered,\n'In order that I might see you again and by you execute vengeance on\nNannaros, which could never have been mine had I taken my life.' The\nking promised him that his hope should be realized, as soon as he came\nto Babylon. But when he came there, Nannaros defended himself on the\nground that Parsondes, though in no way injured by him, had maligned\nhim, and sought to obtain the satrapy over Babylonia. The king pointed\nout that he had made himself judge in his own cause, and had imposed\na punishment of a degrading character; in ten days he would pronounce\njudgment upon him for his conduct. In terror, Nannaros hastened to\nMitraphernes, the eunuch of greatest influence with the king, and\npromised him the most liberal rewards, 10 talents of gold and 100\ntalents of silver, 10 golden and 200 silver bowls, if he could induce\nthe king to spare his life and retain him in the satrapy of Babylonia.\nHe was prepared to give the king 100 talents of gold, 1000 talents of\nsilver, 100 golden and 300 silver bowls, and costly robes, with other\ngifts; Parsondes also should receive 100 talents of silver and costly\nrobes. After many entreaties, Mitraphernes persuaded the king not to\norder the execution of Nannaros, as he had not killed Parsondes, but to\nexact from him the compensation which he was prepared to pay Parsondes\nand the king. Nannaros in gratitude threw himself at the feet of the\nking; but Parsondes said, 'Cursed be the man who first brought gold\namong men; for the sake of gold I have been made a mockery to the\nBabylonians.'\"\n\n[Illustration: Assyrian Rock Sculpture from _The Monuments of Nineveh_,\nby Sir Henry Layard.]\n\nIt is impossible to say what the mythological meaning hidden in\nthis tale may portend. We have the moon-god attempting to feminize\nan unfortunate enemy. Does this mean that Parsondes came under the\ninfluence of the moon-god--that is, that he became a lunatic?\n\n\nAralu, or Eres-ki-Gal\n\nThe deities of the underworld, of the region of the dead, are usually\nof later origin than those of the heavens.[10] They are frequently\nthe gods of an older and discredited religion, and are relegated to\nthe 'cold shades of opposition,' dwelling there just as the dead are\nsupposed to 'dwell' in the grave. A legend exists regarding Aralu which\nwas discovered among other texts at Tel-el-Amarna. The story goes that\nthe gods once gave a feast to which they invited Aralu, apologizing at\nthe same time that they were unable to go down to her and regretting\nthat she could not ascend to them. In their dilemma they requested\nher to send a messenger to bring to her the viands which fell to her\nshare. She complied with the request, and when the messenger arrived\nall the gods stood up to do him honour for his mistress's sake--all\nsave Nergal. The messenger acquainted Aralu with this slight, and\ngreatly enraged she sent him back to the dwelling of the gods to ask\nthat the delinquent might be delivered into her hands so that she\nmight slay him. The gods after some discussion requested the messenger\nto take back him who had offended the dark goddess, and in order\nthat the envoy might the more easily discover him, all the gods were\ngathered together. But Nergal remained in the background. His absence\nwas discovered, however, and he was despatched to the gloomy realm\nof Aralu. But he had no mind to taste death. Indeed Aralu found the\ntables turned, for Nergal, seizing her by the hair, dragged her from\nher throne and prepared to cut off her head. She begged to be allowed\nto speak, and upon her request being granted, she offered herself as a\nwife to her conqueror, along with the dominions over which she held\nsway. Nergal assented to her proposals and they were wed.\n\nNergal is the sun which passes through the gloomy underworld at night\njust as does Osiris, and in this character he has to conquer the powers\nof death and the grave. It is rare, however, to find the sun-hero\nallying himself by marriage to one of the infernal powers, although in\nthe Central American _Popol Vuh_ one of the explorers to the underworld\nweds the daughter of one of its overlords, and Persephone, the\ncorn-goddess, is forced to become the spouse of the lord of Hades.\n\n\nDagon\n\nDagon, alluded to in the Scriptures, was, like Oannes, a fish-god.\nBesides being worshipped in Erech and its neighbourhood, he was adored\nin Palestine and on occasion among the Hebrews themselves. But it was\nin the extreme south of Palestine that his worship attained its chief\nimportance. He had temples at Ashdod and Gaza, and perhaps his worship\ntravelled westward along with that of Ishtar. Both were worshipped at\nErech, and where the cult of the one penetrated it is likely that there\nwould be found the rites of the other.\n\n    Dagon his name; sea-monster, upward man\n    And downward fish,\n\nas Milton expresses it, affords one of the most dramatic instances in\nthe Old Testament of the downfall of a usurping idol.\n\n\"And the Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it from Eben-ezer\nunto Ashdod.\n\n\"When the Philistines took the ark of God, they brought it into the\nhouse of Dagon, and set it by Dagon.\n\n\"And when they of Ashdod arose early on the morrow, behold, Dagon was\nfallen upon his face to the earth before the ark of the Lord. And they\ntook Dagon, and set him in his place again.\n\n\"And when they arose early on the morrow morning, behold, Dagon was\nfallen upon his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord; and the\nhead of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the\nthreshold; only the stump of Dagon was left to him.\n\n\"Therefore neither the priests of Dagon, nor any that come into Dagon's\nhouse, tread on the threshold of Dagon in Ashdod unto this day.\n\n\"But the hand of the Lord was heavy upon them of Ashdod, and he\ndestroyed them, and smote them with emerods, even Ashdod and the coasts\nthereof.\n\n\"And when the men of Ashdod saw that it was so, they said, The ark of\nthe God of Israel shall not abide with us: for his hand is sore upon us\nand upon Dagon our god.\"\n\nThus in the Bible story only the 'stump' or fish's tail of Dagon was\nleft to him. In some of the Ninevite sculptures of this deity, the\nhead of the fish forms a kind of mitre on the head of the man, while\nthe body of the fish appears as a cloak or cape over his shoulders and\nback. This is a sure sign to the mythological student that a god so\nadorned is in process of quitting the animal for the human form.[11]\n\n\nNirig, or Enu-Restu\n\nThis deity is alluded to in an inscription as \"the eldest of the gods.\"\nHe was especially favoured by the Kings of Assyria, and we find his\nname entering into the composition of several of their texts. In a\ncertain poem he is called the \"son of Bel,\" and is described as being\nmade \"in the likeness of Anu.\" He rides, it is said, against the gods\nof his enemies in a chariot of lapis-lazuli, and his onset is full\nof the fury of the tempest. Bel, his father, commands him to set\nforth for the temple of Bel at Nippur. Here Nusku, the messenger of\nBel, meets him, bestows a gift upon him, and humbly requests that he\nwill not disturb the god Bel, his father, in his dwelling-place, nor\nterrify the earth-gods. It would appear from this passage that Nirig\nwas on the point of taking the place of Bel, his father, but that he\never did so is improbable. As a deity of storm he is also a god of\nwar, but he was the seed-scatterer upon the mountains, therefore he\nhad also an agricultural significance. It is strange that in Babylonia\ntempest-gods possess the same functions and attributes--those of war\nand agriculture--as do rain or thunder, or rain-thunder, or wind and\nrain deities elsewhere-a circumstance which is eloquent of the power\nof climatic conditions in the manufacture of myth. In Mesopotamia\nfierce sand-storms must have given the people the idea of a savage and\nintractable deity, destructive rather than beneficent, as many hymns\nand kindred texts witness.\n\nWe have now briefly examined the elder gods of the Babylonian pantheon.\nOther, and in some cases more imposing, gods were yet to be adopted by\nthe Babylonians, as we shall see in the following chapters.\n\n\n[1] The passage is quoted by kind permission of Messrs A. & C. Black.\n\n[2] _Religious Belief in Babylonia and Assyria_, p. 69.\n\n[3] _Athen\u00e6um_, Feb. 12, 1876.\n\n[4] Polyhistor is still speaking. The passage is somewhat obscure, and\nof course relates to the myth of Merodach and Tiawath--Bel representing\nMerodach, and \"the woman-creature\" Tiawath.\n\n[5] _Religious Belief in Babylonia and Assyria_, p. 88.\n\n[6] _Religious Belief in Babylonia and Assyria_, p. 81.\n\n[7] _Religious Belief in Babylonia and Assyria_, p. 82.\n\n[8] Elsewhere Ishtar herself is sprinkled. See p. 130.\n\n[9] Translation from Prof. Sayce's _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 157.\n\n[10] These deities of the underworld must not be confounded with the\ngods of the abyss referred to at great length in Chapter II. The first\ngroup are gods of the dead, the second gods of the primeval waters.\n\n[11] In sacrifice, too, the totemic or symbolic animal of the god\nis often flayed and the skin worn by the priest, who in this manner\npersonates the god. In ancient Mexico the priests of Centeotl wore the\nskin of a woman sacrificed annually to that goddess.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV: THE GILGAMESH EPIC\n\n\nAs it is probable that the materials of the Gilgamesh epic, the great\nmythological poem of Babylonia, originally belong to the older epoch\nof Babylonian mythology, it is fitting that it should be described\nand considered before passing to the later developments of Chaldean\nreligion.\n\nThe Gilgamesh epic ranks with the Babylonian myth of creation as one\nof the greatest literary productions of ancient Babylonia. The main\nelement in its composition is a conglomeration of mythic matter, drawn\nfrom various sources, with perhaps a substratum of historic fact,\nthe whole being woven into a continuous narrative around the central\nfigure of Gilgamesh, prince of Erech. It is not possible at present\nto fix the date when the epic was first written. Our knowledge of it\nis gleaned chiefly from mutilated fragments belonging to the library\nof Assur-bani-pal, but from internal and other evidence we gather\nthat some at least of the traditions embodied in the epic are of\nmuch greater antiquity than his reign. Thus a tablet dated 2100 B.C.\ncontains a variant of the deluge story inserted in the XIth tablet\nof the Gilgamesh epic. Probably this and other portions of the epic\nexisted in oral tradition before they were committed to writing--that\nis, in the remote Sumerian period.\n\nAssur-bani-pal was an enthusiastic and practical patron of literature.\nIn his great library at Nineveh (the nucleus of which had been taken\nfrom Calah by Sennacherib) he had gathered a vast collection of\nvolumes, clay tablets, and papyri, most of which had been carried as\nspoil from conquered lands. He also employed scribes to copy older\ntexts, and this is evidently how the existing edition of the Gilgamesh\nepic came to be written. From the fragments now in the British Museum\nit would seem that at least four copies of the poem were made in\nthe time of Assur-bani-pal. They were not long permitted to remain\nundisturbed. The great Assyrian empire was already declining; ere long\nNineveh was captured and its library scattered, while plundering hordes\nburnt the precious rolls of papyrus, and buried the clay tablets in the\ndebris of the palace which had sheltered them.\n\nThere they were destined to lie for over 2000 years, till the\nexcavations of Sir A. H. Layard, George Smith, and others brought them\nto light. It is true that the twelve tablets of the Gilgamesh epic (or\nrather, the fragments of them which have so far been discovered) are\nmuch defaced; frequently the entire sense of a passage is obscured by a\ngap in the text, and this, when nice mythological elucidations are in\nquestion, is no light matter. Yet to such an extent has the science of\ncomparative religion progressed in recent years that we are probably\nbetter able to read the true mythological significance of the epic\nthan were the ancient Babylonians themselves, who saw in it merely an\naccount of the wanderings and exploits of a national hero.\n\nThe epic, which centres round the ancient city of Erech, relates the\nadventures of a half-human, half-divine hero, Gilgamesh by name,\nwho is king over Erech. Two other characters figure prominently in\nthe narrative--Eabani, who evidently typifies primitive man, and\nUt-Napishtim, the hero of the Babylonian deluge myth. Each of the three\nwould seem to have been originally the hero of a separate group of\ntraditions which in time became incorporated, more or less naturally,\nwith the other two.\n\nThe first and most important of the trio, the hero Gilgamesh, may\nhave been at one time a real personage, though nothing is known of\nhim historically.[1] Possibly the exploits of some ancient king of\nErech have furnished a basis for the narrative. His name (for a time\nprovisionally read _Gisdhubar_, or _Izdubar_, but now known to have\nbeen pronounced _Gilgamesh_[2]) suggests that he was not Babylonian but\nElamite or Kassite in origin, and from indications furnished by the\npoem itself we learn that he conquered Erech (or relieved the city from\na besieging force) at the outset of his adventurous career. It has been\nsuggested also that he was identical with the Biblical Nimrod, like\nhim a hero of ancient Babylon; but there are no other grounds for the\nsuggestion.\n\nSo much for the historical aspect of Gilgamesh. His mythological\ncharacter is more easily established. In this regard he is the\npersonification of the sun. He represents, in fact, the fusion of a\ngreat national hero with a mythical being. Throughout the epic there\nare indications that Gilgamesh is partly divine by nature, though\nnothing specific is said on that head. His identity with the solar god\nis veiled in the popular narrative, but it is evident that he has some\nconnexion with the god Shamash, to whom he pays his devotions and who\nacts as his patron and protector.\n\n\nThe Birth of Gilgamesh\n\nAmong the traditions concerning his birth is one related by \u00c6lian\n(_Historia Animalium_, XII, 21) of Gilgamos (Gilgamesh), the grandson\nof Sokkaros. Sokkaros, who, according to Berossus, was the first\nking to reign in Babylonia after the deluge, was warned by means of\ndivination that his daughter should bear a son who would deprive him of\nhis throne. Thinking to frustrate the designs of fate he shut her up\nin a tower, where she was closely watched. But in time she bore a son,\nand her attendants, knowing how wroth the King would be to learn of the\nevent, flung the child from the tower. But before he reached the ground\nan eagle seized him up and bore him off to a certain garden, where he\nwas duly found and cared for by a peasant. And when he grew to manhood\nhe became King of the Babylonians, having, presumably, usurped the\nthrone of his grandfather.\n\nHere we have a myth obviously of solar significance, conforming in\nevery particular to a definite type of sun-legend. It cannot have\nbeen by chance that it became attached to the person of Gilgamesh.\nEverything in the epic, too, is consonant with the belief that\nGilgamesh is a sun-god--his connexion with Shamash (who may have been\nhis father in the tradition given by \u00c6lian, as well as the eagle which\nsaved him from death), the fact that no mention is made of his father\nin the poem, though his mother is brought in more than once, and the\nassumption throughout the epic that he is more than human.\n\nGiven the key to his mythical character it is not hard to perceive\nin his adventures the daily (or annual) course of the sun, rising to\nits full strength at noonday (or mid-summer), and sinking at length\nto the western horizon, to return in due time to the abode of men.\nLike all solar deities--like the sun itself--his birth and origin are\nwrapped in mystery. He is, indeed, one of the 'fatal children,' like\nSargon, Perseus, or Arthur. When he first appears in the narrative he\nis already a full-grown hero, the ruler and (it would seem) oppressor\nof Erech. His mother, Rimat-belit, is a priestess in the temple of\nIshtar, and through her he is descended from Ut-Napishtim, a native\nof Shurippak, and the hero of the Babylonian flood-legend. Early in\nthe narrative he is brought into contact with the wild man Eabani,\noriginally designed for his destruction by the gods, but with whom\nhe eventually concludes a firm friendship. The pair proceed to do\nbattle with the monster Khumbaba, whom they overcome, as they do also\nthe sacred bull sent against them by Anu. Up to the end of the VIth\ntablet their conquering and triumphant career is without interruption;\nGilgamesh increases in strength as does the sun approaching the zenith.\nAt the VIIth tablet, however, his good fortune begins to wane. Eabani\ndies, slain doubtless by the wrath of Ishtar, whose love Gilgamesh has\nrejected with scorn; and the hero, mourning the death of his friend,\nand smitten with fear that he himself will perish in like manner,\ndecides to go in search of his ancestor, Ut-Napishtim (who, as sole\nsurvivor of the deluge, has received from the gods deification and\nimmortality), and learn of him the secret of eternal life. His further\nadventures have not the triumphal character of his earlier exploits.\nSunwise he journeys to the Mountain of the Sunset, encounters the\nscorpion-men, and crosses the Waters of Death. Ut-Napishtim teaches\nhim the lesson that all men must die (he himself being an exception in\nexceptional circumstances), and though he afterwards gives Gilgamesh\nan opportunity of eating the plant of life, the opportunity is lost.\nHowever, Ut-Napishtim cures Gilgamesh of a disease which he has\ncontracted, apparently while crossing the Waters of Death, and he is\nfinally restored to Erech. In these happenings we see the gradual\nsinking of the sun into the underworld by way of the Mountain of the\nSunset. It is impossible for the sun to attain immortality, to remain\nfor ever in the land of the living; he must traverse the Waters of\nDeath and sojourn in the underworld. Yet the return of Gilgamesh\nto Erech signifies the fresh dawning of the day. It is the eternal\nstruggle of day and night, summer and winter; darkness may conquer\nlight, but light will emerge again victorious. The contest is unending.\n\nSome authorities have seen in the division of the epic into twelve\ntablets a connexion with the months of the year or the signs of the\nzodiac. Such a connexion probably exists, but when we consider that the\nartificial division of the epic into tablets scarcely tallies with the\nnatural divisions of the poem, it seems likely that the astrological\nsignificance of the former was given to the epic by the scribes of\nNineveh, who were evidently at some pains to compress the matter into\ntwelve tablets. Of the astro-theological significance of the narrative\nitself (one of its most important aspects), we shall perhaps be better\nable to judge when we have considered it in detail.\n\n\nEabani\n\nThe most important of the various mythological strata underlying the\nGilgamesh myth is probably that concerning Eabani, who, as has been\nsaid, is a type of primitive man, living among the beasts of the field\nas one of themselves. But he is also, according to certain authorities,\na form of the sun-god, even as Gilgamesh himself. Like the hero of\nErech, he rises to the zenith of his powers in a triumphal progress,\nthen descends into the underworld. He is not lost sight of, however,\nbut lives in the memory of his friend Gilgamesh; and in the XIIth\ntablet he is temporarily brought forth from the underworld (that is,\nhis ghost, or _utukku_), which in a dim and shadowy fashion may typify\nthe daily restoration of the sun.\n\nAnother important stratum of myth is that which concerns Ut-Napishtim,\nthe Babylonian Noah; but whereas the myths of Eabani and Gilgamesh,\nthough still distinguishable, have become thoroughly fused, the deluge\nstory of which Ut-Napishtim is the hero has been inserted bodily into\nthe XIth tablet of the epic, being related to Gilgamesh by Ut-Napishtim\nhimself. When he first appears in the narrative he has the attributes\nand powers of a god, having received these for his fidelity to the gods\nduring the flood, from whose waters he alone of all mankind escaped.\nThe object of his narrative in the Gilgamesh epic seems to be to point\nout to the hero that only the most exceptional circumstances--unique\ncircumstances, indeed--can save man from his doom.\n\nOther distinct portions of the epic are the battle with the monster\nKhumbaba, the episode of Ishtar's love for Gilgamesh, the fight with\nthe sacred bull of Anu, and the search for the plant of life. These,\nwhatever their origin, have become naturally incorporated with the\nstory of Gilgamesh. But besides the various historical and mythical\nelements herein presented, there is also a certain amount of Babylonian\nreligious doctrine, evident to some extent in the XIth tablet (which\npoints the moral that all men must die), but doubly so in the XIIth\ntablet, wherein the shade of Eabani appears to Gilgamesh, relates the\nmisfortunes of the unburied dead or of those uncared for after death,\nand inculcates care for the deceased as the only means whereby they may\nevade the grievous woes which threaten them in the underworld.\n\nLet us examine in detail the Gilgamesh epic as we have it in the\nbroken fragments which remain to us. The Ist and IInd tablets are much\nmutilated. A number of fragments are extant which belong to one or\nother of these two, but it is not easy to say where the Ist ends and\nthe IInd begins. One fragment would seem to contain the very beginning\nof the Ist tablet--a sort of general preface to the epic, comprising\na list of the advantages to be derived from reading it. After this\ncomes a fragment whose title to inclusion in the epic is doubtful.\nIt describes a siege of the city of Erech, but makes no mention of\nGilgamesh. The woeful condition of Erech under the siege is thus\npicturesquely detailed: \"She asses (tread down) their young, cows (turn\nupon) their calves. Men cry aloud like beasts, and maidens mourn like\ndoves. The gods of strong-walled Erech are changed to flies, and buzz\nabout the streets. The spirits of strong-walled Erech are changed to\nserpents, and glide into holes. For three years the enemy besieged\nErech, and the doors were barred, and the bolts were shot, and Ishtar\ndid not raise her head against the foe.\" If this fragment be indeed a\nportion of the Gilgamesh epic, we have no means of ascertaining whether\nGilgamesh was the besieger, or the raiser of the siege, or whether he\nwas concerned in the affair at all.\n\n\nGilgamesh as Tyrant\n\nNow we come to the real commencement of the poem, inscribed on a\nfragment which some authorities assign to the beginning of the\nIInd tablet, but which more probably forms a part of the Ist. In\nthis portion we find Gilgamesh filling the double r\u00f4le of ruler and\noppressor of Erech--the latter evidently not inconsistent with the\ncharacter of a hero. There is no mention here of a siege, nor is there\nany record of the coming of Gilgamesh, though, as has been indicated,\nhe probably came as a conqueror. His intolerable tyranny towards the\npeople of Erech lends colour to this view. He presses the young men\ninto his service in the building of a great wall, and carries off the\nfairest maidens to his court; he \"hath not left the son to his father,\nnor the maid to the hero, nor the wife to her husband.\" Finally his\nharshness constrained the people to appeal to the gods, and they prayed\nthe goddess Aruru to create a mighty hero who would champion their\ncause, and through fear of whom Gilgamesh should be forced to temper\nhis severity. The gods themselves added their prayers to those of the\noppressed people, and Aruru at length agreed to create a champion\nagainst Gilgamesh. \"Upon hearing these words (so runs the narrative),\nAruru conceived a man (in the image) of Anu in her mind. Aruru washed\nher hands, she broke off a piece of clay, she cast it on the ground.\nThus she created Eabani, the hero.\" When the creation of this champion\nwas finished his appearance was that of a wild man of the mountains.\n\"The whole of his body was (covered) with hair, he was clothed with\nlong hair like a woman. His hair was luxuriant, like that of the\ncorn-god. He knew (not) the land and the inhabitants thereof, he was\nclothed with garments as the god of the field. With the gazelles he\nate herbs, with the beasts he slaked his thirst, with the creatures\nof the water his heart rejoiced.\" In pictorial representations on\ncylinder-seals and elsewhere Eabani is depicted as a sort of satyr,\nwith the head, arms, and body of a man, and the horns, ears, and legs\nof a beast. As we have seen, he is a type of beast-man, a sort of\nCaliban, ranging with the beasts of the field, utterly ignorant of the\nthings of civilization.\n\n\n[Illustration: Assyrian Type of Gilgamesh Found at Khorsabad from\n_Religious Belief and Practice in Babylonia and Assyria_, by Professor\nMorris Jastrow.--By permission of Messrs G.P. Putnam's Sons.]\n\n\nThe Beguiling of Eabani\n\nThe poem goes on to introduce a new character, Tsaidu, the hunter,\napparently designed by the gods to bring about the meeting of Gilgamesh\nand Eabani. How he first encounters Eabani is not quite clear from the\nmutilated text. One reading has it that the King of Erech, learning\nthe plan of the gods for his overthrow, sent Tsaidu into the mountains\nin search of Eabani, with instructions to entrap him by whatever means\nand bring him to Erech. Another reading describes the encounter as\npurely accidental. However this may be, Tsaidu returned to Erech and\nrelated to Gilgamesh the story of his encounter, telling him of the\nstrength and fleetness of the wild man, and his exceeding shyness at\nthe sight of a human being. By this time it is evident that Gilgamesh\nknows or conjectures the purpose for which Eabani is designed, and\nintends to frustrate the divine plans by anticipating the meeting\nbetween himself and the wild man. Accordingly he bids Tsaidu return to\nthe mountains, taking with him Ukhut, one of the sacred women of the\ntemple of Ishtar. His plan is that Ukhut with her wiles shall persuade\nEabani to return with her to Erech. Thus the hunter and the girl set\nout. \"They took the straight road, and on the third day they reached\nthe usual drinking-place of Eabani. Then Tsaidu and the woman placed\nthemselves in hiding. For one day, for two days, they lurked by the\ndrinking-place. With the beasts (Eabani) slaked his thirst, with the\ncreatures of the waters his heart rejoiced. Then Eabani (approached)\n...\" The scene which follows is described at some length. Ukhut had\nno difficulty in enthralling Eabani with the snares of her beauty.\nFor six days and seven nights he remembered nothing because of his\nlove for her. When at length he bethought him of his gazelles, his\nflocks and herds, he found that they would no longer follow him as\nbefore. So he sat at the feet of Ukhut while she told him of Erech\nand its king. \"Thou art handsome, O Eabani, thou art like a god. Why\ndost thou traverse the plain with the beasts? Come, I will take thee\nto strong-walled Erech, to the bright palace, the dwelling of Anu and\nIshtar, to the palace of Gilgamesh, the perfect in strength, who, like\na mountain-bull, wieldeth power over man.\" Eabani found the prospect\ndelightful. He longed for the friendship of Gilgamesh, and declared\nhimself willing to follow the woman to the city of Erech. And so Ukhut,\nEabani, and Tsaidu set out on their journey.\n\n\nGilgamesh meets Eabani\n\nThe feast of Ishtar was in progress when they reached Erech. Eabani\nhad conceived the idea that he must do battle with Gilgamesh before\nhe could claim that hero as a friend, but being warned (whether in a\ndream, or by Ukhut, is not clear) that Gilgamesh was stronger than he,\nand withal a favourite of the gods, he wisely refrained from combat.\nMeanwhile Gilgamesh also had dreamed a dream, which, interpreted by\nhis mother, Rimat-belit, foretold the coming of Eabani. That part of\nthe poem which deals with the meeting of Gilgamesh and Eabani is\nunfortunately no longer extant, but from the fragments which take up\nthe broken narrative we gather that they met and became friends.\n\nThe portions of the epic next in order appear to belong to the IInd\ntablet. In these we find Eabani lamenting the loss of his former\nfreedom and showering maledictions on the temple-maiden who has lured\nhim thither. However, Shamash, the sun-god, intervenes (perhaps in\nanother dream or vision; these play a prominent part in the narrative),\nand showing him the benefits he has derived from his sojourn in\nthe haunts of civilization, endeavours with various promises and\ninducements to make him stay in Erech--\"Now Gilgamesh, thy friend and\nbrother, shall give thee a great couch to sleep on, shall give thee a\ncouch carefully prepared, shall give thee a seat at his left hand, and\nthe kings of the earth shall kiss thy feet.\" With this, apparently,\nEabani is satisfied. He ceases to bewail his position at Erech and\naccepts his destiny with calmness. In the remaining fragments of the\ntablet we find him concerned about another dream or vision; and before\nthis portion of the epic closes the heroes have planned an expedition\nagainst the monster Khumbaba, guardian of the abode of the goddess\nIrnina (a form of Ishtar), in the Forest of Cedars.\n\nIn the very mutilated IIIrd tablet the two heroes go to consult the\npriestess Rimat-belit, the mother of Gilgamesh, and through her they\nask protection from Shamash in the forthcoming expedition. The old\npriestess advises her son and his friend how to proceed, and after\nthey have gone we see her alone in the temple, her hands raised to the\nsun-god, invoking his blessing on Gilgamesh: \"Why hast thou troubled\nthe heart of my son Gilgamesh? Thou hast laid thy hand upon him, and he\ngoeth away, on a far journey to the dwelling of Khumbaba; he entereth\ninto a combat (whose issue) he knoweth not; he followeth a road unknown\nto him. Till he arrive and till he return, till he reach the Forest of\nCedars, till he hath slain the terrible Khumbaba and rid the land of\nall the evil that thou hatest, till the day of his return--let Aya, thy\nbetrothed, thy splendour, recall him to thee.\" With this dignified and\nbeautiful appeal the tablet comes to an end.\n\n\nThe Monster Khumbaba\n\nThe IVth tablet is concerned with a description of the monster with\nwhom the heroes are about to do battle. Khumbaba, whom Bel had\nappointed to guard the cedar (_i.e._, one particular cedar which\nappears to be of greater height and sanctity than the others), is\na creature of most terrifying aspect, the very presence of whom in\nthe forest makes those who enter it grow weak and impotent. As the\nheroes draw near Eabani complains that his hands are feeble and his\narms without strength, but Gilgamesh speaks words of encouragement\nto him. It may be noted, in passing, that the word Khumbaba is of\nElamite origin, a fact which has led certain authorities to identify\nthe monster with an Elamite dynasty which anciently dominated Erech,\nand which came to grief about 2250 B.C. It is difficult, if not\nimpossible, to establish the connexion between the mythical encounter\nand a definite historical event; but it may at least be presumed that\nthe bestowal of an Elamite designation on the monster argues a certain\nenmity between Elam and Babylon.\n\nThe next fragments bring us into the Vth tablet. The heroes, having\nreached \"a verdant mountain,\" paused to survey the Forest of Cedars.\nWhen they entered the forest the death of Khumbaba was foretold to\none or other, or both of them, in a dream, and they hastened forward\nto the combat. Unfortunately the text of the actual encounter has not\nbeen preserved, but we learn from the context that the heroes were\nsuccessful in slaying Khumbaba.\n\n\nIshtar's Love for Gilgamesh\n\nIn the VIth tablet, which relates the story of Ishtar's love for\nGilgamesh, and the slaying of the sacred bull, victory again waits on\nthe arms of the heroes, but here nevertheless we have the key to the\nmisfortunes which later befall them. On his return to Erech after the\ndestruction of Khumbaba, Gilgamesh was loudly acclaimed. Doffing the\nsoiled and bloodstained garments he had worn during the battle, he\nrobed himself as befitted a monarch and a conqueror. Ishtar beheld the\nKing in his regal splendour, the flowers of victory still fresh on his\nbrow, and her heart went out to him in love. In moving and seductive\nterms she besought him to be her bridegroom, promising that if he would\nenter her house \"in the gloom of the cedar\" all manner of good gifts\nshould be his--his flocks and herds would increase, his horses and oxen\nwould be without rival, the river Euphrates would kiss his feet, and\nkings and princes would bring tribute to him. But Gilgamesh, knowing\nsomething of the past history of this capricious goddess, rejected her\nadvances with scorn, and began to revile her. He taunted her, too, with\nher treatment of former lovers--of Tammuz, the bridegroom of her youth,\nto whom she clung weepingly year after year; of Alalu the eagle; of a\nlion perfect in might and a horse glorious in battle; of the shepherd\nTabulu and of Isullanu, the gardener of her father. All these she had\nmocked and ill-treated in cruel fashion, and Gilgamesh perceived that\nlike treatment would be meted out to him should he accept the proffered\nlove of the goddess. The deity was greatly enraged at the repulse, and\nmounted up to heaven: \"Moreover Ishtar went before Anu (her father),\nbefore Anu she went and she (said): 'O my father, Gilgamesh has kept\nwatch on me; Gilgamesh has counted my garlands, my garlands and my\ngirdles.'\" Underlying the story of Ishtar's love for Gilgamesh there\nis evidently a nature-myth of some sort, perhaps a spring-tide myth;\nGilgamesh, the sun-god, or a hero who has taken over his attributes,\nis wooed by Ishtar, the goddess of fertility, the great mother-goddess\nwho presides over spring vegetation. In the recital of her former\nlove-affairs we find mention of the Tammuz myth, in which Ishtar slew\nher consort Tammuz, and other mythological fragments. It is possible\nalso that there is an astrological significance in this part of the\nnarrative.\n\n\nThe Bull of Anu\n\nTo resume the tale: In her wrath and humiliation Ishtar appealed to\nher father and mother, Anu and Anatu, and begged the former to create\na mighty bull and send it against Gilgamesh. Anu at first demurred,\ndeclaring that if he did so it would result in seven years' sterility\non the earth; but finally he consented, and a great bull, Alu, was\nsent to do battle with Gilgamesh. The portion of the text which deals\nwith the combat is much mutilated, but it appears that the conflict\nwas hot and sustained, the celestial animal finally succumbing to a\nsword-thrust from Gilgamesh. Ishtar looks on in impotent anger. \"Then\nIshtar went up on to the wall of strong-walled Erech; she mounted to\nthe top and she uttered a curse, (saying), 'Cursed be Gilgamesh, who\nhas provoked me to anger, and has slain the bull from heaven.'\" Then\nEabani incurs the anger of the deity--\"When Eabani heard these words of\nIshtar, he tore out the entrails of the bull, and he cast them before\nher, saying, 'As for thee, I will conquer thee, and I will do to thee\neven as I have done to him.'\" Ishtar was beside herself with rage.\nGilgamesh and his companion dedicated the great horns of the bull to\nthe sun-god, and having washed their hands in the river Euphrates,\nreturned once more to Erech. As the triumphal procession passed through\nthe city the people came out of their houses to do honour to the\nheroes. The remainder of the tablet is concerned with a great banquet\ngiven by Gilgamesh to celebrate his victory over the bull Alu, and with\nfurther visions of Eabani.\n\nThe VIIth and VIIIth tablets are extremely fragmentary, and so much of\nthe text as is preserved is open to various readings. It is possible\nthat to the VIIth tablet belongs a description of the underworld given\nto Eabani in a dream by the temple-maiden Ukhut, whom he had cursed\nin a previous tablet, and who had since died. The description answers\nto that given in another ancient text--the myth of Ishtar's descent\ninto Hades--and evidently embodies the popular belief concerning the\nunderworld. \"Come, descend with me to the house of darkness, the abode\nof Irkalla, to the house whence the enterer goes not forth, to the path\nwhose way has no return, to the house whose dwellers are deprived of\nlight, where dust is their nourishment and earth their good. They are\nclothed, like the birds, in a garment of feathers; they see not the\nlight, they dwell in darkness.\"\n\n\nThe Death of Eabani\n\nThis sinister vision appears to have been a presage of Eabani's death.\nShortly afterwards he fell ill and died at the end of twelve days. The\nmanner of his death is uncertain. One reading of the mutilated text\nrepresents Eabani as being wounded, perhaps in battle, and succumbing\nto the effects of the wound. But another makes him say to his friend\nGilgamesh, \"I have been cursed, my friend, I shall not die as one who\nhas been slain in battle.\" The breaks in the text are responsible for\nthe divergence. The latter reading is probably the correct one; Eabani\nhas grievously offended Ishtar, the all-powerful, and the curse which\nhas smitten him to the earth is probably hers. In modern folk-lore\nphraseology he died of ju-ju. The death of the hero brings the VIIIth\ntablet to a close.\n\nIn the IXth tablet we find Gilgamesh mourning the loss of his friend.\n\n\nThe Quest of Gilgamesh\n\nOn the heart of Gilgamesh, likewise, the fear of death had taken hold,\nand he determined to go in search of his ancestor, Ut-Napishtim,\nwho might be able to show him a way of escape. Straightway putting\nhis determination into effect, Gilgamesh set out for the abode of\nUt-Napishtim. On the way he had to pass through mountain gorges, made\nterrible by the presence of wild beasts. From the power of these he\nwas delivered by Sin, the moon-god, who enabled him to traverse the\nmountain passes in safety.\n\nAt length he came to a mountain higher than the rest, the entrance to\nwhich was guarded by scorpion-men. This was Mashu, the Mountain of\nthe Sunset, which lies on the western horizon, between the earth and\nthe underworld. \"Then he came to the mountain of Mashu, the portals\nof which are guarded every day by monsters; their backs mount up to\nthe ramparts of heaven, and their foreparts reach down beneath Aralu.\nScorpion-men guard the gate (of Mashu); they strike terror into men,\nand it is death to behold them. Their splendour is great, for it\noverwhelms the mountains; from sunrise to sunset they guard the sun.\nGilgamesh beheld them, and his face grew dark with fear and terror, and\nthe wildness of their aspect robbed him of his senses.\" On approaching\nthe entrance to the mountain Gilgamesh found his way barred by these\nscorpion-men, who, perceiving the strain of divinity in him, did not\nblast him with their glance, but questioned him regarding his purpose\nin drawing near the mountain of Mashu. When Gilgamesh had replied to\ntheir queries, telling them how he wished to reach the abode of his\nancestor, Ut-Napishtim, and there learn the secret of perpetual life\nand youthfulness, the scorpion-men advised him to turn back. Before\nhim, they said, lay the region of thick darkness; for twelve _kasbu_\n(twenty-four hours) he would have to journey through the thick darkness\nere he again emerged into the light of day. And so they refused to let\nhim pass. But Gilgamesh implored, \"with tears,\" says the narrative, and\nat length the monsters consented to admit him. Having passed the gate\nof the Mountain of the Sunset (by virtue of his character as a solar\ndeity) Gilgamesh traversed the region of thick darkness during the\nspace of twelve _kasbu_. Toward the end of that period the darkness\nbecame ever less pronounced; finally it was broad day, and Gilgamesh\nfound himself in a beautiful garden or park studded with trees, among\nwhich was the tree of the gods, thus charmingly depicted in the\ntext--\"Precious stones it bore as fruit, branches hung from it which\nwere beautiful to behold. The top of the tree was lapis-lazuli, and it\nwas laden with fruit which dazzled the eye of him that beheld.\" Having\npaused to admire the beauty of the scene, Gilgamesh bent his steps\nshoreward.\n\nThe Xth tablet describes the hero's encounter with the sea-goddess\nSabitu, who, on the approach of one \"who had the appearance of a god,\nin whose body was grief, and who looked as though he had made a long\njourney,\" retired into her palace and fastened the door. But Gilgamesh,\nknowing that her help was necessary to bring him to the dwelling of\nUt-Napishtim, told her of his quest, and in despair threatened to\nbreak down the door unless she opened to him. At last Sabitu consented\nto listen to him whilst he asked the way to Ut-Napishtim. Like the\nscorpion-men, the sea-goddess perceived that Gilgamesh was not to be\nturned aside from his quest, so at last she bade him go to Adad-Ea,\nUt-Napishtim's ferryman, without whose aid, she said, it would be\nfutile to persist further in his mission. Adad-Ea, likewise, being\nconsulted by Gilgamesh, advised him to desist, but the hero, pursuing\nhis plan of intimidation, began to smash the ferryman's boat with his\naxe, whereupon Adad-Ea was obliged to yield. He sent his would-be\npassenger into the forest for a new rudder, and after that the two\nsailed away.\n\n\nGilgamesh and Ut-Napishtim\n\nUt-Napishtim was indeed surprised when he beheld Gilgamesh approaching\nthe strand. The hero had meanwhile contracted a grievous illness, so\nthat he was unable to leave the boat; but he addressed his queries\nconcerning perpetual life to the deified Ut-Napishtim, who stood on the\nshore. The hero of the flood was exceeding sorrowful, and explained\nthat death is the common lot of mankind, \"nor is it given to man to\nknow the hour when the hand of death will fall upon him--the Annunaki,\nthe great gods, decree fate, and with them Mammetum, the maker of\ndestiny, and they determine death and life, but the days of death are\nnot known.\"\n\nThe narrative is continued without interruption into the XIth tablet.\nGilgamesh listened with pardonable scepticism to the platitudes of his\nancestor. \"'I behold thee, Ut-Napishtim, thy appearance differs not\nfrom mine, thou art like unto me, thou art not otherwise than I am;\nthou art like unto me, thy heart is stout for the battle ... how hast\nthou entered the assembly of the gods; how hast thou found life?'\"\n\n\nThe Deluge Myth\n\nIn reply Ut-Napishtim introduces the story of the Babylonian deluge,\nwhich, told as it is without interruption, forms a separate and\ncomplete narrative, and is in itself a myth of exceptional interest.\nPresumably the warning of the deluge came to Ut-Napishtim in a vision.\nThe voice of the god said: 'Thou man of Shurippak, son of Ubara-Tutu,\npull down thy house, build a ship, forsake thy possessions, take heed\nfor thy life! Abandon thy goods, save thy life, and bring up living\nseed of every kind into the ship.' The ship itself was to be carefully\nplanned and built according to Ea's instructions. When the god had\nspoken Ut-Napishtim promised obedience to the divine command. But he\nwas still perplexed as to how he should answer the people when they\nasked the reason for his preparations. Ea therefore instructed him\nhow he should make reply, 'Bel hath cast me forth, for he hateth me.'\nThe purpose of this reply seems clear, though the remaining few lines\nof it are rather broken. Ea intends that Ut-Napishtim shall disarm\nthe suspicions of the people by declaring that the object of his\nshipbuilding and his subsequent departure is to escape the wrath of\nBel, which he is to depict as falling on him alone. He must prophesy\nthe coming of the rain, but must represent it, not as a devastating\nflood, but rather as a mark of the prosperity which Bel will grant to\nthe people of Shurippak, perhaps by reason of his (Ut-Napishtim's)\ndeparture therefrom.\n\n\nThe Babylonian Ark\n\nUt-Napishtim employed many people in the construction of the ship.\nDuring four days he gathered the material and built the ship; on the\nfifth he laid it down; on the sixth he loaded it; and by the seventh\nday it was finished. On a hull 120 cubits wide was constructed a great\ndeck-house 120 cubits high, divided into six stories, each of which\nwas divided in turn into nine rooms. The outside of the ship was made\nwater-tight with bitumen, and the inside with pitch. To signalise the\ncompletion of his vessel, Ut-Napishtim gave a great feast, like that\nwhich was wont to be held on New Year's Day; oxen were slaughtered and\ngreat quantities of wine and oil provided. According to the command\nof Ea, Ut-Napishtim brought into the ship all his possessions, his\nsilver and his gold,[3] living seed of every kind, all his family and\nhousehold, the cattle and beasts of the field, the handicraftsmen, all\nthat was his.\n\nA heavy rain at eventide was the sign for Ut-Napishtim to enter the\nship and fasten the door. All night long it rained, and with the early\ndawn \"there came up from the horizon a black cloud. Ramman in the midst\nthereof thundered, and Nabu and Marduk went before, they passed like\nmessengers over mountain and plain. Uragal parted the anchor-cable.\nThere went Ninib, and he made the storm to burst. The Annunaki carried\nflaming torches, and with the brightness thereof they lit up the earth.\nThe whirlwind of Ramman mounted up into the heavens, and all light was\nturned into darkness.\" During a whole day darkness and chaos appear to\nhave reigned on the earth. Men could no longer behold each other. The\nvery gods in heaven were afraid and crouched \"like hounds,\" weeping,\nand lamenting their share in the destruction of mankind. For six days\nand nights the tempest raged, but on the seventh day the rain ceased\nand the floods began to abate. Then, says Ut-Napishtim--\"I looked upon\nthe sea and cried aloud, for all mankind was turned back into clay. In\nplace of the fields a swamp lay before me. I opened the window and the\nlight fell upon my cheek, I bowed myself down, I sat down, I wept; over\nmy cheek flowed my tears. I looked upon the world, and behold all was\nsea.\"\n\n\nThe Bird Messengers\n\nAt length the ship came to rest on the summit of Mount Nitsir. There\nare various readings of this portion of the text, thus: \"After twelve\n(days) the land appeared;\" or \"At the distance of twelve (kasbu) the\nland appeared;\" or \"Twelve (cubits) above the water the land appeared.\"\nHowever this may be, the ship remained for six days on the mountain,\nand on the seventh Ut-Napishtim sent out a dove. But the dove found no\nresting-place, and so she returned. Then he sent out a swallow, which\nalso returned, having found no spot whereon to rest. Finally a raven\nwas sent forth, and as by this time the waters had begun to abate, the\nbird drew near to the ship \"wading and croaking,\" but did not enter the\nvessel. Then Ut-Napishtim brought his household and all his possessions\ninto the open air, and made an offering to the gods of reed, and\ncedar-wood, and incense. The fragrant odour of the incense came up to\nthe gods, and they gathered, \"like flies,\" says the narrative, around\nthe sacrifice. Among the company was Ishtar, the Lady of the Gods, who\nlifted up the necklace which Anu had given her, saying: \"What gods\nthese are! By the jewels of lapis-lazuli which are upon my neck I will\nnot forget! These days I have set in my memory, never will I forget\nthem! Let the gods come to the offering, but Bel shall not come to\nthe offering since he refused to ask counsel and sent the deluge, and\nhanded over my people unto destruction.\"\n\n[Illustration: Ut-Napishtim makes Offering to the Gods Alan Stewart.--By\npermission of Messrs. Hutchinson and Co.]\n\nThe god Bel was very wroth when he discovered that a mortal man had\nsurvived the deluge, and vowed that Ut-Napishtim should perish. But Ea\ndefended his action in having saved his favourite from destruction,\npointing out that Bel had refused to take counsel when he planned a\nuniversal disaster, and advising him in future to visit the sin on\nthe sinner and not to punish the entire human race. Finally Bel was\nmollified. He approached the ship (into which it would appear that the\nremnants of the human race had retired during the altercation) and led\nUt-Napishtim and his wife into the open, where he bestowed on them his\nblessing. \"Then they took me,\" says Ut-Napishtim, \"and afar off, at the\nmouth of the rivers, they made me to dwell.\"\n\nSuch is the story of the deluge which Ut-Napishtim told to Gilgamesh.\nNo cause is assigned for the destruction of the human race other\nthan the enmity which seems to have existed between man and the\ngods--particularly the warrior-god Bel. But it appears from the latter\npart of the narrative that in the assembly of the gods the majority\ncontemplated only the destruction of the city of Shurippak, and not\nthat of the entire human family. It has been suggested, indeed, that\nthe story as it is here given is compounded of two separate myths, one\nrelating to a universal catastrophe, perhaps a mythological type of a\nperiodic inundation, and the other dealing with a local disaster such\nas might have been occasioned by a phenomenal overflow of the Euphrates.\n\nThe antiquity of the legend and its original character are clearly\nshown by comparison with another version of the myth, inscribed on a\ntablet found at Abu-Habbah (the ancient site of Sippar) and dated in\nthe twenty-first century before our era. Notwithstanding the imperfect\npreservation of this text it is possible to perceive in it many\npoints of resemblance to the Gilgamesh variant. Berossus also quotes\na version of the deluge myth in his history, substituting Chronos\nfor Ea, King Xisuthros for Ut-Napishtim, and the city of Sippar for\nthat of Shurippak. In this version immortality is bestowed not only\non the hero and his wife, but also on his daughter and his pilot. One\nwriter ingeniously identifies these latter with Sabitu and Adad-Ea\nrespectively.\n\nTo return to the epic: The recital of Ut-Napishtim served its primary\npurpose in the narrative by proving to Gilgamesh that his case was\nnot that of his deified ancestor. Meanwhile the hero had remained in\nthe boat, too ill to come ashore; now Ut-Napishtim took pity on him\nand promised to restore him to health, first of all bidding him sleep\nduring six days and seven nights. Gilgamesh listened to his ancestor's\nadvice, and by and by \"sleep, like a tempest, breathed upon him.\"\nUt-Napishtim's wife, beholding the sleeping hero, was likewise moved\nwith compassion, and asked her husband to send the traveller safely\nhome. He in turn bade his wife compound a magic preparation, containing\nseven ingredients, and administer it to Gilgamesh while he slept. This\nwas done, and an enchantment thus put upon the hero. When he awoke (on\nthe seventh day) he renewed his importunate request for the secret\nof perpetual life. His host sent him to a spring of water where he\nmight bathe his sores and be healed; and having tested the efficacy\nof the magic waters Gilgamesh returned once more to his ancestor's\ndwelling, doubtless to persist in his quest for life. Notwithstanding\nthat Ut-Napishtim had already declared it impossible for Gilgamesh to\nattain immortality, he now directed him (apparently at the instance\nof his wife) to the place where he would find the plant of life, and\ninstructed Adad-Ea to conduct him thither. The magic plant, which\nbestowed immortality and eternal youth on him who ate of it, appears\nto have been a weed, a creeping plant, with thorns which pricked the\nhands of the gatherer; and, curiously enough, Gilgamesh seems to have\nsought it at the bottom of the sea. At length the plant was found,\nand the hero declared his intention of carrying it with him to Erech.\nAnd so he set out on the return journey, accompanied by the faithful\nferryman not only on the first, and watery, stage of his travels, but\nalso overland to the city of Erech itself. When they had journeyed\ntwenty _kasbu_ they left an offering (presumably for the dead), and\nwhen they had journeyed thirty _kasbu_, they repeated a funeral chant.\nThe narrative goes on: \"Gilgamesh saw a well of fresh water, he went\ndown to it and offered a libation. A serpent smelled the odour of the\nplant, advanced ... and carried off the plant. Gilgamesh sat down and\nwept, the tears ran down his cheeks.\" He lamented bitterly the loss\nof the precious plant, seemingly predicted to him when he made his\noffering at the end of twenty _kasbu_. At length they reached Erech,\nwhen Gilgamesh sent Adad-Ea to enquire concerning the building of\nthe city walls, a proceeding which has possibly some mythological\nsignificance.\n\nThe XIIth tablet opens with the lament of Gilgamesh for his friend\nEabani, whose loss he has not ceased to deplore. \"Thou canst no longer\nstretch thy bow upon the earth; and those who were slain with the bow\nare round about thee. Thou canst no longer bear a sceptre in thy hand;\nand the spirits of the dead have taken thee captive. Thou canst no\nlonger wear shoes upon thy feet; thou canst no longer raise thy war-cry\non the earth. No more dost thou kiss thy wife whom thou didst love;\nno more dost thou smite thy wife whom thou didst hate. No more dost\nthou kiss thy daughter whom thou didst love; no more dost thou smite\nthy daughter whom thou didst hate. The sorrow of the underworld hath\ntaken hold upon thee.\"[4] Gilgamesh went from temple to temple, making\nofferings and desiring the gods to restore Eabani to him; to Ninsum he\nwent, to Bel, and to Sin, the moon-god, but they heeded him not. At\nlength he cried to Ea, who took compassion on him and persuaded Nergal\nto bring the shade of Eabani from the underworld. A hole was opened in\nthe earth and the spirit of the dead man issued therefrom like a breath\nof wind. Gilgamesh addressed Eabani thus: \"Tell me, my friend, tell me,\nmy friend; the law of the earth which thou hast seen, tell me.\" Eabani\nanswered him: \"I cannot tell thee, my friend, I cannot tell thee.\" But\nafterwards, having bidden Gilgamesh \"sit down and weep,\" he proceeded\nto tell him of the conditions which prevailed in the underworld,\ncontrasting the lot of the warrior duly buried with that of a person\nwhose corpse is cast uncared for into the fields. \"On a couch he lieth,\nand drinketh pure water, the man who was slain in battle--thou and I\nhave oft seen such an one--his father and his mother (support) his\nhead, and his wife (kneeleth) at his side. But the man whose corpse is\ncast upon the field--thou and I have oft seen such an one--his spirit\nresteth not in the earth. The man whose spirit has none to care for\nit--thou and I have oft seen such an one--the dregs of the vessel, the\nleavings of the feast, and that which is cast out upon the streets, are\nhis food.\" Upon this solemn note the epic closes.\n\nThe doctrine of the necessity for ministering to the dead is here\nenunciated in no uncertain fashion. Unless their bodies are decently\nburied and offerings of food and drink made at their graves, their\nlives in the otherworld must be abjectly miserable. The manner in\nwhich they meet their end is likewise taken into account, and warriors\nwho have fallen on the field of battle are pre-eminently fortunate.\nEabani is evidently one of the 'happy' spirits; his ghost is designated\n_utukku_, a name applied not only to the fortunate dead, but likewise\nto a class of beneficent supernatural beings. The term _edimmu_, on\nthe other hand, designates a species of malevolent being as well\nas the errant and even vampirish spirits of the unhappy dead. The\ndue observance of funeral and commemorative rites is thus a matter\nwhich touches the interests not only of the deceased but also of his\nrelatives and friends.\n\nWe have seen from the foregoing that the epic of Gilgamesh is partly\nhistorical, partly mythological. Around the figure of a great national\nhero myths have grown and twined with the passing of the generations,\nand these have in time become woven into a connected narrative,\nsetting forth a myth which corresponds to the daily or annual course\nof the sun. Within this may be discerned other myths and fragments of\nmyths--solar, seasonal, and diluvian.\n\nBut there is in the epic another important element which has already\nbeen referred to--the astro-theological. The zodiacal significance\nof the division of the epic into twelve tablets may be set aside,\nsince, as has been indicated, the significance is in all probability\na superficial one merely, added to the poem by the scribes of\nAssur-bani-pal, and not forming an integral part of it. At the same\ntime it is not hard to divide the epic naturally into twelve episodes,\nthus: (1) Gilgamesh's oppression of Erech; (2) the seduction of\nEabani; (3) the slaying of the monster Khumbaba; (4) the wooing of\nIshtar; (5) the fight with the sacred bull; (6) Eabani's death; (7)\nGilgamesh's journey to the Mountain of the Sunset; (8) his wanderings\nin the region of thick darkness; (9) the crossing of the waters of\ndeath; (10) the deluge-story; (11) the plant of life; (12) the return\nof Eabani's spirit. Throughout the epic there are indications of a\ncorrespondence between the exploits of the hero and the movements of\nheavenly bodies. It is possible, for instance, that Gilgamesh and his\nfriend Eabani had some relation to the sign Gemini, also associated\nin ancient Chaldean mythology with two forms of the solar deity, even\nas were the hero and his friend. The sign Leo recalls the slaying of\nKhumbaba, the allegorical victory of light over darkness, represented\non monuments by the figure of a lion (symbol of fire) fighting with a\nbull. Following the sign of Leo, the wooing of the hero by the goddess\nIshtar falls naturally into the sign of Virgo, the virgin. The sign of\nTaurus is represented by the slaying of the celestial bull, Alu, by\nGilgamesh. The journey of the hero to Mashu and his encounter with the\nscorpion-men at the gate of the sunset are, of course, mythological\nrepresentations of the sign of Scorpio, as are also his wanderings\nin the region of thick darkness. It is noticeable in this respect\nthat Babylonian astrology often doubled the eighth sign (Scorpio) to\nprovide a seventh; it is therefore not unlikely that this sign should\ncorrespond with two distinct episodes in the poem. The first of these\nepisodes is associated with Scorpio by virtue of the introduction of\nscorpion-men; and the second, on the assumption that the scorpion is\nsymbolical of darkness. Perhaps the sea-goddess Sabitu is associated\nastrologically with the fish-tailed goat which is the conventional\nrepresentation of Capricornus. Then the placing of the deluge-story\nin the XIth tablet, corresponding with the eleventh sign of the\nzodiac, Aquarius, the water-bearer, is evidently in keeping with the\nastrological aspect of the epic. Chaldean mythology connected the rainy\neleventh month with the deluge, just as the first month of spring was\nassociated mythologically with the creation. The healing of Gilgamesh's\nsickness by Ut-Napishtim may possibly symbolise the revival of the\nsun after leaving the winter solstice. Lastly, the sign of Pisces,\nthe twelfth sign of the zodiac, corresponding to the return of Eabani\nfrom the underworld, and perhaps also to the restoration of Gilgamesh\nto Erech, is emblematic of life after death, and of the resumption of\nordinary conditions after the deluge. It has been suggested, though\nwithout any very definite basis, that the epic was first put together\nbefore the zodiac was divided into twelve--that is, more than two\nthousand years before the Christian era. Its antiquity, however, rests\non other grounds than these. In later times the Babylonian astrological\nsystem became very complicated and important, and so lent its colour to\nthe epic that, whatever the original plan of that work may have been,\nits astral significance became at length its most popular aspect.\n\n\n[1] That is, we have no definite historical notices concerning him, but\nwe may infer from internal evidence in his saga that he possesses a\ncertain amount of historicity.\n\n[2] By the discovery by Mr T. Pinches in a lexicographical tablet that\nGisdhubar=Gilgamesh.\n\n[3] The inconsistency in details is caused by the composite nature of\nthe tale, which is drawn from two different tablets.\n\n[4] These remarks are perhaps not to be taken literally of Eabani. They\nrepresent the entirely formal manner in which any deceased Babylonian\nwas addressed.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V: THE LATER PANTHEON OF BABYLONIA\n\n\nThe reign of Khammurabi is a convenient point at which to observe\ngeneral changes in and later introductions to the pantheon of the\nBabylonian gods. The political alterations in the kingdom were\nreflected in the divine circle. Certain gods were relegated to the\ncold shades of obscurity, whilst new deities were adopted and others,\nhitherto regarded as negligible quantities, were exalted to the heights\nof heavenly omnipotence. The worship of Merodach first came into\nprominence in the days of Khammurabi. But his cult is so outstanding\nand important that it has been deemed better to deal with it in a\nseparate and later chapter. Meanwhile we shall examine the nature of\nsome of the gods who sprang into importance at or about the era of\nthe great law-maker, and note changes which took place with regard to\nothers.\n\n[Illustration: Nebo Son of Merodach, God of Wisdom, and the inventor of\nwriting.--Photo W. A. Mansell and Co.]\n\nNebo\n\nThe popularity of Nebo was brought about through his association with\nMerodach. His chief seat of worship was at Borsippa, opposite to\nBabylon, and when the latter city became the seat of the imperial power\nthe proximity of Borsippa greatly assisted the cult of Nebo. So close\ndid the association between the deities of the two cities become that\nat length Nebo was regarded as the son of Merodach--a relationship\nthat often implies that the so-called descendant of the elder god is a\nserious rival, or that his cult is nearly allied to the elder worship.\nNebo had acquired something of a reputation as a god of wisdom, and\nprobably this it was which permitted him to stand separately from\nMerodach without becoming absorbed in the cult of the great deity of\nBabylon. He was credited, like Ea, with the invention of writing, the\nprovince of all 'wise' gods, and he presided over that department of\nknowledge which interpreted the movements of the heavenly bodies. The\npriests of Nebo were famous as astrologers, and with the bookish king\nAssur-bani-pal, Nebo and his consort Tashmit were especial favourites\nas the patrons of writing. By the time that the worship of Merodach\nhad become recognised at Babylon, the cult of Nebo at Borsippa was so\nsecurely rooted that even the proximity of the greatest god in the land\nfailed to shake it.\n\nEven after the Persian conquest the temple-school at Borsippa continued\nto flourish. But although Nebo thus 'outlived' many of the greater\ngods it is now almost impossible to trace his original significance\nas a deity. Whether solar or aqueous in his nature--and the latter\nappears more likely--he was during the period of Merodach's ascendancy\nregarded as scribe of the gods, much as Thoth was the amanuensis of\nthe Egyptian otherworld--that is to say, he wrote at the dictation of\nthe higher deities. When the gods were assembled in the Chamber of\nFates in Merodach's temple at Babylon, he chronicled their speeches and\ndeliberations and put them on record. Indeed he himself had a shrine\nin this temple of E-Sagila, or 'the lofty house,' which was known as\nE-Zila, or 'the firm house.' Once during the New Year festival Nebo\nwas carried from Borsippa to Babylon to his father's temple, and in\ncompliment was escorted by Merodach part of the way back to his own\nshrine in the lesser city. It is strange to see how closely the cults\nof the two gods were interwoven. The Kings of Babylonia constantly\ninvoke them together, their names and those of their temples are found\nin close proximity at every turn, and the symbols of the bow and the\nstylus or pen, respectively typical of the father and the son, are\nusually discovered in one and the same inscription. Even Merodach's\ndragon, the symbol of his victory over the dark forces of chaos, is\nassigned to Nebo!\n\n\nNebo as Grain-God\n\nBut Nebo seems to have had also an agricultural side to his character.\nIn many texts he is praised as the god \"who opens up the subterranean\nsources in order to irrigate the fields,\" and the withdrawal of his\nfavour is followed by famine and distress. This seems to favour the\nidea of his watery nature. His name, 'the proclaimer,' does not assist\nus much in fixing his mythological significance, unless it was assigned\nto him in the _r\u00f4le_ of herald of the gods.\n\n\nTashmit\n\nNebo's consort was Tashmit. It is believed that Khammurabi,\nunsuccessful in suppressing the cult of Nebo, succeeded with that of\nhis spouse. She seems to have been the same as a goddess Ealur who\nbecame amalgamated with Zarpanitum, the wife of Merodach. The name may\nmean, according to some, 'the hearer,' and to others a 'revelation,'\nand in view of the character of her wise husband, was perhaps one of\nthe original designations of Merodach himself. Tashmit had therefore\nbut little individuality. None the less she possessed considerable\npopularity. On a seal-impression dating somewhere between 3500-4500\nB.C. there are outlined two figures, male and female, supposed to\nrepresent Nebo and Tashmit. The former has a wide-open mouth and the\nlatter ears of extraordinary size. Both are holding wild animals by the\nhorns, and the representation is thought to be typical of the strength\nor power of speech and silence.\n\n\nShamash and Khammurabi\n\nWe find that Khammurabi was very devoted to Shamash, the early type\nof sun-god. His improvements and restorations at Sippar and Larsa\nwere extensive. The later Babylonian monarchs followed his example,\nand one of them, Mili-Shikhu (_c._ 1450 B.C.) even placed Shamash\nbefore Merodach in the pantheon! The early connexion between Merodach\nand Shamash had probably much to do with the great popularity of the\nlatter. That this was the case, so far at least as Khammurabi was\nconcerned, is obvious from certain of his inscriptions, in which he\nalludes in the same sentence to Merodach and Shamash and to their close\nrelationship. Khammurabi appears also to have been greatly attached\nto the cult of a goddess Innana or Ninni ('lady' or 'great lady'),\nwho was evidently the consort of some male deity. He improved her\ntemple at Hallabi and speaks of her as placing the reins of power in\nhis hands. There was another goddess of the same name at Lagash whom\nGudea worshipped as 'mistress of the world,' but she does not seem to\nhave been the same as the Innana of Hallabi, near Sippar, as she was\na goddess of fertility and generation, of the 'mother goddess' type,\nand there do not appear to be any grounds for the assertion that the\ngoddess of Hallabi can be equated with her.\n\n\nHadad\n\nRamman or Rimmon, identified with Hadad or Adad, is a deity of later\ntype and introduction. Indeed Ramman may be merely a variant or\nsubsidiary name, meaning as it does 'the thunderer,' quite a common\ntitle for several types of deities. The worship of Hadad was widespread\nin Syria and Palestine, and he was a god of storms or rains, whose\nsymbol was the thunderbolt or the lightning which he holds in his\ngrasp like a fiery sword. But he bears solar emblems upon his apparel,\nand seems to wear a solar crown. He does not, however, appear to have\nhad any centre of worship in Babylonia, and was probably a god of the\nAmorites, and becoming popular with the Babylonians, was later admitted\ninto their pantheon. At Asshur in Assyria he was worshipped along with\nAnu, with whom he had a temple in common. This building, which was\nexcavated in 1908, contains two shrines having but the one entrance,\nand the date of its foundation is referred so far back as B.C. 2400.\nThere can be little doubt that the partnership of Hadad with Anu was a\nlate one. Perhaps it was on Assyrian and not Babylonian soil that Hadad\nfirst entered from the alien world.\n\n[Illustration in text: HADAD OR RIMMON from _Religious Belief and\nPractices in Babylonia and Assyria_, by Prof. Jastrow. (G. P. Putnam's\nSons.)]\n\nIn many of his characteristics Hadad closely resembled En-lil.\nLike him he was designated 'the great mountain,' and seems to have\nbeen conceived of as almost a counterpart of the older god. It is\npeculiar that while in Assyria and Babylonia Hadad has many of the\ncharacteristics of a sun-god, in his old home in Syria he possessed\nthose of a thunder-god who dwelt among the mountains of northern\nPalestine and Syria and spoke in thunder and wielded the lightning. But\neven in Assyria the stormy characteristics of Hadad are not altogether\nobscured. Hadad's cult in Babylonia is probably not much older than the\ndays of Khammurabi, in whose time the first inscriptional mention of\nhim is made. His worship obtained a stronger hold in the times of the\nKassite dynasty, for we find many of its monarchs incorporating his\nname with their own and altogether affording him a prominent place.\n\n\nHadad, D\u00e1da, David, and Dido\n\nIn a curious and interesting passage in his _Hibbert Lectures_,[1]\nProfessor Sayce indicates resemblances between the name Hadad,\nD\u00e1da, the abbreviated form of the name of Abd-Hadad, who reigned at\nHierapolis in the fourth century, Queen Dido of Carthage, and that of\nthe Biblical David. Speaking of Hadad he says: \"He was, as I have said,\nthe supreme Baal or Sun-god; whose worship extended southward from\nCarchemish to Edom and Palestine. At Damascus he was adored under the\nAssyrian name of Rimmon, and Zechariah (xii 11) alludes to the cult\nof the compound Hadad-Rimmon in the close neighbourhood of the great\nCanaanitish fortress of Megiddo. Coins bear the name of Abd-Hadad, 'the\nservant of Hadad,' who reigned in the fourth century at Hierapolis,\nthe later successor of Carchemish, and, under the abbreviated form\nof D\u00e1da, Shalmaneser speaks of 'the god D\u00e1da of Aleppo' (Khalman).\nThe abbreviated form was that current among the nations of the north;\nin the south it was confounded with the Semite word which appears in\nAssyrian as _dadu_, 'dear little child.' This is the word which we\nhave in Be-Dad or Ben-Dad, 'the son of Dad,' the father of the Edomite\nHadad; we have it also in the David of the Old Testament. David, or\nDod, as the word ought to be read, which is sometimes written Dodo with\nthe vocalic suffix of the nominative, is the masculine corresponding\nto a Ph[oe]nician goddess whose name means 'the beloved one,' and who\nwas called Dido by the writers of Rome. Dido, in fact, was the consort\nof the Sun-god, conceived as Tammuz, 'the beloved son,' and was the\npresiding deity of Carthage, whom legend confounded with Elissa, the\nfoundress of the city. In the article I have alluded to above, I\nexpressed my conviction that the names of Dodo and David pointed to\na worship of the Sun-god, under the title of 'the beloved one,' in\nsouthern Canaan as well as in Ph[oe]nicia. I had little idea at the\ntime how soon my belief would be verified. Within the last year, the\nsqueeze of the Moabite stone, now in the Louvre, has been subjected\nto a thorough examination by the German Professors Socin and Smend,\nwith the result of correcting some of the received readings and of\nfilling up some of the lacun\u00e6. One of the most important discoveries\nthat have been thus made is that the Israelites of the northern kingdom\nworshipped a Dodo or Dod by the side of Yahveh, or rather that they\nadored the supreme God under the name of Dodo as well as under that of\nYahveh. Mesha, the Moabite king, in describing the victories which his\ngod Chemosh had enabled him to gain over his Israelitish foes, tells us\nthat he had carried away from Atarath 'the _arel_ (or altar) of Dodo\nand dragged it before Chemosh,' and from Nebo 'the _arels_ (or altars)\nof Yahveh,' which he likewise 'dragged before Chemosh.' Here the\n_arel_ or 'altar' of Dodo is placed in parallelism with the _arels_ of\nYahveh; and it is quite clear, therefore, that Dodo, like Yahveh, was\na name under which the deity was worshipped by the people of the land.\nI have suggested that Dod or Dodo was an old title of the supreme God\nin the Jebusite Jerusalem, and that hence Isaiah (v 1), when describing\nJerusalem as the tower of the vineyard the Lord had planted in Israel,\ncalls him D\u00f4d-i, 'my beloved.' We can easily understand how a name of\nthe kind, with such a signification, should have been transferred by\npopular affection from the Deity to the king of whom it is said that\n'all Israel and Judah loved him' (I Sam. xviii 16).\"\n\n\nEa in Later Times\n\nEa developed with the centuries, and about the epoch of Khammurabi\nappears to have achieved a high standard of godhead, probably because\nof the very considerable amount of theological moulding which he had\nreceived. In the later Babylonian period we find him described as the\nprotagonist of mankind, the father of Merodach, and, along with Anu\nand Bel, a member of a great triad. The priests of Babylon were the\nsole mythographers of these days. This is in sharp contradistinction\nto the mythographers of Greece, who were nearly always philosophers\nand never priests. But they were mythographers in a secondary sense\nonly, for they merely rearranged, re-edited, or otherwise altered\nalready existing tales relating to the gods, usually with a view to the\nexaltation of a certain deity or to enable his story to fit in with\nthose of other gods. It is only after a religion or mythological system\nhas enjoyed a vogue more or less extended that the relationship of the\ngods towards one another becomes fixed.\n\nThe appointment of Merodach to the supreme position in the Babylonian\npantheon naturally necessitated a rearrangement so far as the\nrelationship of the other deities to him was concerned. This meant a\nre-shaping of myth and tradition generally for the purpose of ensuring\nconsistency. The men fitted to accomplish such a task were to hand, for\nthe age of Khammurabi was fertile in writers, scholastic and legal,\nwho would be well equipped to carry out a change of the description\nindicated. Ea had not in the past enjoyed any very exalted sphere. But\nas the chief god of the important country in the neighbourhood of the\nPersian Gulf, the most ancient home of Babylonian culture, Ea would\nprobably have exercised a great influence upon the antiquarian and\nhistoric sense of a man like Khammurabi. As the god of wisdom he would\nstrongly appeal to a monarch whose whole career was marked by a love\nof justice and by sagacity and insight. From a local god of Eridu, Ea\nbecame a universal deity of wisdom and beneficence, the strong shield\nof man, and his benefactor by the gifts of harvest and water. Civilized\nand softer emotions must have begun to cluster around the cult of\nthis kindly god who, when the angered deities resolved to destroy\nmankind, interceded for poor humanity and succeeded in preserving it\nfrom the divine wrath. As a god of medicine, too, Ea is humane and\nprotective in character, and all the arts fall under his patronage. He\nis the culture-god of Babylon _par excellence._ He might not transcend\nMerodach, so he became his father. Thus did pagan theology succeed in\nmerging the cults of deities which might otherwise have been serious\nrivals and mutually destructive.\n\n\nZu\n\nZu was a storm-god symbolized in the form of a bird. He may typify the\nadvancing storm-cloud, which would have seemed to those of old as if\nhovering like a great bird above the land which it was about to strike.\nThe North-American Indians possess such a mythological conception\nin the Thunder-bird, and it is probable that the great bird called\nroc, so well known to readers of the _Arabian Nights_, was a similar\nmonster--perhaps the descendant of the Zu-bird. We remember how this\nenormous creature descended upon the ship in which Sindbad sailed and\ncarried him off. Certain it is that we can trace the roc or rukh to the\nPersian simurgh, which is again referable to a more ancient Persian\nform, the amru or sinamru, the bird of immortality, and we may feel\nsure that what is found in ancient Persian lore has some foundation in\nBabylonian belief. The Zu-bird was evidently under the control of the\nsun, and his attempt to break away from the solar authority is related\nin the following legend.\n\n\nThe Legend of Zu\n\nIt is told of the god Zu that on one occasion ambition awaking in his\nbreast caused him to cast envious eyes on the power and sovereignty of\nBel, so that he determined to purloin the Tablets of Destiny, which\nwere the tangible symbols of Bel's greatness.\n\nAt this time, it may be recalled, the Tablets of Destiny had already an\ninteresting history behind them. We are told in the creation legend how\nApsu, the primeval, and Tiawath, chaos, the first parents of the gods,\nafterward conceived a hatred for their offspring, and how Tiawath, with\nher monster-brood of snakes and vipers, dragons and scorpion-men and\nraging hounds, made war on the hosts of heaven. Her son Kingu she made\ncaptain of her hideous army--\n\n    To march before the forces, to lead the host,\n    To give the battle-signal, to advance to the attack,\n    To direct the battle, to control the fight.\n\nTo him she gave the Tablets of Destiny, laying them on his breast with\nthe words: \"Thy command shall not be without avail, and the word of\nthy mouth shall be established.\" Through his possession of the divine\ntablets Kingu received the power of Anu, and was able to decree the\nfate of the gods. After several deities had refused the honour of\nbecoming champion of heaven, Merodach was chosen. He succeeded at\nlength in slaying Tiawath and destroying her evil host; and having\nvanquished Kingu, her captain, he took from him the Tablets of Destiny,\nwhich he sealed and laid on his own breast. It was this Merodach, or\nMarduk, who afterward became identified with Bel.\n\nNow Zu, in his greed for power and dominion, was eager to obtain the\npotent symbols. He beheld the honour and majesty of Bel, and from\ncontemplation of these he turned to look upon the Tablets of Destiny,\nsaying within himself:\n\n\"Lo, I will possess the tablets of the gods, and all things shall be\nsubject unto me. The spirits of heaven shall bow before me, the oracles\nof the gods shall be in my hands. I shall wear the crown, symbol of\nsovereignty, and the robe, symbol of godhead, and then shall I rule\nover all the hosts of heaven.\"\n\nThus inflamed, he sought the entrance to Bel's hall, where he awaited\nthe dawn of day. The text goes on:\n\n   Now when Bel was pouring out the clear water, (_i.e._ the\n       light of day?)\n   And his diadem was taken off and lay upon the throne,\n   (Zu) seized the Tablets of Destiny,\n   He took Bel's dominion, the power of giving commands.\n   Then Zu fled away and hid himself in his mountain.\n\nBel was greatly enraged at the theft, and all the gods with him. Anu,\nlord of heaven, summoned about him his divine sons, and asked for a\nchampion to recover the tablets. But though the god Ramman was chosen,\nand after him several other deities, they all refused to advance\nagainst Zu.\n\nThe end of the legend is unfortunately missing, but from a passage in\nanother tale, the legend of Etana, we gather that it was the sun-god,\nShamash, who eventually stormed the mountain-stronghold of Zu, and with\nhis net succeeded in capturing the presumptuous deity.\n\nThis legend is of the Prometheus type, but whereas Prometheus (once a\nbird-god) steals fire from heaven for the behoof of mankind, Zu steals\nthe Tablets of Destiny for his own. These must, of course, be regained\nif the sovereignty of heaven is duly to continue, and to make the tale\ncircumstantial the sun-god is provided with a fowler's net with which\nto capture the recalcitrant Zu-bird. Jastrow believes the myth to have\nbeen manufactured for the purpose of showing how the tablets of power\nwere originally lost by the older Bel and gained by Merodach, but he\nhas discounted the reference in the Etana legend relating to their\nrecovery.\n\n\nBel\n\nWe find a good deal of confusion in later Babylonian religion as to\nwhether the name 'Bel' is intended to designate the old god of that\nname or is merely a title for Merodach. Khammurabi certainly uses the\nname occasionally when speaking of Merodach, but at other times he\nquite as surely employs it for the older divinity, as for example when\nhe couples the name with Anu. One of the Kassite kings, too, speaks of\n\"Bel, the lord of lands,\" meaning the old Bel, to whom they often gave\npreference over Merodach. They also preferred the old city of Nippur\nand its temple to Babylon, and perhaps made an attempt at one time to\nmake Nippur the capital of their Empire.\n\n[Illustration: Hall in Assyrian Palace (Restored). From a drawing made\non the spot by Sir Henry Layard.]\n\nSome authorities appear to think it strange that Bel should have\nexisted at all as a deity after the elevation of Merodach to the\nhighest rank in the pantheon. It was his association with Anu and\nEa as one of a triad presiding over the heavens, the earth, and the\ndeep which kept him in power. Moreover, the very fact that he was a\nmember of such a triad proves that he was regarded as theologically\nessential to the well-being of the Babylonian religion as a whole. The\nmanufacture or slow evolution of a trinity of this description is by\nno means brought about through popular processes. It is, indeed, the\nwork of a school, of a college of priests. Strangely enough Khammurabi\nseems to have associated Anu and Bel together, but to have entirely\nomitted Ea from their companionship, and it has been thought that the\nconception of a trinity was subsequent to his epoch. The god of earth\nand the god of heaven typify respectively that which is above and that\nwhich is below, and are reminiscent of the Father-sky and Mother-earth\nof many primitive mythologies, and there is much to say for the theory\nthat Ea, god of the deep, although he had existed long prior to any\nsuch grouping, was a later inclusion.\n\n\nThe Triad of Earth, Air, and Sea\n\nThe habit of invoking the great triad became almost a commonplace\nin later Babylonia. They nearly always take precedence in religious\ninscriptions, and we even find some monarchs stating that they hold\ntheir regal authority by favour of the trinity. Whenever a powerful\ncurse has to be launched, one may be certain that the names of the gods\nof the elements will figure in it.\n\n\nDawkina\n\nDawkina was the consort of Ea, and was occasionally invoked along with\nhim. She was a goddess of some antiquity, and, strangely enough for\nthe mate of a water-god, she appears to have originally been connected\nin some manner with the earth. Therefore she was an elemental deity.\nIn later times her attributes appear to have been inherited by Ishtar.\nAccording to some authorities Bel was the son of Ea and Dawkina, Bel\nin this case meaning Merodach. We find her name frequently alluded to\nin the Magical Texts, but her cult does not seem to have been very\nwidespread.\n\n\nAnu\n\nWe have already alluded to Anu's position in the triad with Ea and Bel\nin later Babylonian times. When he stands alone we find him taking\na more human guise than as the mere elemental god of earlier days.\nHe is frequently mentioned in the texts apart from Ea and Bel, and\nis occasionally alluded to along with Ramman, the god of thunder and\nstorms, who of course would naturally stand in close relationship with\nthe sky. We also find him connected with Dagan of Biblical celebrity.\nBut in this case Dagan appears to be the equivalent of Bel.\n\nThere is also a host of lesser deities, the majority of whom are\nno more than mere names. They do not seem to have achieved much\npopularity, or if they did it was an evanescent one. The names of\nsome are indeed only mentioned once or twice, and so little is known\nconcerning them as almost to leave us entirely in the dark regarding\ntheir natures or characteristics.\n\n\n[1] Pp. 56 ff.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI: THE GREAT GOD MERODACH AND HIS CULT\n\n\nThe entire religious system of Babylonia is overshadowed by Merodach,\nits great patron deity. We remember how he usurped the place of Ea,\nand in what manner even the legends of that god were made over to him,\nso that at last he came to be regarded as not only the national god of\nBabylonia but the creator of the world and of mankind. He it was who,\nat the pleading of the other gods, confronted the grisly Tiawath, and\nhaving defeated and slain her, formed the earth out of her body and\nits inhabitants out of his own blood. It is almost certain that this\ncosmological myth was at one time recounted of Ea, and perhaps even\nat an earlier date of Bel. The transfer of power from Ea to Merodach,\nhowever, was skilfully arranged by the priesthood, for they made\nMerodach the son of Ea, so that he would naturally inherit his father's\nattributes. In this transfer we observe the passing of the supremacy of\nthe city of Eridu to that of Babylon. Ea, or Oannes, the fish-tailed\ngod of Eridu, stood for the older and more southerly civilization of\nthe Babylonian race, whilst Merodach, patron god of Babylon, a very\ndifferent type of deity, represented the newer political power.\n\nOriginally Merodach appears to have been a sun-god personifying more\nespecially the sun of the springtime. Thus he was a fitting deity to\ndefeat the chaotic Tiawath, who personified darkness and destruction.\nBut there is another side to him--the agricultural side. Says Jastrow\n(_Religion in Babylonia and Assyria_, p. 38): \"At Nippur, as we shall\nsee, there developed an elaborate lamentation ritual for the occasions\nwhen national catastrophes, defeat, failure of crops, destructive\nstorms, and pestilence revealed the displeasure and anger of the\ngods.\" At such times earnest endeavours were made, through petitions\naccompanied by fasting and other symbols of contrition, to bring\nabout a reconciliation with the angered power. This ritual, owing to\nthe religious pre-eminence of Nippur, became the norm and standard\nthroughout the Euphrates Valley, so that when Marduk (Merodach) and\nBabylonia came practically to replace En-lil and Nippur, the formulas\nand appeals were transferred to the solar deity of Babylon, who,\nrepresenting more particularly the sun-god of spring, was well adapted\nto be viewed as the one to bring blessings and favours after the\nsorrows and tribulations of the stormy season.\n\nStrange as it will appear, although he was patron god of Babylon he\ndid not originate in that city, but in Eridu, the city of Ea, and\nprobably this is the reason why he was first regarded as the son of\nEa. He is also directly associated with Shamash, the chief sun-god\nof the later pantheon, and is often addressed as the 'god of canals'\nand 'opener of subterranean fountains.' In appearance he is usually\ndrawn with tongues of fire proceeding from his person, thus indicating\nhis solar character. At other times he is represented as standing\nabove the watery deep, with a horned creature at his feet, which also\noccasionally serves to symbolize Ea. It is noteworthy, too, that his\ntemple at Babylon bore the same name--E-Sagila, 'the lofty house,'--as\ndid Ea's sanctuary at Eridu.\n\nWe find among the cuneiform texts--a copy of an older Babylonian\ntext--an interesting little poem which shows how Merodach attracted the\nattributes of the other gods to himself.\n\n    Ea is the Marduk (or Merodach) of canals;\n    Ninib is the Marduk of strength;\n    Nergal is the Marduk of war;\n    Zamama is the Marduk of battle;\n    Enlil is the Marduk of sovereignty and control;\n    Nebo is the Marduk of possession;\n    Sin is the Marduk of illumination of the night;\n    Shamash is the Marduk of judgments;\n    Adad is the Marduk of rain;\n    Tishpak is the Marduk of the host;\n    Gal is the Marduk of strength;\n    Shukamunu is the Marduk of the harvest.\n\nThis would seem as if Merodach had absorbed the characteristics of all\nthe other gods of any importance so successfully that he had almost\nestablished his position as the sole deity in Babylonia, and that\ntherefore some degree of monotheism had been arrived at.\n\n\nA New-Year's Ceremony\n\nOn the first day of the Babylonian New Year an assembly of the gods\nwas held at Babylon, when all the principal gods were grouped round\nMerodach in precisely the same manner in which the King was surrounded\nby the nobility and his officials, for many ancient faiths imagined\nthat the polity of earth merely mirrored that of heaven, that, as\nParacelsus would have said, the earth was the microcosm of the heavenly\nmacrocosm--\"as above, so below.\" The ceremony in question consisted in\nthe lesser deities paying homage to Merodach as their liege lord. In\nthis council, too, they decided the political action of Babylonia for\nthe coming year.\n\nIt is thought that the Babylonian priests at stated intervals enacted\nthe myth of the slaughter of Tiawath. This is highly probable, as in\nGreece and Egypt the myths of Persephone and Osiris were represented\ndramatically before a select audience of initiates. We see that these\nrepresentations are nearly always made in the case of divinities who\nrepresent corn or vegetation as a whole, or the fructifying power of\nspringtime. The name of Merodach's consort Zarpanitum was rendered by\nthe priesthood as 'seed producing,' to mark her connexion with the god\nwho was responsible for the spring revival.\n\nMerodach's ideograph is the sun, and there is abundant evidence that he\nwas first and last a solar god. The name, originally Amaruduk, probably\nsignifies 'the young steer of day,' which seems to be a figure for the\nmorning sun. He was also called Asari, which may be compared with Asar,\nthe Egyptian name of Osiris. Other names given him are Sar-agagam, 'the\nglorious incantation,' and Meragaga, 'the glorious charm,' both of\nwhich refer to the circumstance that he obtained from Ea, his father,\ncertain charms and incantations which restored the sick to health and\nexercised a beneficial influence upon mankind.\n\nMerodach was supposed to have a court of his own above the sky, where\nhe was attended to by a host of ministering deities. Some superintended\nhis food and drink supply, while others saw to it that water for his\nhands was always ready. He had also door-keepers and even attendant\nhounds, and it is thought that the satellites of Jupiter, the planet\nwhich represented him, may have been dimly visible to those among\nthe Chaldean star-gazers who were gifted with good sight. These dogs\nwere called Ukkumu, 'Seizer,' Akkulu, 'Eater,' Iksuda, 'Grasper,' and\nIltehu, 'Holder.' It is not known whether these were supposed to assist\nhim in shepherding his flock or in the chase, and their names seem\nappropriate either for sheep-dogs or hunting hounds.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII: THE PANTHEON OF ASSYRIA\n\n\nThe Pantheon of Assyria, as befitted the religious system of a nation\nof soldiers, was more highly organized than that of the kindred people\nof Babylonia, the ranks and relationships of the gods who comprised\nit were more definitely fixed, it was considerably more compact than\nthat of the southern kingdom, and its lesser luminaries were fewer. It\nhas been assumed that the deities of the Assyrians were practically\nidentical in every respect with those of the Babylonians, with the\nsingle exception of Asshur, who equated with Merodach. With all\ndue respect to practical Assyriologists the student of Comparative\nReligion may perhaps be granted leave to take exception to such a\nstatement. Ethnological differences (and these certainly existed\nbetween the peoples of the northern and southern culture-groups),\nclimatic conditions, a different political environment--all these as\nwell as other considerations, as important if less obvious, must have\neffected almost radical changes in the ideas of the gods as conceived\nby the Assyrians. Exactly what these changes were we shall probably\nnever know. They are scarcely likely to be revealed by inscriptions\nor sacred writings which undoubtedly conserve for us little more\nthan the purely ecclesiastical view-point, always anxious to embalm\nwith scrupulous care the cherished theological beliefs of an older\nday. But little of the religious beliefs of a people can survive in\npriestly inscriptions and the labours of priestly copyists, nor is it\nsafe or scientific to endorse the character of the faith of a race by\ncomparison or analogy with that of a neighbouring folk. If a striking\nexample were required of the danger of such a proceeding it might be\nfound in the vain attempt to discover an exact parallel between the\nreligious systems of ancient Mexico and those of Guatemala and Yucatan.\nThe city-states of the more northerly group of people had evolved a\nseparate system of worship for each pueblo or town, the deities of\nwhich, with minor differences, were substantially identical. But when\nthe pantheons of the more southerly region come to be examined it will\nbe found that, although the gods which figure in them spring apparently\nfrom the same stock as those of the Mexican people, and even possess\nnames which are mere translations of those of the gods of Mexico, their\nattributes and characteristics differ profoundly from those of their\nMexican congeners. The reason for this dissimilarity is to be found\nin variations of climate, culture, and politics, three sure factors\nin the modification of religion. If, then, we are satisfied that such\ndifferences existed in the religious systems of two race-groups almost\nas closely connected as were the peoples of Babylonia and Assyria, may\nwe not be pardoned for the supposition that similar divergences existed\nbetween the faiths of the two great races of Chaldea?\n\nWe find in the Assyrian pantheon numerous foreign deities whom the\nAssyrian kings included among the national gods by right of conquest.\nThese we shall deal with later. It will suffice for the present to\nmention Assur-bani-pal, who speaks of the capture of twenty gods of the\nElamites. It was, of course, only upon the rise of a distinct Assyrian\nempire that the religion of the northern kingdom acquired traits that\ndistinguished it from that of Babylonia.\n\nHaving outlined the reasons for the differences which we believe to\nhave existed between the Babylonian and Assyrian faiths, let us\nbriefly consider the variation of type between the two peoples which\nmust have caused this divergence. The languages of the two races\nwere not more distinct than the dialects of northern and southern\nEngland--indeed among scholars they are designated by the common name\nof Assyrian. But the Assyrians had a pure strain of that Semitic blood\nwhich has done so much to systematize religions ancient and modern.\nThe Semite cannot content himself with half-truths. It is essential to\nhis very life, that he must feel himself upon sure religious ground.\nHe hates doubt and despises the doubter. At an early time in his\nancient career he had so securely systematized religion as to supply\nthe earliest instances of pure dogma. There followed the relentless\nabjuration of all the troublous circumstances of mistrust. A code\nfounded upon the rock of unquestioning faith was instituted. And in the\nreligious systems of Babylonia and especially of Assyria we observe a\nportion of the process of evolution which assisted in the upbuilding of\na narrow yet highly spiritualized system.\n\nThe great gods in Assyria were even more omnipotent than in Babylonia.\nOne cause contributing to this was the absorption of the minor local\ncults by deities associated with the great centres of Assyrian life.\nEarly religion is extremely sensitive to political change, and as a\nrace evolves from the tribal or local state and bands itself into a\nnation, so the local gods become national and centralized, probably in\nthe great deity of the most politically active city in the state. Nor\nis it essential to this process that the deities absorbed should be of\na like nature with the absorbing god. Quite often a divinity assumes\nthe name and attributes of one with whom he had little in common.\n\n\nAsshur\n\nThe state religion of Assyria centres in Asshur, nor was any deity ever\nso closely identified with an empire as he. On the fall of the Assyrian\nstate, Asshur fell with it. Moreover all the gods of Assyria may be\nsaid to have been combined in his person. In Babylonia, Merodach was a\nleader of hosts. In Assyria, Asshur personified these hosts, that is,\nthe other Assyrian gods had become attributes of Asshur, and we can\nonly understand the remaining Assyrian gods if we regard them as lesser\nAsshurs, so to speak, as broken lights of the great god of battle and\nconquest.\n\n[Illustration: Symbols of the God Asshur.--From _Religious Belief and\nPractice in Babylonia and Assyria_, by Prof. Jastrow (G.P. Putnam's\nSons.)]\n\nAsshur originated in the city of his name situated on the west bank\nof the Tigris, not far from the point where the lower Zab flows\ninto that river. It was not of course until the rise of this city to\npolitical pre-eminence that its god figured as all-powerful. There are\nconflicting estimates as regards his original nature, some authorities\nholding that he was lunar, others that he symbolized fire or water. The\nfacts, however, point to the conclusion that he was solar in character.\n\nMerodach had chiefly been worshipped in Babylon. As other Babylonian\nterritories became subject to that city we do not find them placing\nthe god of Babylon above their own local god. But it was different\nwith Asshur. We find temples to him broadcast over Assyria. Indeed\nas Assyrian history advances, we see different cities alluded to as\nthe chief centre of his worship, and he resides now at Asshur, now at\nCalah, now at Nineveh, now at Khorsabad. Wherever the Kings of Assyria\ntook up their official residence there Asshur was adored, and there\nhe was supposed to dwell. He was not symbolized by an idol or any\nman-like statue which would serve to give the populace an idea of his\nphysical likeness, but was represented by a standard consisting of\na pole surrounded by a disc enclosed with two wings. Above the disc\nwas the figure of a warrior with bent bow and arrow on string. This\nwell symbolized the military nature of the Assyrian nation and of its\ntutelar deity. At the same time indications are not wanting that this\npole and its accompanying symbols are the remains of a totem-standard\nupon which has been superimposed the anthropomorphic figure of a\nlightning- or tempest-god. The pole is a favourite vehicle for carrying\nthe totem symbols into battle, and it looks here as if the sun had at\none time been regarded as a tribal totem. The figure of the archer at\nthe top seems representative of a lightning- or storm-god--a mythic\ncharacter frequently associated with the sun, that 'strong warrior.' By\nvirtue of his possession of the lightning arrow the storm-god is often\naccepted as a god of war.\n\nThe etymology of the name of Asshur throws little light upon his\ncharacter as a divinity. The city which took his name was in all\nprobability originally called 'The city of the god Asshur.' To call\nit by the name of the god alone would not be unnatural. The name is\nderived from a root meaning 'to be gracious,' and therefore means\n'the gracious god,' 'the good god.' But there are indications that an\nolder form of the name had existed, and it has been asserted that the\nform Anshar has priority. With Kishar, a god Anshar was created as the\nsecond pair of deities to see the light, and according to one version\nit is Anshar who dispatches Anu, Ea, and finally Merodach to destroy\nthe monster Tiawath. This Anshar, then, appears as possessed with\nauthority among the gods. But we find no mention of him in the ancient\ntexts and inscriptions of Babylonia. The version in which Anshar is\nalluded to may of course have been tampered with, and his inclusion\nin the creation myth may be regarded as a concession to Assyrian\ngreatness. Indeed in one creation tablet we find Merodach displaced by\nAsshur as framer of the earth!\n\n\nThe Secret of Assyrian Greatness\n\nAsshur is mentioned in the oldest Assyrian inscription known to us,\nthat of Samsi-Ramman (_c._ 1850 B.C.), the priest-chief of Asshur, who\nruled in the days when as yet the offices of king and high priest were\nundivided. Indeed, when the title of 'king' had come into use some\n350 years later, the monarchs of Assyria still retained the right to\ncall themselves 'priests of the god Asshur.' The entire faith in and\ndependence on their beloved deity on the part of these early Assyrian\nrulers is touching. They are his children and rely wholly upon him\nfirst for protection against their cruel enemies the Kassites and\nafterwards for the extension of their growing empire. No wonder that\nwith such a faith to stimulate her Assyria became great. Faith in her\ntutelar god was, indeed, the secret of her greatness. The enemies of\nAssyria are 'the enemies of Asshur,' her soldiers are 'the warriors\nof Asshur,' and their weapons are 'the weapons of Asshur.' Before his\nface the enemies of Assyria tremble and are routed, he is consulted\noracularly as to the making and conduct of war, and he is present on\nthe battle-field. But the solitary nature of Asshur was remarkable.\nOriginally he possessed 'neither kith nor kin,' neither wife nor child,\nand the unnaturalness of his splendid isolation appears to have struck\nthe Assyrian scribes, who in an interesting prayer attempted to connect\ntheir divinity with the greater gods of Babylonia, to find him a wife,\nministers, a court and messengers.\n\n  A prayer to Asshur, the king of the gods, ruler over\n     heaven and earth,\n  the father who has created the gods, the supreme first-born\n     of heaven and earth,\n  the supreme muttallu who inclines to counsel,\n  the giver of the sceptre and the throne.\n  To Nin-lil, the wife of Asshur, the begetter, the creatress\n     of heaven and earth,\n  who by command of her mouth ...\n  To Sin, the lord of command, the uplifter of horns, the\n     spectacle of heaven,\n  To the Sun-god, the great judge of the gods, who causes\n     the lightning to issue forth,\n  To Anu, the lord and prince, possessing the life of Asshur,\n     the father of the great gods.\n  To Rammon, the minister of heaven and earth, the lord of\n     the wind and the lightning of heaven.\n  To Ishtar, the queen of heaven and the stars, whose seat\n     is exalted.\n  To Merodach, the prince of the gods, the interpreter of\n     the spirits of heaven and earth.\n  To Adar, the son of Mul-lil the giant, the first-born ...\n  To Nebo, the messenger of Asshur (Ansar) ...\n  To Nergal, the lord of might and strength ...\n  To the god who marches in front, the first-born ...\n  To the seven gods, the warrior deities ...\n  the great gods, the lords of heaven and earth.\n\n\nAsshur as Conqueror\n\nAn incident which well illustrated the popularity of the Assyrian\nbelief in the conquering power of the national god is described in an\naccount of the expedition of Sargon against Ashdod stamped on a clay\ncylinder of that monarch's reign. Sargon states that in his ninth\nexpedition to the land beside the sea, to Philistia and Ashdod, to\npunish King Azuri of that city for his refusal to send tribute and\nfor his evil deeds against Assyrian subjects, Sargon placed Ahimiti,\nnephew of Azuri, in his place and fixed the taxes. But the people of\nAshdod revolted against the puppet Sargon had placed over them, and\nby acclamation raised one Yaran to the throne, and fortified their\ndominions. They and the surrounding peoples sought the aid of Egypt,\nwhich could not help them. For the honour of Asshur, Sargon then\nengaged in an expedition against the Hittites, and turned his attention\nto the state of affairs in Philistia (_c._ 711 B.C.), hearing which\nYaran, for fear of Asshur, fled to Meroc on the borders of Egypt, where\nhe hid ignominiously. Sargon besieged and captured the city of Ashdod,\nwith the gods, wives, children, and treasures of Yaran.\n\nIt is plain that this punitive expedition was undertaken for the\npersonal honour of Asshur, that he was believed to accompany the\ntroops in their campaign against the rebellious folk of Ashdod, and\nthat victory was to be ascribed to him and to him alone. All tribute\nfrom conquered peoples became the property of Asshur, to whom it was\noffered by the Kings of Assyria. Even the great and proud monarchs of\nthis warlike kingdom do not hesitate to affirm themselves the creatures\nof Asshur, by whom they live and breathe and by whose will they hold\nthe royal authority, symbolized by the mighty bow conferred upon them\nby their divine master. That these haughty rulers were not without an\nelement of affection as well as fear for the god they worshipped is\nseen from the circumstance that they frequently allude to themselves\nas the sons of Asshur, whose viceroys on earth they were. Asshur was,\nindeed, in later times the spirit of conquering Assyria personalized.\nWe do not find him regarded as anything else than a war-god. We do not\nfind him surrounded by any of the gentler attributes which distinguish\nnon-militant deities, nor is it likely that his cult would have\ndeveloped, had it lasted, into one distinguished for its humanizing\ninfluence or its ethical subtlety. It was the cult of a war-god pure\nand simple, and when Asshur was beaten at his own business of war he\ndisappeared into the limbo of forgotten gods as rapidly as he had\narisen.\n\n\nIshtar in Assyria\n\nNext to Asshur in the affections of the Assyrian people stood Ishtar.\nAs a goddess in Assyria she was absolutely identical with the\nBabylonian Ishtar, her favourite shrines in the northern kingdom being\nNineveh, Arbela, and the temple of Kidmuru, also in Nineveh. The\nAssyrians appear to have admitted her Babylonian origin, or at least\nto have confessed that theirs was originally a Babylonian Ishtar, for\nTiglath-pileser I lays emphasis upon the circumstance that a shrine he\nraised to Ishtar in his capital is dedicated to 'the Assyrian Ishtar.'\nThe date of this monarch is 1010 B.C., or near it, so that the above\nis a comparatively early allusion to Ishtar in Assyrian history. The\nIshtars of Arbela and Kidmuru do not appear in Assyrian texts until the\ntime of Esar-haddon (681 B.C.), thus the Ishtar of Nineveh was much the\nmost venerable of the three. Arbela was evidently a religious centre of\nimportance, and the theory has been advanced that it became the seat\nof a school of prophets connected with the worship of Ishtar. Jastrow\nin his _Religion of Babylonia and Assyria_ (1898, p. 203), writing on\nthis point, says, \"It is quite possible, if not probable, that the\nthree Ishtars are each of independent origin. The 'queen of Kidmuru,'\nindeed, I venture to think, is the indigenous Ishtar of Nineveh, who is\nobliged to yield her place to the so-called 'Assyrian Ishtar,' upon the\ntransfer of the capital of Assyria to Nineveh, and henceforth is known\nby one of her epithets to distinguish her from her more formidable\nrival. The cult of Ishtar at Arbela is probably, too, of ancient\ndate; but special circumstances that escape us appear to have led to\na revival of interest in their cults during the period when Assyria\nreached the zenith of her power. The important point for us to bear in\nmind is that no essential distinctions between these three Ishtars were\nmade by the Assyrians. Their traits and epithets are similar, and for\nall practical purposes we have only one Ishtar in the northern empire.\"\n\n\nIshtar as a War-Goddess\n\nIshtar was frequently placed by the side of Asshur as a war-goddess.\nEre she left the plains of Babylonia for the uplands of Assyria she\nhad evinced certain bellicose propensities. In the Gilgamesh epic\nshe appears as a deity of destructive and spiteful character, if not\nactually of warlike nature. But if the Babylonians regarded her first\nand foremost as the great mother-goddess, the Assyrians took but little\nnotice of this side of her character. To them she was a veritable\nValkyrie, and as the Assyrians grew more and more military so she\nbecame more the war-goddess and less the nature-mother of love and\nagriculture. She appeared in dreams to the war-loving Kings of Assyria,\nencouraging and heartening them with words of cheer to further military\nexploits. Fire was her raiment, and, as became a goddess of battle, her\nappearance was terrific. She consumed the enemies of Assur-bani-pal\nwith flames. Still, strangely enough, in the religious texts,\ninfluenced probably by Babylonian sources, she was still to a great\nextent the mild and bountiful mother of nature. It is in the historical\ntexts which ring with tales of conquest and the grandiloquent boastings\nof conquering monarchs that she appears as the leader of armies and the\nmartial goddess who has slain her thousands and her tens of thousands.\nSo has it ever been impossible for the priest and the soldier to\npossess the selfsame idea of godhead, and this is so in the modern no\nless than in the ancient world. Yet occasionally the stern Assyrian\nkings unbent, and it was probably in a brief interval of peace that\nAssur-nazir-pal alluded to Ishtar as the lady who \"loves him and his\npriesthood.\" Sennacherib also spoke of the goddess in similar terms. It\nis necessary to state that the name or title of Belit given to Ishtar\ndoes not signify that she is the wife or consort of Bel, but merely\nthat she is a 'great lady,' for which the title 'Belit' is a generic\nterm. If she is at times brought into close association with Asshur\nshe is never regarded as his wife. She is not the consort of any god,\nbut an independent goddess in her own right, standing alone, equal\nwith Asshur and the dependant of no other divinity. But it was later\nonly that she ranked with Asshur, and purely because of her military\nreputation.\n\n\nNinib as an Assyrian War-God\n\nSuch a deity as Ninib (another name for Nin-girsu, the god of Lagash)\nwas certain to find favour among the Assyrians by virtue of those\ncharacteristics which would render him a valuable ally in war. We\nfind several kings extolling his prowess as a warrior, notably\nTiglath-pileser I, and Assur-rishishi, who allude to him as \"the\ncourageous one,\" and \"the mighty one of the gods.\" His old status\nas a sun-and-wind god, in which he was regarded as overthrowing and\nlevelling with the ground everything which stood in his path, would\nsupply him with the reputation necessary to a god of battles. He is\nassociated with Asshur in this capacity, and Tiglath-pileser brackets\nthem as those \"who fulfil his desire.\" But Ninib's chief votary was\nAssur-nazir-pal (858-60 B.C.), who commenced his annals with a p\u00e6an of\npraise in honour of Ninib, which so abounds in fulsome eulogy that we\nfeel that either he must have felt much beholden to the god, or else\nhave suffered from religious mania. The epithets he employs in praise\nof Ninib are those usually lavished upon the greatest of gods only.\nThis proceeding secured immense popularity for Ninib and gave him a\nsocial and political vogue which nothing else could have given, and\nwe find Shamsi-ramman, the grandson of Assur-nazir-pal, employing the\nselfsame titles in honouring him.\n\nThe great temple of Ninib was situated in Calah, the official residence\nof Assur-nazir-pal, and within its walls that monarch placed a tablet\nrecording his deeds, and a great statue of the god. He further endowed\nhis cult so that it might enjoy continuance.\n\nWe can readily understand how the especial favour shown to such a god\nas Ninib by an Assyrian monarch originated. Asshur would be regarded by\nthem as much too popular and national a deity to choose as a personal\npatron. But more difficult to comprehend are the precise reasons which\nactuated the Assyrian kings, or indeed the kings of any similar ancient\nstate, in choosing their patrons. Does a polytheistic condition of\nreligion permit of the fine selection of patron deities, or is it\nnot much more probable that the artful offices of ecclesiastical and\npolitical wire-pullers had much to do with moulding the preferences\nof the King before and after he reached the throne? The education of\nthe monarch while yet a prince would almost certainly be entrusted\nto a high ecclesiastical dignitary, and although many examples to\nthe contrary exist, we are pretty safe in assuming that whatever the\ncomplexion of the tutor's mind, that of the pupil would to some extent\nreflect it. On the other hand there is no resisting the conclusion that\nthe Assyrian kings were very often vulgar parvenus, ostentatious and\n'impossible,' as such people usually are, and that, after the manner\nof their kind, they 'doted' upon everything ancient, and, possibly,\neverything Babylonian, just as the later Romans praised everything\nGreek.\n\n\nNinib as Hunter-God\n\nBut Ninib ministered to the amusement of his royal devotees as well as\nto their warlike desires. We find Assur-nazir-pal invoking him before\ncommencing a long journey in search of sport, and Tiglath-pileser I,\nwho was a doughty hunter of lions and elephants, ascribes his success\nto Ninib, who has placed the mighty bow in his hands.\n\nJensen in his _Kosmologie_ points out that Ninib represents the\neastern sun and the morning sun. If this is so, it is strange to find\na god representing the sun of morning in the status of a war-god. It\nis usually when the sun-god reaches the zenith of the heavens that\nhe slays his thousands and his tens of thousands. As a variant of\nNin-girsu he would of course be identified with Tammuz. His consort was\nGula, to whom Assur-nazir-pal erected a sanctuary.\n\n[Illustration: Tiglath-Pileser I directed by Ninib.--Evelyn Paul.]\n\nDagan\n\nDagan the fish-god, who, we saw, was the same as Oannes or Ea,\nstrangely enough rose to high rank in Assyria. Some authorities\nconsider him of Philistian or Aram\u00e6an origin, and do not compare him\nwith Ea, who rose from the waters of the Persian Gulf to enlighten his\npeople, and it is evident that the Mesopotamian-Palestinian region\ncontained several versions of the origin of this god, ascribing it to\nvarious places. In the Assyrian pantheon he is associated with Anu,\nwho rules the heavens, Dagan supervising the earth. It is strange\nto observe a deity, whose sphere must originally have been the\nsea, presiding over the terrestrial plane, and this transference it\nwas which cost Dagan his popularity in Assyria, for later he became\nidentified with Bel and disappeared almost entirely from the Assyrian\npantheon.\n\n\nAnu\n\nAnu in Assyria did not differ materially from Anu in Babylon, but\nhe suffered, as did other southern deities, from the all-pervading\nworship of Asshur. He had a temple in Asshur's own city, which was\nrebuilt by Tiglath-pileser I 641 years after its original foundation.\nHe was regarded in Assyria as lord of the Igigi and Anunnaki, or\nspirits of heaven and earth, probably the old animistic spirits, and\nto this circumstance, as well as to the fact that he belonged to the\nold triad along with Bel and Ea, he probably owed the prolongation of\nhis cult. As an elemental and fundamental god opposition could not\npossibly displace him, and as ruler of the spirits of air and earth he\nwould have a very strong hold upon the popular imagination. Gods who\npossess such powers often exist in folk-memory long after the other\nmembers of the pantheon which contained them are totally forgotten,\nand one would scarcely be surprised to find Anu lingering in the\nshadows of post-Assyrian folk-lore, if any record of such lore could be\ndiscovered. Anu was frequently associated with Ramman, but more usually\nwith Bel and Eausas in Babylonia.\n\n\nRamman\n\nRamman enjoyed much greater popularity in Assyria than in Babylonia,\nfor there he exercised the functions of a second Asshur, and was\nregarded as destruction personified. Says an old Assyrian hymn\nconcerning Ramman:\n\n    The mighty mountain, thou hast overwhelmed it.\n    At his anger, at his strength,\n    At his roaring, at his thundering,\n    The gods of heaven ascend to the sky,\n    The gods of the earth ascend to the earth,\n    Into the horizon of heaven they enter,\n    Into the zenith of heaven they make their way.\n\nWhat a picture have we here in these few simple lines of a pantheon\nin dread and terror of the wrath and violence of one of its number.\nWe can almost behold the divine fugitives crowding in flight, some\ninto the upper regions of air to outsoar the anger of the destroyer,\nothers seeking the recesses of the earth to hide themselves from the\nfierceness of his countenance, the roar of his thunderbolts, and the\narrows of his lightning. Simple, almost bald, as the lines are they\npossess marvellous pictorial quality, bringing before us as they do the\nrout of a whole heaven in a few simple words.\n\nThe weapons of Ramman are lightning, deluge, hunger, and death, and\nwoe to the nation upon whom he visits his wrath, for upon it he visits\nflood and famine. Thus his attributes as a storm-god are brought into\nplay when he figures as a war deity, for just as a weather-god of the\nlightning wields it as a spear or dart in the fight, so Ramman as\nstorm-god brings to bear the horrors of tempest upon the devoted head\nof the enemy.\n\nSo highly did the Assyrian kings value the assistance of Ramman that\nthey sacrificed to him during the stress and bustle of a campaign in\nthe field. They liken an attack of their troops to his onslaught,\nand if they wish to depict the stamping out of an adversary, his\n'eating up,' as Chaka's Zulus were wont to term the process, they\ndeclare that their men swept over the enemy as Ramman might have\ndone. Assur-nazir-pal alludes to Ramman as 'the mightiest of the\ngods,' but as in reality that phrase was employed in connexion with\nall the principal deities at one time or another by kings or priests\nwho favoured them, there is no reason to suppose that anything more\nis intended than that Ramman occupied a place of importance in the\nAssyrian pantheon.\n\nThe worship of Ramman in later times came very much into prominence. It\nwas only in the days of Khammurabi that he came into his kingdom, as\nit were, and even then his worship was not very firmly established in\nBabylonia. With the rise of the Kassite dynasty, however, we find him\ncoming more into favour, and his name bestowed upon Babylonian kings.\nHe seems to have formed a triad with Sin and Shamash, and in the Hymn\nof Khammurabi we find him appealed to along with Shamash as 'Divine\nLords of Justice.' Nebuchadrezzar I appears to have held him in high\nesteem, although he was unfriendly to the dynasty which first brought\nhim into prominence, and this monarch couples him with Ishtar as the\ndivinity who has chiefly assisted him in all his great undertakings.\nIndeed, Nebuchadrezzar evinced much partiality for Ramman, perhaps\nfeeling that he must placate the especial god of those he had cast from\npower. He speaks of him as the 'lord of the waters beneath the earth,'\nand of the rains from heaven.\n\nThe place of Ramman's origin seems obscure. We have already dealt with\nhis manifestations in more primitive days, but opinions appear to\ndiffer regarding the original seat of his worship, some authorities\nholding that it was Muru in Southern Babylonia, others that it is\nnecessary to turn to Assyria for traces of his first worship. His cult\nis found in Damascus and extended as far south as the Plain of Jezreel.\nAs Milton says:\n\n  \"... Rimmon, whose delightful seat\n   Was fair Damascus, on the fertile banks\n   Of Abbana and Pharphar, lucid streams.\n   He also 'gainst the house of God was bold\n   A leper once he lost, and gained a king,\n   Ahaz his sottish conqu'ror, whom he drew\n   God's altar to disparage and displace\n   For one of Syrian mode, whereon to burn\n   His odious offerings, and adore the gods\n   Whom he had vanquish'd.\"\n\nThis later theory would make him of Aramaic origin, but his cult\nappears to have been of very considerable antiquity in Assyria, and it\nmight have been indigenous there. Moreover, the earliest mention of\nhis worship is in the city of Asshur. As has been indicated, he was\nprobably a storm-god or a thunder-and-lightning god, but he was also\nassociated with the sun-god Shamash. But whatever he may have been in\nBabylonia, in Assyria he was certainly the thunder-deity first and\nforemost.\n\nA Babylonian text of some antiquity contains a really fine hymn to\nRamman, which might be paraphrased as follows, omitting redundancies:--\n\n\"O lord Ramman, thy name is the great and glorious Bull, child of\nheaven, lord of Karkar, lord of plenty, companion of the lord Ea.\nHe that rideth the great lion is thy name. Thy name doth charm the\nland, and covers it like a garment. Thy thunder shakes even the great\nmountain, En-lil, and when thou dost rumble the mother Nin-lil\ntrembles. Said the lord En-lil, addressing his son Ramman: 'O son,\nspirit of wisdom, with all-seeing eyes and high vision, full of\nknowledge as the Pleiades, may thy sonorous voice give forth its\nutterance. Go forth, go up, who can strive with thee? The father is\nwith thee against the cunning foe. Thou art cunning in wielding the\nhail-stones great and small. Oh, with thy right hand destroy the enemy\nand root him up!' Ramman hearkened to the words of his father and took\nhis way from the dwelling, the youthful lion, the spirit of counsel.\"\n\nIn later times in Babylonia Ramman seems to have typified the rain\nof heaven in its beneficent as well as its fertilizing aspect. Not\nonly did he irrigate the fields and fill the wells with water, but\nhe was also accountable for the dreadful tempests which sweep over\nMesopotamia. Sometimes he was malevolent, causing thorns to grow\ninstead of herbs. The people, if they regarded him in some measure as a\nfertilizing agent, also seem to have looked upon him as a destructive\nand lion-like deity quite capable of desolating the country-side and\n'eating up the land.' His roar is typical of him, filling all hearts\nwith affright as it does, and signifying famine and destruction. It is\nnot strange that Mesopotamian regions should have had so many deities\nof a destructive tendency when we think of the furious whirlwinds\nwhich frequently rush across the face of the land, raising sand-storms\nand devastating everything in their track. Ramman was well likened to\nthe roaring lion, seeking what he may devour, and this seems to have\nsymbolized him in the eyes of the peasant population of the land.\nIndeed, the Assyrians, impressed by his destructive tendencies, made a\nwar-god of him, and considered his presence as essential to victory.\nNo wonder that the great god of storm made a good war-god!\n\n[Illustration: Assur-nazir-pal attended by a Winged Mythological Being.\n--Bas-relief from the north-western palace at Nimr\u00fbd.--Photo W. A. Mansell\nand Co.]\n\nShamash\n\nThe cult of Shamash in Assyria dates from at least 1340 B.C., when\nPudilu built a temple to this god in the city of Asshur. He entitled\nShamash 'The Protecting Deity,' which name is to be understood as that\nof the god of justice, whose fiat is unchangeable, and in this manner\nShamash differed somewhat from the Babylonian idea concerning him. In\nthe southern kingdom he was certainly regarded as a just god, but not\nas _the_ god of justice--a very different thing. It is interesting\nas well as edifying to watch the process of evolution of a god of\njustice. Thus in Ancient Mexico Tezcatlipoca evolved from a tribal\ndeity into a god who was beginning to bear all the marks and signs\nof a god of justice when the conquering Spaniards put an end to his\ncareer. We observe, too, that although the Greeks had a special deity\nwhose department was justice, other divinities, such as Pallas Athene,\ndisplayed signs that they in time might possibly become wielders of\nthe balances between man and man. In the Egyptian heavenly hierarchy\nMaat and Thoth both partook of the attributes of a god of justice,\nbut perhaps Maat was the more directly symbolical of the two. Now in\nthe case of Shamash no favours can be obtained from him by prayer or\nsacrifice unless those who supplicate him, monarchs though they be, can\nlay claim to righteousness. Even Tiglath-pileser I, mighty conqueror\nas he was, recognized Shamash as his judge, and, naturally, as the\njudge of his enemies, whom he destroys, not because they are fighting\nagainst Tiglath, but because of their wickedness. When he set captives\nfree Tiglath took care to perform the gracious act before the face of\nShamash, that the god might behold that justice dwelt in the breast of\nhis royal servant. Tiglath, in fact, is the viceroy of Shamash upon\nearth, and it would seem as if he referred many cases regarding whose\nprocedure he was in doubt to the god before he finally pronounced upon\nthem.\n\nBoth Assur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser II exalted the sun-cult of\nShamash, and it has been suggested that the popularity of the worship\nof Ra in Egypt had reflected upon that of Shamash in Assyria. It\nmust always be extremely difficult to trace such resemblances at an\nepoch so distant as that of the ninth century B.C. But certainly it\nlooks as if the Ra cult had in some manner influenced that of the old\nBabylonian sun-god. Sargon pushed the worship of Shamash far to the\nnorthern boundaries of Assyria, for he built a sanctuary to the deity\nbeyond the limits of the Assyrian Empire--where, precisely, we do not\nknow. Amongst a nation of warriors a god such as Shamash must have been\nvalued highly, for without his sanction they would hardly be justified\nin commencing hostilities against any other race.\n\n\nSin in the Northern Land\n\nWe do not find Sin, the Babylonian moon-god, extensively worshipped\nin Assyria. Assur-nazir-pal founded a temple to him in Calah, and\nSargon raised several sanctuaries to him beyond the Assyrian frontier.\nIt is as a war-god chiefly that we find him depicted in the northern\nkingdom--why, it would be difficult to say, unless, indeed, it was\nthat the Assyrians turned practically all the deities they borrowed\nfrom other peoples into war-gods. So far as is known, no lunar deity\nin any other pantheon possesses a military significance. Several are\nnot without fear-inspiring attributes, but these are caused chiefly by\nthe manner in which the moon is regarded among primitive peoples as a\nbringer of plague and blight. But we find Sin in Assyria freed from\nall the astrological significances which he had for the Babylonians.\nAt the same time he is regarded as a god of wisdom and a framer of\ndecisions, in these respects equating very fully with the Egyptian\nThoth. Assur-bani-pal alludes to Sin as 'the first-born son of Bel,'\njust as he is alluded to in Babylonian texts, thus affording us a clue\nto the direct Babylonian origin of Sin.\n\n\nNusku of the Brilliant Sceptre\n\nIt is strange that although we know that Nusku had been a Babylonian\ngod from early times, and had figured in the pantheon of Khammurabi, it\nis not until Assyrian times that we gain any very definite information\nregarding him. The symbols used in his name are a sceptre and a\nstylus, and he is called by Shalmaneser I 'The Bearer of the Brilliant\nSceptre.' This circumstance associates him closely with Nabu, to\ndesignate whom the same symbols are employed. It is difficult, however,\nto believe that the two are one, as some writers appear to think, for\nNusku is certainly a solar deity, while Nabu appears to have originally\nbeen a water-god. There are, however, not wanting cases where the\nsame deity has evinced both solar and aqueous characteristics, and\nthese are to be found notably among the gods of American races. Thus\namong the Maya of Central America the god Kukulcan is depicted with\nboth solar and aqueous attributes, and similar instances could be\ndrawn from lesser-known mythologies. Nusku and Nabu are, however,\nprobably connected in some way, but exactly in what manner is obscure.\nIn Babylonian times Nusku had become amalgamated with Gibil, the god\nof fire, which perhaps accounts for his virtual effacement in the\nsouthern kingdom. In Assyria we find him alluded to as the messenger of\nBel-Merodach, and Assur-bani-pal addresses him as 'the highly honoured\nmessenger of the gods.' The Assyrians do not seem to have identified\nhim in any way with Gibil, the fire-god.\n\n\nBel-Merodach\n\nEven Bel-Merodach was absorbed into the Assyrian pantheon. To the\nAssyrians, Babylonia was the country of Bel, and they referred to their\nsouthern neighbours as the 'subjects of Bel.' This, of course, must be\ntaken not to mean the older Bel, but Bel-Merodach. They even alluded to\nthe governor whom they placed over conquered Babylonia as the governor\nof Bel, so closely did they identify the god with the country. It is\nonly in the time of Shalmaneser II--the ninth century B.C.--that we\nfind the name Merodach employed for Bel, so general did the use of\nthe latter become. Of course it was impossible that Merodach could\ntake first place in Assyria as he had done in Babylonia, but it was a\ntribute to the Assyrian belief in his greatness that they ranked him\nimmediately after Asshur in the pantheon.\n\n\nPrisoner-Gods\n\nThe Assyrian rulers were sufficiently politic to award this place to\nMerodach, for they could not but see that Babylonia, from which they\ndrew their arts and sciences, as well as their religious beliefs,\nand from which they benefited in many directions, must be worthily\nrepresented in the national religion. And just as the Romans in\nconquering Greece and Egypt adopted many of the deities of these more\ncultured and less powerful lands, thus seeking to bind the inhabitants\nof the conquered provinces more closely to themselves, so did the\nAssyrian rulers believe that, did they incorporate Merodach into their\nhierarchy, he would become so Assyrian in his outlook as to cease to be\nwholly Babylonian, and would doubtless work in favour of the stronger\nkingdom. In no other of the religions of antiquity as in the Assyrian\nwas the idea so powerful that the god of the conquered or subject\npeople should become a virtual prisoner in the land of the conquerors,\nor should at least be absorbed into their national worship. Some of the\nAssyrian monarchs went so far as to drag almost every petty idol they\nencountered on their conquests back to the great temple of Asshur, and\nit is obvious that they did not do this with any intention of uprooting\nthe worship of these gods in the regions they conquered, but because\nthey desired to make political prisoners of them, and to place them in\na temple-prison, where they would be unable to wreak vengeance upon\nthem, or assist their beaten worshippers to war against them in the\nfuture.\n\nIt may be fitting at this point to emphasize how greatly the Assyrian\npeople, as apart from their rulers, cherished the older beliefs of\nBabylonia. Both peoples were substantially of the same stock, and any\nmovement which had as its object the destruction of the Babylonian\nreligion would have met with the strongest hostility from the populace\nof Assyria. Just as the conquering Aztecs seem to have had immense\nreverence for the worship of the Toltecs, whose land they subdued, so\ndid the less cultivated Assyrians regard everything connected, with\nBabylonia as peculiarly sacred. The Kings of Assyria, in fact, were not\na little proud of being the rulers of Babylonia, and were extremely\nmild in their treatment of their southern subjects--very much more so,\nin fact, than they were in their behaviour toward the people of Elam\nor other conquered territories. We even find the kings alluding to\nthemselves as being nominated by the gods to rule over the land of Bel.\n\nThe Assyrian monarchs strove hard not to disturb the ancient Babylonian\ncult, and Shalmaneser II, when he had conquered Babylonia, actually\nentered Merodach's temple and sacrificed to him.\n\n\nThe Assyrian Bel and Belit\n\nAs for Bel, whose place Merodach usurped in the Babylonian pantheon,\nhe was also recognized in Assyria, and Tiglath-pileser I built him a\ntemple in his city of Asshur. Tiglath prefixes the adjective 'old'\nto the god's name to show that he means Bel, not Bel-Merodach.\nSargon, too, who had antiquarian tastes, also reverts to Bel, to whom\nhe alludes as the 'Great Mountain,' the name of the god following\nimmediately after that of Asshur. Bel is also invoked in connexion\nwith Anu as a granter of victory. His consort Belit, although\noccasionally she is coupled with him, more usually figures as the\nwife of Asshur, and almost as commonly as a variant of Ishtar. In a\ntemple in the city of Asshur, Tiglath-pileser I made presents to Belit\nconsisting of the images of the gods vanquished by him in his various\ncampaigns. Assur-bani-pal, too, regarded Belit as the wife of Asshur,\nand himself as their son, alluding to Belit as 'Mother of the Great\nGods,' a circumstance which would go to show that, like most of the\nAssyrian kings, his egoism rather overshadowed his sense of humour. In\nAssur-bani-pal's pantheon Belit is placed close by her consort Asshur.\nBut there seems to have been a good deal of confusion between Belit and\nIshtar because of the general meaning of the word Belit.\n\n\nNabu and Merodach\n\nAs in Babylonia so in Assyria, Nabu and Merodach were paired together,\noften as Bel and Nabu. Especially were they invoked when the affairs\nof Babylonia were being dealt with. In the seventh century B.C. we\nfind the cult of Nabu in high popularity in Assyria, and indeed\nRamman-Nirari III appears to have made an attempt to advance Nabu\nconsiderably. He erected a temple to the god at Calah, and granted\nhim many resounding titles. But even so, it does not seem that\nRamman-Nirari intended to exalt Nabu at the expense of Asshur. Indeed\nit would have been impossible for him to have done so if he had\ndesired to. Asshur was as much the national god of the Assyrian people\nas Osiris was of the Egyptians. Nabu was the patron of wisdom, and\nprotector of the arts; he guided the stylus of the scribe; and in\nthese attributes he is very close to the Egyptian Thoth, and almost\nidentical with another Babylonian god, Nusku, alluded to on pages 224,\n225. Sargon calls Nabu 'the Seer who guides the gods,' and it would\nseem from some notices of him that he was also regarded as a leader of\nheavenly or spiritual forces. Those kings who were fond of erudition\npaid great devotion to Nabu, and many of the tablets in their literary\ncollections close with thanksgiving to him for having opened their ears\nto receive wisdom.\n\n\nEa\n\nEa was of course accepted into the Assyrian pantheon because of his\nmembership in the old Assyrian triad, but he was also regarded as a\ngod of wisdom, possibly because of his venerable reputation; and we\nfind him also as patron of the arts, and especially of building and\narchitecture. Threefold was his power of direction in this respect.\nThe great Colossi, the enormous winged bulls and mythological figures\nwhich flanked the avenues leading to the royal places, the images of\nthe gods, and, lastly, the greater buildings, were all examples of the\narchitectural art of which he was the patron.\n\n\nDibbarra\n\nAnother Babylonian deity who was placed in the ranks of the Assyrian\npantheon was Dibbarra, the plague-god, who can only be called a god\nthrough a species of courtesy, as he partook much more of a demoniac\ncharacter, and was at one time almost certainly an evil spirit. We have\nalready alluded to the poem in which he lays low people and armies by\nhis violence, and it was probably from one of the texts of this that\nAssur-bani-pal conceived the idea that those civilians who had perished\nin his campaigns against Babylonia had been slaughtered by Dibbarra.\n\n\nLesser Gods\n\nSome of the lesser Babylonian gods, like Damku and Sharru-Ilu, seem to\nhave attracted a passing interest to themselves, but as little can be\nfound concerning them in Babylonian texts, it is scarcely necessary\nto take much notice of them in such a chapter as this. Most probably\nthe Assyrians accepted the Babylonian gods on the basis not only of\ntheir native reputation, but also of the occurrence of their names in\nthe ancient religious texts, with which their priests were thoroughly\nacquainted, and though, broadly speaking, they accepted practically the\nwhole of the Babylonian religion and its gods in entirety, there is no\ndoubt that some of these by their very natures and attributes appealed\nmore to them than others, and therefore possessed a somewhat different\nvalue in their eyes from that assigned to them by the more peace-loving\npeople of the southern kingdom.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII: BABYLONIAN STAR-WORSHIP\n\n\nAncient Chaldea was undoubtedly the birthplace of that mysterious\nscience of astrology which was destined to exert such influence upon\nthe European mind during the Middle Ages, and which indeed has not yet\nceased to amuse the curious and flatter the hopes of the credulous.\nWhether any people more primitive than the Akkadians had studied the\nmovements of the stars it would indeed be extremely difficult to say.\nThis the Akkadians or Babylonians were probably the first to attempt.\nThe plain of Mesopotamia is peculiarly suited to the study of the\nmovements of the stars. It is level for the most part, and there are\nfew mountains around which moisture can collect to obscure the sky.\nMoreover the climate greatly assists such observations.\n\n\n[Illustration: Procession of Gods Rock-relief at Malatia (Anti-Taurus\nrange). Order from right to left: Asshur, Ishtar, Sin, En-lil, Shamash,\nAdad and Ishtar of Arbela. From _Religious Belief and Practice in\nBabylonia and Assyria_, by Prof. Jastrow (G.P. Putnam's Sons.).]\n\n\nLike most primitive people the Babylonians originally believed the\nstars to be pictures drawn on the heavens. At a later epoch they were\ndescribed as the 'writing of heaven'; the sky was supposed to be a\ngreat vault, and the movements observed by these ancient astronomers\nwere thought to be on the part of the stars alone. Of course it would\nbe noticed at an early stage that some of the stars seemed fixed while\nothers moved about. Lines were drawn between the various stars and\nplanets, and the figures which resulted from these were regarded as\nomens. Again, certain groups or constellations were connected with\nsuch lines which led them to be identified with various animals, and\nin this we may observe the influence of animism. The Babylonian zodiac\nwas, with the exception of the sign of Merodach, identified with the\neleven monsters forming the host of Tiawath. Thus it would seem that\nthe zodiacal system as a whole originated in Babylonia. The knowledge\nof the Chaldean astronomers appears to have been considerable, and it\nis likely that they were familiar with most of the constellations known\nto the later Greeks.\n\n\nLegend of the Origin of Star-Worship and Idolatry\n\nThe following legend is told regarding the origin of astrology by\nMaimonides, the famous Jewish rabbi and friend of Averroes, in his\ncommentary on the _Mischnah_:\n\n\"In the days of Enos, the son of Seth, the sons of Adam erred with\ngreat error: and the council of the wise men of that age became\nbrutish; and Enos himself was of them that erred. And their error\nwas this: they said,--Forasmuch as God hath _created these stars and\nspheres to govern the world_, and hath set them on high, and hath\nimparted honour unto them, and they are ministers that minister before\nHim, it is meet that men should laud and glorify and give them honour.\nFor this is the will of God that we laud and magnify whomsoever He\nmagnifieth and honoureth, even as a king would honour them that stand\nbefore him. And this is the honour of the king himself. When this\nthing was come up into their hearts they began to build temples unto\nthe stars, and to offer sacrifice unto them, and to laud and magnify\nthem with words, and to worship before them, that they might, in their\nevil opinion, obtain favour of their Creator. And this was the root of\nidolatry; for in process of time there stood up false prophets among\nthe sons of Adam, which said, that God had commanded them and said\nunto them,--Worship such a star, or all the stars, and do sacrifice\nunto them thus and thus; and build a temple for it, and make an image\nof it, that all the people, women and children, may worship it. And\nthe false prophet _showed them the image_ which he had feigned out of\nhis own heart, and said that _it was the image_ of that star which was\nmade known to him by prophecy. And they began after this manner to make\nimages in temples, and under trees, and on the tops of mountains and\nhills, and assembled together and worshipped them; _and this thing was\nspread through all the world_ to serve images, with services different\none from another, and to sacrifice unto and worship them. So, in\nprocess of time, the glorious and fearful Name was forgotten out of the\nmouth of all living, and out of their knowledge, and they acknowledged\nHim not. And there was found on earth no people that knew aught, save\nimages of wood and stone, and temples of stone which they had been\ntrained up from their childhood to worship and serve, and to swear by\ntheir names; and the wise men that were among them, the priests and\nsuch like, thought that there was no God save the stars and spheres,\nfor whose sake, and _in whose likeness_, they had made these images;\nbut as for the Rock Everlasting, there was no man that did acknowledge\nHim or know Him save a few persons in the world, as Enoch, Methusaleh,\nNoah, Shem, and Heber. And in this way did the world work and converse,\ntill that pillar of the world, Abram our father, was born.\"\n\n\nSpeculations of the Chaldeans\n\nTo arrive at a proper comprehension of Babylonian religious doctrines\nit is necessary to understand the nature of the astrological\nspeculations of the ancient Chaldeans. They recognized at an early\nperiod that eternal and unchangeable laws underlay planetary motion,\nand seem to have been able to forecast eclipses. Soon also did they\nbegin to identify the several heavenly bodies with the gods. Thus the\npath of the sun was known as the 'way of Anu,' and the course of the\nmoon and planets they determined with reference to the sun's ecliptic\nor pathway. It is strange, too, that they should have employed the same\nideograph for the word 'star' and the word 'god,' the only difference\nbeing that in the case of a god they repeated the sign three times. If\nthe sun and moon under animistic law are regarded as gods, it stands to\nreason that the stars and planets must also be looked upon as lesser\ndeities. Indeed, poets still use such an expression regarding them as\n'the host of heaven,' and we frequently encounter in classical authors\nthe statement that the stars in their courses fought for such and such\na person. This is tantamount to saying that the stars possess volition,\nand even although omens were looked for out of their movements, it\nmay have been believed that these were the outcome of volition on the\npart of the stars themselves as deities or deific individuals. Again\nwe can see how the idea that the gods reside in 'heaven'--that is,\nthe sky--arose from early astrological conceptions. The gods were\nidentified in many cases with the stars, therefore it is only natural\nto suppose that they resided in the sky-region. It is, indeed, one of\nthe most difficult matters for even an intelligent and enlightened man\nin our enlightened age to dissociate the idea of God from a residence\nin the sky or 'somewhere up there.'\n\nThe idea of space, too, must have assisted in such a conception as the\nresidence of the gods in the upper regions of air. The earth would not\nbe large enough for them, but the boundless vault above would afford\nthem plenty of space in which to dwell. Again, the sun and moon being\ngods, it would be only natural for the other deities to dwell beside\nthem, that is, in the 'heaven of Anu,' as the Babylonians called the\nsky. It has been suggested that the conception of a pantheon dwelling\nin the sky originated in theological processes forwarded by a school or\npriesthood, but there is no reason to suppose that this was so, and the\npossibilities are easily covered by the circumstances of the animistic\ntheory.\n\n\nPlanets identified with Gods\n\nJupiter, the largest of the planets, was identified with Merodach,\nhead of the Babylonian pantheon. We find him exercising control over\nthe other stars in the creation story under the name Nibir. Ishtar was\nidentified with Venus, Saturn with Ninib, Mars with Nergal, Mercury\nwith Nabu. It is more than strange that gods with certain attributes\nshould have become attached to certain planets in more countries than\none, and this illustrates the deep and lasting influence which Semitic\nreligious thought exercised over the Hellenic and Roman theological\nsystems. The connexion is too obvious and too exact not to be the\nresult of close association. There are, indeed, hundreds of proofs to\nsupport such a theory. Who can suppose, for example, that Aphrodite is\nany other than Ishtar? The Romans identified their goddess Diana with\nthe patroness of Ephesus. There are, indeed, traces of direct relations\nof the Greek goddess with the moon, and she was also, like Ishtar,\nconnected with the lower world and the sea. The Greeks had numerous and\nflourishing colonies in Asia Minor in remote times, and these probably\nassisted in the dissemination of Asiatic and especially Babylonian lore.\n\nThe sun was regarded as the shepherd of the stars, and Nergal, the\ngod of destruction and the underworld, as the 'chief sheep,' probably\nbecause the ruddy nature of his light rendered him a most conspicuous\nobject. Anu is the Pole Star of the ecliptic, Bel the Pole Star of\nthe equator, while Ea, in the southern heavens, was identified with\na star in the constellation Argo. Fixed stars were probably selected\nfor them because of their permanent and elemental nature. The sun\nthey represented as riding in a chariot drawn by horses, and we\nfrequently notice that the figure representing the luminary on Greek\nvases and other remains wears the Phrygian cap, a typically Asiatic\nand non-Hellenic head-dress, thus assisting proof that the idea of the\nsun as a charioteer possibly originated in Babylonia. Lunar worship,\nor at least computation of time by the phases of the moon, frequently\nprecedes the solar cult, and we find traces in Babylonian religion\nof the former high rank of the moon-god. The moon, for example, is\nnot one of the flock of sheep under guidance of the sun. The very\nfact that the calendar was regulated by her movements was sufficient\nto prevent this. Like the Red Indians and other primitive folk, the\nBabylonians possessed agricultural titles for each month, but these\nperiods were also under the direct patronage of some god or gods. Thus\nthe first month, Nizan, is sacred to Anu and Bel; and the second, Iyar,\nto Ea. Siwan is devoted to Sin, and as we approach the summer season\nthe solar gods are apportioned to various months. The sixth month is\nsacred to Ishtar, and the seventh to Shamash, great god of the sun.\nMerodach rules over the eighth, and Nergal over the ninth month. The\ntenth, curiously enough, is sacred to a variant of Nabu, to Anu, and\nto Ishtar. The eleventh month, very suitably, to Ramman, the god of\nstorms, and the last month, Adar, falling within the rainy season, is\npresided over by the seven evil spirits.\n\nNone of the goddesses received stellar honours. The names of the months\nwere probably quite popular in origin. Thus we find that the first\nmonth was known as the 'month of the Sanctuary,' the third as the\n'period of brick-making,' the fifth as the 'fiery month,' the sixth as\nthe 'month of the mission of Ishtar,' referring to her descent into the\nrealms of Allatu. The fourth month was designated 'scattering seed,'\nthe eighth that of the opening of dams, and the ninth was entitled\n'copious fertility,' while the eleventh was known as 'destructive rain.'\n\nWe find in this early star-worship of the ancient Babylonians the\ncommon origin of religion and science. Just as magic partakes in some\nmeasure of the nature of real science (for some authorities hold that\nit is pseudo-scientific in origin) so does religion, or perhaps more\ncorrectly speaking, early science is very closely identified with\nreligion. Thus we may believe that the religious interest in their\nearly astronomy spurred the ancient star-gazers of Babylonia to acquire\nmore knowledge concerning the motions of those stars and planets which\nthey believed to be deities. We find the gods so closely connected with\nancient Chaldean astronomy as to be absolutely identified with it in\nevery way. A number was assigned to each of the chief gods, which would\nseem to show that they were connected in some way with mathematical\nscience. Thus Ishtar's number is fifteen; that of Sin, her father, is\nexactly double that. Anu takes sixty, and Bel and Ea represent fifty\nand forty. Ramman is identified with ten.\n\nIt would be idle in this place to attempt further to outline\nastrological science in Babylonia, concerning which our knowledge is\nvague and scanty. Much remains to be done in the way of research before\nanything more definite can be written about it, and many years may pass\nbefore the workers in this sphere are rewarded by the discovery of\ntexts bearing on Chaldean star-lore.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX: THE PRIESTHOOD, CULT, AND TEMPLES\n\n\nAt an early period in Babylonian history the priesthood and kingship\nwere blended in one office, and it is not until after several centuries\nfrom the beginnings of Babylonian history as we know it that the\ntwo offices were separated. Indeed, long afterward the monarchs of\nBabylonia and Assyria appear to have taken especial pleasure in styling\nthemselves the priests of such and such a deity, and in all likelihood\nthey personally officiated at the altars of the gods on occasions of\nhigh religious sanctity. The priesthood in general was called _shangu_,\nwhich may mean 'sacrificer,' and there is little doubt that at first,\nas among other peoples, the Babylonian priest was practically a\nmedicine-man. It was his business to secure people from the attacks of\nthe evil demons who caused disease and the wiles of witches, and to\nforecast the future and discover the will and intentions of the gods.\nIt is quite clear how such an official as this came to be known as\nthe 'sacrificer,' for it would seem that the best way to find favour\nwith the gods was to make offerings to them through an accredited\nintermediary. Indeed the early priesthood of Babylonia appears to have\nbeen as much magical as religious, and we read of the _makhkhu_, or\nsoothsayer, the _mushelu_, or necromancer, the _asipu_, or sorcerer,\nand the _mashmashu_, or charmer, whose especial functions are probably\noutlined in their several titles.\n\nBut as civilization proceeded and theological opinion took shape,\nreligious ceremonial began to take the place of what was little better\nthan sorcery. It has been said that magic is an attempt to force the\nhands of the gods, to overawe them, whereas religion is an appeal\nto their protective instincts. Now when the feeling began to obtain\nthat there was such a quality as justice in the universe, and when\nthe idea of just gods had an acceptance among the people through the\ninstruction of thinking theologians, the more vulgar practices of\nthe sorcerer-priests fell out of favour with the upper classes, if\nnot with the populace, and a more imposing ceremonial took the place\nof mere incantation. Besides, being founded on the idea of mercy as\nopposed to mere power, religion has invariably recommended itself,\npolitically speaking, to the class of mind which makes for immediate\nand practical progress as apart from that which seeks to encourage mere\nspeculation. As the ritual grew the necessity for new branches of the\npriesthood was discovered. At the head of the priestly organization was\nthe _shangan-makhu_, and each class of priests had its chief as well.\nThe priests were a caste,--that is, it is probable that the right to\nenter the priesthood was vested in certain families, but many young men\nwere educated by the priests who did not in after life exercise their\nfunctions, but who became scribes or lawyers.\n\nAs in the case of most primitive religions, the day of the priest was\ncarefully subdivided. It was made up of three watches, and the night\nwas divided into a similar number of watches. Three relays of priests\nthus officiated through the day and three through the night.\n\nPriestesses were also known in Babylonia, and many references are made\nin the texts to the 'sacred women.' Some of these were exorcisers, and\nothers, like the Greek pythonesses, presided at oracular shrines. The\ncult of Ishtar in especial had many attendant priestesses, and these\nwere of several classes.\n\n\nSacrifices\n\nLike the other Semitic peoples the Babylonians attached great\nimportance to the question of sacrifices. Professor Robertson Smith has\nput it on record in his _Religion of the Semites_, that sacrifice among\nthat race was regarded as a meal shared between the worshipper and the\ndeity. This view of sacrifice is almost world-wide among peoples in the\nhigher stages of barbarism if not in those of savagery.\n\nThere is no source from which we can definitely discover the exact\nmanner of Babylonian and Assyrian sacrifices. As civilization advanced\nwhat was intended for the god almost invariably went for the use of\nthe temple. Certain parts of the animal which were not fit to eat\nwere burned to the glory of the deity. The blood of the animal may,\nhowever, have been regarded as more directly pleasing to the gods, and\nwas probably poured out upon the altar. This practice is distinctly\nof magical origin. The wizard believes that the dead, demons, and\nsupernatural beings in general have a special desire for blood, and\nwe remember Homer's vivid description of how, when the trench was cut\nand the blood of the victims poured therein, the shadowy presentments\nof the dead flocked about it and devoured the steam arising from the\nsacrifice. In some cults blood alone is offered to the gods, and\nperhaps the most striking instance of this is afforded by the religion\nof ancient Mexico, in which blood was regarded as the pabulum or food\nof the gods, and the body of the victim as the ceremonial corpse of\nthe deity to be eaten by his worshippers.\n\n[Illustration: 1. Zikkurats of the Anu-Adad at Ashur. 2. Stage-tower at\nSamarra.--From _Religions Belief and Practice in Babylonia and Assyria_,\nby Professor Morris Jastrow By permission of Messrs G.P. Putnam's Sons.]\n\nThe Temples of Babylonia and Assyria\n\nThe temple-building phase is characteristic of Babylonian religion\nfrom an early stage. More than 3000 years before the final extinction\nof the cult we find places of worship being raised in the Euphrates\nValley. Even in later times these Babylonian structures would appear\nto have been built for practical rather than \u00e6sthetic purposes, and in\nthe early part of the temple-building epoch they were of the crudest\ndescription, mere rude structures of brick, without an attempt at\narchitectural elaboration. An early ideal was to reproduce in miniature\nthe 'mountain of all lands'--Khursag-kurkura, the birthplace of the\ngods--and to this end the temple was erected on a mountain-like heap\nof earth. To the primitive one-storied building other stories came\nto be added, till in pursuit of a general ideal of height they came\nto be veritable Towers of Babel, aspiring to reach to heaven. These\n_zikkurats_, or staged towers, as they have been called, were built\nof brick, and were quadrangular in form, their four sides facing\nnorth, south, east, and west respectively. Their sombre and unlovely\nappearance was relieved to some extent by the use of brilliant\ncolourings, but in neither form nor colour need we look for any\nparticular artistic interest, nor any especial religious or other\nsymbolism, though attempts have been made both in later Babylonian and\nin our own times to find astrological interpretations of these. By and\nby the zikkurat came to be more of a 'high-place' than a temple, the\naltars and sanctuary proper being disposed about its base.\n\nWith this development of the temple area a new phase was inaugurated.\nHuge courts were built, supported by brick columns, and enclosing all\nthe various buildings connected with the cult of the deity to whom the\ntemple was dedicated. These courts, which were for the most part open\nto the sky, covered a large area--as much, perhaps, as ten or twelve\nacres in some cases. Brick was still the material employed in their\nstructure, though wood was used for gateways and for roofs for the\nsmaller temples. As time went on they became more richly decorated,\nprecious metals and woods were imported for their adornment, and\ndraperies and coloured bricks were employed with more or less \u00e6sthetic\nintent. In some Assyrian temples stone columns were employed. The\ninterior of the temple proper consisted of a central hall, a 'holy\nof holies,' wherein was set the statue of the god in whose honour\nthe sanctuary was built, and an assembly-room where the gods of the\npantheon met.\n\nThe temples of Babylonia resemble very closely those of ancient Mexico\nand Central America, for just as the Chaldean temple was evolved from\nthe idea of the 'holy hill,' so was the Mexican _teocalli_, or 'house\nof God.' Originating probably in a rude mound of earth, the temple\nin both countries came through the march of civilization under the\ninfluence of architecture proper. In America there are still extant\nmany links in the chain of evolution between the rude earth-mound\nand the carven teocalli, but in the case of Babylonia we have only\ninference to support the theory of such a development. This inference\nis, however, of a very powerful character. Commencing probably with\na one-story structure, we find both the Mexican and Babylonian 'high\nplaces' developing a second, then a third, fourth, fifth, and even\nsixth stage in the case of Babylonia, and sometimes a fourth in the\ncase of Mexico.\n\nA sharp distinction must be drawn between the Egyptian pyramid and\nthe temples of Babylonia and Assyria. The pyramid of the Nile country\nwas undoubtedly developed from the grave-mound, the cairn. It is\nthe burial-place of a monarch, and has nothing whatever to do with\nreligious worship. The zikkurats of Babylonia and the teocallis of\nMexico, as their names imply, were unquestionably religious in origin,\nand had nothing whatsoever to do with burial.\n\nBut one essential difference there was between them, and that is, that\nwhereas in Mexico the teocallis seldom possessed interiors, this was\nvery frequently the case with the temples of Babylonia. It is true that\nthe Mexican temples had attached to them buildings called _teopan_,\nbut these appear to have been dwelling-places for the various grades\nof priests. In Babylonia, on the other hand, another description of\nresidence arose. This was the temple proper, apart from the zikkurat\nor tower. Most Babylonian cities had a definite religious quarter,\nand excavations have made us familiar to some extent with the plan\nand appearance of these. Perhaps the best known example is that at\nNippur, the extent of which appears to have been about sixteen acres.\nA large court was lined with brick columns, and when excavated was\nfound to have supported a wooden roof. Close to this was the building\nin which the temple records were kept. The people gathered for worship\nin a second court of sixty wooden columns with supports and capitals\nof metal, and there, in a basin specially built for the purpose, they\nmade their ablutions before offering up sacrifice. At the eastern end\nof this courtyard was placed a tent containing the ark. This kind of\ncourtyard may be said to be characteristic of the Semitic worship,\nas there was undoubtedly such a structure in most Hebrew temples.\nThis court of columns was surrounded by chambers which probably\nserved the purpose of administrative offices and perhaps dwellings\nfor the priests and attendants, or booths for the sale of sacrificial\nofferings. The training college for the younger priests was also within\nthe temple area, as were the astronomical observatories, and around\nthese gathered the learned of the district, just as they did in the\ntemple at Jerusalem to dispute concerning religious matters and to\nsplit theological hairs. The Babylonian priests were also the lawyers\nof their period, and the courts of justice were probably hard by the\ntemple.\n\nMany of these religious areas, as, for example, those at Babylon,\nNippur, Sippar, and Ur, must have been so extensive as to have\nconstituted what were in reality sacred cities. The whole was enclosed\nby a containing wall, and even the several divisions of the temple\nbuildings were also surrounded by lesser walls. The material of which\nthese edifices were built was the universal one of brick. In early\ndays sun-dried brick was employed, but as its use resulted in the\ncrumbling and speedy destruction of most of the edifices composed\nof it, kiln-dried bricks were substituted for it, and as these were\noften glazed their durability was much enhanced. The cement used to\nhold these together was common bitumen, found in great quantities in\nBabylonia, and the roof was usually built of wood, cedars from Lebanon\nbeing a favourite material for carpentering.\n\nFrom the restoration plans with which several explorers have furnished\nus we can judge how stately and striking the interior of many of\nthe Babylonian temples must have been. The enamelled bricks, the\nhighly-polished woodwork, the brilliant precious stones, the gold and\nsilver inlaid on the walls and ceilings must indeed have dazzled the\nbeholder. The Semites were prone to the use of bright colours, and as\nit was the aim of the architects to outshine the sun itself in their\ninteriors, we can judge of the effect. Draperies and rugs were probably\nalso lavishly used. The wooden gates were overlaid with bronze in high\nrelief. Passing through them the worshipper must have been deeply\naffected by the wonderful play of colour and shadow combined in the\ninterior. The vastness of length and height would inspire him with deep\nawe, and the curtain screening the holy of holies would be for him the\nboundary betwixt the human and the divine. Behind this curtain was\nprobably the statue of the god, and the chamber which contained this\nwas known as the _papakhu_, which means 'shut off.' In all probability\nno one had access to it but the king and high religious officials.\nIt was indeed the holy of holies. A stone tablet found at Sippar\nrepresents the god Shamash seated in such a chamber. He is sitting on\na low throne, and before him is an altar containing a symbol of the\nsun-god. A monarch and priest stand before him. The decoration of such\na chamber was lavish in the extreme, the floors, walls, and ceiling\nbeing inlaid with precious stones, and in some cases, as that of\nMerodach in the temple of Babylon, the statue and the altar in front of\nit were of solid gold.\n\n\nThe Great Temple-Builders\n\nThe history of temple-building in Babylonia begins at an early date.\nWe find Sargon and Naram-sin calling themselves 'Builder of the\nTemple of En-lil in Nippur.' Gudea was probably the first potentate to\nachieve great results in temple-building. Khammurabi was also active\nas a builder of sanctuaries. But besides planning the erection of new\ntemples, the kings of Babylonia and Assyria appear to have been zealous\nin the restoration and improvement of the older temples in the land.\nRestoration was frequently necessary because of the fact that many of\nthe older shrines had been built of sun-dried brick, which had not the\nsame lasting power as the glazed brick dried in kilns used in later\ntimes.\n\nThe Assyrian conquerors of Babylonia considered it their policy as\nwell as their pleasure to restore many of the ancient shrines of the\nland they had subdued, and in doing so they frequently allude in their\nrecords to the age of the temple on which they are at work, sometimes\nproviding us with a clue to the date of its foundation. In this way we\ncan trace the history of some of these ancient buildings over a space\nof more than 3000 years. Such a sanctuary must have appeared to the\nAssyrian monarch who rebuilt it, as an edifice erected in the days of\nSolomon would seem to us. Thus in the times of the later Assyrian kings\nsome of the older temples would have behind them a record as ancient as\nthat of the temple at Jerusalem to-day!\n\nThe Assyrian restorers of these ancient fanes refer piously to their\noriginal builders. They carefully unearthed the old foundation-stones,\nwhich they preserved, and clung tenaciously to the ritual which had\nbeen celebrated in the temples of Babylonia from very early times.\n\nThere are many long lists of temples in existence, and, assuming that\neach god possessed his own shrine, hundreds of temples must have been\nscattered over the length and breadth of the northern and southern\nlands. These were probably much more numerous in Babylonia, which was\nolder, and whose people exhibited a greater religious feeling.\n\n\nThe Temple of E-Kur\n\nThe oldest known temple in Babylonia was that of E-Kur at Nippur,\nsacred to En-lil. It was probably founded somewhere about 4000 B.C., or\neven at an earlier date. Before the time of Sargon we find the rulers\nof Nippur embellishing the temple there. The climate of the place\nnecessitated frequent repairs, and by reason of occasional popular\nrevolutions the fabric received considerable damage. We find Urbau\nabout 2700 B.C. building a zikkurat in the temple area at Nippur, and\na few centuries afterward Bur-sin repairing this zikkurat and adding\na new shrine. E-Kur saw numerous political changes, and when foreign\ndynasties ruled the land its importance waned somewhat. But later alien\nrulers shrewdly saw the advantage of restoring its rather tarnished\nsplendour, and we find several kings of the Kassite dynasty (_c._ 1400\nB.C.) so far honouring it as to place within its confines a votive\nobject from Elam, which had originally been placed in the temple of\nIshtar at Erech, whence it had been removed by an Elamite conqueror\nabout 900 years before. This was almost as remarkable as if the Stone\nof Destiny, the Lia Fail, in Westminster Abbey were to be restored to\nits original seat in Ireland.\n\nThe temple at Nippur was at this time dedicated to Bel before that\ndeity was ousted by Merodach. Almost every one of the Kassite rulers\nmade more or less costly additions to the temple at Nippur, and from\ntheir several inscriptions we can follow its history down to Assyrian\ntimes. About the twelfth century B.C. E-Kur yielded its supremacy to\nE-Sagila. It was sacked and partially destroyed, until later restored\nby Assyrian monarchs, who conscientiously re-decorated it and erected\nmany new buildings within its area. But during the new Babylonian\nperiod it was once more sacked by order of southern rulers, and at the\nend of the seventh century B.C. its history comes to a close. Its site,\nhowever, did not lose its sanctity, for it was used as a cemetery and\npartially inhabited till the twelfth century A.D.\n\n\nThe Brilliant House\n\nThis outline of the history of E-Kur will serve for that of many other\nBabylonian temples. The temple of Shamash at Sippar, which was known\nas E-babbara, or the 'Brilliant House,' can be traced back as far\nas the days of Naram-Sin. This was also restored by monarchs of the\nKassite dynasty, but the nomadic tribes, who ever threatened the peace\nof Babylonia, made an inroad, scattered the priesthood, and destroyed\nthe great idol of Shamash. It was nearly 500 years after this that the\n'Brilliant House' was restored to its former glory by Nabu-baliddin.\nNebuchadrezzar rebuilt portions of the temple, as did the last King of\nBabylonia, Nabonidus, who scandalized the priests of Babylon by his\npreference for the worship of Shamash.\n\n\nUr, the Moon-City\n\nWe shall remember that one of the principal centres of the cult of the\nmoon was at Ur, the city whence came Abram the Patriarch, and it is\nprobable that he was originally a moon-worshipper. Another such centre\nof lunar adoration was Harran. These places were regarded as especially\nsacrosanct, as the moon-cult was more ancient than that of the sun, and\nwas therefore looked upon with a greater degree of veneration. Both\nof these cities possessed temples to Sin, the moon-god, and in them\nastrology and stellar observation were enthusiastically carried on.\nHarran was more than once overrun by the fierce nomadic tribes of the\ndesert, but its prestige survived even their destructive tendencies.\n\nThe temple of E-anna at Erech, dedicated to Ishtar, was one of the\nmost famous sanctuaries in Babylonia. It is alluded to in one of the\ncreation legends, as were also the temples at Nippur, as 'The bright\nhouse of the gods.'\n\n\nThe Twin Temples\n\nThe temple of Merodach at E-Sagila and that of Nabu at E-Zida were\ninseparably associated, for a visit to one practically necessitated\na visit to both. An original rivalry between the gods had ended in\na species of amalgamation, and together they may be said to have\nsymbolized the national religion of Babylonia. Indeed so great was\ntheir influence that it can scarcely be over-estimated. The theological\nthought of the country emanated from the schools which clustered around\nthem, and they were the great literary centres of Babylonia, and thus\nthe progenitors of Assyrian culture.\n\n[Illustration: Excavated Ruins of the Temple of E-Sagila. The two walls\nin the centre mark the entrance to the passage, a quarter of a mile\nlong, which connected the Tower of Babel with this temple. Copyright by\nUnderwood and Underwood, London.]\n\nTemples as Banks\n\nIt was perhaps typical of the race that its places of worship should\ngradually become great financial centres and the nuclei of trade and\nusury. Heavily endowed as they were by the kings of Babylonia and\nAssyria, and boasting immense wealth in lands, subsidies, and slaves,\nthey also had at their command an army of workmen and labourers.\nBut their directors were also bankers and money-lenders, buyers and\nbarterers of produce and manufactures of every kind, estate-agents and\nmen of commerce generally. Sacred objects of every kind were on sale in\nthe temple precincts, idols, votive offerings, amulets, and so forth.\nWith what object did the priesthood of Babylonia pursue a commercial\ncareer? It could scarcely have been one in which personal gain bulked\nlargely, as the impersonal temple swallowed up all the profit. The cost\nof upkeep of such shrines must have been enormous, and when we think of\nthe gorgeous nature of their interiors, and the costly character of the\nrich vessels and altars with which they were equipped, we can marvel no\nlonger at what appears a degrading and unnecessary commerce on the part\nof their priesthood.\n\n\nFeasts and Festivals\n\nBabylonian religious festivals were, as a rule, periods of jubilation\nand rejoicing. Each god had his own day of festival in the calendar.\nThe first day of the year, or _Zag-muku_, was sacred to the goddess\nBau. Gudea, who had made Nin-girsu his favourite, attempted to 'work\nhim into' this festival by uniting him in marriage with Bau, and he\noffers her marriage gifts on New Year's Day. But later the _Zag-muku_\nwas transformed into a festival to Merodach. The circumstance that\nit was celebrated in the first month of the year shows that it did\nnot originally belong to Merodach, whose month was Marcheshuan, the\neighth. But it is eloquent of his popularity that the great New Year's\nfeast should have been dedicated to him. It seems to have lasted for\nat least ten or twelve days. As has already been described, the union\nof Nabu and Merodach, father and son, was solemnly celebrated, Nabu\npiously paying a visit to his father's sanctuary. The other gods were\nsupposed to assemble in spirit in Merodach's temple to witness the\nceremony, and afterwards the priests of Merodach escorted the idol of\nNabu back to its shrine, themselves carrying the image of their deity.\n\nTo behold this festival, which was celebrated with all possible\nmagnificence, people flocked from all parts of Babylonia. The\nking, approaching the statue of the god, seized its hands in token\nof covenant, and in later times Assyrian monarchs, in order to\nlegitimatize themselves as rulers of Babylonia, went through this\nceremony, which came to be recognized as duly fulfilling their claims\nto sovereignty in the southern land; but whereas they went through the\nceremony once only, the kings of Babylonia celebrated it annually with\nthe intensest possible devotion.\n\n\nThe Chamber of Fates\n\nOn the eighth day of the festival all the gods were thought to assemble\nin Merodach's 'Chamber of Fates,' to hearken to Merodach's decree\nconcerning the fates of men for the ensuing year. This remarkable\napartment was regarded as the reproduction of the interior of the great\nmountain wherein the gods met in council, just as the zikkurat was\nthought to typify that mountain itself. It was situated in a special\nportion of the 'mountain' known as the _Ubshu-Kenna_, and among its\nsacred names is one which may be translated 'brilliant chamber,'\nwhich shows that it must have been lavishly decorated. Ubshu-Kenna\n(or Upshukki-naku) must be carefully distinguished from the 'heaven'\nproper of the Babylonian gods. It is situated in the east, in the\nMountain of the Sunrise, not far from the edge of the world, where\nit was bounded by the waters of the great deep. It is, in fact, the\n'brilliant chamber' where the sun takes his rise.\n\n\nLamentation Rituals\n\nOn the occasion of any national or popular disaster, such as defeat in\nwar, the appearance of a pestilence or an eclipse of the sun or moon, a\ncertain formula of lamentation was gone through, which was thought to\nhave the effect of lessening or averting the malign influence of evil\npowers, or the punitive measures of an angry god. This formula varied\nof course with the deity or demon who was considered to have caused\nthe calamity. Many of these ancient lamentations are written in the\nSumerian tongue, which witnesses to their great antiquity. From them\nit would seem that the Babylonians were of the opinion that if the\npeople had in any way sinned, the gods averted their faces from them,\nand departing from their neighbourhood left them a prey to calamities\nof all kinds. A definite ritual accompanied these formulas, one of the\nprovisions of which was fasting, and purification ceremonies of a very\nelaborate nature were also celebrated by the priests, probably in the\nhope of symbolically washing away the sin which had so offended the\ngods.\n\nThe formula most in use in these propitiatory ceremonies was that which\nobtained in the sacred city of Nippur, and particularly in the temple\nof E-Kur. The monotony of these laments is typical of ancient Semitic\nworship. They describe the disasters that have occurred, and piteously\nbeg that the gods may be appeased. Only now and again in perusing them\ndoes a bright line or a picturesque phrase capture the eye and fire\nthe imagination. A paraphrase of one of them may well characterize\nthe whole. The god En-lil, shepherd of the dark-headed people, is\nimplored to return to his city. He is entreated by the various names\nof his godhead, such as 'lord of lands,' 'lord of the faithful word,'\n'lord of self-created vision,' and so forth. Each separate part of the\ntemple area is alluded to in the request that he will return--the great\ngate, the storehouse, and the other religious departments. A touching\ndomestic picture is drawn of the deserted homes in the city; where the\nwoman could say to her young husband, \"My husband,\" where she could\nsay to the young child, \"My child,\" where the maiden could say, \"My\nbrother,\" where the little girl could say, \"My father,\"--there the\nlittle ones perish, there the great perish. In her banqueting-hall the\nwind holds revel, her streets are desolate.\n\nFrom some of the texts it would appear that the suppliants were\nignorant of the sin they had committed, and many so-called 'penitential\npsalms' are extant in which the stricken one appeals fervently to the\ngods to release him from the burden of his unknown sin. He weeps,\nand he is unable to restrain himself. He laments earnestly, and begs\nthrough the priest for the divine mercy. These appeals always end in\nthe same way--that is, in the pious hope that the heart and liver of\nthe god may be appeased. With the Babylonians, as with the modern\nArmenians, to whom they are perhaps related, the liver was regarded as\nthe seat of the emotions.\n\nOccasionally a higher intellectual and ethical plane is reached by\nthese prayers. \"Men,\" says one of them, \"are blind: which of them knows\nanything? They do not even know good from evil.\" The god is fervently\npetitioned not to cast his servant off. He is in a deep morass, and he\nearnestly prays that the deity may take him by the hand, may change his\nsin to grace, and permit the wind to carry off his transgressions.\n\n\nThe Terror of Eclipse\n\nThe terror of eclipse of the sun or moon was a very real one to the\nancient Babylonians. The tablet with the history of the seven evil gods\nor spirits, though much mutilated, gives us a hint of the attack made\nby them upon the moon. They dwelt in the lower part of heaven, and were\nrebellious in heart. Shaped like leopards, serpents, and angry beasts\nof prey, they went from city to city on the wings of an evil wind,\ndestroying and smiting. And into the heaven of Anu they burst, but Bel\nand Ea took counsel, and set Sin the moon, Shamash the sun, and Ishtar\nthe planet Venus in the lower part of heaven to govern and control it\nalong with Anu. No sooner had this been accomplished than the seven\nevil spirits fiercely attacked the moon-god. But Bel saw the peril of\nSin, and said to his attendant, the god Nusku, \"Carry word of this\nthing to the ocean, to the god Ea.\" Ea heard the message, and called\nhis son, the god Merodach. \"Go, my son Merodach,\" quoth he, \"enter\ninto the shining Sin, who in heaven is greatly beset, and expel his\nenemies from heaven.\" It is impossible to decipher the context from the\nmutilated remains of the tablets, but we may take it for granted that\nthe pious efforts of Merodach were rewarded with success.\n\nAn eclipse to most primitive peoples means that the sun- or moon-god\nhas either met with disaster or has withdrawn his face from his\nworshippers. The monthly waning of the moon made the ancients believe\nthat it would be entirely blotted out unless the god was pacified. Thus\nif no eclipse took place it was considered that the efforts of priests\nand people had prevailed; otherwise they were held to have failed, and\npanic ruled supreme. In a certain prayer Sin is adjured not to withhold\nhis face from his people. The day of the monthly disappearance of the\nmoon is called a day of distress, but a season of jubilee followed upon\nthe advent of the new moon next day.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X: THE MAGIC AND DEMONOLOGY OF BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA\n\n\nLike other primitive races the peoples of Chaldea scarcely\ndiscriminated at all between religion and magic. One difference\nbetween the priest and the sorcerer was that the one employed magic\nfor religious purposes whilst the other used it for his own ends. The\nliterature of Chaldea--especially its religious literature--teems\nwith references to magic, and in its spells and incantations we see\nthe prototypes of those employed by the magicians of medi\u00e6val Europe.\nIndeed so closely do some of the Assyrian incantations and magical\npractices resemble those of the European sorcerers of the Middle Ages\nand of primitive peoples of the present day that it is difficult to\nconvince oneself that they are of independent origin.\n\nIn Chaldea as in ancient Egypt the crude and vague magical practices\nof primeval times received form and developed into accepted ritual,\njust as early religious ideas evolved into dogmas under the stress\nof theological controversy and opinion. As there were men who would\ndispute upon religious questions, so were there persons who would\ndiscuss matters magical. This is not to say that the terms 'religion'\nand 'magic' possessed any well-defined boundaries for them. Nor is\nit at all clear that they do for us in this twentieth century. They\noverlap; and it has long been the belief of the writer that their\nrelations are but represented by two circles which intersect one\nanother and the areas of which partially coincide.\n\nThe writer has outlined his opinions regarding the origin of magic\nin an earlier volume of this series,[1] and has little to add to\nwhat he then wrote, except that he desires to lay stress upon the\nidentification of early religion and magic. It is only when they begin\nto evolve, to branch out, that the two systems present differences. If\nthere is any one circumstance which accentuates the difference more\nthan another it is that the ethical element does not enter into magic\nin the same manner as it does into religion.\n\nThat Chaldean magic was the precursor of European medi\u00e6val magic as\napart from popular sorcery and witchcraft is instanced not only by the\nsimilarity between the systems but by the introduction into medi\u00e6val\nmagic of the names of Babylonian and Assyrian gods and magicians. Again\nand again is Babylon appealed to even more frequently than Egypt, and\nwe meet constantly with the names of Beelzebub, Ishtar (as Astarte),\nBaal, and Moloch, whilst the names of demons, obviously of Babylonian\norigin, are encountered in almost every work on the subject. Frequent\nallusions are also made to the 'wise men' and necromancers of Babylon,\nand to the 'star-gazers' of Chaldea. The conclusion is irresistible\nthat ceremonial magic, as practised in the Middle Ages, owed much to\nthat of Babylon.\n\nOur information regarding Chaldean magic is much more complete than\nthat which we possess concerning the magic of ancient Egypt. Hundreds\nof spells, incantations, and omen-inscriptions have been recovered,\nand these not only enlighten us regarding the class of priests who\npractised magic, but they tell us of the several varieties of demons,\nghosts, and evil spirits; they minutely describe the Babylonian witch\nand wizard, and they picture for us many magical ceremonies, besides\ninforming us of the names of scores of plants and flowers possessing\nmagical properties, of magical substances, jewels, amulets, and the\nlike. Also they speak of sortilege or the divination of the future, of\nthe drawing of magical circles, of the exorcism of evil spirits, and\nthe casting out of demons.\n\n\nThe Roots of Science\n\nIn these Babylonian magical records we have by far the most complete\npicture of the magic of the ancient world. It is a wondrous story\nthat is told by those bricks and cylinders of stamped clay--the story\nof civilized man's first gropings for light. For in these venerable\nwritings we must recognize the first attempts at scientific elucidation\nof the forces by which man is surrounded. Science, like religion, has\nits roots deep in magic. The primitive man believes implicitly in the\nefficacy of magical ritual. What it brings about once it can bring\nabout again if the proper conditions be present and recognized. Thus\nit possesses for the barbarian as much of the element of certainty as\nthe scientific process does for the chemist or the electrician. Given\ncertain causes certain effects _must_ follow. Surely, then, in the\nbarbarous mind, magic is pseudo-scientific--of the nature of science.\n\nThere appears a deeper gloom, a more ominous spirit of the ancient and\nthe obscure in the magic of old Mesopotamia than in that of any other\nland. Its mighty sanctuaries, its sky-aspiring towers, seem founded\nupon this belief in the efficacy of the spoken spell, the reiterated\ninvocation. Thousands of spirits various and grotesque, the parents\nof the ghosts and goblins of a later day, haunt the purlieus of the\ntemple, battening upon the remains of sacrifice (the leavings of the\ngorged gods), flit through the night-bound streets, and disturb the\nrest of the dwellers in houses. Demons with claw and talon, vampires,\nghouls--all are there. Spirits blest and unblest, jinn, witch-hags,\nlemures, sorrowing unburied ghosts. No type of supernatural being\nappears to have been unknown to the imaginative Semites of old\nChaldea. These must all be 'laid,' exorcised, or placated, and it is\nnot to be marvelled at that in such circumstances the trade of the\nnecromancer flourished exceedingly. The witch or wizard, however, the\nunprofessional and detached practitioner with no priestly status, must\nbeware. He or she was regarded with suspicion, and if one fell sick of\na strange wasting or a disease to which he could not attach a name,\nthe nearest sorcerer, male or female, real or imaginary, was in all\nprobability brought to book.\n\n\nPriestly Wizards\n\nThere were at least two classes of priests who dealt in the occult--the\n_bar\u00fb_, or seers, and the _asip\u00fb_, or wizards. The caste of the bar\u00fb\nwas a very ancient one, dating at least from the time of Khammurabi.\nThe bar\u00fb performed divination by consulting the livers of animals and\nalso by observation of the flight of birds. We find many of the kings\nof Babylonia consulting this class of soothsayer. Sennacherib, for\nexample, sought from the bar\u00fb the cause of his father's violent death.\nThe asip\u00fb, on the other hand, was the remover of taboo and bans of\nall sorts; he chanted the rites described in the magical texts, and\nperformed the ceremony of atonement. It is\n\n  He that stilleth all to rest, that pacifieth all.\n  By whose incantations everything is at peace.\n\nThe gods are upon his right hand and his left, they are behind and\nbefore him.\n\nThe wizard and the witch were known as _Kassapu_ or _Kassaptu_. These\nwere the sorcerers or magicians proper, and that they were considered\ndangerous to the community is shown by the manner in which they are\ntreated by the code of Khammurabi, in which it is ordained that he who\ncharges a man with sorcery and can justify the charge shall obtain the\nsorcerer's house, and the sorcerer shall plunge into the river. But if\nthe sorcerer be not drowned then he who accused him shall be put to\ndeath and the wrongly accused man shall have his house.\n\nA series of texts known as 'Maklu' provides us, among other things,\nwith a striking picture of the Babylonian witch. It tells how she\nprowls the streets, searching for victims, snatching love from handsome\nmen, and withering beauteous women. At another time she is depicted\nsitting in the shade of the wall making spells and fashioning images.\nThe suppliant prays that her magic may revert upon herself, that the\nimage of her which he has made, and doubtless rendered into the hands\nof the priest, shall be burnt by the fire-god, that her words may be\nforced back into her mouth. \"May her mouth be fat, may her tongue be\nsalt,\" continues the prayer. The _haltappen-plant_ along with sesame is\nsent against her. \"O, witch, like the circlet of this seal may thy face\ngrow green and yellow!\"\n\nAn Assyrian text says of a sorceress that her bounds are the whole\nworld, that she can pass over all mountains. The writer states that\nnear his door he has posted a servant, on the right and left of his\ndoor has he set Lugalgirra and Allamu, that they might kill the witch.\n\nThe library of Assur-bani-pal contains many cuneiform tablets dealing\nwith magic, but there are also extant many magical tablets of the\nlater Babylonian Empire. These were known to the Babylonians by some\nname or word, indicative perhaps of the special sphere of their\nactivities. Thus we have the Maklu ('burning'), Surpu ('consuming'),\nUtukki limn\u00fbti ('evil spirits'), and Labartu ('witch-hag') series,\nbesides many other texts dealing with magical practices.\n\nThe Maklu series deals with spells against witches and wizards, images\nof whom are to be consumed by fire to the accompaniment of suitable\nspells and prayers. The Surpu series contains prayers and incantations\nagainst taboo. That against evil spirits provides the haunted with\nspells which will exorcise demons, ghosts, and the powers of the air\ngenerally, and place devils under a ban. In other magical tablets the\ndiseases to which poor humanity is prone are guarded against, and\ninstructions are given on the manner in which they may be transferred\nto the dead bodies of animals, usually swine or goats.\n\n[Illustration: Exorcising Demons of Disease.--From _Religious Belief and\nPractice in Babylonia and Assyria_, by Professor Morris Jastrow.--By\npermission of Messrs G.P. Putnam's Sons.]\n\nA Toothache Myth\n\nThe Assyrian physician had perforce to be something of a demonologist,\nas possession by devils was held to be the cause of divers diseases,\nand we find incantations sprinkled among prescriptions. Occasionally,\ntoo, we come upon the fag-end of a folk-tale or dip momentarily into\nmyth, as in a prescription for the toothache, compounded of fermented\ndrink, the plant _sakilbir_, and oil--probably as efficacious in the\ncase of that malady as most modern ones are. The story attached to the\ncure is as follows:\n\nWhen Anu had created the heavens, the earth created the rivers, the\nrivers the canals, and the canals the marshes, which in turn created\nthe worm. And the worm came weeping before Ea, saying, \"What wilt thou\ngive me for my food, what wilt thou give me for my devouring?\" \"I will\ngive thee ripe figs,\" replied the god, \"ripe figs and scented wood.\"\n\"Bah,\" replied the worm, \"what are ripe figs to me, or what is scented\nwood? Let me drink among the teeth and batten on the gums that I may\ndevour the blood of the teeth and the strength thereof.\" This tale\nalludes to a Babylonian superstition that worms consume the teeth.\n\n\nThe Word of Power\n\nAs in Egypt, the word of power was held in great reverence by the\nmagicians of Chaldea, who believed that the name, preferably the\nsecret name, of a god possessed sufficient force in its mere syllables\nto defeat and scatter the hordes of evil things that surrounded and\nharassed mankind. The names of Ea and Merodach were, perhaps, most\nfrequently used to carry destruction into the ranks of the demon army.\nIt was also necessary to know the name of the devil or person against\nwhom his spells were directed. If to this could be added a piece of\nhair, or the nail-parings in the case of a human being, then special\nefficacy was given to the enchantment. But just as hair or nails were\npart of a man so was his name, and hence the great virtue ascribed\nto names in art-magic, ancient and modern. The name was, as it were,\nthe vehicle by means of which the magician established a link between\nhimself and his victim, and the Babylonians in exorcising sickness or\ndisease of any kind were wont to recite long catalogues of the names of\nevil spirits and demons in the hope that by so doing they might chance\nto light upon that especial individual who was the cause of the malady.\nEven long lists of names of persons who had died premature deaths were\noften recited in order to ensure that they would not return to torment\nthe living.\n\n\nBabylonian Vampires\n\nIn all lands and epochs the grisly conception of the vampire has gained\na strong hold upon the imagination of the common people, and this was\nno less the case in Babylonia and Assyria than elsewhere. There have\nnot been wanting those who believed that vampirism was confined to the\nSlavonic race alone, and that the peoples of Russia, Bohemia, and the\nBalkan Peninsula were the sole possessors of the vampire legend. Recent\nresearch, however, has exposed the fallacy of this theory and has\nshown that, far from being the property of the Slavs or even of Aryan\npeoples, this horrible belief is or was the possession of practically\nevery race, savage or civilized, that is known to anthropology. The\nseven evil spirits of Assyria are, among other things, vampires of no\nuncertain type. An ancient poem which was chanted by them commences\nthus:\n\n  Seven are they! Seven are they!\n  In the ocean deep, seven are they!\n  Battening in heaven, seven are they!\n  Bred in the depths of the ocean;\n  Not male nor female are they,\n  But are as the roaming wind-blast.\n  No wife have they, no son can they beget;\n  Knowing neither mercy nor pity,\n  They hearken not to prayer, to prayer.\n  They are as horses reared amid the hills,\n  The Evil Ones of Ea;\n  Throne-bearers to the gods are they,\n  They stand in the highway to befoul the path;\n  Evil are they, evil are they!\n  Seven are they, seven are they,\n  Twice seven are they!\n\n  Destructive storms (and) evil winds are they,\n  An evil blast that heraldeth the baneful storm,\n  An evil blast, forerunner of the baleful storm.\n  They are mighty children, mighty sons,\n  Heralds of the Pestilence.\n  Throne-bearers of Ereskigal,\n  They are the flood which rusheth through the land.\n  Seven gods of the broad earth,\n  Seven robber(?)-gods are they,\n  Seven gods of might,\n  Seven evil demons,\n  Seven evil demons of oppression,\n  Seven in heaven and seven on earth.\n\n  Spirits that minish heaven and earth,\n  That minish the land,\n  Spirits that minish the land,\n  Of giant strength,\n  Of giant strength and giant tread,\n  Demons (like) raging bulls, great ghosts,\n  Ghosts that break through all houses,\n  Demons that have no shame,\n  Seven are they!\n  Knowing no care, they grind the land like corn;\n  Knowing no mercy, they rage against mankind,\n  They spill their blood like rain,\n  Devouring their flesh (and) sucking their veins.\n   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *\n  They are demons full of violence, ceaselessly devouring\n        blood.[2]\n\nThis last line clearly indicates their character as vampires. They are\nakin to the Rakshasas of India or the arch-demons of Zoroastrianism.\nSuch demons are also to be seen in the Polynesian _tii_, the Malayan\n_hantu penyadin_, a dog-headed water-demon, and the _kephu_ of the\nKarens, which under the form of a wizard's head and stomach devours\nhuman souls. Tylor considers vampires to be \"causes conceived in\nspiritual form to account for specific facts of wasting disease.\"\nAfanasief regards them as thunder-gods and spirits of the storm, who\nduring winter slumber in their cloud-coffins to rise again in spring\nand draw moisture from the clouds. But this theory will scarcely\nrecommend itself to anyone with even a slight knowledge of mythological\nscience. The Abb\u00e9 Calmet's difficulty in believing in vampires was\nthat he could not understand how a spirit could leave its grave and\nreturn thence with ponderable matter in the form of blood, leaving no\ntraces showing that the surface of the earth above the grave had been\nstirred. But this view might be solved by the occult theory of the\n'precipitation of matter'!\n\n\nThe Bible and Magic\n\nThe earliest Biblical account of anything supposed to be connected with\nmagic, is to be found in the history of Rachel. When with her sister\nLeah, and her husband Jacob, she had left the house of her father.\n\"Rachel had stolen the images that were her father's.... Then Laban\novertook Jacob ... and Laban said ... yet wherefore hast thou stolen my\ngods?... and Jacob answered and said, With whomsoever thou findest thy\ngods, let him not live: before our brethren discern thou what is thine\nwith me, and take it to thee. For Jacob knew not that Rachel had stolen\nthem. And Laban went into Jacob's tent, and into Leah's tent, and into\nthe two maid-servants' tent, but he found them not. Then went he out\nof Leah's tent and entered into Rachel's tent. Now Rachel had taken\nthe images, and put them in the camel's furniture and sat upon them.\nAnd Laban searched all the tent, but found them not. And she said to\nher father, Let it not displease my lord that I cannot rise up before\nthee.... And he searched, but found not the images.\" This passage has\ngiven no little trouble to commentators; but most of them seem to\nconsider these teraphim or images as something of a magical nature.\n\n\nThe Speaking Head\n\nThe targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel gives the following version: \"And\nRachel stole the images of her father; for they had murdered a man,\nwho was a first-born son, and, having cut off his head, they embalmed\nit with salt and spices, and they wrote divinations upon a plate of\ngold, and put it under his tongue and placed it against the wall, and\nit conversed with them, and Laban worshipped it. And Jacob stole the\nscience of Laban the Syrian, that he might not discover his departure.\"\n\nThe Persian translation gives us astrolabes instead of teraphim, and\nimplies that they were instruments used for judicial astrology, and\nthat Rachel stole them to prevent her father from discovering their\nroute. At all events the teraphim were means of divination among\nbelievers and unbelievers; they were known among the Egyptians and\namong Syrians. What makes it extremely probable that they were not\nobjects of religious worship is, that it does not appear from any other\npassage of Scripture that Laban was an idolater; besides which Rachel,\nwho was certainly a worshipper of the true God, took them, it seems,\non account of their supposed supernatural powers. It must, however, be\nobserved that some have supposed these teraphim to have been talismans\nfor the cure of diseases; and others, that being really idols, Rachel\nstole them to put a stop to her father's idolatry. There is a not very\ndissimilar account related (Judges xviii) of Micah and his teraphim,\nwhich seems sufficient to prove that the use of them was not considered\ninconsistent with the profession of the true religion.\n\n\nGods once Demons\n\nMany of the Babylonian gods retained traces of their primitive\ndemoniacal characteristics, and this applies to the great triad, Ea,\nAnu, and En-lil, who probably evolved into godhead from an animistic\ngroup of nature spirits. Each of these gods was accompanied by demon\ngroups. Thus the disease-demons were 'the beloved sons of Bel,' the\nfates were the seven daughters of Anu, and the seven storm-demons the\nchildren of Ea. In a magical incantation describing the primitive\nmonster form of Ea it is said that his head is like a serpent's, the\nears are those of a basilisk, his horns are twisted into curls, his\nbody is a sun-fish full of stars, his feet are armed with claws, and\nthe sole of his foot has no heel.\n\nEa was 'the great magician of the gods'; his sway over the forces\nof nature was secured by the performance of magical rites, and his\nservices were obtained by human beings who performed requisite\nceremonies and repeated appropriate spells. Although he might be\nworshipped and propitiated in his temple at Eridu, he could also be\nconjured in mud huts. The latter, indeed, as in Mexico, appear to have\nbeen the oldest holy places.\n\n\nThe Legend of Ura\n\nIt is told that Ura, the dread demon of disease, once made up his mind\nto destroy mankind. But Ishnu, his counsellor, appeased him so that\nhe abandoned his intention, and he gave humanity a chance of escape.\nWhoever should praise Ura and magnify his name would, he said, rule\nthe four quarters of the world, and should have none to oppose him.\nHe should not die in pestilence, and his speech should bring him into\nfavour with the great ones of the earth. Wherever a tablet with the\nsong of Ura was set up, in that house there should be immunity from the\npestilence.\n\nAs we read in the closing lines of the Gilgamesh epic, the dead were\noften left unburied in Babylonia, and the ghosts of those who were\nthus treated were, as in more modern times and climes, supposed to\nhaunt the living until given proper sepulture. They roamed the streets\nand byways seeking for sustenance among the garbage in the gutters,\nand looking for haunted houses in which to dwell, denied as they were\nthe shelter of the grave, which was regarded as the true 'home' of\nthe dead. They frequently terrified children into madness or death,\nand bitterly mocked those in tribulation. They were, in fact, the\noutcasts of mortality, spiteful and venomous because they had not been\nproperly treated. The modern race which most nearly approximates to\nthe Babylonian in its treatment of and attitude to the dead seems to\nbe the Burmese, who are extremely circumspect as to how they speak and\nact towards the inhabitants of the spirit-world, as they believe that\ndisrespect or mockery will bring down upon them misfortune or disease.\nAn infinite number of guardian spirits is included in the Burman\ndemonological system. These dwell in their houses and are the tutelars\nof village communities, and even of clans. These are duly propitiated,\nat which ceremonies rice, beer, and tea-salad are offered to them.\nWomen are employed as exorcists for driving out the evil spirits.\n\n\nPurification\n\nPurification by water entered largely into Babylonian magic. The\nceremony known as the 'Incantation of Eridu,' so frequently alluded to\nin Babylonian magical texts, was probably some form of purification\nby water, relating as it does to the home of Ea, the sea-god. Another\nceremony prescribes the mingling of water from a pool 'that no hand\nhath touched,' with tamarisk, _mastakal_, ginger, alkali, and mixed\nwine. Therein must be placed a shining ring, and the mixture is then to\nbe poured upon the patient. A root of saffron is then to be taken and\npounded with pure salt and alkali and fat of the _matku_-bird brought\nfrom the mountains, and with this strange mixture the body of the\npatient is to be anointed.\n\n\nThe Chamber of the Priest-Magician\n\nLet us attempt to describe the treatment of a case by a\npriest-physician-magician of Babylonia. The proceeding is rather a\nrecondite one, but by the aid of imagination as well as the assistance\nof Babylonian representation we may construct a tolerably clear\npicture. The chamber of the sage is almost certain to be situated in\nsome nook in one of those vast and imposing fanes which more closely\nresembled cities than mere temples. We draw the curtain and enter a\nrather darksome room. The atmosphere is pungent with chemic odours,\nand ranged on shelves disposed upon the tiled walls are numerous\njars, great and small, containing the fearsome compounds which the\npractitioner applies to the sufferings of Babylonian humanity. The\nasipu, shaven and austere, asks us what we desire of him, and in the\nr\u00f4le of Babylonian citizens we acquaint him with the fact that our\nlives are made miserable for us by a witch who sends upon us misfortune\nafter misfortune, now the blight or some equally intractable and\nhorrible disease, now an evil wind, now unspeakable enchantments which\ntorment us unceasingly. In his capacity of physician the asipu examines\nour bodies, shrunken and exhausted with fever or rheumatism, and having\nprescribed for us, compounds the mixture with his own hands and enjoins\nus to its regular application. He mixes various ingredients in a stone\nmortar, whispering his spells the while, with many a prayer to Ea the\nbeneficent and Merodach the all-powerful that we may be restored to\nhealth. Then he promises to visit us at our dwelling and gravely bids\nus adieu, after expressing the hope that we will graciously contribute\nto the upkeep of the house of religion to which he is attached.\n\nLeaving the darkened haunt of the asipu for the brilliant sunshine of\na Babylonian summer afternoon, we are at first inclined to forget our\nfears, and to laugh away the horrible superstitions, the relics of\nbarbarian ancestors, which weigh us down. But as night approaches we\ngrow more fearful, we crouch with the children in the darkest corner\nof our clay-brick dwelling, and tremble at every sound. The rushing of\nthe wind overhead is for us the noise of the Labartu, the hag-demon,\ncome hither to tear from us our little ones, or perhaps a rat rustling\nin the straw may seem to us the Alu-demon. The ghosts of the dead\ngibber at the threshold, and even pale Uru, lord of disease, himself\nmay glance in at the tiny window with ghastly countenance and eager,\nred eyes. The pains of rheumatism assail us. Ha, the evil witch is at\nwork, thrusting thorns into the waxen images made in our shape that we\nmay suffer the torment brought about by sympathetic magic, to which we\nwould rather refer our aches than to the circumstance that we dwell\nhard by the river-swamps.\n\nA loud knocking resounds at the door. We tremble anew and the children\nscream. At last the dread powers of evil have come to summon us to the\nfinal ordeal, or perhaps the witch herself, grown bold by reason of\nher immunity, has come to wreak fresh vengeance. The flimsy door of\nboards is thrown open, and to our unspeakable relief the stern face of\nthe asipu appears beneath the flickering light of the taper. We shout\nwith joy, and the children cluster around the priest, clinging to his\ngarments and clasping his knees.\n\n\nThe Witch-Finding\n\nThe priest smiles at our fear, and motioning us to sit in a circle\nproduces several waxen figures of demons which he places on the floor.\nIt is noticeable that these figures all appear to be bound with\nminiature ropes. Taking one of these in the shape of a Labartu or\nhag-demon, the priest places before it twelve small cakes made from a\npeculiar kind of meal. He then pours out a libation of water, places\nthe image of a small black dog beside that of the witch, lays a piece\nof the heart of a young pig on the mouth of the figure and some white\nbread and a box of ointment beside it. He then chants something like\nthe following: \"May a guardian spirit be present at my side when I draw\nnear unto the sick man, when I examine his muscles, when I compose his\nlimbs, when I sprinkle the water of Ea upon him. Avoid thee whether\nthou art an evil spirit or an evil demon, an evil ghost or an evil\ndevil, an evil god or an evil fiend, hag-demon, ghoul, sprite, phantom,\nor wraith, or any disease, fever, headache, shivering, or any sorcery,\nspell, or enchantment.\"\n\nHaving recited some such words of power the asipu then directs us to\nkeep the figure at the head of our bed for three nights, then to bury\nit beneath the earthen floor. But alas! no cure results. The witch\nstill torments us by day and night, and once more we have recourse to\nthe priest-doctor; the ceremony is gone through again, but still the\nfamily health does not improve. The little ones suffer from fever, and\nbad luck consistently dogs us. After a stormy scene between husband and\nwife, who differ regarding the qualifications of the asipu, another\npractitioner is called in. He is younger and more enterprising than\nthe last, and he has not yet learned that half the business of the\nphysician is to 'nurse' his patients, in the financial sense of the\nterm. Whereas the elderly asipu had gone quietly home to bed after\nprescribing for us, this young physician, who has his spurs to win,\nafter being consulted goes home to his clay surgery and hunts up a\nlikely exorcism.\n\nNext day, armed with this wordy weapon, he arrives at our dwelling and,\nplacing a waxen image of the witch upon the floor, vents upon it the\nfull force of his rhetoric. As he is on the point of leaving, screams\nresound from a neighbouring cabin. Bestowing upon us a look of the\ndeepest meaning our asipu darts to the hut opposite and hales forth\nan ancient crone, whose appearance of age and illness give her a most\nsinister look. At once we recognize in her a wretch who dared to menace\nour children when in innocent play they cast hot ashes upon her thatch\nand introduced hot swamp water into her cistern. In righteous wrath\nwe lay hands on the abandoned being who for so many months has cast a\nblight upon our lives. She exclaims that the pains of death have seized\nupon her, and we laugh in triumph, for we know that the superior magic\nof our asipu has taken effect. On the way to the river we are joined by\nneighbours, who rejoice with us that we have caught the witch. Great is\nthe satisfaction of the party when at last the devilish crone is cast\nheadlong into the stream.\n\nBut ere many seconds pass we begin to look incredulously upon each\nother, for the wicked one refuses to sink. This means that she is\ninnocent! Then, awful moment, we find every eye directed upon us, we\nwho were so happy and light-hearted but a moment before. We tremble,\nfor we know how severe are the laws against the indiscriminate\naccusation of those suspected of witchcraft. As the ancient crone\ncontinues to float, a loud murmuring arises in the crowd, and with\nquaking limbs and eyes full of terror we snatch up our children and\nmake a dash for freedom.\n\nLuckily the asipu accompanies us so that the crowd dare not pursue,\nand indeed, so absurdly changeable is human nature, most of them are\nbusied in rescuing the old woman. In a few minutes we have placed\nall immediate danger of pursuit behind us. The asipu has departed\nto his temple, richer in the experience by the lesson of a false\n'prescription.'[3] After a hurried consultation we quit the town, skirt\nthe arable land which fringes it, and plunge into the desert. She who\nwas opposed to the employment of a young and inexperienced asipu does\nnot make matters any better by reiterating \"I told you so.\" And he\nwho favoured a 'second opinion,' on paying a night visit to the city,\ndiscovers that the 'witch' has succumbed to her harsh treatment; that\nhis house has been made over to her relatives by way of compensation,\nand that a legal process has been taken out against him. Returning to\nhis wife he acquaints her with the sad news, and hand in hand with\ntheir weeping offspring they turn and face the desert.\n\n\nThe Magic Circle\n\nThe magic circle, as in use among the Chaldean sorcerers, bears many\npoints of resemblance to that described in medi\u00e6val works on magic.\nThe Babylonian magician, when describing the circle, made seven little\nwinged figures, which he set before an image of the god Nergal. After\ndoing so he stated that he had covered them with a dark robe and bound\nthem with a coloured cord, setting beside them tamarisk and the heart\nof the palm, that he had completed the magic circle and had surrounded\nthem with a sprinkling of lime and flour.\n\nThat the magic circle of medi\u00e6val times must have been evolved from\nthe Chaldean is plain from the strong resemblance between the two.\nDirections for the making of a medi\u00e6val magic circle are as follows:--\n\nIn the first place the magician is supposed to fix upon a spot proper\nfor such a purpose, which must be either in a subterranean vault, hung\nround with black, and lighted by a magical torch, or else in the centre\nof some thick wood or desert, or upon some extensive unfrequented\nplain, where several roads meet, or amidst the ruins of ancient\ncastles, abbeys, or monasteries, or amongst the rocks on the seashore,\nin some private detached churchyard, or any other melancholy place\nbetween the hours of twelve and one in the night, either when the moon\nshines very bright, or else when the elements are disturbed with storms\nof thunder, lightning, wind, and rain; for, in these places, times, and\nseasons, it is contended that spirits can with less difficulty manifest\nthemselves to mortal eyes, and continue visible with the least pain.\n\nWhen the proper time and place are fixed upon, a magic circle is to\nbe formed within which the master and his associates are carefully to\nretire. The reason assigned by magicians and others for the institution\nand use of the circles is, that so much ground being blessed and\nconsecrated by holy words and ceremonies has a secret force to expel\nall evil spirits from the bounds thereof, and, being sprinkled with\nsacred water, the ground is purified from all uncleanness; beside\nthe holy names of God being written over every part of it, its force\nbecomes proof against all evil spirits.\n\n\nBabylonian Demons\n\nBabylonian demons were legion and most of them exceedingly malevolent.\nThe Utukku was an evil spirit that lurked generally in the desert,\nwhere it lay in wait for unsuspecting travellers, but it did not\nconfine its haunts to the more barren places, for it was also to be\nfound among the mountains, in graveyards, and even in the sea. An evil\nfate befel the man upon whom it looked.\n\nThe Rabisu is another lurking demon that secretes itself in\nunfrequented spots to leap upon passers-by. The Labartu, which has\nalready been alluded to, is, strangely enough, spoken of as the\ndaughter of Anu. She was supposed to dwell in the mountains or in\nmarshy places, and was particularly addicted to the destruction of\nchildren. Babylonian mothers were wont to hang charms round their\nchildren's necks to guard them against this horrible hag.\n\nThe Sedu appears to have been in some senses a guardian spirit and in\nothers a being of evil propensities. It is often appealed to at the\nend of invocations along with the Lamassu, a spirit of a similar type.\nThese malign influences were probably the prototypes of the Arabian\njinn, to whom they have many points of resemblance.\n\nMany Assyrian spirits were half-human and half-supernatural, and some\nof them were supposed to contract unions with human beings, like\nthe Arabian jinn. The offspring of such unions was supposed to be a\nspirit called Alu, which haunted ruins and deserted buildings and\nindeed entered the houses of men like a ghost to steal their sleep.\nGhosts proper were also common enough, as has already been observed,\nand those who had not been buried were almost certain to return to\nharass mankind. It was dangerous even to look upon a corpse, lest the\nspirit or edimmu of the dead man should seize upon the beholder. The\nAssyrians seemed to be of the opinion that a ghost like a vampire\nmight drain away the strength of the living, and long formul\u00e6 were in\nexistence containing numerous names of haunting spirits, one of which\nit was hoped would apply to the tormenting ghost, and these were used\nfor the purposes of exorcism. To lay a spirit the following articles\nwere necessary: seven small loaves of roast corn, the hoof of a\ndark-coloured ox, flour of roast corn, and a little leaven. The ghosts\nwere then asked why they tormented the haunted man, after which the\nflour and leaven were kneaded into a paste in the horn of an ox and a\nsmall libation poured into a hole in the earth. The leaven dough was\nthen placed in the hoof of an ox, and another libation poured out with\nan incantation to the god Shamash. In another case figures of the dead\nman and the living person to whom the spirit has appeared are to be\nmade and libations poured out before both of them, then the figure of\nthe dead man is to be buried and that of the living man washed in pure\nwater, the whole ceremony being typical of sympathetic magic, which\nthus supposed the burial of the body of the ghost and the purification\nof the living man. In the morning incense was to be offered up before\nthe sun-god at his rising, when sweet woods were to be burned and a\nlibation of sesame wine poured out.\n\nIf a human being was troubled by a ghost, it was necessary that he\nshould be anointed with various substances in order that the result of\nthe ghostly contact might be nullified.\n\nAn old text says, \"When a ghost appeareth in the house of a man there\nwill be a destruction of that house. When it speaketh and hearkeneth\nfor an answer the man will die, and there will be lamentation.\"\n\n\nTaboo\n\nThe belief in taboo was universal in ancient Chaldea. Amongst the\nBabylonians it was known as _mamit._ There were taboos on many things,\nbut especially upon corpses and uncleanness of all kinds. We find the\ntaboo generally alluded to in a text \"as the barrier that none can\npass.\"\n\nAmong all barbarous peoples the taboo is usually intended to hedge in\nthe sacred thing from the profane person or the common people, but it\nmay also be employed for sanitary reasons. Thus the flesh of certain\nanimals, such as the pig, may not be eaten in hot countries. Food must\nnot be prepared by those who are in the slightest degree suspected of\nuncleanness, and these laws are usually of the most rigorous character;\nbut should a man violate the taboo placed upon certain foods, then he\nhimself often became taboo. No one might have any intercourse with him.\nHe was left to his own devices, and, in short, became a sort of pariah.\nIn the Assyrian texts we find many instances of this kind of taboo,\nand numerous were the supplications that these might be removed. If\none drank water from an unclean cup he had violated a taboo. Like the\nArab he might not \"lick the platter clean.\" If he were taboo he might\nnot touch another man, he might not converse with him, he might not\npray to the gods, he might not even be interceded for by anyone else.\nIn fact he was excommunicate. If a man cast his eye upon water which\nanother person had washed his hands in, or if he came into contact with\na person who had not yet performed his ablutions, he became unclean. An\nentire purification ritual was incumbent on any Assyrian who touched or\neven looked upon a dead man.\n\nIt may be asked, wherefore was this elaborate cleanliness essential to\navoid taboo? The answer undoubtedly is--because of the belief in the\npower of sympathetic magic. Did one come into contact with a person who\nwas in any way unclean, or with a corpse or other unpleasant object, he\nwas supposed to come within the radius of the evil which emanated from\nit.\n\n\nPopular Superstitions\n\nThe superstition that the evil-eye of a witch or a wizard might bring\nblight upon an individual or community was as persistent in Chaldea as\nelsewhere. Incantations frequently allude to it as among the causes of\nsickness, and exorcisms were duly directed against it. Even to-day, on\nthe site of the ruins of Babylon children are protected against it by\nfastening small blue objects to their head-gear.\n\nJust as mould from a grave was supposed by the witches of the Middle\nAges to be particularly efficacious in magic, so was the dust of the\ntemple supposed to possess hidden virtue in Assyria. If one pared one's\nnails or cut one's hair it was considered necessary to bury them lest\na sorcerer should discover them and use them against their late owner;\nfor a sorcery performed upon a part was by the law of sympathetic magic\nthought to reflect upon the whole. A like superstition attached to the\ndiscarded clothing of people, for among barbarian or uncultured folk\nthe apparel is regarded as part and parcel of the man. Even in our own\ntime simple and uneducated people tear a piece from their garments\nand hang it as an offering on the bushes around any of the numerous\nhealing wells in the country that they may have journeyed to. This is a\nsurvival of the custom of sacrificing the part for the whole.\n\nIf one desired to get rid of a headache one had to take the hair of a\nyoung kid and give it to a wise woman, who would \"spin it on the right\nside and double it on the left,\" then it was to be bound into fourteen\nknots and the incantation of Ea pronounced upon it, after which it\nwas to be bound round the head and neck of the sick man. For defects\nin eyesight the Assyrians wove black and white threads or hairs\ntogether, muttering incantations the while, and these were placed upon\nthe eyes. It was thought, too, that the tongues of evil spirits or\nsorcerers could be 'bound,' and that a net because of its many knots\nwas efficacious in keeping evilly-disposed magicians away.\n\n\nOmens\n\nDivination as practised by means of augury was a rite of the first\nimportance among the Babylonians and Assyrians. This was absolutely\ndistinct from divination by astrology. The favourite method of augury\namong the Chaldeans of old was that by examination of the liver of a\nslaughtered animal. It was thought that when an animal was offered up\nin sacrifice to a god that the deity identified himself for the time\nbeing with that animal, and that the beast thus afforded a means of\nindicating the wishes of the god. Now among people in a primitive state\nof culture the soul is almost invariably supposed to reside in the\nliver instead of in the heart or brain. More blood is secreted by the\nliver than by any other organ in the body, and upon the opening of a\ncarcase it appears the most striking, the most central, and the most\nsanguinary of the vital parts. The liver was, in fact, supposed by\nearly peoples to be the fountain of the blood supply and therefore of\nlife itself. Hepatoscopy or divination from the liver was undertaken\nby the Chaldeans for the purpose of determining what the gods had in\nmind. The soul of the animal became for the nonce the soul of the god,\ntherefore if the signs of the liver of the sacrificed animal could be\nread the mind of the god became clear, and his intentions regarding the\nfuture were known. The animal usually sacrificed was a sheep, the liver\nof which animal is most complicated in appearance. The two lower lobes\nare sharply divided from one another and are separated from the upper\nby a narrow depression, and the whole surface is covered with markings\nand fissures, lines and curves which give it much the appearance of\na map on which roads and valleys are outlined. This applies to the\nfreshly excised liver only, and these markings are never the same in\nany two livers.\n\nCertain priests were set apart for the practice of liver-reading, and\nthese were exceedingly expert, being able to decipher the hepatoscopic\nsigns with great skill. They first examined the gall-bladder, which\nmight be reduced or swollen. They inferred various circumstances from\nthe several ducts and the shapes and sizes of the lobes and their\nappendices. Diseases of the liver, too, particularly common among sheep\nin all countries, were even more frequent among these animals in the\nmarshy portions of the Euphrates Valley.\n\n[Illustration: Clay Object resembling a Sheep's Liver. This is inscribed\nwith magical formul\u00e6; it was probably used for purposes of divination,\nand was employed by the priests of Babylon in their ceremonies.--Photo\nW.A. Mansell and Co.]\n\nThe literature connected with this species of augury is very extensive,\nand Assur-bani-pal's library contained thousands of fragments\ndescribing the omens deduced from the practice. These enumerate the\nchief appearances of the liver, as the shade of the colour of the gall,\nthe length of the ducts, and so forth. The lobes were divided into\nsections, lower, medial, and higher, and the interpretation varied from\nthe phenomena therein observed. The markings on the liver possessed\nvarious names, such as 'palaces,' 'weapons,' 'paths,' and 'feet,' which\nterms remind us somewhat of the bizarre nomenclature of astrology.\nLater in the progress of the art the various combinations of signs\ncame to be known so well, and there were so many cuneiform texts in\nexistence which afforded instruction in them, that a liver could be\nquickly 'read' by the _bar\u00fb_ or reader, a name which was afterward\napplied to the astrologists as well and to those who divined through\nvarious other natural phenomena.\n\nOne of the earliest instances on record of hepatoscopy is that\nregarding Naram-Sin, who consulted a sheep's liver before declaring\nwar. The great Sargon did likewise, and we find Gudea applying to his\n'liver inspectors' when attempting to discover a favourable time for\nlaying the foundations of the temple of Nin-girsu. Throughout the whole\nhistory of the Babylonian monarchy in fact, from its early beginnings\nto its end, we find this system in vogue. Whether it was in force\nin Sumerian times we have no means of knowing, but there is every\nlikelihood that such was the case.\n\n\nThe Ritual of Hepatoscopy\n\nQuite an elaborate ritual grew up around the readings of the omens by\nthe examination of the liver. The bar\u00fb who officiated must first of\nall purify himself and don special apparel for the ceremony. Prayers\nwere then offered up to Shamash and Hadad or Rammon, who were known as\nthe 'lords of divination.' Specific questions were usually put. The\nsheep selected for sacrifice must be without blemish, and the manner of\nslaughtering it and the examination of its liver must be made with the\nmost meticulous care. Sometimes the signs were doubtful, and upon such\noccasions a second sheep was sacrificed.\n\nNabonidus, the last King of Babylon, on one occasion desired to restore\na temple to the moon-god at Harran. He wished to be certain that this\nstep commended itself to Merodach, the chief deity of Babylonia, so he\napplied to the 'liver inspectors' of his day and found that the omen\nwas favourable. We find him also desirous of making a certain symbol of\nthe sun-god in accordance with an ancient pattern. He placed a model\nof this before Shamash and consulted the liver of a sheep to ascertain\nwhether the god approved of the offering, but on three separate\noccasions the signs were unfavourable. Nabonidus then concluded that\nthe model of the symbol could not have been correctly reproduced, and\non replacing it by another he found the signs propitious. In order,\nhowever, that there should be no mistake he sought among the records of\nthe past for the result of a liver inspection on a similar occasion,\nand by comparing the omens he became convinced that he was safe in\nmaking a symbol.\n\nPeculiar signs, when they were found connected with events of\nimportance, were specially noted in the literature of liver divination,\nand were handed down from generation to generation of diviners. Thus a\nnumber of omens are associated with Gilgamesh, the mythical hero of the\nBabylonian epic, and a certain condition of the gall-bladder is said\nto indicate \"the omen of Urumush, the king, whom the men of his palace\nkilled.\"\n\nBad signs and good signs are enumerated in the literature of the\nsubject. Thus like most peoples the Babylonians considered the right\nside as lucky and the left as unlucky. Any sign on the right side of\nthe gall-bladder, ducts or lobes, was supposed to refer to the king,\nthe country, or the army, while a similar sign on the sinister side\napplied to the enemy. Thus a good sign on the right side applied to\nBabylonia or Assyria in a favourable sense, a bad sign on the right\nside in an unfavourable sense. A good sign on the left side was an omen\nfavourable to the enemy, whereas a bad sign on the left side was, of\ncourse, to the native king or forces.\n\nIt would be out of place here to give a more extended description of\nthe liver-reading of the ancient Chaldeans. Suffice it to say that\nthe subject is a very complicated one in its deeper significance, and\nhas little interest for the general reader in its advanced stages.\nCertain well-marked conditions of the liver could only indicate certain\npolitical, religious, or personal events. It will be more interesting\nif we attempt to visualise the act of divination by liver reading, as\nit was practised in ancient Babylonia, and if our imaginations break\ndown in the process it is not the fault of the very large material they\nhave to work upon.\n\n\nThe Missing Caravan\n\nThe ages roll back as a scroll, and I see myself as one of the great\nbanker-merchants of Babylon, one of those princes of commerce whose\ncontracts and agreements are found stamped upon clay cylinders where\nonce the stately palaces of barter arose from the swarming streets of\nthe city of Merodach. I have that morning been carried in my litter by\nsweating slaves, from my white house in a leafy suburb lying beneath\nthe shadow of the lofty temple-city of Borsippa. As I reach my place of\nbusiness I am aware of unrest, for the financial operations in which\nI engage are so closely watched that I may say without self-praise\nthat I represent the pulse of Babylonian commerce. I enter the cool\nchamber where I usually transact my business, and where a pair of\nofficious Persian slaves commence to fan me as soon as I take my seat.\nMy head clerk enters and makes obeisance with an expression on his\nface eloquent of important news. It is as I expected--as I feared. The\ncaravan from the Persian Gulf due to arrive at Babylon more than a week\nago has not yet made its appearance, and although I had sent scouting\nparties as far as Ninnur, these have returned without bringing me the\nleast intelligence regarding it.\n\nI feel convinced that the caravan with my spices, woven fabrics, rare\nwoods, and precious stones will never come tinkling down the great\ncentral street to deposit its wealth at the doors of my warehouses;\nand the thought renders me so irritable that I sharply dismiss the\nPersian fan-bearers, and curse again and again the black-browed sons\nof Elam, who have doubtless looted my goods and cut the throats of my\nguards and servants. I go home at an early hour full of my misfortune.\nI cannot eat my evening meal. My wife gently asks me what ails me, but\nwith a growl I refuse to enlighten her upon the cause of my annoyance.\nStill, however, she persists, and succeeds in breaking down my surly\nopposition.\n\n\"Why trouble thy heart concerning this thing when thou mayest know what\nhas happened to thy goods and thy servants? Get thee to-morrow to the\nBaru, and he will enlighten thee,\" she says.\n\nI start. After all, women have sense. There can be no harm in seeing\nthe Baru and asking him to divine what has happened to my caravan. But\nI bethink me that I am wealthy, and that the priests love to pluck a\nwell-feathered pigeon. I mention my suspicions of the priestly caste in\nno measured terms, to the distress of my devout wife and the amusement\nof my soldier-son.\n\nRestlessly I toss upon my couch, and after a sleepless night feel that\nI cannot resume my business with the fear of loss upon me. So without\nbreathing a word of my intention to my wife, I direct my litter-slaves\nto carry me to the great temple at Borsippa.\n\nArrived there, I enquire for the chief Baru. He is one of the friends\nof my youth, but for years our paths have diverged, and it is with\nsurprise that he now greets me. I acquaint him with the nature of my\ndilemma, and nodding sympathetically he assures me that he will do his\nutmost to assist me. Somewhat reassured, I follow him into a tiled\ncourt near the far end of which stands a large altar. At a sign from\nhim two priests bring in a live sheep and cut its throat. They then\nopen the carcase and extract the liver. Immediately the chief Baru\nbends his grey head over it. For a long time he stares at it with the\nkeenest attention. I begin to weary, and my old doubts regarding the\nsacerdotal caste return. At last the grey head rises from the long\ninspection, and the Baru turns to me with smiling face.\n\n\"The omen is good, my son,\" he says, with a cheerful intonation. \"The\ncompass and the hepatic duct are short. Thy path will be protected by\nthy Guardian Spirit, as will the path of thy servants. Go, and fear\nnot.\"\n\nHe speaks so definitely and his words are so reassuring that I seize\nhim by the hands, and, thanking him effusively, take my leave. I go\ndown to my warehouses in a new spirit of hopefulness and disregard the\ndisdainful or pitying looks cast in my direction. I sit unperturbed and\ndictate contracts and letters of credit to my scribe.\n\nHa! what is that? By Merodach, it is--it is the sound of bells! Up\nI leap, upsetting the wretched scribe who squats at my feet, and\ntrampling upon his still wet clay tablets, I rush to the door. Down the\nstreet slowly advances a travel-worn caravan, and at the head of it\nthere rides my trusty brown-faced captain, Babbar. He tumbles out of\nthe saddle and kneels before me, but I raise him in a close embrace.\nAll my goods, he assures me, are intact, and the cause of delay was\na severe sickness which broke out among his followers. But all have\nrecovered and my credit is restored.\n\nAs I turn to re-enter my warehouse with Babbar, a detaining hand is\nplaced on my shoulder. It is a messenger from the chief Baru.\n\n\"My brother at the temple saw thy caravan coming from afar,\" he says\npolitely, \"and his message to thee, my son, is that, since thou hast so\nhappily recovered thine own, thou shouldst devote a tithe of it to the\nservice of the gods.\"\n\n\n[1] _The Myths of Ancient Egypt._\n\n[2] From _Semitic Magic_, by R. Campbell Thompson, p. 47 _ff_. (By\npermission of Messrs Luzac and Co., London.)\n\n[3] He is exempt from the punishment provided by the code of Khammurabi\nfor the false accusation.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI: THE MYTHOLOGICAL MONSTERS AND ANIMALS OF CHALDEA\n\n\nTiawath was not the only monster known to Babylonian mythology. But\nshe is sometimes likened to or confounded with the serpent of darkness\nwith which she had originally no connexion whatever. This being was,\nhowever, like Tiawath, the offspring of the great deep and the enemy of\nthe divine powers. We are told in the second verse of Genesis that \"the\nearth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the\ndeep,\" and therefore resembling the abyss of Babylonian myth. We are\nalso informed that the serpent was esteemed as \"more subtle than other\nbeast of the field,\" and this, it has been pointed out by Professor\nSayce, was probably because it was associated by the author or authors\nof Genesis with Ea, the god of waters and of wisdom. To Babylonian\ngeographers as to the Greeks, the ocean was a coiling, snake-like\nthing, which was often alluded to as the great serpent, and this soon\ncame to be considered as the source of all evil and misfortune. The\nancients, and especially the ancient Semites, with the exception of\nthe Ph\u0153nicians, appear to have regarded it with dread and loathing.\nThe serpent appears to have been called Aibu, 'the enemy.' We can see\nhow the serpent of darkness, the offspring of chaos and confusion,\nbecame also the Hebrew symbol for mischief. He was first the source of\nphysical and next the source of moral evil.\n\n\nWinged Bulls\n\nThe winged bulls so closely identified with ancient Chaldean mythology\nwere probably associated with Merodach. These may have represented\nthe original totemic forms of the gods in question, but we must not\nconfound the bull forms of Merodach and Ea with those winged bulls\nwhich guarded the entrances to the temples. These, to perpetrate a\ndouble 'bull,' were not bulls at all but divine beings, the gods or\ngenii of the holy places. The human head attached to them indicated\nthat the creature was endowed with humanity and the bull-like body\nsymbolized strength. When the Babylonian translated the word 'bull'\nfrom the Akkadian tongue he usually rendered it 'hero' or 'strong\none.' It is thought that the bull forms of Ea and Merodach must have\noriginated at Eridu, for both of these deities were connected with\nthe city. The Babylonians regarded the sky-country as a double of the\nplain in which they dwelt, and they believed that the gods as planets\nploughed their way across the azure fields of air. Thus the sun was\nthe 'Bull of Light,' and Jupiter, the nearest of the planets to the\necliptic, was known as the 'Planet of the Bull of Light.'\n\n\nThe Dog in Babylonia\n\nStrangely enough the dog was classed by the Babylonians as a monster\nanimal and one to be despised and avoided. In a prayer against the\npowers of evil we read, \"From the dog, the snake, the scorpion, the\nreptile, and whatever is baleful ... may Merodach preserve us.\" We\nfind that although the Babylonians possessed an excellent breed of dog\nthey were not fond of depicting them either in painting or bas-relief.\nDogs are seen illustrated in a bas-relief of Assur-bani-pal, and five\nclay figures of dogs now in the British Museum represent hounds which\nbelonged to that monarch. The names of these animals are very amusing,\nand appear to indicate that those who bestowed them must have suffered\nfrom a complete lack of the humorous sense, or else have been blessed\nwith an overflow of it. Translated, the names are: 'He-ran-and-barked,'\n'The-Producer-of-Mischief,' 'The-Biter-of-his-foes,'\n'The-Judge-of-his-companions,' and 'The-Seizer-of-enemies.' How well\nthese names would fit certain dogs we all know or have known! Here is\ngood evidence from the buried centuries that dog nature like human\nnature has not changed a whit.\n\nBut why should the dog, fellow-hunter with early man and the companion\nof civilized humanity, have been regarded as evil? Professor Sayce\nconsiders that the four dogs of Merodach \"were not always sent on\nerrands of mercy, and that originally they had been devastating winds.\"\n\n\nA Dog Legend\n\nThe fragment of a legend exists which does not exhibit the dog in any\nvery favourable light.\n\nOnce there was a shepherd who was tormented by the constant assaults of\ndogs upon his flocks. He prayed to Ea for protection, and the great god\nof wisdom sent his son Merodach to reassure the shepherd.\n\n\"Ea has heard thee,\" said Merodach. \"When the great dogs assault thee,\nthen, O shepherd, seize them from behind and lay them down, hold them\nand overcome them. Strike their heads, pierce their breasts. They are\ngone; never may they return. With the wind may they go, with the storm\nabove it! Take their road and cut off their going. Seize their mouths,\nseize their mouths, seize their weapons! Seize their teeth, and make\nthem ascend, by the command of Ea, the lord of wisdom; by the command\nof Merodach, the lord of revelation.\"[1]\n\n\nGazelle and Goat Gods\n\nThe gazelle or antelope was a mythological animal in Babylonia so far\nas it represented Ea, who is entitled 'the princely gazelle' and 'the\ngazelle who gives the earth.' But this animal was also appropriated\nto Mul-lil, the god of Nippur, who was specially called the 'gazelle\ngod.' It is likely, therefore, that this animal had been worshipped\ntotemically at Nippur. Scores of early cylinders represent it being\noffered in sacrifice to a god, and bas-reliefs and other carvings show\nit reposing in the arms of various deities. The goat, too, seems to\nhave been peculiarly sacred, and formed one of the signs of the zodiac.\nA god called Uz has for his name the Akkadian word for goat. Mr Hormuzd\nRassam found a sculptured stone tablet in a temple of the sun-god at\nSippara on which was an inscription to Sin, Shamash, and Ishtar, as\nbeing \"set as companions at the approach to the deep in sight of the\ngod Uz.\" This god Uz is depicted as sitting on a throne watching the\nrevolution of the solar disc, which is placed upon a table and made to\nrevolve by means of a rope or string. He is clad in a robe of goat-skin.\n\n\nThe Goat Cult\n\nThis cult of the goat appears to be of very ancient origin, and the\nstrange thing is that it seems to have found its way into medi\u00e6val\nand even into modern magic and pseudo-religion. There is very little\ndoubt that it is the Baphomet of the knights-templar and the Sabbatic\ngoat of the witchcraft of the Middle Ages. It seems almost certain\nthat when the Crusaders sojourned in Asia-Minor they came into contact\nwith the remains of the old Babylonian cult. When Philip the Fair of\nFrance arraigned them on a charge of heresy a great deal of curious\nevidence was extorted from them regarding the worship of an idol that\nthey kept in their lodges. The real character of this they seemed\nunable to explain. It was said which the image was made in the likeness\nof 'Baphomet,' which name was said to be a corruption of Mahomet, the\ngeneral Christian name at that period for a pagan idol, although others\ngive a Greek derivation for the word. This figure was often described\nas possessing a goat's head and horns. That, too, the Sabbatic goat\nof the Middle Ages was of Eastern and probably Babylonian origin is\nscarcely to be doubted. At the witch orgies in France and elsewhere\nthose who were afterwards brought to book for their sorceries declared\nthat Satan appeared to them in the shape of a goat and that they\nworshipped him in this form. The Sabbatic meetings during the fifteenth\ncentury in the wood of Mofflaines, near Arras, had as their centre a\ngoat-demon with a human countenance, and a like fiend was adored in\nGermany and in Scotland. From all this it is clear that the Sabbatic\ngoat must have had some connexion with the East. Eliphas Levi drew a\npicture of the Baphomet or Sabbatic goat to accompany one of his occult\nworks, and strangely enough the symbols that he adorns it with are\npeculiarly Oriental--moreover the sun-disc figures in the drawing. Now\nLevi knew nothing of Babylonian mythology, although he was moderately\nversed in the mythology of modern occultism, and it would seem that if\nhe drew his information from modern or medi\u00e6val sources that these must\nhave been in direct line from Babylonian lore.\n\nAdar, the sun-god of Nippur, was in the same manner connected with the\npig, which may have been the totem of the city he ruled over; and many\nother gods had attendant animals or birds, like the sun-god of Kis,\nwhose symbol was the eagle.\n\nThose monsters who had composed the host of Tiawath were supposed,\nafter the defeat and destruction of their commandress, to have been\nhurled like Satan and his angels into the abyss beneath. We read of\ntheir confusion in four tablets of the creation epic. This legend seems\nto be the original source of the belief that those who rebelled against\nhigh heaven were thrust into outer darkness. In the Book of Enoch we\nread of a 'great abyss' regarding which an angel said to the prophet,\n\"This is a place of the consummation of heaven and earth,\" and again,\nin a later chapter, \"These are of the stars who have transgressed the\ncommand of God, the Highest, and are bound here till 10,000 worlds, the\nnumber of the days of their sins, shall have consummated ... this is\nthe prison of the angels, and here they are held to eternity.\" Eleven\ngreat monsters are spoken of by Babylonian myth as comprising the host\nof Tiawath, besides many lesser forms having the heads of men and the\nbodies of birds. Strangely enough we find these monsters figuring in a\nlegend concerning an early Babylonian king.\n\n\nThe Invasion of the Monsters\n\nThe tablets upon which this legend was impressed were at first known\nas 'the Cuth\u00e6an legend of creation'--a misnomer, for this legend does\nnot give an account of the creation of the world at all, but deals with\nthe invasion of Babylonia by a race of monsters who were descended from\nthe gods, and who waged war against the legendary king of the period\nfor three years. The King tells the story himself. Unfortunately the\nfirst portions of both tablets containing the story are missing, and\nwe plunge right away into a description of the dread beings who came\nupon the people of Babylonia in their multitudes. We are told that they\npreferred muddy water to clear water. These creatures, says the King,\nwere without moral sense, glorying in their power, and slaughtering\nthose whom they took captives. They had the bodies of birds and some\nof them had the faces of ravens. They had evidently been fostered by\nthe gods in some inaccessible region, and, multiplying greatly, they\ncame like a storm-cloud on the land, 360,000 in number. Their king\nwas called Benini, their mother Melili, and their leader Memangab,\nwho had six subordinates. The King, perplexed, knew not what to do.\nHe was afraid that if he gave them battle he might in some way offend\nthe gods, but at last through his priests he addressed the divine\nbeings and made offerings of lambs in sacrifice to them. He received a\nfavourable answer and decided to give battle to the invaders, against\nwhom he sent an army of 120,000 men, but not one of these returned\nalive. Again he sent 90,000 warriors to meet them, but the same fate\novertook these, and in the third year he despatched an army of nearly\n70,000 troops, all of whom perished to a man. Then the unfortunate\nmonarch broke down, and, groaning aloud, cried out that he had brought\nmisfortune and destruction upon his realm. Nevertheless, rising from\nhis lethargy of despair, he stated his intention to go forth against\nthe enemy in his own person, saying, \"The pride of this people of the\nnight I will curse with death and destruction, with fear, terror, and\nfamine, and with misery of every kind.\"\n\nBefore setting out to meet the foe he made offerings to the gods. The\nmanner in which he overcame the invaders is by no means clear from the\ntext, but it would seem that he annihilated them by means of a deluge.\nIn the last portion of the legend the King exhorts his successors not\nto lose heart when in great peril but to take courage from his example.\n\nHe inscribed a tablet with his advice, which he placed in the shrine\nof Nergal in the city of Cuthah. \"Strengthen thy wall,\" he said,\n\"fill thy cisterns with water, bring in thy treasure-chests and thy\ncorn and thy silver and all thy possessions.\" He also advises those\nof his descendants who are faced by similar conditions not to expose\nthemselves needlessly to the enemy.\n\nIt was thought at one time that this legend applied to the\ncircumstances of the creation, and that the speaker was the god Nergal,\nwho was waging war against the brood of Tiawath. It was believed that,\naccording to local conditions at Cuthah, Nergal would have taken the\nplace of Merodach, but it has now been made clear that although the\ntablet was intended to be placed in the shrine of Nergal, the speaker\nwas in reality an early Babylonian king.\n\n[Illustration: Eagle-headed Mythological Being In the Louvre.--Photo W.\nA. Mansell and Co.]\n\nThe Eagle\n\nAs we have seen, the eagle was perhaps regarded as a symbol of the\nsun-god. A Babylonian fable tells how he quarrelled with the serpent\nand incurred the reptile's hatred. Feeling hungry he resolved to eat\nthe serpent's young, and communicated his intention to his own family.\nOne of his children advised him not to devour the serpent's brood,\nbecause if he did so he would incur the enmity of the god Shamash. But\nthe eagle did not hearken to his offspring, and swooping down from\nheaven sought out the serpent's nest and devoured his young. On his\narrival at home the serpent discovered his loss, and at once repaired\nin great indignation to Shamash, to whom he appealed for justice. His\nnest, he told the god, was set in a tree, and the eagle had swooped\nupon it, destroying it with his mighty wings and devouring the little\nserpents as they fell from it.\n\n\"Help, O Shamash!\" cried the serpent. \"Thy net is like unto the broad\nearth, thy snare is like unto the distant heaven in wideness. Who can\nescape thee?\"\n\nShamash hearkening to his appeal, described to him how he might succeed\nin obtaining vengeance upon the eagle.\n\n\"Take the road,\" said he, \"and go into the mountain and hide thyself in\nthe dead body of a wild ox. Tear open its body, and all the birds of\nheaven shall swoop down upon it. The eagle shall come with the rest,\nand when he seeks for the best parts of the carcase, do thou seize him\nby his wing, tear off his wings, his pinions, and his claws, pull him\nin pieces and cast him into a pit. There may he die a death from hunger\nand thirst.\"\n\nThe serpent did as Shamash had bidden him. He soon came upon the body\nof a wild ox, into which he glided after opening up the carcase.\nShortly afterwards he heard the beating of the wings of numberless\nbirds, all of which swooped down and ate of the flesh. But the eagle\nsuspected the purpose of the serpent and did not come with the rest,\nuntil greed and hunger prompted him to share in the feast.\n\n\"Come,\" said he to his children, \"let us swoop down and let us also eat\nof the flesh of this wild ox.\"\n\nNow the young eagle who had before dissuaded his father from devouring\nthe serpent's young, again begged him to desist from his purpose.\n\n\"Have a care, O my father,\" he said, \"for I am certain that the serpent\nlurks in yonder carcase for the purpose of destroying you.\"\n\nBut the eagle did not hearken to the warning of his child, but swooped\non to the carcase of the wild ox. He so far obeyed the injunctions\nof his offspring, however, as closely to examine the dead ox for the\npurpose of discovering whether any trap lurked near it. Satisfied that\nall was well he commenced to feed upon it, when suddenly the serpent\nseized upon him and held him fast. The eagle at once began to plead for\nmercy, but the enraged reptile told him that an appeal to Shamash was\nirrevocable, and that if he did not punish the king of birds he himself\nwould be punished by the god, and despite the eagle's further protests\nhe tore off his wings and pinions, pulled him to pieces, and finally\ncast him into a pit, where he perished miserably as the god had decreed.\n\n[1] Sayce, _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 288 (by permission of Messrs Williams\nand Norgate).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII: TALES OF THE BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN KINGS\n\n\nThe tales of the Babylonian and Assyrian kings which we present in\nthis chapter are of value because they are taken at first hand from\ntheir own historical accounts of the great events which occurred during\ntheir several reigns. On a first examination these tablets appear\ndry and uninteresting, but when studied more closely and patiently\nthey will be found to contain matter as absorbing as that in the most\nexciting annals of any country. Let us take for example the wonderful\ninscriptions of Tiglath-pileser II (950 B.C.) which refer to his\nvarious conquests, and which were discovered by George Smith at Nimr\u00fbd\nin the temple of Nebo.\n\nTiglath commences with the usual Oriental flourish of trumpets. He\nstyles himself the powerful warrior who, in the service of Asshur, has\ntrampled upon his haters, swept over them like a flood, and reduced\nthem to shadows. He has marched, he says, from the sea to the land\nof the rising sun, and from the sea of the setting sun to Egypt. He\nenumerates the countless lands that he has conquered. The cities\nSarrapanu and Malilatu among others he took by storm and captured the\ninhabitants to the number of 150,000 men, women, and children, all of\nwhom he sent to Assyria. Much tribute he received from the people of\nthe conquered lands--gold, silver, precious stones, rare woods, and\ncattle. His custom seems to have been to make his successful generals\nrulers of the cities he conquered, and it is noticeable that upon a\nvictory he invariably sacrificed to the gods. His methods appear to\nhave been drastic in the extreme. Irritated at the defiance of the\npeople of Sarrapanu he reduced it to a heap of earth, and crucified\nKing Nabu-Usabi in front of the gate of his city. Not content with\nthis vengeance, Tiglath carried off his wealth, his furniture, his\nwife, his son, his daughters, and lastly his gods, so that no trace\nof the wretched monarch's kingdom should remain. It is noticeable\nthat throughout these campaigns Tiglath invariably sent the prisoners\nto Assyria, which shows at least that he considered human life as\nrelatively sacred. Probably these captive people were reduced to\nslavery. The races of the neighbouring desert, too, came and prostrated\nthemselves before the Assyrian hero, kissing his feet and bringing him\ntribute carried by sailors.\n\nTiglath then begins to boast about his gorgeous new residence with\nall the vulgarity of a _nouveau riche_. He says that his house was\ndecorated like a Syrian palace for his glory. He built gates of\nivory with planks of cedar, and seems to have had his prisoners, the\nconquered kings of Syria, on exhibition in the palace precincts. At\nthe gates were gigantic lions and bulls of clever workmanship which he\ndescribes as \"cunning, beautiful, valuable,\" and this place he called\n'The Palaces of Rejoicing.'\n\n[Illustration: Capture of Sarrapanu by Tiglath-Pileser II.--Evelyn Paul.]\n\nIn a fragment which relates the circumstances of his Eastern\nexpeditions he tells how he built a city called Humur, and how he\nexcavated the neighbouring river Patti, which had been filled up in\nthe past, and along its bed led refreshing waters into certain of the\ncities he had conquered. He complains in one text that Sarduri, the\nKing of Ararat, revolted against him along with others, but Tiglath\ncaptured his camp and Sarduri had perforce to escape upon a mare. Into\nthe rugged mountains he rode by night and sought safety on their\npeaks. Later he took refuge with his warriors in the city of Turuspa.\nAfter a siege Tiglath succeeded in reducing the place. Afterwards he\ndestroyed the land of Ararat, and made it a desert over an area of\nabout 450 miles. Tiglath dedicated Sarduri's couch to Ishtar, and\ncarried off his royal riding carriage, his seal, his necklace, his\nroyal chariot, his mace, and lastly a 'great ship,' though we are not\ntold how he accomplished this last feat.\n\n\nPoet or Braggart?\n\nIt is strange to notice the inflated manner in which Tiglath speaks in\nthese descriptions. He talks about people, races, and rulers 'sinning'\nagainst him as if he were a god, but it must be remembered that he,\nlike other Assyrian monarchs, regarded himself as the representative\nof the gods upon earth. But though his language is at times boastful\nand absurd, yet on other occasions it is extremely beautiful and even\npoetic. In speaking of the tribute he received from various monarchs\nhe says that he obtained from them \"clothing of wool and linen, violet\nwool, royal treasures, the skins of sheep with fleece dyed in shining\npurple, birds of the sky with feathers of shining violet, horses,\ncamels, and she-camels with their young ones.\"\n\nHe appears, too, to have been in conflict with a Queen of Sheba or\nSaba, one Samsi, whom he sent as a prisoner to Syria with her gods and\nall her possessions.\n\n\nThe Autobiography of Assur-bani-pal\n\nIn a former chapter we outlined the mythical history of Assur-bani-pal\nor Sardanapalus, and in this place may briefly review the story of\nhis life as told in his inscriptions. He commences by stating that he\nis the child of Asshur and Beltis, but he evidently intends to convey\nthat he is their son in a spiritual sense only, for he hastens to tell\nus that he is the \"son of the great King of Riduti\" (Esar-haddon). He\nproceeds to tell of his triumphal progress throughout Egypt, whose\nkings he made tributary to him. \"Then,\" he remarks in a hurt manner,\n\"the good I did to them they despised and their hearts devised evil.\nSeditious words they spoke and took evil counsel among themselves.\"\nIn short, the kings of Egypt had entered into an alliance to free\nthemselves from the yoke of Assur-bani-pal, but his generals heard\nof the plot and captured several of the ringleaders in the midst of\ntheir work. They seized the royal conspirators and bound them in\nfetters of iron. The Assyrian generals then fell upon the populations\nof the revolting cities and cut off their inhabitants to a man, but\nthey brought the rulers of Egypt to Nineveh into the presence of\nAssur-bani-pal. To do him justice that monarch treated Necho, who is\ndescribed as 'King of Memphis and Sars,' with the utmost consideration,\ngranting him a new covenant and placing upon him costly garments and\nornaments of gold, bracelets of gold, a steel sword with a sheath of\ngold; with chariots, mules, and horses.\n\n\nDream of Gyges\n\nContinuing, Assur-bani-pal recounts how Gyges, King of Lydia, a remote\nplace of which his fathers had not heard the name, was granted a\ndream concerning the kingdom of Assyria by the god Asshur. Gyges was\ngreatly impressed by the dream and sent to Assur-bani-pal to request\nhis friendship, but having once sent an envoy to the Assyrian court\nAssur-bani-pal seemed to think that he should continue to do so\nregularly, and when he failed in this attention the Assyrian king\nprayed to Asshur to compass his discomfiture. Shortly afterwards\nthe unhappy Gyges was overthrown by the Cimmerians, against whom\nAssur-bani-pal had often assisted him.\n\nAssur-bani-pal then plaintively recounts how Saulmugina, his younger\nbrother, conspired against him. This brother he had made King of\nBabylon, and after occupying the throne of that country for some time\nhe set on foot a conspiracy to throw off the Assyrian yoke. A seer\ntold Assur-bani-pal that he had had a dream in which the god Sin spoke\nto him, saying that he would overthrow and destroy Saulmugina and\nhis fellow-conspirators. Assur-bani-pal marched against his brother,\nwhom he overthrew. The people of Babylon, overtaken by famine, were\nforced to devour their own children, and in their agony they attacked\nSaulmugina and burned him to death with his goods, his treasures, and\nhis wives. As we have before pointed out, this tale strangely enough\nclosely resembles the legend concerning Assur-bani-pal himself. Swift\nwas the vengeance of the Assyrian king upon those who remained. He cut\nout the tongues of some, while others were thrown into pits to be eaten\nby dogs, bears, and eagles. Then after fixing a tribute and setting\ngovernors over them he returned to Assyria. It is noticeable that\nAssur-bani-pal distinctly states that he 'fixed upon' the Babylonians\nthe gods of Assyria, and this seems to show that Assyrian deities\nexisted in contradistinction to those of Babylonia.\n\nIn one expedition into the land of Elam, Assur-bani-pal had a dream\nsent by Ishtar to assure him that the crossing of the river Itite,\nwhich was in high flood, could be accomplished by his army in perfect\nsafety. The warriors easily negotiated the crossing and inflicted\ngreat losses upon the enemy. Among other things they dragged the idol\nof Susinay from its sacred grove, and he remarks that it had never\nbeen beheld by any man in Elam. This with other idols he carried off\nto Assyria. He broke the winged lions which flanked the gates of the\ntemple, dried up the drinking wells, and for a month and a day swept\nElam to its utmost extent, so that neither man nor oxen nor trees\ncould be found in it--nothing but the wild ass, the serpent, and the\nbeast of the desert. The King goes on to say that the goddess Nan\u00e2,\nwho had dwelt in Elam for over 1600 years, had been desecrated by so\ndoing. \"That country,\" he declares, \"was a place not suited to her.\nThe return of her divinity she had trusted to me. 'Assur-bani-pal,'\nshe said, 'bring me out from the midst of wicked Elam and cause me\nto enter the temple of Anna.'\" The goddess then took the road to the\ntemple of Anna at Erech, where the King raised to her an enduring\nsanctuary. Those chiefs who had trusted the Elamites now felt afflicted\nat heart and began to despair, and one of them, like Saul, begged his\nown armour-bearer to slay him, master and man killing each other.\nAssur-bani-pal refused to give his corpse burial, and cutting off its\nhead hung it round the neck of Nabu-Quati-Zabat, one of the followers\nof Saulmugina, his rebellious brother. In another text Assur-bani-pal\nrecounts in grandiloquent language how he built the temples of Asshur\nand Merodach.\n\n\"The great gods in their assembly my glorious renown have heard, and\nover the kings who dwell in palaces, the glory of my name they have\nraised and have exalted my kingdom.\n\n\nAssur-bani-pal as Architect\n\n\"The temples of Assyria and Babylonia which Esar-haddon, King of\nAssyria, had begun, their foundations he had built, but had not\nfinished their tops; anew I built them: I finished their tops.\n\n\"Sadi-rabu-matati (the great mountain of the earth), the temple of\nthe god Assur my lord, completely I finished. Its chamber walls I\nadorned with gold and silver, great columns in it I fixed, and in its\ngate the productions of land and sea I placed. The god Assur into\nSadi-rabu-matati I brought, and I raised him an everlasting sanctuary.\n\n\"Saggal, the temple of Merodach, lord of the gods, I built, I completed\nits decorations; Bel and Beltis, the divinities of Babylon and Ea, the\ndivine judge from the temple of ... I brought out, and placed them in\nthe city of Babylon. Its noble sanctuary a great ... with fifty talents\nof ... its brickwork I finished, and raised over it. I caused to make\na ceiling of sycamore, durable wood, beautiful as the stars of heaven,\nadorned with beaten gold. Over Merodach the great lord I rejoiced in\nheart, I did his will. A noble chariot, the carriage of Merodach, ruler\nof the gods, lord of lords, in gold, silver, and precious stones, I\nfinished its workmanship. To Merodach, king of the whole of heaven and\nearth, destroyer of my enemies, as a gift I gave it.\n\n\"A couch of sycamore wood, for the sanctuary, covered with precious\nstones as ornaments, as the resting couch of Bel and Beltis, givers of\nfavour, makers of friendship, skilfully I constructed. In the gate ...\nthe seat of Zirat-banit, which adorned the wall, I placed.\n\n\"Four bulls of silver, powerful, guarding my royal threshold, in the\ngate of the rising sun, in the greatest gate, in the gate of the temple\nSidda, which is in the midst of Borsippa, I set up.\"[1]\n\n[Illustration: The Fatal Eclipse (June 15, 763 B.C.)--M. Dovaston,\nR.B.A.--By permission of Messrs Hutchinson and Co.]\n\nA 'Likeable' Monarch\n\nEsar-haddon, the father of Assur-bani-pal, has been called \"the\nmost likeable\" of the Assyrian kings. He did not press his military\nconquests for the mere sake of glory, but in general for the\nmaintenance of his own territory. He is notable as the restorer\nof Babu and the reviver of its culture. He showed much clemency\nto political offenders, and his court was the centre of literary\nactivity. Assur-bani-pal, his son, speaks warmly of the sound education\nhe received at his father's court, and to that education and its\nenlightening influences we now owe the priceless series of cylinders\nand inscriptions found in his library. He does not seem to have been\nable to control his rather turbulent neighbours, and he was actually\nweak enough (from the Assyrian point of view) to return the gods of the\nkingdom of Aribi after he had led them captive to Assyria. He seems to\nhave been good-natured, enlightened, and easy-going, and if he did not\nboast so loudly as his son he had probably greater reason to do so.\n\nOne of the descendants of Assur-bani-pal, Bel-zakir-iskun, speaks\nof his restoration of certain temples, especially that of Nebo, and\nplaintively adds: \"In after days, in the time of the kings my sons\n... When this house decays and becomes old who repairs its ruin and\nrestores its decay? May he who does so see my name written on this\ninscription. May he enclose it in a receptacle, pour out a libation,\nand write my name with his own; but whoever defaces the writing of my\nname may the gods not establish him. May they curse and destroy his\nseed from the land.\" This is the last royal inscription of any length\nwritten in Assyria, and its almost prophetic terms seem to suggest that\nhe who framed them must have foreseen the downfall of the civilization\nhe represented. Does not the inscription almost foreshadow Shelley's\nwondrous sonnet on 'Ozymandias'?\n\n    I met a traveller from an antique land\n    Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone\n    Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,\n    Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,\n    And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,\n    Tell that its sculptor well those passions read\n    Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,\n    The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed;\n    And on the pedestal these words appear:\n    \"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:\n    Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!\"\n    Nothing beside remains. Round the decay\n    Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,\n    The lone and level sands stretch far away.\n\n\nThe Fatal Eclipse\n\nThe reign of Assur-Dan III (773-764 B.C.) supplies us with a\npicturesque incident. This Assyrian monarch had marched several times\ninto Syria, and had fought the Chaldeans in Babylonia. Numerous were\nhis tributary states and widespread his power. But disaster crept\nslowly upon him, and although he made repeated efforts to stave it\noff, these were quite in vain. Insurrection followed insurrection, and\nit would seem that the priests of Babylon, considering themselves\nslighted, joined the malcontent party and assisted to foment discord.\nAt the critical juncture of the fortunes of Assur-Dan there happened\nan eclipse of the sun, and as the black shadow crept over Nineveh and\nthe King lay upon his couch and watched the gradual blotting out of\nthe sunlight, he felt that his doom was upon him. After this direful\nportent he appears to have resisted no longer, but to have resigned\nhimself to his fate. Within the year he was slain, and his rebel son,\nAdad-Narari IV, sat upon his murdered father's throne. But Nemesis\nfollowed upon the parricide's footsteps, for he in turn found a rebel\nin his son, and the land was smitten with a terrible pestilence.\n\n[Illustration: Shalmaneser pouring out the Dust of a Conquered City.\n--Ambrose Dudley.--By permission of Messrs. Hutchinson and Co.]\n\nShalmaneser I (_c._ 1270) was cast in a martial and heroic mould, and\nan epic might arise from the legends of his conquests and military\nexploits. In his time Assyria possessed a superabundant population\nwhich required an outlet, and this the monarch deemed it his duty to\nsupply. After conquering the provinces of Mitani to the west of the\nEuphrates, he attacked Babylonia, and so fiercely did he deal with\nhis southern neighbours that we find him actually gathering the dust\nof their conquered cities and casting it to the four winds of heaven.\nSurely a more extreme manner of dealing summarily with a conquered\nenemy has never been recorded!\n\nAlthough the life of the Babylonian or Assyrian king was lived in the\nfull glare of publicity, he had not to encounter the same criticism as\nregards his actions that present-day monarchs must face, for the moral\ncode of the peoples of Mesopotamia was fundamentally different from\nthat which obtains at the present time. As the monarch was regarded as\nthe vicegerent of the gods upon earth, it therefore followed that he\ncould do no wrong. Submission to his will was complete. In the hands\nof a race of men who wielded this power unwisely it could have been\nnothing else but disastrous to both prince and people. But on the whole\nit may be said that the kings of this race bore themselves worthily\naccording to their lights. If their sense of dignity at times amounted\nto bombast, that was because they were so full of their sense of\ndelegated duty from above. There is every reason to believe that before\nentering upon their kingly state they had to undergo a most rigorous\neducation, consisting of instruction upon religious subjects, some\nhistory, and the inculcation of moral precepts. On the other hand they\nwere by no means mere puppets, for we find them initiating campaigns,\npresiding over courts of law, and framing the laws themselves and\ngenerally guiding the trend of the national policy. As a whole they\nwere a strong and determined race, wise as well as warlike, and by no\nmeans unmindful of the requirements of their people. But with them the\ngods were first, and their reading of the initial duty of a king seems\nto have been the building of temples and the celebration of religious\nceremonies of which a gorgeous and prolonged ritual was the especial\nfeature.\n\n\nA Royal 'Day'\n\nA sketch of a day in the life of an Assyrian or Babylonian king may\nassist the reader to visualize the habits of royalty in a distant era.\nThe ceremonies of robing and ablution upon rising would necessitate the\nattendance of numerous special officials, and, the morning repast over,\na private religious ceremony would follow. The business of the court\nwould supervene. Perhaps an embassy from Elam or Egypt would occupy the\nearly hours of the morning, failing which the dictation of letters to\nthe governors of provinces and cities or to distant potentates would\nbe overtaken. As a scholar himself the King would probably carefully\nscrutinize these productions. A visit might then be paid to a temple\nin course of construction, where the architect would describe the\nprogress of the building operations, and the King would watch the slow\nrising of shrine and tower; or, perhaps, the afternoon would be set\napart for the pleasures of the chase. Leashes of great dogs, not unlike\nthose of the Danish boarhound breed, would be gathered at a certain\npoint, and setting out in a light but strong chariot, the King would\nsoon arrive at that point where the beaters had assured themselves of\nthe presence of gazelles, wild asses, or even lions. Matters would,\nof course, be so arranged that the chief glories of the day should be\nleft with royalty. It is not clear whether the King was accompanied\nby his courtiers in the chase, as was the case in the Middle Ages,\nor if he was merely attended by professional huntsmen. Be that as it\nmay, when the ceremony of pouring libations over the dead game came\nto be celebrated, we find no one except the King, the harpers, and\nprofessional huntsmen present, for the kings of this virile and warlike\nrace did not disdain to face the lion unattended and armed with nothing\nbut bow and arrows and a short falchion. Unless the inscriptions which\nthey have left on record are altogether mendacious we must believe that\nmany an Assyrian king risked his life in close combat with lions. Great\nrisk attends lion-hunting when the sportsman is armed with modern\nweapons of precision, but the risk attending a personal encounter with\nthese savage animals when the hunter is armed with the most rudimentary\nweapons seems appalling, according to modern civilized ideas.\n\nOr again the afternoon might be occupied by a great ceremonial\nreligious function, the laying of the foundation-stone of a temple,\nthe opening of a religious edifice, or the celebration of a festival.\nThe King, attended by a glittering retinue of courtiers and priests,\nwould be carried in a litter to the place of celebration where hymns\nto the god in whose honour the function was held were sung to the\naccompaniment of harps and other instruments, libations to the god\nwere poured out, sacrifices offered up, and prayers made for continued\nprotection.\n\n[Illustration: The Marriage Market from the painting by Edwin Long,\nR.A.--By permission of the Fine Art Society, Ltd.]\n\nThe private life of an Assyrian or Babylonian king was probably not\nof a very comfortable order, surrounded as he was by sycophantic\nofficials, spies in the pay of his enemies, schemers and office-seekers\nof all descriptions. As in most Oriental countries, the harem was\nthe centre of intrigue and political unrest. Its occupants were\nusually princesses from foreign countries who had probably received\ninjunctions on leaving their native lands to gain as much ascendancy\nover the monarch as possible for the purpose of swaying him in matters\npolitical. Many of these alliances were supposed to be made in the\nhope of maintaining peaceful relations between Mesopotamia and the\nsurrounding countries, but there is little doubt that the numerous\nwives of a Mesopotamian king were only too often little better than\nspies whose office it was to report periodically to their relatives the\ncondition of things in Babylon or Nineveh.\n\nSlaves swarmed in the palaces, and these occupied a rather higher\nstatus than in some other countries. A slave who possessed good\nattainments and who was skilled in weaving, the making of unguents or\npreserves, was regarded as an asset. The slaves were a caste, but the\nlaws regarding them were exact and not inhumane. They were usually sold\nby auction in the market-places of the large towns. A strange custom,\ntoo, is said by Herodotus to have obtained among the Babylonians in\nconnexion with marriage. Every marriageable woman obtained a husband\nin the following manner: The most beautiful girls of marriageable age\nwere put up to auction, and the large sums realized by their sale were\ngiven to the plainer young women as dowries, who, thus furnished with\nplentiful means, readily found husbands. The life of a Mesopotamian\nking was so hedged around by ceremonial as to leave little time for\nprivate pleasures. These, as in the case of Assur-bani-pal, sometimes\ntook the form of literary or antiquarian amusements, but the more\ngeneral form of relaxation seems to have been feasts or banquets at\nwhich the tables were well supplied with delicacies obtained from\ndistant as well as neighbouring regions. Dancing and music, both\nfurnished by a professional class, followed the repast, and during\nthe evening the King might consult his soothsayers or astrologers as\nto some portent that had been related to him, or some dream he had\nexperienced.\n\nThe royal lines of Mesopotamia seem to have been composed of men grave,\nsedate, and conscious of the authority which reposed in them. But few\nweaklings sat upon the thrones of Babylonia or Assyria, and those who\ndid were not infrequently swept aside to make room for better men.\n\n\n[1] George Smith's translation. See his _Assyrian Discoveries_, p. 355\nff.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII: THE COMPARATIVE VALUE OF THE BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN\nRELIGIONS\n\n\nThe comparative value of the religions of Babylonia and Assyria is\nvery high, as they represent Semitic polytheism in evolution, and in a\nstate of prosperity, though hardly in decay. They are, in fact, typical\nof Semitic religion as a whole, and as the Semitic race initiated no\nless than three of the great religious systems of the world--Judaism,\nChristianity, and Mohammedanism--they are well worth careful study\non the part of those who desire to specialize in religious science.\nIt is, however, for a variety of reasons, inevitable that we should\ncompare them most frequently with the religion of Israel, the faith\nthat in general most resembled them, although a wide cleavage existed\nbetween the ethics of that system and their moral outlook. That\nnotwithstanding, there was direct contact between the Babylonian\nand Jewish religions for a prolonged period, and the influence thus\nabsorbed was quickened by racial relationship.\n\nEre we deal with these purely Semitic and racial resemblances which\nare so important for the proper comprehension of Biblical history and\nreligious science in general, let us briefly compare the faith of\nBabylonia and Assyria with some of the great religious systems of the\nworld. It perhaps more closely resembles the composite general Egyptian\nreligious idea (one cannot speak of an Egyptian religion) than any\nother. But whereas in Egypt the deities had been almost universally\nevolved from nome or province-patrons, totemic or otherwise, a\nnumber often coalesced in one form, the gods of Chaldea were usually\ncity- or district-gods, showing much less of the nature of the\ndepartmental deity in their construction than the divinities of Egypt.\nThe Egyptian god-type was more exact and explicit. We have seldom much\ndifficulty in discovering the nature of an Egyptian god. We have\nfrequently, however, immense trouble in finding out for what a\nMesopotamian deity stands. The Babylon-Assyrian idea of godhead appears\nto have been principally astral, terrestrial, or aquatic--that is, most\nBabylonian-Assyrian deities are connected either with the heavenly\nbodies, the earth, or the waters. It is only as an afterthought that\nthey become gods of justice, of letters, of the underworld. This\nstatement must of course be taken as meaning that their connexion with\nabstract qualities is much more loose than in the case of the Egyptian\ngods--that their departmental character is secondary to their original\ncharacter as gods of nature. There is only one exception to this, and\nthat is to be found in the department of war, to which certain of them\nappear to have been relegated at an early period and later to have\nbecome identified with it very closely indeed.\n\nIn one circumstance the Babylonian-Assyrian religion closely resembled\nthe Egyptian, and that was the lasting effect wrought upon it by\npriestly cults and theological schools. Just as the priests of Thebes\nand Memphis and On moulded the varying cults of Egypt, added to their\nmythology, and read into them ethical significance, so did the priests\nof Nippur and Erech mould and form the faith of Babylon. We have plenty\nof evidence for such a statement, and nowhere perhaps was theological\nthought so rife in the ancient world as in Babylonia and Egypt.\n\nThere are also points of contact with the great mythological system\nof Greece, that system which was so much a mythology that it could\nscarcely be called a religion. That Greece borrowed largely from\nMesopotamia is not to be doubted, but we find the Hellenic departmental\ndeities very explicit indeed in their nature. Pallas, for example,\nstands for wisdom, Poseidon for the sea, Ares for war, and so forth.\nOne god usually possesses one attribute, and although Zeus has a number\nof minor attributes we do not find him combining in his one person\nso many as does Merodach. As has been said, it would seem that the\ndepartmental character of many Babylonian gods was purely accidental\nor fortuitous. The formula seems to run--take a local or city god,\nprobably derived from totemic sources or perhaps of animistic origin,\nand, having conquered much surrounding territory, exalt him to the\nposition of the god of a large region, which, being incorporated again\nwith a still larger empire, leaves him only a local status. This status\nhe cannot hold in a pantheon where each member must possess a specific\nattribute, therefore it becomes necessary to impose upon him some\nquality by which he can be specially recognized. Sometimes that quality\nis suitable to his character, in fact it may be indicated by it, but\nat other times it is merely arbitrary. Why, for example, should Ishtar\nhave been made a goddess of war by the Assyrians?\n\nThis bestowal of departmental characteristics upon the gods of\nBabylonia and Assyria was contemporary with the erection of these\ncountries into empires. No pantheon can exist on high without a\npolitical reflex in the world below. Like the granting of most\ndepartmental offices in religious systems, these changes took place\nat a comparatively late date in the evolution of Semitic religion.\nWhenever we find the departmental deities of a religious system more\nor less sharply outlined as to their duties and status we may premise\ntwo things: first, that temporal power has been acquired by the race\nwhich conceived them, and secondly that this power is of comparatively\nrecent origin.\n\n\nSemitic Conservatism\n\nWhen we speak of departmental deities of a country like Babylonia or\nEgypt we must bear in mind that these lands knew so many dynasties and\nhad such an extended history that their religious systems must from\nfirst to last have experienced the most profound changes. In Egypt,\nfor example, religious phenomena altered slowly and by imperceptible\ndegrees. The changes experienced in the course of fifty centuries\nof religious evolution must have made the cults of Egypt exhibit\nvery different conditions at the close of their development from,\nlet us say, those seen midway in their evolutionary course. We have\nseen how the Babylonian and Assyrian faiths altered in the course of\ngenerations, but withal there appears to have been something more\nstrongly conservative in the nature of Semitic religion than in any\nother. Probably in no other land did the same ritual and the same\nreligious practices obtain over so long a period as in Babylonia, where\nthe national life was much stronger and much more centralized than in\nEgypt, and where, if rival cults did exist, they were all subservient\nto one, as was by no means the case in the land of the Nile.\n\n\nTeutonic and Celtic Comparisons\n\nCompared with the great Germanic religion the Babylonian offers few\npoints of resemblance. In the faith of the Teutons departmental\ndeities were the rule rather than the exception; in fact in no mythic\nsystem are the gods so associated with departments as in the Teutonic,\nand this despite the fact that no definite empire was ruled by Teutonic\ntribes. (Was the Teutonic system the remains of a religious aristocracy\nwhich had hived off from some centre of political power?) Nor do the\nSemitic religions have much in common with the Celtic so far as their\nbasis of polity is concerned, although numerous valiant attempts have\nbeen made by antiquarian gentlemen, of the type so common half a\ncentury ago and not yet defunct, to prove Babylonian influence upon\nCeltic faith and story. Thus we have been told that the Celtic Bil\u00e9\nwas as certainly allied to the Semitic Bel as the Roman Mars was to\nthe Greek Ares, and this of course through Ph\u0153nician influence, the\npeople of Tyre and Sidon having been traced to Ireland as colonists.\nThese 'theories' are, of course, not worth the paper they are printed\nupon, any more than is the supposition that the Scottish-Celtic\nfestival of Beltane has any connexion with the Babylonian Bel. It was,\nin fact, presided over by the god Bil\u00e9, a Celtic deity who has on other\ncounts been confounded with the Babylonian god.\n\n\nBabylonian Religion Typically Animistic\n\nWe learn, then, from the comparison of the Babylonian religion with\nthat of other ancient races one circumstance of outstanding importance,\nthat is, if the Babylonian gods were so perfunctorily attached to\ndepartments expressive of their functions and were so closely bound to\nthe elements that they must have had an elemental origin, that they\nwere indeed originally spirits of the earth, the air, and the water.\nThis, of course, is no new conclusion, only the circumstance that the\nBabylonian gods were not strictly departmental, that they have only a\nslight hold upon their offices, assists in proving the correctness of\nthe theory of their elemental origin. It is also of interest to the\nstudent of comparative religion as indicating to him a mythological\nsystem in which the majority of the gods are certainly of elemental\norigin as opposed to totemic or fetishistic origin. Of the spiritistic\nnature of the Babylonian pantheon small doubt remains. To the Semite,\nin whom imagination and matter-of-fact are so strongly combined,\nanimistic influences would be sure to appeal most strongly. It stands\nto primitive reason that if man is gifted with life so is everything\nelse, and this conviction gives imagination full play. We do not\ndiscover these animistic influences so strongly entrenched in ancient\nEgypt. The Osirian cult is certainly animistic to a degree, but the\nvarious totemic cults which rivalled it and which it at last embraced\nheld their own for many a day.\n\n[Illustration: A Royal Hunt (See p. 310)--Photo W. A. Mansell and Co.]\n\nA Mother-Goddess Theory\n\nOne outstanding feature of Babylonian religion is the worship of the\ngreat earth-mother. This is a universal religious phase, but in few\nsystems do we find it so prominent as in Babylonia and indeed in the\nwhole Mesopotamian tract. Efforts have been made to show that in\nMesopotamia there encountered one another two streams of people of\nopposing worship, one worshipping a male, and the other a female deity.\nWith those who worshipped the man-god--hunters and warriors with whom\nwomen were considered more as beasts of burden than anything else--man\nwas the superior being. The other people who worshipped the woman-god\nwere not necessarily more civilized; the origin of their adoration may\nhave been a scarcity of women in the tribe. Where these two streams\nfused the worship of an _androgyne_, or man-woman god, is said to\nhave resulted. But were there peoples who specifically and separately\nworshipped male and female deities? If certainty can be approached in\ndebating such matters, these deities would assuredly be animistic,\nand a people who worship animistic gods do not worship one god or\none sex, but scores of spirit-gods of both sexes. Wherever we find a\nmother-earth, too, we are almost certain to discover a father-sky.\nThe cult of the great mother-goddess was of rather later origin. All\nlocalities and all regions in the Semitic world possessed such a\ndeity and it was the fusion of these in one that produced Ishtar or\nAstarte, who was probably also the 'Diana of the Ephesians.' Perhaps\nthe best parallel to this Semitic worship of the earth-mother is to\nbe found in the mythology of the ancient Mexican races, where each\npueblo, or city-state, possessed its earth-mother, several of whom were\nfinally merged, after the conquest of their worshippers, in the great\nearth-mother of Mexico.\n\n\nBabylonian Influence on Jewish Religion\n\nBut Babylonian-Assyrian religion is chiefly of interest to the student\nof comparative religion in that it casts a flood of light upon that\nwonderful Jewish faith with which the history of our own is so closely\nidentified.\n\nProfessor Sayce[1] writes:\n\n\"There was one nation at all events which has exercised, and still\nexercises, a considerable influence upon our own thought and life,\nand which had been brought into close contact with the religion and\nculture of Babylonia at a critical epoch in its history. The influence\nof Jewish religion upon Christianity, and consequently upon the races\nthat have been moulded by Christianity, has been lasting and profound.\nNow Jewish religion was intimately bound up with Jewish history, more\nintimately perhaps than has been the case with any other great religion\nof the world. It took its colouring from the events that marked the\npolitical life of the Hebrew people; it developed in unison with their\nstruggles and successes, their trials and disappointments. Its great\ndevotional utterance, the Book of Psalms, is national, not individual;\nthe individual in it has merged his own aspirations and sufferings into\nthose of the whole community. The course of Jewish prophecy is equally\nstamped with the impress of the national fortunes. It grows clearer and\nmore catholic as the intercourse of the Jewish people with those around\nthem becomes wider; and the lesson is taught at last that the God of\nthe Jews is the God also of the whole world. Now the chosen instruments\nfor enforcing this lesson, as we are expressly told, were the Assyrian\nand Babylonian. The Assyrian was the rod of God's anger, while the\nBabylonish exile was the bitter punishment meted out to Judah for its\nsins. The captives who returned again to their own land came back with\nchanged hearts and purified minds; from henceforth Jerusalem was to be\nthe unrivalled dwelling-place of 'the righteous nation which keepeth\nthe truth.'\n\n\"Apart, therefore, from any influence which the old religious beliefs\nof Babylonia may have had upon the Greeks, and which, as we shall see,\nwas not so wholly wanting as was formerly imagined, their contact with\nthe religious conceptions of the Jewish exiles must, to say the least,\nhave produced an effect which it is well worth our while to study.\nHitherto the traditional view has been that this effect exhibited\nitself wholly on the antagonistic side; the Jews carried nothing away\nfrom the land of their captivity except an intense hatred of idolatry,\nmore especially Babylonian, as well as of the beliefs and practices\nassociated therewith.\"\n\nProfessor Ignatius Goldziher, of Budapest, has enlightened us, in a\npassage in his _Mythology among the Hebrews_, as to the great influence\nwielded by Babylonian upon Jewish religion. He says: \"The receptive\ntendency of the Hebrew manifested itself again prominently during the\nBabylonian Captivity. Here first they gained an opportunity of forming\nfor themselves a complete and harmonious conception of the world. The\ninfluence of Canaanitish civilization could not then be particularly\npowerful on the Hebrews; for that civilization, the highest point of\nwhich was attained by the Ph\u0153nicians, was quite dwarfed by the\nmental activity exhibited in the monuments of the Babylonian and\nAssyrian Empire, which we are now able to admire in all their grandeur.\nThere the Hebrews found more to receive than some few civil, political,\nand religious institutions. The extensive and manifold literature\nwhich they found there could not but act on a receptive mind as a\npowerful stimulus; for it is not to be imagined that the nation then\ndragged into captivity lived so long in the Babylonian-Assyrian Empire\nwithout gaining any knowledge of its intellectual treasures. Schrader's\nlatest publications on Assyrian poetry have enabled us to establish a\nstriking similarity between both the course of ideas and the poetical\nform of a considerable portion of the Old Testament, especially of the\nPsalms, and those of this newly-discovered Assyrian poetry. It would\nbe a great mistake to account for this similarity by reference to a\ncommon Semitic origin in primeval times; for we can only resort to\nthat in cases which do not go beyond the most primitive elements of\nintellectual life and ideas of the world, or designations of things of\nthe external world. Conceptions of a higher and more complicated kind,\nas well as \u00e6sthetic points, can certainly not be carried off into the\nmists of a prehistoric age. It is much better to keep to more real and\ntangible ground, and to suppose those points of contact between Hebrew\nand Assyrian poetry which are revealed by Schrader's, Lenormant's, and\nGeorge Smith's publications, to form part of the contributions made by\nthe highly civilized Babylonians and Assyrians to the Hebrews in the\ncourse of the important period of the Captivity.\n\n\"We see from this that the intellect of Babylon and Assyria exerted a\nmore than passing influence on that of the Hebrews, not merely touching\nit, but entering deep into it and leaving its own impress upon it.\nThe Assyrian poetry of the kind just mentioned stands in the same\nrelation to that of the Hebrews as does the plain narrative texts of\nthe Hebrews, and as does the sacrificial Tablet of Marseilles to the\nHebrews' beginnings of a sacerdotal constitution. The Babylonian and\nAssyrian influence is of course much more extensive, pregnant, and\nnoteworthy.\"\n\nThe Abb\u00e9 Loisy in a French work, _Les myths babyloniens, et les\npremiers chapitres de la Gen\u00e8se_ (Paris, 1901), says a few things upon\nJewish and Babylonian mythical relations worth translating:\n\n\"We can no longer take the first eleven or twelve chapters of Genesis\nas a whole and treat them as a monotheistic redaction of the Babylonian\nmyths.... The Biblical accounts are not mere transcriptions ... and the\ngaps between them presuppose much assimilation and transformation, much\ntime, and probably many intermediaries to boot.... If the relationship\nof the Biblical narratives to the Chaldean legends is in many respects\nless intimate than was thought, it now appears to be more general.\nThe Creation, and the Flood in particular, are still the most obvious\npoints of resemblance; but the story of Adam and Eve, the earthly\nparadise, the food of life, the explanation of death,--all of which\nhave sometimes been sought where they were not to be found,--are now\nfound where there was no thought of seeking them.... The Biblical texts\nhave no literary dependence upon the Babylonian texts; they do not even\nstand to them in a relation of direct dependence in the case of the\nspecial traditions they exhibit: but they rest on a similar--we might\nsay a common--foundation, of Chaldean origin, whose antiquity cannot be\neven approximately estimated.... On the other hand, it appears certain\nthat the period of Assyrian dominance, and the Captivity, quickened\nthe recollection of the old traditions and supplemented them by fresh\nmaterials easy to graft on the ancient stem.... We may well believe\nthat the metamorphosis was complete in the oral tradition of the people\nbefore the legend was embodied in the Biblical narrative.\"\n\n\nBabylonian Influence upon the other Semites\n\nThe influence of the Babylonian religion upon other Semitic cults is\nworthy of notice, although its effect upon the Jewish faith was more\nmarked than on any other Semitic form of belief. Yet still through\nconquest and other causes it undoubtedly exercised a strong influence\nupon the surrounding peoples, especially those of related stock. We\nmust regard the whole of Asia Minor, or at least its most civilized\nportion, as peopled by races of diverse origin who yet possessed a\ngeneral culture in common. Some of those races, if we be permitted to\nemploy rather time-worn ethnological labels, were 'Semitic,' like the\nAssyrians and Hebrews, others were of the 'Ural-Altaic' or 'Armenoid'\ntype, like the Hittites, whilst still others, like the Philistines,\nappear to have been of 'Aryan' race, resembling the Greeks and Goths.\nBut all these different races had embraced a common culture, their\narchitecture, pottery, weapons, crafts, and laws seem to have come from\na common source, and lastly their religious systems were markedly alike.\n\n\nThe Canaanites\n\nWe find a people called the Canaanites as the first historic dwellers\nin the countries now known as Syria and Palestine. We do not know\nwhether the name Canaan originated with the land or the race, but\nthe name 'Canaanites' is now used as a general designation of the\npre-Israelite inhabitants of Palestine. These people were probably\nneolithic in origin and appeared to have been Semitic. In any case they\nspoke a language very much akin to Hebrew. They exercised a strong\ninfluence upon Egypt about 1400 B.C., and thousands of them settled\nin that country as slaves or officials. They invaded Babylonia at\nan early date under the name of Amorites, and many of the personal\nnames of Babylonian kings during the Hammurabi dynasty seem to be\nAmorite in origin. From the Egyptian records it seems pretty clear that\nas early as 2500 B.C. they had invaded Palestine, had exterminated\nthe inhabitants, and that this invasion synchronized with that of\nBabylonia. Their religion seems to have been markedly Semitic in type\nbut of the earlier variety, that is, animism was just beginning to\nemerge into polytheism. The gods were not called by their personal\nnames, but rather by their attributes. The general name for 'god' was\n'_el_,' which was used also by the Hebrews, and which we find in such\nnames as Jezebel, Elkanah, and perhaps in the modern Arabic 'Allah.'\nBut this word was not employed by the Canaanites in a monotheistic\nsense, it was generic and denoted the particular divinity who dwelt\nin a certain place. It was indeed the word 'god'--a god, any god, but\nnot _the_ God. But such a god having a sanctuary or presiding over a\ncommunity was known as '_Ba'al_.' This might apply to any supernatural\nbeing from fetish to full-fledged deity, and only meant that the spirit\nor divinity had established a relation with a particular holy place.\n\nWe also find amongst the Canaanitish deities Shamash, the sun-god so\nwidely worshipped in Babylonia, Sin the moon-god, Hadad or Rimmon,\nand Uru, god of light, whose name is found in Uru-Salim or Jerusalem.\nDagon, too, is held by some authorities to have been purely an Amorite\ndivinity. The worship of animals was also general, and bulls, horses,\nand serpents were represented as deities. There were also an immense\nnumber of nameless gods or spirits presiding over all sorts of\nphysical objects, and these were known as _ba'alim_. They were the\nresultants of animistic ideas. The early inhabitants of Canaan were\nalso ancestor-worshippers like many other primitive people, and they\nseem to have shown a marked preference for the cult of the dead.\n\nBut many of their departmental deities were either identical with or\nstrongly resembled the gods of the Babylonians. Ashtart was of course\nIshtar. In the mounds of Palestine large numbers of terra-cotta plaques\nbearing her effigy are found. She is often depicted on these with a\ntall head-dress, necklace, anklets, and girdle quite in the Babylonian\nstyle. But other representations of her reveal Egyptian, Cypriote,\nand Hittite influences, and this goes to show that in all probability\nthe great mother-goddess of Babylon and Asia Minor was compounded of\nvarious early types fused into one. To confine ourselves to those\ndeities who are more closely connected with the Babylonian religion, we\nfind the name of Ninib translated by the Canaanites as En-Mashti, and\nit has been thought that Ninib was a god of the West who had migrated\nto Babylonia. The name of Nebo, the Babylonian patron of Borsippa, who\nalso acted as scribe to the gods, appears in that of the town of Nebo\nin Moab in Judea, and that Canaanites were conversant with the name\nof Nergal, the war-god, is proved by a sealed cylinder of Canaanitish\nworkmanship which bears the inscription, \"Atanaheli, son of Habsi\nservant of Nergal.\" Resheph also appears to have been known to the\nCanaanites.\n\n[Illustration: Elijah prevailing over the Priests of Baal.--Evelyn Paul.]\n\nThe Gods of the Ph\u0153nicians\n\nThe Ph\u0153nicians who were the lineal descendants of the Canaanites\nadopted many of the deities of Babylonia. Like the early deities of\nthat great empire, the Ph\u0153nician gods were associated either with\nthe earth, the waters, or the air. Some of these in later times held\nsway over more than one element. Thus the god Melkarth of Tyre had both\na celestial and a marine aspect, and Baal and Ashtart assumed celestial\nattributes in addition to their earthly one. The Ph\u0153nicians\ndescribed their gods in general as _al\u00f4nim_, much as the Israelites\nin early times must have described theirs, for we find in the first\nchapters of Genesis the word _elohim_ employed. Both then went back\nto the singular form _el_, the common Semitic name for 'god,' adding\nto it the Semitic plural ending _im_. The god of a locality or shrine\nwas known as its '_ba'al_,' and, as in early times, this did not apply\nto any particular deity. Although their gods all had names, yet still\nthey were merely the _ba-alim_ of Tyre, the chief of whom was Melkarth,\nwhose name signifies merely 'king' or patron of the city. Perhaps one\nof their most venerated gods was Ba'al-Hamman, who was also worshipped\nin Carthage, a Ph\u0153nician colony. One of the most strongly marked\ncharacteristics of the Ph\u0153nician religion was the unvarying addition\nof a female to every male god. Ashtart or Ishtar was quite as popular\nin modern Ph\u0153nicia as she has been in ancient Canaan. It must be\nborne in mind that Tyre and Sidon were closely in touch with Assyria,\nand that their ships probably carried Assyrian commerce far and wide\nthroughout the Mediterranean, exchanging Syrian goods for Egyptian,\nCyprian, and Hellenic. Ashtart or Ishtar had temples at Sidon and\nAskelon, and Ph\u0153nician mariners seem to have carried her worship as\nfar as Cyprus and even Sicily. Indeed it was probably through their\nagency that she was introduced into the Greek world, but there were\nGreek colonies on the shores of Asia Minor at an early date, and these\nmay have transferred her cult to the people of their own race in the\nGreek motherland. Another goddess specially honoured at Carthage was\nTanith, who was also called the 'Countenance of Ba'al.' Eshmun, the god\nof vital force and healing, seems to have been worshipped especially\nat Sidon but also at Carthage. Melkarth, the patron deity of Tyre, the\nGreeks equated with their Heracles; Reshef, the lightning god, was\nof Syrian origin, and was identified by the Greeks with Apollo. The\nPh\u0153nicians were also prone to fuse their gods one with another, so\nthat we have such combinations as Eshmun-Melkarth, Melkarth-Reshef,\nand so forth. Ph\u0153nician religion was also strongly influenced by\nEgyptian ideas, and Plutarch has put it on record that when Isis\njourneyed to Byblus she was called Astarte. Certain Ph\u0153nician\nsettlers at Pir\u00e6us, the port of Athens, worshipped the Assyrian god\nNergal, and many of their proper names are compounded of the names of\nBabylon deities. The worship of Moloch was also popular in Ph\u0153nicia,\nwhere he was called Melk ('King'), and to him, as to the Moloch of\nthe other Semitic peoples, infants were offered up in sacrifice. The\nPh\u0153nicians likewise adopted the custom of burning the chief god\nof the city in effigy or in the person of a human representative at\nTyre and Carthage. (See remarks on Hamman, pages 142-144; and on\nSardanapalus, pages 31-34.)\n\nWe know very little concerning Ph\u0153nician myth. We cannot credit\nwhat is written by Philo of Byblus concerning it, as he professed that\nhe had used as his authority the writings of one Sanchuniathon, an\nancient Ph\u0153nician sage, who, he says, derived his information from\ninscribed stones in Ph\u0153nician temples. All of Philo that remains\n(and thus all of Sanchuniathon) is preserved in the works of Eusebius.\nIt would seem, however, to be unfair to regard Eusebius as the inventor\nof Sanchuniathon. As we have already remarked in the paragraphs dealing\nwith the legend of Oannes or Ea, several of the myths he quotes as\ncoming from the Ph\u0153nician sage are manifestly of Babylonian origin.\n\nLike all Semites the Ph\u0153nicians closely identified themselves with\ntheir gods, in whom, if inscriptions can be believed, they seemed to\nfind a great deal of comfort. They were assiduous devotees of their\nseveral cults, and as prone to sacrifice as were their cousins of\nBabylonia. Probably, too, their voyages and mercantile ventures made\nthem firm believers in the efficacy of divination, and it cannot be\ndoubted that the trade of the seer in ancient Tyre or Sidon must have\nbeen a flourishing one indeed.\n\n\nThe Carthaginian Religion\n\nVery little is known concerning the religion of the Semites of\nCarthage, those colonists from Ph\u0153nicia who settled on the\nnorth-western shores of Africa at an early date, and this is probably\nowing to the circumstance that the jealousy of their Roman conquerors\nordained that all records pertaining to them should so far as possible\nbe blotted out. In Virgil's _\u00c6neid_ we find Queen Dido of Carthage\nworshipping and sacrificing to the gods of Rome, but whether this error\nis due to Roman lack of imagination or otherwise it would be difficult\nto say. Carthaginian religion was strongly influenced by Assyrian\nbelief. The chief gods worshipped in Carthage were Baal-ammon or\nMoloch, Tanit, goddess of the heavens and the moon, Ashtart or Ishtar,\nand Eshmun, the patron deity of the city. The cult of Tammuz-Adonis was\nalso greatly in vogue, as was that of the god Patechus, a repulsive\nmonster who may have been of Egyptian origin. The Tyrian Melkarth, too,\nwas widely worshipped. We also encounter in inscriptions the names of\ndeities concerning whom we know nothing, such as Rabbat Umma, 'the\nGreat Mother,' Illat, Sakon, and Tsaphon.\n\nAbout the beginning of the third century B.C. the intimate relations\nbetween the Carthaginians and the Greeks of Sicily favoured the\nintroduction of a Hellenic element into the Punic religion, and there\nwas reciprocal borrowing on the part of the Greeks. In the forum of\nCarthage was a temple to Apollo containing a colossal statue which was\nlater removed to Rome, and on one occasion the Carthaginian worshippers\nof Apollo actually sent offerings to Delphi. We also find their goddess\nTanit compared with the Greek Demeter. Her symbol is a crescent moon,\nand in her temple at Carthage was preserved a famous veil which was\nregarded as the palladium or 'mascot' of the city, its luck-bringer.\nInscriptions to Tanit and Baal-ammon abound, and as these are usually\nfound in conjunction it is only reasonable to suppose that these\ntwo deities are worshipped together. Tanit was, in fact, frequently\nalluded to as 'The Countenance of Baal,' whose name we find in those\nof the Carthaginian heroes, Hannibal and Hasdrubal. The Carthaginian\nBaal-ammon is represented as an old man with ram's horns on his\nforehead, and that animal was frequently portrayed along with him. He\nalso holds a scythe. At Carthage children were sacrificed to him, and\ntheir bodies were placed in the arms of a colossal bronze statue which\nrepresented him. When they grew tired they slipped through the embrace\nof the god into a furnace below amid the excited cries of the fanatical\nworshippers. Even Roman severity could not put an end to these horrors,\nwhich persisted in secret until a relatively late date.\n\nIt is strange to think that after the fall of Carthage the goddess\nTanit became identified with Dido by the new Roman colonists of the\ncity. Virgil had celebrated her misfortunes, and a public Dido cult\ngrew up, the colonists even claiming to have discovered the very house\nfrom which she had watched the departure of \u00c6neas.\n\nIt is not unlikely that through the agency of the Ph\u0153nicians some\nfragments of the Babylonian religion may have penetrated even to\nour own shores. We know that they traded for tin with the ancient\ninhabitants of Cornwall and the Scilly Isles, and some writers believe\nthey have philology on their side when they try to show that several\nCornish names are of Ph\u0153nician origin. For example, the name\nMarazion appears to mean in Semitic 'Hill by the Sea,' and Polgarth,\nsay some, owes its second syllable to the Ph\u0153nician word for 'city.'\nBut it will not do to be dogmatic regarding these names, which may\nafter all be explicable from Cornish or other sources.\n\nWe see then that the Semitic religion travelled over a considerably\nwide area, that beginning in all probability in Arabia it spread\nitself through Mesopotamia northward as far as Lake Van, and southward\nthrough the Sinaitic peninsula into Egypt and the north of Africa. It\nis strange to observe that the later Semitic religion of Mohammed\nfollowed almost precisely the same course, and that its early progress\nwestward halted almost on the very site of ancient Carthage; that\nwhen it overflowed into Spain its disciples were acting precisely as\nCarthaginian Hannibal had done long before, and that it was beaten back\nby European effort in almost exactly the same way.\n\nRobertson Smith in his valuable work, _The Religion of the Semites_,\nmentions that in his view Semitic religion does not differ so\nfundamentally from the other types of world religion as many writers\non the subject appear to think. But the longer one considers it the\ngreater do the barriers between Semitic and other religions appear\nand the more clearly marked their lines of demarcation. The prolonged\nisolation to which the Semitic peoples seem to have been subjected\nappears to have greatly affected their manner of religious thought.\nThey are in truth a 'peculiar people,' practical yet mystical, strongly\nof the world yet finding their chief solace in those things which are\nnot of the world.\n\nThe materials for a complete inquiry into the history of Semitic\nreligion are lacking, and we must perforce fill up the gaps which are\nmany by comparative methods. But in this we are greatly assisted by\nthe numerous manifestations of Semitic faith which, including as it\ndoes Babylonian, Assyrian, Canaanitish, Ph\u0153nician, Arabian, and\nMohammedan cults, provides us with rich comparative material.\n\n\nThe Religion of Zoroaster\n\nThe faith which immediately supplanted that of ancient Babylonia\nand Assyria could not fail to draw considerably from it. This was\nthe Zoroastrian faith, the religion of the Persians introduced by\nthe reformer Zarathustra, the earliest form of Zoroaster's name as\ngiven in the _Avesta_. Uncertainty hangs over the date and place of\nhis birth. The Greeks spoke of him as belonging to a remote age, but\nmodern scholars assign the period of his life to the latter half of\nthe seventh and early sixth century B.C. It seems certain that he was\nnot a Persian, but a Mede or a Bactrian, either supposition being\nsupported by indications of one kind or another. From the whole tenor\nof the Gathas, the most ancient part of the _Avesta_, we are led, says\nDr. Haug, their translator, to feel that he was a man of extraordinary\nstamp acting a grand part on the stage of his country's history.\nZarathustra speaks of himself as a messenger from God sent to bring\nthe people the blessing of civilization and to destroy idolatry. Many\nlegends grew up around his memory, of miraculous signs at his birth,\nof his precocious wisdom, whereby even as a child he confounded the\nMagi, of his being borne up to the highest heaven and there receiving\nthe word of life from Deity itself, together with the revelation of\nall secrets of the future. He retired as a young man from the world\nto spend long years of contemplation before he began his teaching at\nthirty, and he lived to the age of seventy-seven. The religion he\ntaught was the national religion of the Persians from the time of the\nAch\u00e6menid\u00e6, who dethroned Cyaxares' son, 558 B.C., to the middle of\nthe seventh century A.D. It declined after Alexander's conquest under\nthe Seleucid\u00e6 and the succeeding dynasty of the Arsacid\u00e6, but was\nrevived by the Sassanian rulers and flourished for the four centuries\nA.D. 226-651. Then followed the Mohammedan conquest, accompanied by\npersecution, before which the faithful followers of Zarathustra fled\nto India, where they are now represented by their descendants, the\nParsis of Bombay.\n\nThe religious belief taught by Zarathustra is based on the dual\nconception of a good principle, Ahura Mazda, and an evil principle,\nAnra Mainyu, and the leading idea of his teaching is the constant\nconflict between the two, which must continue until the end of the\nperiod ordained by Ahura Mazda for the duration of the world, when\nevil will be finally overcome; until then the god's power is to\nsome degree limited, as evil still withstands him. Zarathustra's\ndoctrine was essentially practical and ethical; it was not in abstract\ncontemplation, or in separation from the world, that man was to\nlook for spiritual deliverance, but in active charity, in deeds of\nusefulness, in kindness to animals, in everything that could help to\nmake the world a well-ordered place to live in, in courage and all\nuprightness. To build a bridge or dig a canal was to help to lessen\nthe power of evil. As Reinach has concisely expressed it, \"a life\nthoroughly occupied was a perpetual exorcism.\"\n\nThe two figures of Ahura Mazda and Anra Mainyu, the one with his\nattendant archangels and angels, and the other with his arch-demons\nand demons, or Divs, compose the Zarathustrian celestial hierarchy, as\nrepresented in the earlier sacred writings; in the later ones other\nfigures are introduced into the pantheon. The sacred writings that\nhave been preserved are of different periods, and outside the range\nof Zarathustra's moral system of religion there are traces in them of\nrevivals of an older primitive nature worship, and of the beliefs of an\nearly nomadic shepherd life, as, for instance, the sacredness in which\ncow and dog are held, as well as reminiscences of general Indo-Germanic\nmyths.\n\nAhura Mazda was the creator of the universe for the duration of which\nhe fixed a certain term. It seems uncertain whether the Persians\npictured the world as round or flat, but according to their idea it\nwas divided into seven zones, of which the central one was the actual\nhabitable earth. Between these zones and enveloping the whole was the\ngreat abyss of waters. Between earth and heaven rose the celestial\nmountain whence all the rivers upon earth had their source, and on\nwhich was deposited the Haoma.\n\nThe central feature of Zoroastrian ritual was the worship of fire, an\nold-established worship which had existed before Zoroaster's time.\nIn the oldest period images were forbidden, and holy rites could be\nperformed without temples, portable fire-altars being in use. Temples\nwere, however, built in quite early times, and within these was the\nsanctuary from which all light was excluded, and where the sacred fire\nwas kept alight, which could only be approached by the priest with\ncovered hands and mouth. The Persians carried the fear of defilement to\nan extreme, and had even more elaborate regulations than most Easterns\nconcerning methods of purification and avoidance of defilement, both as\nregards personal contamination or that of the sacred elements of earth,\nfire, and water. Even hair and nails could not be cut without special\ndirections as to how to deal with the separated portions. But this\nperpetual and exhausting state of caution and protective effort against\ncontact with defiling objects and rigorous system of purification had\nan ultimate concern with the great struggle going on between good and\nevil. Death and everything that partook of death, or had any power of\ninjury, were works of the arch-enemy.\n\nIt was owing to the fear of contaminating the three elements named\nabove that the Persians neither buried nor cremated their dead, and\nlooked upon it as a criminal act to throw a corpse into the water. The\nold mode of disposing of the dead was similar to that now practised\nby the Parsis of Bombay, who carry the body to one of the Towers\nof Silence. So the Persians exposed the corpse, till one or other\ndevouring agent, birds of prey or the elements, had reduced it to a\nskeleton. As regards man himself he was thought to be a reasonable\nbeing of free will with conscience, soul, and a guardian spirit or\nprototype of himself who dwelt above, called a Fravashi--his own\ncharacter, indeed, put into a spiritual body, almost identical with the\n_amei-malghen_ or spiritual nymphs of the Araucanian Indians of Chile.\nHe had the choice of good and evil, and consequently suffered the due\npunishment of sin. For the first three days after death the soul of the\ndead was supposed to hover about its earthly abode.\n\nDuring this time friends and relatives performed their funerary rites,\ntheir prayers and offerings becoming more earnest and abundant as the\nhour drew nigh when the soul was bound to start on its journey to the\nbeyond. This was at the beginning of the fourth day, when Sraosha\ncarried it aloft, assailed on the way by demons desirous of obtaining\npossession of his burden. On earth everything was being done to keep\nthe evil spirits in check, fires lighted as particularly effective\nagainst the powers of darkness. And, thus assisted, Sraosha arrived\nsafely with his charge at the bridge that spanned the space between\nearth and heaven. Here at the entrance to the 'accountants' bridge' the\nsoul's account was cast up by Mithra and Rashnu; the latter weighed\nits good and evil deeds, and even if the good deeds turned the scale,\nthe soul had still to undergo immediate penance for its transgression,\nso strict was the justice meted out to each. Now the bridge may be\ncrossed, and a further automatic kind of verdict is given, for to\nthose fit for heaven the bridge appears a wide and easy way; to the\nunfortunate ones doomed to destruction it seems but of a hair's\nbreadth, and stepping on to it they straightway fall into the yawning\ngulf beneath. The blessed ones are met at heaven's gate by a radiant\nfigure, who leads them through the ante-chambers that finally open into\nthe everlasting light of the celestial abode. This is the triumph of\nthe individual soul; but there is 'a far-off divine event' awaiting,\nwhich will be heralded by signs and wonders. For 3000 years previous to\nit there are alternate intervals of overpowering evil and conquering\npeace. At last the great dragon is let loose and the evil time comes,\nbut Mazda sends a man to slay it. Then the saviour Saoshyant is born of\na virgin. The dead arise, the sheep and goats are divided, and there is\nlamentation on the earth. The mountains dissolve and flood the earth\nwith molten metal, a devouring agent of destruction to the wicked,\nbut from which the good take no hurt. The spiritual powers have now\nto battle it out. Mazda and Sraosha overcome Ahriman and the dragon,\nand \"then age, decay, and death are done away, and in their place are\neverlasting growth and life.\"\n\n\nBabylonian Ethics\n\nAnd, lastly, what of the ethics of ancient Babylon and Assyria? On\nthe whole the moral standard of these countries was not by any means\nso exalted as our own, although the religious outlook was not a low\none. To begin with, the character of Babylonian myth was a great deal\npurer than that of Hellenic or Scandinavian myth. The gods of Babylonia\nappear to be more dignified than those of the Greeks or Norsemen,\nfor example. They do not descend to the same puerilities, and their\nrecord is immeasurably cleaner. This may have something to do with the\nvery great body of ritual connected with the Babylonian religion, for\nwhen a people is so hedged in by religious custom as were the ancient\nChaldeans, so threatened on every side by taboo, the mere thought of\nwrongdoing and the consequence thereof is sufficient to deter them from\nacting otherwise than reasonably. In course of time sin becomes so ugly\nand repulsive in the light of punishment that the moral code receives a\ntremendous impulse.\n\nThere is no doubt that the Babylonians devoutly believed that their\ngods demanded rigid adherence to the moral code. It was generally\nthought that misfortune and illness were the consequences of moral\ntransgression. But the Babylonians did not believe that the cardinal\nsins alone were heinous, for they included in transgression such\nmisdemeanours as maliciousness, fraud, unworthy ambitions, and\ninjurious teaching.\n\n\n[1] _Hibbert Lectures_, pp. 38 ff. (by permission of Messrs Williams\nand Norgate).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV: MODERN EXCAVATION IN BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA\n\n\nIn no land has excavation assisted history so greatly as in\nMesopotamia. In Egypt, although spade-work has widened our knowledge of\nlife and religion in the Nile country, most of what we know of these\nsubjects has been gleaned from temples and pyramids, rock-tombs and\nmastabas, for the proper examination of which little or no digging\nwas necessary, and generally speaking it may be said that excavation\nin Egypt has furnished us with a greater insight into the earlier\nperiods of Egyptian progress, its 'prehistoric' life. But in the\nBabylonian-Assyrian region, practically every discovery has been due to\nstrenuous labour with pick and spade; our knowledge of Chaldea in its\nhey-day has literally been dug up piece by piece.\n\nThe honour of beginning the great task of unearthing the buried cities\nof Mesopotamia belongs to M. Botta, who was French consul at Mosul in\n1842. Moved by the belief that many of the great sand-covered mounds\nwhich are so conspicuous a feature of the Mesopotamian landscape\nprobably concealed ruins of a vanished civilization, Botta commenced to\nexcavate the large mound of Kouyunjik, which is situated close to the\nvillage where he resided. But he found little to reward his labours,\nand he does not seem to have gone about the business of excavation in\na very workmanlike manner. His attention was called by an intelligent\nnative to the mounds of Khorsabad, the site of ancient Nineveh, and\nhe dispatched a party of workmen to the spot. Soon his perseverance\nwas rewarded by the discovery of some sculptures, and recognizing\nthe superior importance of Khorsabad for arch\u00e6ological purposes, he\ntransferred his establishment to that village and resolved to devote\nhimself to a thorough investigation of the site.\n\nSoon a well-planned sinking operation came upon one of the palace\nwalls, and subsequent digging was rewarded by the discovery of many\nchambers and halls faced with slabs of gypsum covered with mythological\nfigures, battle scenes, processions, and similar subjects. He had, in\nfact, unearthed a palace built at Nineveh by Sargon, King of Assyria,\nwho reigned 722-705 B.C., one of the finest examples of Assyrian\npalatial architecture. He continued his excavations at Khorsabad until\n1845, and was successful in bringing to light a temple and a grand\nporch decorated by three pairs of wings, under which passed the road\nfrom the city to the palace. Many of the fruits of his labours were\nremoved to Paris and deposited in the Louvre. His successor, Victor\nPlace, continued Botta's work at Khorsabad, and discovered a city gate\nguarded by winged bulls, the backs of which supported the arch of the\nentrance.\n\n\nSir Henry Layard\n\nMeanwhile Mr, afterward Sir Henry, Layard had visited the country in\n1840, and was greatly impressed by Botta's work and its results. Five\nyears later, through the assistance of Sir Stratford Canning, he was\nenabled himself to commence excavations at Nimr\u00fbd. He soon unearthed\nthe remains of extensive buildings--in fact he discovered two Assyrian\npalaces on the very first day of his excavations! At the outset he\nhad only eleven men in his employ, and being anxious to push on the\nwork in fear that the local Turkish governor or the approach of the\nwinter season would put an end to his operations, he increased his\nstaff to thirty men. The peasants laboured enthusiastically, but to the\nexcavator's disgust the Turkish authorities forbade him to proceed.\nLayard, nevertheless, hoodwinked the authorities, and succeeded in\nuncovering several large figures of winged bulls and lions.\n\n[Illustration: EXCAVATIONS IN BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA. From _Guide to the\nBabylonian and Assyrian Antiquities_, by permission of the Director of\nthe British Museum.]\n\nSoon after this Layard spent Christmas with Sir Henry Rawlinson of the\nBritish Museum, with whom he cemented a warm friendship, and together\nthey were able to overcome the unfriendliness of the Turkish officials.\nHormuzd Rassam, an intelligent native Christian, came to Layard's\nassistance, and operations were once more commenced at Nimr\u00fbd. Rassam's\nlabours were quickly crowned by success, for he came upon a large hall\nin a fine state of preservation. The serious work of excavation was\nnot without its humorous side, for if they chanced to unearth a carven\nmonster with the body of a bull and the head of a bearded man, the\nnative labourers threw down their tools and ran. The Turkish Governor,\ntoo, hearing from a native source that 'Nimrod' had been found, sent a\nmessage to the effect that \"his remains should be treated with respect\nand be no further disturbed.\"\n\n[Illustration: The 'Black Obelisk' of Shalmaneser II.--Photo W. A.\nMansell and Co.]\n\nLayard had now unearthed many valuable sculptures, and he resolved to\nattempt their dispatch to England. Rawlinson sent a small steamer,\nthe _Nitocris_, to Nimr\u00fbd, but it was found impossible to ship the\nmassive pieces on this frail craft, and even the smaller sculptures\nhad perforce to be floated down the Tigris on rafts. Layard's health\nwas by this time in no very robust state, but a two months' mountain\nholiday in Kurdistan refreshed him, and once more he recommenced his\nlabours at Nimr\u00fbd, heartened by the news that the British Government\nhad awarded a grant for the continuation of his researches. The grant,\nhowever, was distressingly small, and its inadequacy compelled him to\nlimit his excavations in the most unsatisfactory way. Despite this, the\nnew operations were rich in results, especially those in the building\nknown as the 'south-west palace.' This palace, he ascertained from\nbricks unearthed, had been built by Esar-haddon, King of Assyria.\nSculptures glorifying King Assur-nazir-pal (885-860 B.C.) were also\ndiscovered at the north-west palace, some of them of a most spirited\ncharacter, representing the King in battle, crossing a river full of\nturtles and fishes, or leading his army.\n\nIt was in the central building, however, that one of his most important\ndiscoveries awaited him. This was the obelisk of Shalmaneser II\n(860-825 B.C.), nearly seven feet high, and in admirable preservation.\nThe monarch had erected this in his palace to commemorate the leading\nmilitary events of his career. It contains twenty small bas-reliefs and\n210 lines of cuneiform inscription, alluding among other things to the\nreceipt of the tribute of \"Jehu, son of Omri.\"[1] This priceless relic\nis one of the treasures in the keeping of the British Museum.\n\nLayard devoted the first four months of 1847 to the exploration of\nthe north-west palace, and disclosed painted chambers on which were\nrepresented hunting-scenes and various religious ceremonies, each\ndesign separated by a conventional representation of the sacred tree.\nMany of the lesser objects found here exhibited Egyptian influence.\nHere he also came upon the oldest Assyrian arch ever discovered.\n\nHe had now collected a large number of important sculptures, and of\nthese he succeeded in sending three by raft to Basra, whence they were\nlater shipped to England. By the middle of May 1847 he had finished his\nwork at Nimr\u00fbd, and had commenced his search for the ruins of Nineveh\nin the mound of Kouyunjik, near Mosul, where Botta had laboured before\nhim. He dug for the platform of sun-dried bricks which he knew by\nexperience formed the foundation of all large Assyrian edifices, and\ncame upon it, as he had expected, at a depth of twenty feet, shortly\nafterward discovering the entrance, flanked by the inevitable winged\nbulls. But the building itself had been so damaged by fire as to\npresent little more than crumbling heaps of lime.\n\nLayard returned to England in June 1847, and was appointed attach\u00e9\nto the Embassy at Constantinople. Meanwhile his published works had\ncreated an extraordinary impression throughout Europe, and the pressure\nof public opinion so wrought upon the Government that he was requested\nto lead a second expedition to Nineveh.\n\n\nWhere Rawlinson Slept\n\nBetter equipped, Layard left Constantinople in August 1849 and arrived\nat Kouyunjik in October. Employing about a hundred men, he set\nstrenuously to work, removing only as much earth as was necessary to\nshow the sculptured walls. Having fairly started the work at Kouyunjik,\nLayard, accompanied by Rassam, returned to Nimr\u00fbd, and recommenced\nwork there. One morning he was inspecting the trenches when he found\nRawlinson asleep on the floor of an excavated chamber, wrapped in his\ntravelling cloak, \"wearied out by a long and harassing night's ride.\"\nHe was on his way home to England, which he had not seen for twenty-two\nyears.\n\nThe rich finds in the painted palace of Sennacherib at Kouyunjik\nconsisted chiefly of mural paintings and bas-reliefs. Of these\nProfessor Hilprecht says:[2] \"Hundreds of figures cover the face of the\nslabs from top to bottom. We become acquainted with the peculiarities,\nin type and dress, of foreign nations, and the characteristic features\nand products of their lands; we are introduced into the very life\nand occupations of the persons represented. The sculptor shows us\nthe Babylonian swamps with their jungles of tall reeds, frequented\nby wild boars, and barbarous tribes skimming over the waters in\ntheir light boats of wicker-work, exactly such as are used to-day by\nthe inhabitants of the same marshes; or he takes us into the high\nmountains of Kurdistan, covered with trees and crowned with castles,\nendeavouring even to convey the idea of a valley by reversing the trees\nand mountains on one side of the stream, which is filled with fishes\nand crabs and turtles. He indicates the different head-gear worn by\nfemale musicians, or by captive women carried with their husbands\nand children to Nineveh. Some wear their hair in long ringlets, some\nplaited or braided, some confined in a net; others are characterized by\nhoods fitting close to their heads, others by a kind of turban; Elamite\nladies with their hair in curls falling on their shoulders, bound above\nthe temples by a band or fillet, while those from Syria wear a high\nconical head-dress, similar to that which is frequently found to-day in\nthose regions.\"\n\nThe excavation of Sennacherib's palace with its seventy rooms, halls,\nand galleries was indeed one of the most striking results of Layard's\nsecond expedition to Nineveh. But even more remarkable was the find of\nAssur-bani-pal's famous royal library at Nineveh, which has already\nbeen described. Results at Nimr\u00fbd, too, had been favourable, perhaps\nthe most interesting being the discovery of the tower of Calah,\nregarded at first as the tomb of Sardanapalus. Now for the second time\nLayard began to feel the effects of overwork and exposure, and in April\n1851, accompanied by Rassam, he turned from the ruins of Nineveh \"with\na heavy heart.\" Twenty-four years later he was to become Ambassador\nat Constantinople, in which capacity he loyally assisted the zealous\nRassam, his worthy subordinate.\n\n[Illustration: Outline of the Mounds at Nimr\u00fbd. From a drawing made on\nthe spot by Sir Henry Layard.]\n\nIn 1851 Rawlinson was entrusted by the British Government with the\nexcavations in Assyria and Babylonia. He had the invaluable assistance\nof Rassam as 'chief practical excavator.' Stationing his workmen at\nas many sites as possible, he unearthed the annals of Tiglath-pileser\nI at Qal'at Sherqat, discovered E-zide, the temple of Nebo at Nimr\u00fbd,\nand a 'stele' of Samsi-Adad IV (825-812 B.C.). At Kouyunjik he came\nupon the palace of Assur-bani-pal. A beautiful bas-relief was recovered\nrepresenting Assur-bani-pal in his chariot on a hunting expedition.\nThe 'lion-room,' the walls of which represented a lion-hunt, was also\nunearthed, and was shown to have been used both as a library and a\npicture-gallery, many thousands of clay book-tablets being found\ntherein.\n\nAbandoning excavation for a political appointment, Mr Rassam was\nfollowed by William Kennet Loftus, who did good work at the ruins of\nWark\u00e2 in Babylonia. Meanwhile the French expedition under Fresnel,\nOppert, and Thomes was excavating at Babylon, coming upon the remains\nof the Nebuchadrezzar period and excavating the mound of B\u00e2bil.\n\n\nGeorge Smith\n\nOne who was to perform yeoman service for Assyriology now entered the\nfield. This was George Smith, whose name is so unalterably associated\nwith the romantic side of that science he loved so well. Writing of\nhimself he says: \"Everyone has some bent or inclination which, if\nfostered by favourable circumstances, will colour the rest of his life.\nMy own taste has always been for Oriental studies, and from my youth I\nhave taken a great interest in Eastern explorations and discoveries,\nparticularly in the great work in which Layard and Rawlinson were\nengaged. For some years I did little or nothing, but in 1866, seeing\nthe unsatisfactory state of our knowledge of those parts of Assyrian\nhistory which bore upon the history of the Bible, I felt anxious to do\nsomething towards settling the questions involved.\"[3] Smith found the\nDeluge tablets among the scores of fragments sent to the British Museum\nby Layard and Loftus, and this and other discoveries whetted his desire\nto go to Mesopotamia and unearth its treasures with his own hands. In\nconsequence of the wide interest taken at the time in these discoveries\nthe proprietors of _The Daily Telegraph_ came forward with the offer of\na thousand guineas for fresh researches at Nineveh, with the proviso\nthat Smith should head the expedition and supply the journal with\naccounts of his discoveries. The offer was accepted, and Smith, now a\nmember of the staff of the British Museum, received leave of absence\nfor six months.\n\nArrived at Nimr\u00fbd, Smith settled down to excavation there, commencing\noperations at the temple of Nebo; but he found little to justify his\nlabour, as the structure was in a ruinous condition and had latterly\nbeen used as a granary. On each side of the entrance stood a colossal\nfigure of the god with crossed arms in an attitude of meditation,\nand lesser images of him were found inside the ruined building.\nSmith's reason for digging here was that he suspected the presence of\ninscriptions which might cast light upon the reign of Tiglath-pileser\nII (745 B.C.) and therefore upon Bible history. His industry was\nrewarded by the discovery of the upper portion of a tablet of this\nmonarch, but further finds of importance were not forthcoming.\n\n[Illustration: The Palaces of Nimr\u00fbd (Restored). From a sketch by James\nFerguson for Sir Henry Layard.]\n\nThe Palace of Nimr\u00fbd\n\nSmith then instituted systematic excavations in the south-east palace,\nand made some interesting discoveries. On examining this part of the\nmound he saw a considerable tunnel in the south face, commencing on\nthe sloping part of the mound. This tunnel appeared to go along the\nmiddle of a chamber, the floor having been cut through and appearing\nin a line on each side of the tunnel. Further on, the tunnel reached\nthe wall at the end of the chamber, and the face of this had been\ncleared for some little distance; then, descending below the foundation\nof this wall, the passage ran for some distance into the base of the\nmound. He commenced on the two sides of this cutting, and cleared away\nto the level of the pavement, soon coming to the wall on each side.\nThe southern wall of the chamber had fallen over into the plain, as it\nwas here close to the edge of the platform, and the chamber commenced\nwith two parallel walls running north and south. The right-hand wall,\nin a place near the edge where it was much broken down, showed three\nsteps of an ascent which had gone apparently to some upper chambers.\nFurther on it showed two recesses, each ornamented on both sides\nwith three square pilasters. The left hand showed an entrance into a\nsecond chamber running east to west, and from this turned a third,\nrunning parallel with the first. Altogether in this place he opened\nsix chambers, all of the same character, the entrances ornamented by\nclusters of square pilasters and recesses in the rooms in the same\nstyle. The walls were coloured in horizontal bands of red, green, and\nyellow on plaster; and where the lower parts of the chambers were\npanelled with small stone slabs, the plaster and colours were continued\nover these. In one of these rooms there appeared a brick receptacle\nlet into the floor, and on lifting the brick which covered this Smith\nfound six terra-cotta winged figures, closely packed in the receptacle.\nEach figure was full-faced, having a head like a lion, four wings, with\none hand across the breast, holding a basket in the other, and clothed\nin a long dress to the feet. These figures were probably intended to\npreserve the building against the power of evil spirits.\n\nAll the eastern and southern portions of the mound of Nimr\u00fbd had\nbeen destroyed by being turned into a burial-place. The ruins had\nbeen excavated after the fall of the Assyrian empire, walls had been\ndug through, and chambers broken into, and the openings filled with\ncoffins.\n\nMr Smith then turned his attention to the ruins of Nineveh at Kouyunjik\nand Nebbi Yunas. Layard and even the Turkish Government had both been\nbefore him here. He commenced operations by cutting trenches at the\nsouth-eastern corner of Assur-bani-pal's palace. But at first nothing\nof great interest resulted, and he diverted operations to the palace\nof Sennacherib hard by. Here he came upon a number of inscriptions\nwhich compensated him for his labour. At length the excavations in\nAssur-bani-pal's palace bore fruit, for there were unearthed the\ngreater portion of seventeen lines of inscription belonging to the\nfirst column of the Deluge narrative, and fitting into the only place\nwhere there was a serious blank in the story.\n\nThe palace of Sennacherib also steadily produced its tribute of\nobjects, including a small tablet of Esar-haddon, King of Assyria, some\nnew fragments of one of the historical cylinders of Assur-bani-pal, and\na curious fragment of the history of Sargon, King of Assyria, relating\nto his expedition against Ashdod, which is mentioned in the twentieth\nchapter of the Book of Isaiah. On the same fragment was also part of\nthe list of Median chiefs who paid tribute to Sargon.\n\nThe proprietors of _The Daily Telegraph_ considered that with the\nfinding of the Deluge fragment the purpose of the expedition had been\nserved, and that further excavation in Mesopotamia should be carried\non under national auspices. Mr Smith was therefore forced to return to\nEngland, but not before he had discovered further a valuable syllabary,\nand two portions of the sixth tablet of the Deluge story, as well as\nother minor objects of interest.\n\nAbout the end of 1873, however, the British Museum authorities\ndispatched Mr Smith once more to Mesopotamia, where he recommenced\noperations at Kouyunjik, and unearthed on this occasion an inscription\nof Shalmaneser I, King of Assyria (1300 B.C.), recording that he\nfounded the palace of Nineveh, and alluding to his restoration of the\ntemple of Ishtar. Inscriptions of his son Tukulti-ninip were also\nfound at this place, as were dedications of Assur-nazir-pal (885 B.C.)\nand Shalmaneser II (860 B.C.). Some very curious pottery, too, came\nfrom this spot, ornamentations being laid on the clay, as in many\nexamples of the pottery of the Maya of Central America. At the same\ntime fragments of sculptured walls representing marching warriors were\nbrought to light, and some tablets of great importance giving the names\nof six new Babylonian kings, a sixth tablet of the Deluge series, and a\nbilingual tablet in fine preservation.\n\nIn the south-west palace Smith excavated at the grand entrance to see\nif any records remained under the pavement, but there were none. This\npart of the pavement had been broken through, and anything under it\nhad long ago been carried away. He sank some trenches in the grand\nhall and found a fragment of inscription, and further on in the palace\nseveral other fragments. His principal excavation was, however, carried\non over what Layard called the library chamber of this palace. Layard,\nwho discovered the library chamber, describes it as full of fragments\nof tablets, up to a foot or more from the floor. This chamber Layard\nhad cleared out and he had brought its treasures to England, but\nSmith thought on examining the collection at the British Museum that\nnot one-half of the library had been removed, and steadily adhered\nto the belief that the rest of the tablets must be in the palace of\nSennacherib. On excavating he found nearly three thousand fragments of\ntablets in the chambers round Layard's library chamber, and from the\nposition of these fragments he was led to the opinion that the library\nwas not originally situated in these chambers but in an upper story of\nthe palace, and that on the collapse of the building they fell into\nthe chambers below. Some of the chambers in which he found inscribed\ntablets had no communication with each other, while fragments of the\nsame tablets were in them; and looking at this fact, and the positions\nand distribution of the fragments, he was convinced that the tablets\nwere scattered over a wide area and resolved to excavate over an\nextensive section of the palace.\n\n\"In the long gallery, which contained scenes representing the moving\nof winged figures,\" says Smith, \"I found a great number of tablets,\nmostly along the floor; they included syllabaries, bilingual lists,\nmythological and historical tablets. Among these tablets I discovered a\nbeautiful bronze Assyrian fork, having two prongs joined by ornamental\nshoulder to shaft of spiral work, the shaft ending in the head of an\nass. This is a beautiful and unique specimen of Assyrian work, and\nshows the advances the people had made in the refinements of life.\nSouth of this there were numerous tablets round Layard's old library\nchamber, and here I found part of a curious astrolabe, and fragments of\nthe history of Sargon, King of Assyria, 722 B.C. In one place, below\nthe level of the floor, I discovered a fine fragment of the history\nof Assurbanipal, containing new and curious matter relating to his\nEgyptian wars, and to the affairs of Gyges, King of Lydia. From this\npart of the palace I gained also the shoulder of a colossal statue,\nwith an inscription of Assurbanipal. In another spot I obtained a bone\nspoon, and a fragment of the tablet with the history of the seven\nevil spirits. Near this I discovered a bronze style, with which I\nbelieve the cuneiform tablets were impressed. In another part of the\nexcavation I found part of a monument with the representation of a\nfortification. In the western part of the palace, near the edge of the\nmound, I excavated and found remains of crystal and alabaster vases,\nand specimens of the royal seal. Two of these are very curious; one\nis a paste seal, the earliest example of its kind, and the other is\na clay impression of the seal of Sargon, King of Assyria. Near where\nthe principal seals were discovered I found part of a sculpture with a\ngood figure of a dead buffalo in a stream. Among these sculptures and\ninscriptions were numerous small objects, including beads, rings, stone\nseals, etc.\"[4]\n\nBy January 1, 1874, Smith had no less than six hundred men employed.\nBut he had to encounter tremendous local difficulties, especially\ndemands that he should pay immense sums to the proprietors of the land\nwhich he excavated. Soon afterward, the season being unpropitious, he\nreturned to England. A third visit to Mesopotamia proved his last,\nas he became ill and passed away at Aleppo in 1876, to the universal\nregret not only of those who were privileged to have his friendship,\nbut to all who had perused his works and were aware of his strenuous\nlife and studies. From the position of a bank-note engraver he had\nraised himself to that of an esteemed scholar, and his kindness of\nheart and honesty of purpose, no less than his outstanding abilities,\nmake him one of the most gracious figures in the history of a science\nto which many men of high endeavour have devoted their lives.\n\n[Illustration: Work of the excavators in Babylon. One hundred workmen\nlaboured in digging this cut, which is 40 feet deep. Copyright by\nUnderwood and Underwood, London.]\n\nHormuzd Rassam\n\nThe lamented death of Smith caused the British authorities to request\nMr Hormuzd Rassam, who had retired into private life in England,\nto take up the vacant post. Mr Rassam at once accepted the trust,\nand started for Constantinople in November 1876. At first there was\nserious trouble with the Turkish Government, but in January 1878\nRassam was enabled to commence excavations, which he carried on almost\ncontinuously for five years. Layard, as ambassador at Constantinople,\nstood him in good stead. He took much advantage of native talent,\nwhich, if not up to the standard of European efficiency, he found in no\nwise despicable. But too many excavations were being carried on at one\nand the same time. Again, Rassam was prone to attempt sensational finds\nrather than to keep steadily at the more solid and less showy work of\nexcavation. Guided by certain indications of the presence of objects\nof the Shalmaneser period at Kouyunjik, he dug there once more and\nsucceeded in unearthing the bronze plaques which had covered the cedar\ngates of a large Assyrian building at least 2500 years old, and built\nby Shalmaneser II. They represented warriors and equestrian figures,\nand it was found that the site on which they were discovered had been\nthe city of Imgur-Bel. Rassam also recovered further clay tablets from\nthe library of Assur-bani-pal at Kouyunjik. With his return to England\nin 1882 it may be said that the Assyrian excavations of the nineteenth\ncentury, in contradistinction to those carried out on Babylonian soil,\ncame to an end.\n\n\nDe Sarzec\n\nWith the excavations of the Frenchman de Sarzec at Tell\u00f4 the second\ngreat period of Chaldean arch\u00e6ological research may be said to have\ncommenced. Ernest de Sarzec was French Vice-consul at Basra, but by\nhis private efforts he succeeded in making Tell\u00f4 'the Pompeii of early\nBabylonian antiquity.' The two principal mounds excavated by him are\nknown to Assyriologists as 'Mound A' and 'Mound B.' Digging in the\nformer he soon collected sufficient evidence to convince him that\nhe stood on a site of great antiquity. He found indeed that Mound A\nconsisted of a platform of unbaked bricks crowned by an edifice of\nconsiderable size and extent. He unearthed part of a great statue,\non the shoulder of which was engraved the name of Gudea (2700 B.C.),\npatesi, or ruler, of Lagash, with which city Mound A proved to be\nidentical, and later exposed numerous large columns of bricks of the\ntime of Gudea, the 'stele of vultures' erected by King E-anna-tum, and\ntwo large terra-cotta cylinders of Gudea, each inscribed with about\n2000 lines of early cuneiform writing.\n\nOn a later visit, at the end of 1880 and beginning of 1881, he further\ndeveloped excavation in Mound A, and discovered nine large dolerite\nstatues, fragments of precious bas-reliefs, and numerous inscriptions.\nHe also came upon layers of more ancient remains beneath the building\nhe had unearthed in Mound A.\n\nThe collection of early Babylonian sculptures regained by de Sarzec\nwas hailed with acclamation in Paris. An Oriental section was\ninstituted in the Louvre, and L\u00e9on Heuzy commenced the publication of a\nmonumental work, _D\u00e9couvertes en Chald\u00e9e par Ernest de Sarzec_ (Paris,\n1884, _seq._), which laid the foundation for a methodical treatment of\nancient Chaldean art. The subsequent excavation of de Sarzec in Tell\u00f4\nand its neighbourhood carried the history of the city back to at least\n4000 B.C., and a collection of more than 30,000 tablets of the time of\nGudea was gradually unearthed.\n\nIn 1886-1887 a German expedition under Dr Koldewey explored the\ncemetery of El Hibba to the South of Tell\u00f4, and succeeded in throwing\nmuch light upon the burial customs of ancient Babylonia. A second\nGerman expedition under Dr Andrae, working at Babylon in 1889, laid\nbare the palace of Nebuchadrezzar and the great processional road,\nand subsequently conducted excavations at Qal'at Sherqat, the site of\nAsshur.\n\n\nThe American Expedition of 1889\n\nThere had been keen interest in Babylonian arch\u00e6ology in America\nalmost from the inception of the series of excavations dealt with in\nthis sketch, and this was in all likelihood due to the popularity of\nBiblical studies in the great republic of the West. The Babylonian\nExploration Fund was instituted on November 30, 1887. Excavatory\nlabours were commenced at Nippur in 1889, and on first beholding the\nimmense mass of the mounds which concealed the ruins of the temple-city\nthe members of the expedition were not a little disturbed. \"Even at\na distance I began to realize that not twenty, not fifty years would\nsuffice to excavate this important site thoroughly,\" writes Professor\nHilprecht.[5] The ruins resembled \"a picturesque mountain range\" rather\nthan \"the last impressive remains of human constructions.\" But the\nAmericans 'sat down' before the mass with the courage of their race,\nresolved to probe into its innermost secrets. At first they speculated\nas to the character of the buildings hidden from their view. The\ndirector, Dr Peters, was rapidly exhausting his fund of $15,000 without\ncoming upon anything of value, and recognizing the necessity for the\nprompt discovery of important objects if opinion at home was to be\nplacated, Hilprecht pointed out to him the desirability of attacking\nan isolated mound which in his judgment contained the residences of\nthe priests and the temple library. Peters agreed to the proposal,\nand almost at once an important series of tablets was discovered. The\nmound seemed, indeed, inexhaustible, and most of its contents were of\na date about 2000 B.C., but there were also later tablets belonging to\nthe reign of Nabopolasser, Nebuchadrezzar, Nabonidus, and even Cyrus,\nCambyses, and Darius. Shortly after this the first expedition was\nbrought to a close.\n\n[Illustration in text, previous page: Plan of Nineveh (Nippur) A.\nPalace of Sennacherib. B. Palace of Assur-bani-pal. _By permission of\nthe Director of the British Museum._]\n\nIn the second expedition, also undertaken at Nippur, Dr Peters decided\nto dispense with the services of Messrs Hilprecht and Field, the expert\nAssyriologists who had been dispatched to advise him professionally.\nHimself not an Assyriologist, he laboured at a disadvantage without\nthe assistance of these experts. The work of the first expedition had\nconcentrated at three conspicuous points--the temple, the 'tablet'\nhill which had yielded such good results, and the 'Court of Columns.'\nThe principal objective was now the conical hill of Bint-el-Amir,\ncontaining the zikkurat and temple of Bel. Peters regarded the temple\nas having been built by a king \"not far removed from Nebuchadrezzar in\ntime,\" but many of his inferences have been traversed by Hilprecht. \"In\nhis endeavour to reach the older remains before the more recent strata\nhad been investigated in the least adequately, Peters broke through\nthe outer casing of the zikkurat, built of 'immense blocks of adobe,'\nin a cavity of which he discovered a well-preserved goose egg, and\nperceived that there was an older stage-tower of quite a different form\nand much smaller dimensions enclosed within the other. By means of a\ndiagonal trench cut through its centre, he ascertained its height and\ncharacteristic features down to the level of Ur-Gur, and came to the\nconclusion (which, however, did not prove correct) that the zikkurat\nof this ancient monarch was the earliest erected at Nippur. 'Wells and\nsimilar shafts were sunk at other points of the temple,' especially\nat the northern and western corners, where he reached original\nconstructions of Ashurbanapal (668-626 B.C.) and Ur-Gur (about 2700\nB.C.), and discovered scattered bricks ... 'showing that many kings of\nmany ages had honoured the temple of Bel at Nippur.'\"[6]\n\n\nThe Business Quarter of Nippur\n\nThe excavators soon concluded that they had hit upon the business\nquarter of Nippur, basing their belief upon the commercial character\nof the tablets found, the large number of day labels pierced for\nattachment to sacks and jars, books of entry in clay, and weights\nand measures. So much damage had been done to the buildings while\nexcavating, however that the appearance and plan of any of the\nBabylonian business houses and warehouses could not be arrived at.\n\nIn August 1893 Haynes commenced a search for the original bed and\nembankment of the river Chebar, which he came upon at a depth of\ntwenty feet from the surface. In the dried-up bed of the river or\ncanal he found a round terra-cotta fountain in three fragments,\ndecorated with birds from whose mouths the water passed.\n\n\nThe Fourth Campaign\n\nThe fourth campaign covered the years 1898-1900, and was under the\ndirect control of the University of Pennsylvania. Excavations were\ncommenced at the extreme south-eastern end of the west ridge. Spring\nand summer were spent by Haynes in a 'nervous search' for tablets,\nalthough a strictly scientific examination of Nippur had been asked\nfor. Late tablets and coffins resulted from this search; finds of old\nBabylonian character were meagre. The director did not see eye to eye\nwith his architects, and one of them, Mr Fisher, resigned, returning,\nhowever, in the autumn of 1899. The Committee in America requested\nHaynes to confine his efforts to the exploration of the eastern half\nof the temple court, and to this task he addressed himself with zeal\nif only with partial success. Tablets, according to the director,\nsufficient to institute \"a distinct library by itself,\" continued to\npour out of 'Tablet Hill.' But technical and expert advice was lacking.\nThe architects desired to remove a Parthian round tower, Haynes\nreluctantly consented, and upon its removal the gate of an ancient\ntemple was unearthed.\n\n\nHilprecht Returns\n\nProfessor Hilprecht now reappeared, and his coming put a new complexion\non affairs. A trained and efficient arch\u00e6ologist, he saw at once that\n'Tablet Hill' represented the site of the temple library, so resolved\nto leave its excavation to a later expedition, and meantime to settle\n\"the more essential topographical questions.\" He saw that these once\nanswered, \"it would be a comparatively easy task for the Committee to\nhave the single mounds excavated one after another by somebody else, if\nnecessity arose, who was less familiar with the ruins and the history\nof their exploration. Every trench cut henceforth--and there were a\ngreat many--was cut for the sole purpose of excavating structures\nsystematically and of gathering necessary data for the history and\ntopography of ancient Nippur. If these trenches yielded tangible museum\nresults at the same time, so much the better; if they did not,\" he\nsays, \"I was not troubled by their absence.\" However, \"antiquities were\nfound so abundantly in the pursuit of the plan described, that the\nprinciple was established anew that a strictly scientific method of\nexcavating is at the same time the most profitable.\"\n\nSummarizing his 'explanations' of the ruins at Bint-el-Amir, Hilprecht\nwrites: \"1. A stage-tower of smaller dimensions existed at Nippur\nbefore Sargon I (about 3800 B.C.). 2. In pre-Sargonic times the ground\naround the sacred enclosure was a vast graveyard, a regular fire\nnecropolis. 3. One of the names of the stage-tower of Nippur suggested\nthe idea of a tomb to the early inhabitants of the country. In the\ncourse of time certain zikkurats were directly designated by the\nBabylonians as tombs of the gods. 4. The stage-tower of Bel did not\noccupy the centre of the enclosed platform, but the south-west section\nof it, while the north-east part was reserved for 'the house of Bel,'\nhis principal sanctuary, which stood at the side of the stage-tower.\n5. The temple of Bel consisted of two large courts adjoining each\nother, the north-west court with the zikkurat and 'the house of\nBel' representing the most holy place or the inner court, while the\nsouth-east (outer) court seems to have been studded with the shrines of\nall the different gods and goddesses worshipped at Nippur, including\none for Bel himself. 6. Imgur-Marduk and Nimit-Marduk, mentioned in the\ncuneiform inscriptions as the two walls of Nippur (d\u00fbru and Shalkh\u00fb),\ncannot have surrounded the whole city. According to the results of the\nexcavations conducted under my own supervision, only the temple was\nenclosed by a double wall, while in all probability the city itself\nremained unprotected. 7. The large complex of buildings covering the\ntop of Bint-el-Amir has nothing to do with the ancient temple below,\nbut represents a huge fortified Parthian palace grouped around and upon\nthe remains of the stage-tower then visible.\"[7]\n\nBy means of careful tunnelling Hilprecht also unearthed the south-east\nside of a pre-Sargonic temple-tower, but the nature of the excavation,\nrisking as it did a sudden collapse of soil and bricks, was too\ndangerous to permit of further labours upon it.\n\n\nThe House of the Dead\n\nA building-record of Assur-bani-pal was brought to light which\ndescribed the temple-tower of Nippur as E-gigunn\u00fb, 'House of the Tomb.'\nBefore this other titles of it had been recovered which alluded to it\nas 'Mountain of the Wind,' and it was understood to have been a local\nrepresentation of the great mythological 'mountain of the world,'\nKharsag-kurkura. This was puzzling until Hilprecht found that the\ntower penetrated so far into the earth as to descend to the 'city of\nthe dead' which, according to Babylonian belief, was directly below and\nwithin the earth.\n\n\nThe Temple Library\n\nHilprecht now turned his attention to the temple library in 'Tablet\nHill,' with results most important for the science of Assyriology.\nThis building, contemporary with the time of Abram, now yielded large\nquantities of ancient tablets, occurring in strata of from one to\nfour feet in thickness, as if they had once been disposed upon wooden\nshelves.\n\n\nA Babylonian Museum\n\nAn important find was made of a jar containing about twenty inscribed\nobjects, mostly clay tablets, which constituted a veritable small\nBabylonian museum, evidently collected by a late Babylonian priest or\nsomeone connected with the temple library. Arch\u00e6ology was probably\nfashionable about the time of Nabonidus (556-539 B.C.), himself a\nmonarch of antiquarian tastes. The collector of this 'museum' had\nactually taken a 'squeeze' or impression of an inscription of Sargon I\n(3800 B.C.), in his time about 3340 years old, and had even placed upon\nit a label stating that the object was a 'squeeze' or 'mould' of an\ninscribed stone \"which Nab\u00fbz\u00earlishir, the scribe, saw in the palace of\nKing Naram-Sin at Agade.\"\n\nSays Hilprecht concerning this remarkable collection, \"The owner,\nor curator, of the little museum of Babylonian originals must have\nobtained his specimens by purchase or through personal excavations\ncarried out in the ruined buildings of Bel's city. He doubtless lived\nin the sixth century, about the time of King Nabonidos, and was a\nman well versed in the ancient literature of his nation and deeply\ninterested in the past history of Nippur. This follows from the fact\nthat his vase was found in the Neo-Babylonian stratum of 'Tablet Hill,'\nand from the circumstance that the latest antiquity of his collection\nis dated in the government of Sin-sharishkun, the last representative\nof the Assyrian dynasty (about 615 B.C.).\"\n\nIn the second year of this campaign Peters contented himself with\n'sounding' as many places as possible rather than settling down to the\nsteady work of excavation, in which preference he resembled Rassam. But\nhis labours were crowned with no little success, for he came upon a\nlarge number of Kassite votive objects, the first great collection of\nantiquities of this dynasty ever found, and a shrine of King Bur-Sin\nI dedicated to Bel about 2600 B.C. The excavation of the large and\nimportant building remains grouped around the temple tower of Bel\nwas, however, Peters' principal task during his second campaign. But\nhis hope of discovering many inscribed tablets while excavating these\nruins was not to be realized. He was more fortunate, however, in the\ntriangular mound (that known as 'Mound IV') to the south of the temple,\nwhich yielded some 2000 tablets, scientific, literary, and financial\nmanuscripts, and even school exercises being turned up by the spade.\nAbout the same time excavations in the south-eastern wing of the\nlarge mounds disclosed the presence of thousands of tablets and many\nfigures of Bel and his consort Beltis. Most of the tablets here were\ncommercial, and of date about 2600 to 2000 B.C. In May the labours of\nthe second campaign came to a close.\n\n\nHaynes' Work at Nippur\n\nThe third campaign (1893-1896) Peters delegated to Haynes, who\ncommenced operations at Nippur in the great ridge which stretches\nalong the southward bank of the Shatt-en-N\u00eel, where numerous tablets\nhad already been unearthed. In about four months he had collected some\n8000 tablets, and when the supply of these began to fail he transferred\nhis attention to the temple mound which had been worked at before, and\nwhich he continued to explore until April 1894. With the help of Joseph\nA. Meyer, a young American architect, Haynes concentrated his work on\nthe zikkurat at Nippur. Unfortunately Meyer died in December, but not\nuntil he had rendered priceless service to Haynes in his capacity as\nadvisory architect. Haynes, unable to continue the exploration of the\ntemple-mound without expert advice, undertook to unearth a sufficient\nquantity of tablets to meet Peters' demand for inscribed material.\nLater he pursued excavations at the Bint-el-Amir, where Peters had\nworked before him, cleared the zikkurat of Assur-bani-pal there and\nexcavated the court of that building down to the water level. The\nexcavation of the immense fa\u00e7ade of this great erection was a work of\nenormous labour, hundreds of thousands of cubic feet of rubbish having\nto be removed before a partial clearance was effected.\n\nThe excavation of the south-west court of the zikkurat of\nAssur-bani-pal was the most interesting part of Haynes' work on\nthe temple of Bel. First he had to clear away the Parthian ruins\nsuperimposed upon the site, until he came to the brick pavement of\nAssur-bani-pal. He then came upon a pavement of the Sargonic period\nwhich extended through a considerable part of the mound as a dividing\nline. The rubbish which lay beneath this was about sixteen feet in\ndepth, and had been accumulated within a period of more than three\nthousand years (3800-350 B.C.). The most important of the many strata\nof this rubbish-heap is that which lies between the pavement of King\nUr-Ninib and that immediately below it. Over 600 fragments of vases,\nstatues, and slabs were gathered here, all seemingly deliberately\nbroken, \"by somebody who lived between the reigns of Ur-Gur of Ur and\nUr-Ninib of Nisin\"--perhaps the leader of an Elamite raid. The famous\ntext of Lugalzuggisi, King of Erech, with its 132 lines of writing, was\nfound here and restored by Hilprecht from sixty-four fragments.\n\nDigging elsewhere, Haynes unearthed the oldest arch in the world at\na considerable depth, drain-pipes of the date about 4500 B.C., and\npre-Sargonic cellars containing large wine-or oil-jars. In one chamber\ntwenty feet below the surface were found the business archives of a\ngreat Babylonian firm, Murashu and Sons, bankers and brokers at Nippur\n(_c_. 464-424 B.C.).\n\n[Illustration: Ruins of Babylon Uncovered after twelve years' labour\nby German arch\u00e6ologists, who began excavating in 1900. Copyright by\nUnderwood and Underwood, London.]\n\nRecent Research\n\nRecent research in Mesopotamia has centred around the site of Babylon,\nwhere results of a most interesting and encouraging description have\nbeen achieved. The German Oriental Society commenced work upon the site\nin the spring of 1899, and after twelve years of incessant labour under\nthe direction of Dr Robert Koldewey, published the report of their\nlabours in 1911.\n\n\nThe Babylon of Nebuchadrezzar II\n\nThe portion of the city laid bare in these twelve years of digging was\ncontemporary with the reigns of Nebuchadrezzar II and Nabonidus, the\nlast native King of Babylon, but certain parts of the ruins unearthed\nhad been built in the much more ancient era of Khammurabi, the great\nlaw-maker, and even during the First Dynasty. The later Babylon is\nknown to us from the pages of Herodotus and Ctesias, and the explorers\nspeedily found that the accounts of these writers in nowise squared\nwith the actual topographical conditions of the ruins unearthed and\nsurveyed. Herodotus speaks of a Babylon 53 miles in circumference, and\nCtesias is not much more modest in his estimate of over 40 miles. The\ncity wall to the north-east side may still be traced in its entirety,\nand remains to prove that the city on this side measured not more\nthan 2 3/4 miles, and judging from this, we obtain an approximate\ncircumference of 11 miles--a figure far short of the estimate of the\n'Father of History.'\n\n\nThe Outer Wall\n\nThe walls themselves are of considerable interest. The outer wall\nwas nearly twenty feet in thickness, and was built of burnt bricks\nimpressed with the royal stamp of Nebuchadrezzar. Here and there\nits length was broken by towers for outlook or defensive purposes.\nHerodotus states that so broad was the top of the wall that a\nfour-horse chariot could easily turn upon its surface, and that two of\nthese vehicles had a sufficiency of room to pass one another without\nrisk to horses or driver. Companies of men could be moved along this\nmural highway in time of siege, so that a supply of defenders could be\nbrought with dispatch to guard any portion of the defences that was\nimminently threatened.\n\n\nB\u00e2bil as a Citadel\n\nThe mound of B\u00e2bil, to which we have frequently referred in\nthis account of Babylonian excavation, was recognized by the\nGerman expedition as a citadel built for defensive purposes by\nNebuchadrezzar--a place of refuge to which the King and court could\nrepair in case of the capture of the city itself. It contained the\nroyal stores and treasury, a large armoury and arsenal, and there is\nreason to believe that the monarch resided there even in times of\npeace. It was, indeed, a miniature city, a lesser Babylon, containing\neverything necessary for the royal support and pleasure.\n\n\nBabylon's Water-Supply\n\nThe question of a suitable water-supply agitated municipal Babylon just\nas keenly as it does any of our own great centres of population, and\nrecent excavations have illustrated the manner in which the Euphrates\nwas utilized for this purpose. Nabopolasser has left inscriptions to\nshow how he rebuilt the walls of a channel called the Arakhtu to lead\nthe river Euphrates past the city boundaries. Nebuchadrezzar built\na massive fortification with walls of from fifty to sixty feet in\nthickness into the bed of the Euphrates to prevent the formation of\nsandbanks in the river which possibly caused the flooding of the left\nbank above the temple of E-Sagila. This left a narrow channel between\nthe new wall and the old quay, and it is probable that this huge\nconstruction caused a subsequent change in the course of the Euphrates.\n\n\nNebuchadrezzar's Palace\n\nNebuchadrezzar's palace was situated in the southern citadel on the\nmound known as the Kasr. On this building he lavished both time and\ntreasure. When he came to the throne he found the site occupied by the\nresidence of his father Nabopolasser, but when he returned from his\ntriumphant Egyptian campaigns he despised the plain old place and, like\nsome modern potentates, resolved to build himself a royal edifice which\nwould symbolize the power and majesty of the empire he had won for\nhimself. He turned his father's palace into a mere platform upon which\nto rear his own more flamboyant structure, and filled in its rooms,\ncourts, and spaces with rubble.\n\n\nThe Palace without Windows\n\nFor the most part the palace was built round open courts, much in the\nSpanish fashion, and there is no trace of windows, a phenomenon which\nconstantly recurs in ancient buildings in the East, in Egypt, and in\nCentral America. But when we consider the extremes of heat encountered\nin these latitudes we can appreciate the desire for a cool semi-gloom\nwhich called for the windowless chamber. The flat roofs, too, were used\nfor sleeping purposes, so that the inhabitants did not wholly dispense\nwith fresh air.\n\n\nThe Great Throne Room\n\nBut by far the most interesting apartment in the palace is the great\nThrone Room of Nebuchadrezzar, the apartment upon which he lavished so\nmuch personal care and consideration. It stands immediately south of\nthe Great Court, and is much the most spacious room in the palace. In\nthe wall opposite the grand entrance from the court is a deep recess or\nniche, where it is thought the royal throne must have stood, so that\nnot only the courtiers in the Throne Room but the lesser dignitaries\nthronging the courtyard without could have had sight of the monarch of\nthe Eastern World seated in all his splendour upon his imperial throne.\nStrangely enough the walls of this great apartment of state were merely\nplastered with white gypsum, while the brickwork of the outer fa\u00e7ade\nwhich faced the court was decorated with brightly coloured enamels\ndisplaying the most involved designs, floral and geometrical, in blue,\nyellow, black, and white. Such ornamentation would probably be banned\nfrom the Throne Room because of the high reflections from a brightly\npolished enamelled surface, and as we have seen heat and light were\ntaboo in Babylonian interiors.\n\n[Illustration: The Hanging Gardens of Babylon.--M. Dovaston, R.B.A.--By\npermission of Messrs Hutchinson and Co.]\n\nThe Drainage System\n\nDoors in the throne-room wall communicated with what were probably\nthe King's private apartments. The harem and other purely private\nsuites were placed further to the west, over the earlier residence of\nNabopolasser, the official portion of the palace being situated towards\nthe east. There was a most elaborate drainage system which not only\ncarried rain-water from the flat roofs but from the courts and walls as\nwell. The larger drains had corbel-shaped roofs, but the smaller ones\nwere formed of bricks set together in the shape of a 'V' and closed\nin at the top with other bricks laid flat. Vertical shafts and gutters\nwere also in use, and these were conducted down the sides of towers and\nfortifications.\n\n\nThe Hanging Gardens\n\nAnother structure has been indicated as perhaps the foundation of\nthe famous Hanging Gardens of Babylon. It consists of a number of\nbarrel-vaulted cells, seven on each side of a central passage. These\ncells are roofed over with semi-circular arches, and are flanked on\nthe north by the palace wall. It is known that hewn stone was employed\nin the construction of this 'wonder of the world,' and only in three\nother places in the palace demesne (the Sacred Road, the bridge over\nthe Euphrates, and the Kasr Wall) is stone employed. This points\nto the identification of the site in question as being that of the\nHanging Gardens, on which layers of earth were laid and the shrubs,\ntrees, and arbours which decorated it planted thereon. Berossus\ndistinctly states that these gardens were within the buildings by which\nNebuchadrezzar enlarged his father's palace. But the dimensions of this\nstructure do not tally with those given by Strabo and Diodorus, and\nthe imagination revolts at the conception of these famous and romantic\ngardens having for their foundation this obscure and prosaic cellarage.\nArch\u00e6ology must leave us something. By all means let us have truth and\nenlightenment--unless where truth is itself uglier than falsehood! It\nhas been shrewdly conjectured by Professor King[8] that these cellars\nformed the palace granary, and we must be grateful to him for the\nsuggestion.\n\n\nThe Great Gate of Ishtar\n\nIt was in the spring of 1902 that Dr. Koldewey made the important\ndiscovery of the Great Gate of the goddess Ishtar which spanned the\nSacred Way of the imperial city. This turreted erection, ornamented\nin relief by the figures of mythical animals in coloured brick, has\nbeen excavated clean out of the superincumbent earth, and constitutes\na double monument to its ancient builders and to the patient\narch\u00e6ologists who recovered it from the sands of antiquity. It was the\nmain gate in the north citadel wall, and had been reconstructed by the\nzealous Nebuchadrezzar. It is double (for the fortification line in\nwhich it stood was twofold), and in front consists of two high towers\nwith gate-houses behind. The figures of the animals are so arranged\nthat to the eye of one approaching the city they would seem advancing\nto meet him. At least 575 of these creatures were depicted on the\ngate, the favourite subjects being bulls and dragons, beautifully and\nrealistically modelled in relief.\n\n\nThe Street of Processions\n\nA portion of the Street of Processions upon which this gateway opened\nhas also been excavated. This highway was of imposing breadth, and\nran its course from north to south directly across the city. It was\na species of Via Sacra, for over its stones was carried the image of\nMerodach upon his day of high festival. Its use was restricted to\nfoot-passengers, and no chariots or other horse-drawn vehicles were\npermitted to make use of it. Its foundation is of burnt brick upon\nwhich is overlaid an upper pavement of breccia (conglomerate rock) in\nslabs.\n\n\nThe Temples of Babylon\n\nInterest has naturally centred around the excavation of the five great\ntemples of Babylon, the ground-plans of four of which have been laid\nbare. The temple of E-Makh, dedicated to the goddess Nin-Makh was the\nfirst to be excavated. It contains one of the only two altars found in\nBabylon, a structure of plain, crude brick, simple and unadorned, which\nstands outside its main entrance. As the only other example in the city\noccupies an exactly similar position, we must conclude that custom or\nritual dictated an exterior site for the sacrificial altar. The temple\nof Nin-Makh was a simple shrine of mere mud-brick, decorated with black\nand white designs superimposed upon a scanty coating of whitewash.\nNin-Makh (the great lady) was one of the titles of Ishtar. The temple\nappears to have been built round a large court, and to have been\nentered by a gateway flanked by a series of square, solid towers, three\non either side. There is a long, narrow passage behind the shrine,\nwhich probably gave access to a concealed opening in the back wall of\nthe temple behind the image of the goddess, who could thus have been\nmade to give forth oracular utterances. In the courtyard was a well\nfrom which water was drawn for the purpose of performing lustral rites.\n\nWe are ignorant of the precise form of the upper part of Babylonian\ntemples (apart from the _zikkurats_ or towers), as only the lower\nportions of their walls in most cases remain to us. But from certain\nplaques and seals on which temples are represented we can glean that\nthey were probably turreted or castellated in front and perhaps at\nthe sides as well, and that the entrance was arched, the frontage\npresenting a picture not very unlike that of a heavily constructed\ncastle of the Norman epoch. Indeed one unidentified temple bears\nresemblance to a prison, so forbidding is it in its almost unbroken\nline of turret and retaining wall. We must remember, however, that\ncolour lent embellishment to these buildings, the otherwise heavy\nfa\u00e7ades of which would have been dreary indeed.\n\n\nE-Sagila\n\nThe temple of E-Sagila, which was dedicated to Merodach, patron deity\nof Babylon, is of course by far the most important within the city\nbounds. It has not been wholly excavated from the mound of Tell Amran,\nbut the main western portion of it has been brought to light, and has\nbeen shown, like other Babylonian shrines, to have consisted of a\nseries of chambers built round an open court. In the centre of each\nside was an open gateway where once stood the famous eight bronze\nserpents, two to each entrance. The especial shrine of Merodach,\nwhich has not yet been unearthed, lay on the western side, and had a\ntowered entrance and decorated fa\u00e7ade which Nebuchadrezzar stated he\ncaused 'to shine like the sun.' He coated the walls of the shrine with\ngold and roofed it with the choicest cedars from Lebanon, 'the noble\nforest.' Here, says Herodotus, the mighty figure of the god rested,\nwhich, with the throne, dais, and table before it was fashioned of pure\ngold, of 800 talents in weight. To the north of Merodach's temple rose\nits _zikkurat_ or tower. So far excavation upon it has in a measure\ndisproved the account of Herodotus that it consisted of a stepped\ntower in eight stages with the ascent to the summit encircling the\noutside. The first stage, now uncovered, has a triple stairway built\nagainst one side of the tower, but we shall never know what the upper\nstories were like, for they have long since crumbled into desert dust.\nDr. Koldewey considers that the great tower was built in one stage,\ndecorated with coloured bands, and surmounted by a shrine.\n\n\nThe Great Tower of Nabu (E-Zida)\n\nThe foundations of the great tower of Nabu at Borsippa, a suburb of\nBabylon, still awaits excavation, but as it stands it rises to a\nheight of over 100 feet above the desert. The clearing of its base\nwill necessitate a colossal amount of labour, but when effected, our\nknowledge of these temple-towers will be considerably enhanced.\n\n\nThe Euphrates Bridge\n\nThe bridge over the river Euphrates is worthy of mention, since it\nrepresents the oldest bridge known to the science of arch\u00e6ology. It\npossessed stone piers, built in the shape of boats, thus showing that\nit had been evolved from an earlier bridge of boats. The bows of these\npiers point up-stream, and thus break the force of the current. The\nriver at the point where it was crossed by the bridge was at least\nsixty feet broad, and the passage-way of wood was laid across the\nboat-piers, and must have been rather narrow. The structure was the\nwork of Nabopolasser.\n\n\nThe Elder Babylon\n\nDuring the first years of their labours the excavators were under the\nimpression that the destruction of the older portions of the city by\nSennacherib had been so complete that but few of its remains were to\nbe looked for in the course of excavation. But as time progressed it\nwas found that the relics of the older quarters lay mostly beneath the\npresent water-level. In the Menkes Mound a quarter of the ancient city\nhas been unearthed at a depth of some thirty feet, and the outline of\nits streets clearly shown. Still lower were found houses dating from\nthe period of Merodach-baladan I (1201-1189 B.C.) and Meli-shipok II\n(1216-1202 B.C.). A thick layer of ashes showed that a still earlier\nportion of the city had been destroyed by fire, and this archaic\nquarter has been identified as the city of Khammurabi, the princely\nlaw-maker (2123-2081 B.C.), and his immediate successors, according\nto dated tablets found among the burnt debris--mute witnesses of the\ndisaster which overtook Babylon's First Dynasty.\n\n\nTown-Planning\n\nIt is noticeable that the later streets follow closely the trend and\nplan of the older thoroughfares, which, generally speaking, ran north\nand south, parallel to the course of the Sacred Way. Professor King[9]\ngives it as his opinion that here we have a deliberate attempt at\ntown-planning on a scientific basis! He credits this to the Semitic\nelement in the population, as in Sumerian towns there is no trace of\ntown-planning. And yet Babylon was strangely conservative. As she\ncommenced, so she continued, and her early efforts were only superseded\nin magnitude, not in quality of purpose.\n\n\n[1] But _cf._ 1 Kings xix 16, _ff_.; 2 Kings ix and x.\n\n[2] _Explorations in Bible Lands_ (T. and T. Clark, 1903).\n\n[3] _Assyrian Discoveries_, p. 9 (London, 1875).\n\n[4] _Assyrian Discoveries_, p. 148 (London, 1875).\n\n[5] _Explorations in Bible Lands_ (T. and T. Clark, 1903).\n\n[6] Hilprecht, _Explorations in Bible Lands_, p. 232 (T. and T. Clark,\n1903).\n\n[7] _Explorations in Bible Lands_ (T. and T. Clark, 1903).\n\n[8] _History of Babylon_, p. 50 (1915).\n\n[9] _History of Babylon_, p. 85.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV: THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS\n\n\nWith the fall of the Assyrian empire in 606 B.C., Babylonia once more\nregained her national status. This meant that her national god Merodach\nwas no longer subservient to the Assyrian Asshur in a political sense,\nand regained his place as sole head of the Babylonian pantheon.\n\nGreat must have been the satisfaction of the people of Babylon when,\nthis comparatively mild tyranny removed, they could worship their own\ngods in their own way, free from the humiliating remembrance that\ntheir northern neighbours regarded all Babylonian sacred things as\nappanages of the Assyrian empire. Nabopolasser and Nebuchadrezzar, his\nsuccessor, gave effect to these changes, and the latter king placed\nNabu on a footing of equality with Merodach. Was this the cause of\nhis punishment? Was it because he had offended in a religious sense\nthat he had to undergo the terrible infliction of which we read in the\nScriptures? The priesthood of Merodach must have possessed immense and\npractically unlimited power in Babylon, and we may feel sure that any\nsuch interference with their newfound privilege, as is here suggested,\nwould have met with speedy punishment. Was the wretched monarch led to\nbelieve that an enchantment had been cast upon him, and that he had\nbeen transformed into animal shape at the command of an outraged deity?\nWe cannot say. The cause of his misfortune must for ever remain one of\nthe mysteries of the ancient world.\n\nThe unfortunate Nabonidus, too, attempted to replace the cults of\nMerodach and Nabu by that of Shamash. And that hastened his doom,\nfor the priests became his bitter enemies, and when the Persian Cyrus\nentered the gates of Babylon as a conqueror he was hailed as the\nsaviour of Merodach's honour.\n\nThe last native kings of Babylonia were great temple-builders, and\nthis policy they continued until the end. Indeed in the time of\nNebuchadrezzar there was a revival of ancient and half-forgotten cults,\nand many local gods were exalted to a pitch of popularity hitherto\nunknown.\n\n\nThe Conquering Cyrus\n\nThen in 539 B.C. came the conquering Cyrus, and the period of the decay\nof the Babylonian religion began. The victor merely upheld the cults of\nMerodach and Nabu for reasons of policy, and when in turn the Greeks\nruled over Babylonia they followed the Persian lead in this respect.\nBy the defeat of the Persian Darius at the battle of Arbela (331 B.C.)\nthe way to Babylon was left open to the mighty Alexander the Great.\nThis was the beginning of the end. The old religion dragged out a\nbroken existence until about the beginning of the Christian era, then\nslowly but surely vanished beneath the attacks of Hellenic scepticism,\nChristian propaganda, and pagan caprice.\n\nThat a faith so virile, so ancient, so entrenched in the love of a\npeople as that of Babylonia should fall into an oblivion so profound\nas to be totally forgotten for nearly nineteen centuries is a solemn\nand impressive reminder of the evanescent character of human affairs.\nThey were men of their hands, these ancient Mesopotamians, great\ntheologians, great builders, great soldiers. Yet their mighty works,\ntheir living faith left 'not a wrack behind' save mounds of rubbish\nwhich, when excavated by the modern antiquary, were found to contain\na few poor vestiges of the splendour that was Babylon and the pomps\nof the city of Asshur. Does there not reside in this a great lesson\nfor modernity? Must our civilization, our faith, all that is ours and\nthat we have raised--must these things, too, fade into the shadows of\nunremembrance as did the civilization of Mesopotamia?\n\n\nA Great Lesson\n\nThe answer to such a question depends upon ourselves--upon each and\nevery one of us. If we quit ourselves as civilized men, striving\nand ever striving to refine and purify our lives, our conduct, our\nintellectual outlook, to spiritualize our faith, then though the things\nof our hands may be dust, the works of our minds, of our souls shall\nnot vanish, but shall remain in the consciousness of our descendants\nso long as human memory lasts. The faith of ancient Babylon went under\nbecause it was built rather on the worship of frail and bestial gods\nthan the love of truth,--gods many of whom were devils in disguise,\nbut devils no whit worse than our fiends of ambition, of greed, of\npugnacity, of unsympathy. Through the worship of such gods Babylon came\nto oblivion. Let us contemplate the colossal wreck of that mighty work\nof man, and as we gaze over the gulf of a score of centuries to where\nits \"cloud-capp'd towers and gorgeous palaces\" glitter in the mirage of\nlegend, let us brace ourselves for the struggle which humanity has yet\nto wage with darkness, with disease, with superstition. But while we\nremember her fall with sadness, let us think generously and kindly of\nher dead mightiness, of the ancient effort she made, striving after her\nlights, of her picturesque and many-coloured life, and, not least, of\nher achievements--the invention of those symbols by which the words of\nman can be transferred to his brother across the silent ocean of time.\n\n\n\n\nGLOSSARY AND INDEX\n\n\n\n\nTHE PRONUNCIATION OF ASSYRIAN\n\n\nAssyrian differs in many respects from the other Semitic languages.\nThere are few gutturals, these having been mostly smoothed out. Thus\n'Ba'l' became 'Bel,' and 'Hadad,' 'Adad.' On the other hand it is\nthought that the cuneiform inscriptions may have omitted guttural\nsounds. The cuneiform system of writing is so imperfect and complicated\nthat we must make certain reservations in our acceptance of the\ntranscriptions of contemporary Assyriologists, and it must therefore be\nunderstood that Assyrian names and words as we know them and as found\nin the present work and index may be yet greatly modified by future\nresearches. Assyrian names as known to-day are pronounced according to\nanalogy gleaned from the pronunciation of the other Semitic languages.\nThus 'Shin'ar' is spelt with the Hebrew _'ain_, (guttural _a_) in\nthe Scriptures, and we are unaware whether the Scriptural author\ninterpolated the guttural or not. Analogy in this instance is not\nnearly so valuable a guide as in the case of Egyptian, where we have in\nCoptic the modern form of the Egyptian language to guide us, nor is it\nat all likely that we shall ever know much more than we do concerning\nthe pronunciation of a language the written symbols of which are so\nuncertain as regards their precise alphabetic values.\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\nA\n\nAa or \u00c2. Consort of Shamash, 110\nABED'NEGO. One of Daniel's companions, 38\nAB'RAM. Ur, city of, 15, 145, 249;\n  Nimrod and, 51-56;\n  Jewish legends _re_, 51, 52;\n  Persian traditions _re_, 52, 53;\n  another tradition _re_, preserved in the East, 53-56;\n  star Venus and, 55\nAB'U-HABB'AH. The ancient site of Sippar, 177\nABYDENUS. Statement of, _re_ Ea, 112\nABYSS, THE. Paradise and, 82\nACCA'D. Part of Nimrod's kingdom, 49\nACH\u00c6MENID\u00c6. Cyaxares' son dethroned by, 333\nA'DAD. Equivalent, Hadad, 187-191\nA'DAD-EA. Ut-Napishtim's ferry-man, 172;\n  Gilgamesh consults, 172;\n  Ut-Napishtim, Gilgamesh and, 178\nA'DAD-NARARI IV. Son of Assur-Dan III, 308\nADAM. The sons of, 232\nAD'APA. The South Wind and, story of, 116-121\nAD'AR. Sun-god of Nippur;\n  Hymn to, 68;\n  connected with the pig, 93, 294\nAD'NA. Wife of Azar;\n  according to an Eastern tradition the parents of Abram, 54\nAD-\u00d4NIS. Smyrna, mother of, reference to, 127;\n  myth of related to that of Tammuz, 131\nAEDORACHUS. Of Pantibiblon, reference to, 112\n\u00c6LIAN. Of Gilgamos (Gilgamesh);\n  grandson of Sokkaros, 157\nAF-AN-AS-I'EF. On vampires, 266\nAFRICA, 329;\n  Semitic religion in, 331\nA'HAB. King of Israel, overthrown by Shalmaneser II, 24\nA'HI-MI-TI. Sargon displaces Azuri by, 210\nAH'RI-MAN. Mazda and Sraosha overcome, 337\nAHURA MAZDA. Good principle of Zarathustra's religion, 334;\n  creator of the universe, 335\nA-I'BU. The serpent, 289\nAKK'AD. Kingdom founded by Semites, 16;\n  King Sargon of, founds first great Semitic empire in Babylonia, 16\nAKK-AD'IANS. Description of, 13-16;\n  language, 13, 14;\n  Babylonian Semites receive germs of culture from the, 14;\n  modern equivalent for the older, is the expression 'Sumerian,' 15;\n  stars studied by, 231\nAKK'U-LU (Eater). Attendant hound of Merodach, 202\nA-LAL'U. The eagle;\n  Ishtar and, 167\nALEXANDER THE GREAT, 378\n'ALL'AH.' Modern Arabic name, 325\nALL-A-TU. Equivalent, Eresh-ki-gal, mistress of Hades, 129;\n  realms of, 237\n_Al-\u00f4-nim_. Descriptive term of Ph\u0153nicians for their gods, 327\nALTAR-S. Of Dodo, and of Yahveh, 190, 191\nA'LU. Bull, sent by Anu against Gilgamesh, 168, 169\nAL'U-DEMON. The, 271, 277\nA-MAR'UDUK. The name Merodach, originally, 202\nAM'EN-HET'EP IV. King of Egypt;\n  letters to, unearthed at Tel-el-Amarna, 22\nAMORITE-S. Hadad, a god of the, 188;\n  deity, Dagon an, 352\nAN'A-TU. The consort of Anu, 123;\n  mother of Ishtar, 168\nANCESTOR-WORSHIP. The Canaanites and, 326\nANDRAE, Dr. A German explorer, 356\nANIMALS. Babylonian gods having form of, 92, 93;\n  mythological monsters and, of Chaldea, 289-298;\n  the dog, 290-292;\n  the pig, 294\nANIMISTIC. Babylonian religion typically, 317, 319\nAN-NE-DA'TUS. Appears from Eruthrean Sea, 112\n_Ann'-u-na-ki_, THE. Generic name for the gods of the earth, 82, 130;\n  spirits of earth, 90;\n  decree fate, 173;\n  torches carried by, 175\nAN'SAR. God;\n  birth of, 71;\n  Tiawath and, 76\nAN'SHAR. Variant of Asshur;\n  created with Kishar, 208;\n  Anu, Ea, and Merodach sent to destroy Tiawath, 208\nAN'U. God of the sky;\n  son of Ansar and Kisar, 72;\n  Ansar and, 76;\n  Merodach and, 79;\n  most ancient of Babylonian deities, 90;\n  held sway over Erech and Der, 94;\n  temple of, 102;\n  South Wind and, 117-121;\n  En-lil, Ea and, the universal triad, 121;\n  significance, 121-123;\n  Anatu, the consort of, 123;\n  Bau and, 144;\n  sacred bull sent against Gilgamesh by, 158;\n  father of Ishtar, 168;\n  Hadad worshipped with, at Asshur, 188;\n  the Tablets of Destiny and, 195;\n  in a triad with Ea and Bel, but more frequently in the texts apart\n  from them, 197, 198;\n  Dagan and, 198;\n  in Assyria--in Babylon, 217;\n  invoked with Bel, 227;\n  the Pole Star, 236;\n  eclipses and, 255\nANU'NIT. Lesser goddess, merged in conception of Ishtar, 124\nAPH-RO-DI'T\u00c9. Ishtar and cult, of, 124;\n  Ishtar and, connected, 235\nAPOCRYPHA. Legend of Bel and the Dragon in, 97\nAPOLLO. Temple to, at Carthage, 330\nAPOLLODORUS. Statement of, _re_ Ea, 112\n_Ap'su_. The deep, or 'house of knowledge,' 72;\n  alternative, Zigarun;\n  mother of Ea, 72, 73, 74;\n  the primeval, 193\nAQUARIUS, SIGN OF. The deluge story and, 183\nARABIA. Semites believed to have come from, 15, 16;\n  Naram-Sin penetrates, 17;\n  Semitic religion in, 331\nAR-AKH'TU. Nabopolasser and the channel called the, 368\nAR-A-L\u00db.\n1. The underworld, 125;\n  128-131, 171.\n2. Goddess;\n  variant, Eres-ki-gal;\n  Nergal and, 150\nAR-BE'LA. Ishtar's shrine in, 212;\n  battle of, 378\nARCH\u00c6OLOGY. Babylonian, 46, 47;\n  Chaldean, 339-366;\n  American interest in Babylonian, 356-366;\n  fashionable about the time of Nabonidus (556-539 B.C.), 363\nARES. Greek god, 315\nAR'GO. Ea identified with a star in the constellation, 236\nARK. The Babylonian, 174-178\nAR-TA'IOS. Median monarch;\n  Nannar confounded with, 146\nARTEMIS. Reference to, 132\nART-S. Babylonian;\n  gem-cutting, etc., 17;\n  Babylonian literature and, under Khammurabi the Great, 20;\n  all the, under Ea's patronage, 192\nA-RU'-RU. Goddess who aided the formation of man, 82, 86, 123;\n  creates a champion against Gilgamesh, 162\nAR'Y-AN. Race;\n  the Philistines of, 324\nAS-A'RI. Appellation of Merodach, 202;\n  may be compared with Asar (Osiris), 202\nASH'DOD. Temple of Dagon at, 151;\n  Sargon's expedition against, 210, 211, 350\nASH'TART or ISH'TAR. Worshipped in Carthage, 327, 330\nASH'TER-OTH or AS-TAR'TE. Ishtar known to Canaanites, Ph\u0153nicians,\n  and Greeks as, 124, 319, 326;\n  the Aphrodite of the Greeks, 131;\n  Ph\u0153nician god, 328\nASHURBAN'APAL. _See_ Assur-bani-pal.\nA-SHU'SHU-NA'MIR. Created by Ea, 130\nASIA. Submitted to Ninus, 25;\n  Tiglath-pileser III invested with sovereignty of, 30;\n  Belit and Asshur in pantheon of, 228\nASIA MINOR. Greek colonies in, 235, 236;\n  peopled by diverse races, 324;\n  worship of Ashtart in, 328\n_A'si-p\u00fb_. The wizards, 260;\n  273, 274\nAS'KE-LON. Temple of Ashtart (Ishtar) at, 327\nASSH'UR.\n1. City;\n  site of, explored by the German expedition of 1899, 47;\n  residence of god Asshur, 207;\n  Bel's temple in, 227.\n2. God;\n  identified with Merodach, 94;\n  Ishtar, consort of, 125;\n  religion of Assyria centres in, 206-211;\n  etymology of name, 208;\n  variant, Anshar, 208;\n  mentioned in inscription of Samsi-Ramman, 208;\n  Sargon and the conquering power of, 210, 211;\n  Ishtar and, 214;\n  Bel-Merodach placed after, in the Assyrian Pantheon, 225, 377;\n  prisoner-gods and, 226;\n  Belit and, 227\nASSUR-BAN'I-PAL. King of Assyria;\n  Greek equivalent, Sardanapalus, 32;\n  historic reality, 33;\n  death of, 33;\n  succeeded Esar-haddon, 34;\n  Samus-sum-yukin, brother of, 34;\n  his death, 35;\n  his library at Nineveh, 35, 46, 71, 261, 282, 346;\n  patron of literature, 154;\n  Sin and, 224;\n  Belit and, 227, 228;\n  capture of twenty gods of the Elamites by, 204;\n  tablets dealing with magic in library of, 261;\n  the five hounds of, 290, 291;\n  autobiography of, 301-306;\n  palace of, discovered by Rawlinson, 346;\n  fragment of history of, discovered by George Smith, 352;\n  tablets of, 354;\n  zikkurat of, 365\nASS'UR-DAN III. The fatal eclipse and, 307-309\nASSUR-NAZ'IR-PAL. Son of Tuk-ul-ti-in-Aristi, 23;\n  places Hadad-nadin-akhi on throne of Babylon, 23;\n  Ishtar and, 214;\n  Ninib, and, 214, 216;\n  Calah residence of, 215;\n  Shamash and, 223;\n  Sin and, 223;\n  sculptures glorifying, 343;\n  dedications of, unearthed, 351\nASSUR-NAZ'IR-PAL III. King of Assyria, reference to his reign, 23\nASS'UR-RI-SHI'-SHI'. Ninib and, 214\nASS'UR-YU-BALL'IDH. The Kassite king of Babylonia marries daughter of, 22\nASSYRIA-NS. Race origin, 12;\n  Hittite and Amorite elements intermingled with, 12, 13;\n  land boundaries, the Tigris and Euphrates, 12;\n  the Akkadians and, 13;\n  Tiglath-pileser, King of, 23;\n  Semiramis the Great, Queen of, 24-29;\n  Assur-bani-pal desired to make the centre of religious influence\n  of the empire, 35;\n  Scythians penetrate into, 36;\n  Sin-sar-iskin, last King of, 36;\n  cuneiform writing of, 60-66;\n  religion, Semitic influence on, 91, 92;\n  the Pantheon of, 203-230;\n  religion of, centres in Asshur, 206;\n  greatness;\n  secret of, 208, 209;\n  Ishtar in, 211-214;\n  worship of Ramman in, 220;\n  Shammash's cult in, 222, 223;\n  Bel-Merodach and, 225;\n  cult of Nabu in, 228;\n  temples of, 242-251;\n  culture;\n  progenitors of, 250;\n  magic and demonology, 257-288;\n  belief in taboo, 278;\n  religions of Babylonia and, comparative value of, 313-337;\n  religion of Zoroaster supplanted that of ancient, 332;\n  ethics, 337, 338;\n  modern excavations in, 339-366;\n  empire, fall of, in 606 B.C., 377\nASTROLOGY. Birthplace of, 231\nATARATH. The _arel_ (or altar) of Dodo carried from, 190\nATARGA'TUS. God; Dagon worshipped as, 27\nATARYAT'IS. Alternative, Derketo. Fish-goddess, legendary mother of\n  Semiramis, 25\nATHENAG'ORAS. Refers to worship of Semiramis, 27\nATHENS. Pir\u00e6us, port of, 328\nAT'TIS. A god akin to Adonis, 132\nAU'RA MA-I-NYU. Evil principle of Zarathustra's religion, 334\nA-VERR'-O-ES. Friend of Maimonides, 232\nAVESTA. Earliest form of Zoroaster's name in the, 333\nA'YA. The betrothed of Sham-ash, 166\nAZ'AR. One of Nimrod's guards; traditional father of Abram, 54\nAZ'TECS. Reverence of, for worship of Toltecs, 226, 227\nAZ-U-RI, King. Sargon displaces, by Ahimiti, 210\n\n\nB\n\nBAAL. Sun-god;\n  Hadad the supreme, 189;\n  magic and, 258;\n  Ph\u0153nician god, 327;\n  Tanit alluded to as 'The Countenance of --,' 330\n'BA'AL.' Canaanitish god, 325;\n  term applied by Ph\u0153nicians, 327\nBAAL-AMM'ON or MO'LOCH. _See_ Moloch\nBA'AL-HAMM'AN. Ph\u0153nician god worshipped in Carthage, 327\n_Ba'alim_. Presiding spirits, 326;\n  of Tyre, the Ph\u0153nicians and, 327\nBA'BEL. The Tower of, 48;\n  Hebrew verb _babal_ confused with word _babel_, 48;\n  story of Tower of, suggested by one of the towers of Babylon;\n  the beginning of Nimrod's kingdom was, 49\nB\u00c2BIL. Mound and enclosure of 103, 347;\n  as a citadel, 368\nBA'BU. Esar-haddon, restorer of, 306\nBABYLON-IA-N. Racial origin, 12;\n  mother of astrology and magic, 12;\n  land boundaries, the Tigris and Euphrates, 12;\n  the Akkadians and, 13;\n  Semites--receive germs of culture from Akkadians, 14;\n  language, 14;\n  civilization, 14;\n  offshoot of culture of Eridu, 15;\n  first founders, 15;\n  Semite conquerors enter, 15, 16;\n  first great Semitic empire in, founded by Sargon of Akkad, 16;\n  Syria and Palestine welded with, by Sargon, 17;\n  kings, vicegerents of the gods, 17;\n  art; gem-cutting, etc., 17;\n  communication between island of Cyprus and, 18;\n  fall of 'First Dynasty of --', 21;\n  Burna-buryas, King of, 22;\n  Tukulti-in-Aristi takes, and slays King Bitilyasu, 22;\n  built by Semiramis, 26;\n  finally conquered by Tiglath-pileser III, 30;\n  surrender of, through starvation, 34;\n  literature; Assur-bani-pal and, 35;\n  Nebuchadrezzar leads Jews into captivity in, 37;\n  Kings; Nabonidus, last of, 40;\n  independence of, recovered after death of Darius, 41;\n  Persians conquer, 41;\n  destruction of, 41;\n  Seleucia built out of ruins of, 42;\n  arch\u00e6ology, 46, 47;\n  legend of confusion of tongues and towers of, 47;\n  E-Sagila, tower of, 47;\n  built by Nimrod, 50;\n  cuneiform writing of, 60-66;\n  cosmogony, 70-87;\n  religion, early, 88-153;\n  spirits and gods in ancient, 89-153;\n  religion, Semitic influence on, 91, 92;\n  religion, signs of totemism in, 92;\n  the Pantheon--Early, 94, 95;\n  Later, 184-198;\n  Nippur preferred to, 196;\n  the country of Bel, 225;\n  star-worship in, 231-238;\n  temples of, 242-251;\n  magic and demonology, 257-288;\n  belief in taboo, 278;\n  conquered by Shalmaneser I, 308;\n  religions of Assyria and, comparative value, 313-336, etc.;\n  captivity, 321;\n  religion, penetrated to Britain, 331;\n  the religion of Zoroaster supplanted that of ancient, 332;\n  ethics, 337, 338;\n  myth, compared with Hellenic and Scandinavian, 338;\n  moral code, 338;\n  modern excavations in, 339-366;\n  the, of Nebuchadrezzar II, 367;\n  water supply of, 368;\n  hanging gardens of, 371;\n  the elder, 375, 376;\n  national status of, regained, 377;\n  religion, decay of, 378, 379\n_Bab-y-lon'ic-a_. A work by Iamblichus, containing fragments of\n  Babylonian history, 56;\n  reference to an epitome of the, by Photius, 56\nBANKS. Temples as, 250, 251\nBAPHOMET. Name of pagan idol, 293\nBARBARO, JOSAPHAT. Cuneiform writing and, 61\nBAR-SA'NES. King of Armenia, 25\n_Bar\u00fb_. The seers, 260\nBAS'RA. Layard sends sculptures to, 344;\n  Ernest de Sarzec, French vice-consul at, 355\nBAS-RELIEF-S. Found in palace of Sennacherib at Kouyunjik, 345;\n  found in palace of Assur-bani-pal, 346\nBAU. Goddess;\n  mother of mankind, 'chief daughter of Anu,' 144, 145;\n  _Zag-muku_ and, 251\nBE-DAD or BEN-DAD. The father of the Edomite Hadad, 190\nBE-EL'ZE-BUB. Magic and, 258\nBE-HIS-T\u00dbN. Persian text at, 65\nBEL. Babylonian sun-god, 41;\n  the Dragon and 71;\n  Merodach and, 79, 194;\n  at Nippur, looked on as creator of man, 86;\n  ruled at Nippur (Niffur), 94;\n  earlier variant, En-lil;\n  description of, 95-97;\n  legend of the Dragon and, in the Apocrypha, 97;\n  worship of, at Babylon, 98;\n  King Cyrus and worship of, 98-101;\n  the temple of, 101-105;\n  discovery of Mr George Smith re temple of, 101;\n  Nebo, son of, 102;\n  father of Nirig, 153;\n  Ut-Napishtim and, 174, 176;\n  Gilgamesh resorts to, 180;\n  Tablets of Destiny and, 193-195;\n  Dagan and, 198, 216;\n  the Assyrians and the country of, 225;\n  Merodach usurped place of, 227;\n  the Pole Star (of equator), 236;\n  eclipses and, 255;\n  Bil\u00e9 allied with, 317;\n  shrine to, of King Bur-Sin I, 364\n_Bel, The Observations of_. In library founded by Sargon, 18;\n  translated into Greek by Berossus, 18\nBEL'IT. A generic term given to Ishtar, 214, 227;\n  Anu's consort, 227;\n  figures as wife of Asshur, 227;\n  Tiglath-pileser I and, 227;\n  Assur-bani-pal and, 227\nBEL-KU'DUR-U'ZUR. The last of the old Assyrian line, killed by\n  Hadad-nadin-akhi, 23\nBEL-MER'O-DACH. Babylonian god;\n  avenged by Cyrus, 41;\n  son of Ea and Dawkina, 73;\n  absorbed into the Assyrian pantheon, 225\nBE'LOS. _See_ variant, Bel-Merodach, 73\nBEL-TE-SHAZZ'AR. Babylonian appellation for Daniel, 37\nBEL'TIS. Variant, Nin-lil;\n  the wife of En-lil, 101;\n  sanctuary of, at Girsu, 101;\n  name signified 'lady,' 101;\n  tablets and figures of, found by Dr Peters, 364\nBEL'US. Temple of;\n  mound of B\u00e2bil identified with, 103;\n  delineations of animals preserved in temple of, 114;\n  variant, Dis, 114\nBEL-ZAK'IR-ISK'UN. Descendant of Assur-bani-pal, 306, 307\nBE-NA'NI. God;\n  husband of Melili, 82\nBE-NI'NI. King of the monsters, 295, 296\nBER-OSS'US.\n1. Babylonian historian;\n  translates _The Observations of Bel_ into Greek, 18;\n  narrative of, _re_ creation of man, 81;\n  his statement _re_ Ea copied by Alexander Polyhistor, etc., 112, 113;\n  quotes version of the deluge myth, 177, 178;\n  the hanging gardens of Babylon and, 371.\n2. A priest of Bel at Babylon, 42;\n  'history' by, 42-45;\n  extracts from history of, preserved by Josephus and Eusebius, 42;\n  Sisuthrus and, 42;\n  his legend of Oannes, 42;\n  his account of the deluge, 42-44;\n  Daonus and, 127\nBIL\u00c9. A Celtic deity, 317\nBINT-EL-AMIR. Hill of, 358, 361, 362, 365\nBIRD MESSENGERS. Ut-Napishtim sends out, 176\nBIRS NIMR\u00dbD. Ruins of, 103\n_Bit-ili_, THE. Sacred stones, 19\nBIT-IL-YA'SU. King of Babylon, slain by Tukulti-in-Aristi, 22\nBOMBAY. The Parsis of, 336\nBOR-SIP'PA. Site of Nebo's temple at, 103;\n  'The Stages of the Seven Spheres,' the wonder of, 104;\n  chief seat of Nebo's worship, 184\nBOTTA, M. Arch\u00e6ological researches at Nineveh, 46;\n  French Consul at Mosul;\n  his excavations in Mesopotamia, 339, 340\nBRITISH MUSEUM. Bricks in, containing Assur-bani-pal's researches, 35,\n  71, 154, 155, 290;\n obelisk of Shalmaneser II in, 343\nBULL. Sacred, slain by Gilgamesh and Eabani, 158;\n  Ramman's name the great, 220;\n  forms of Ea and Merodach, 290\nBULL, WINGED. Symbol of and En-lil, 97;\n  associated with Merodach, 289, 290\nBURMESE. Attitude of, to the dead, 269\nBUR'NA-BUR'YAS. King of Babylonia, 22\nBURNOUF. Cuneiform writing and, 63\nBUR-SIN. Repairs Urbau's zikkurat, 248;\n  shrine to Bel dedicated by, 364\nBYB'LUS. Journey of Isis to, 328;\n  Philo of, 328\n\n\nC\n\nCA'LAH. Sennacherib takes nucleus of Assur-bani-pal's library from, 154;\n  residence of Asshur, 207;\n  Ninib's temple at, 215;\n  residence of Assur-nazir-pal, 215;\n  Sin's temple of, 223;\n  tower of, discovered by Layard, 346\nCALMET, ABB\u00c9. Disbelief of, in vampires, 266\nCAL'NEH. Part of Nimrod's kingdom, 49\nCAM-BY'SES. Son of Cyrus, 41\nCANAANITES, THE. First historic dwellers in Syria and Palestine, 324-326;\n  gods of, 325, 326;\n  ancestor-worship and, 326\nCANNING, SIR STRATFORD. Sir Henry Layard assisted by, in his excavations\n  at Nimr\u00fbd, 340\nCAPRICORNUS, SIGN OF. Sea-goddess Sabitu and, 183\nCAPTIVITY, THE BABYLONIAN, 321-323\nCARAVAN. The story of the missing, 285-288\nCAR-CHE'MISH. Worship of Hadad extended from, to Edom, 189\nCARTHAGE. Dido, the presiding deity of, 190;\n  Ba'al-Hamman worshipped in, 327;\n  Tanith honoured at, 328;\n  Eshmun worshipped at, 328;\n  religion of Semites of, 329;\n  Dido, Queen of, 329;\n  Apollo's temple at, 330;\n  Mohammedanism at, 332\nCELTIC. Teutonic religion and, compared, 317;\n  deity;\n  Bil\u00e9 a, 317\nCE'RES. Reference to, 133\nCHAL'CHIS. Iamblichus a native of, 56\nCHALDEAN MYTHOLOGY. The sign Gemini, associated with the two forms\n  of the solar deity in, 182\nCHAL-DE'A-N-S. Birthplace of Abram, 52;\n  Nimrod, King of, 52;\n  star-gazers, 202;\n  difference between the faiths of the two great races of, 204;\n  astrologers, 231, 232;\n  speculations, 233-235;\n  magic, 258, 259;\n  belief in taboo, 278;\n  belief in superstitions, 280;\n  divination, 281;\n  excavations in, 339\nCHA'OS. Tiawath, 193\nCHARDIN, JOHN. Cuneiform writing and, 61\nCHE'MOSH. God of the Moabite king, Mesha, 190\nCHRISTIANITY. Initiated by Semitic race, 313;\n  Jewish influence upon, 320\nCHRO'NOS. Berossus substitutes for Ea in the version of the deluge myth\n  quoted in his history, 177\nCHUS. The \u00c6thiop;\n  equivalents, Cush, or Cash (a coloured race), 49;\n  father of Nimrod, 49\nCIRCLE, THE MAGIC. Chaldean sorcerers and, 275, 276\nCODE, MORAL. Of the Babylonians, 338\nCOLOSSI. Gate of, 101;\n  example of art of which Ea was patron, 229\nCOR-CY'RE-AN MOUNTAINS. Reference to, by Berossus, 44\nCORN-SPIRITS. The primitive, 139\nCORNWALL. Ph\u0153nicians in, 331\nCOSMOGONY. Babylonian, 70-87;\n  Jastrow's opinion, 84;\n  type of, 84-87\nCREATION. Babylonian myth of, 70-87;\n  story of, in Genesis;\n  myths found in Egyptian papyri;\n  and that in the _Popol Vuh_, 70;\n  Seven Tablets of, 71;\n  of man, by Merodach, 80, 81;\n  legend; Apsu and Tiawath in, 193;\n  'Cuth\u00e6an legend of --,' 294-296;\n  common origin of Biblical and Babylonian accounts of, 323\nCTES'I-AS. His tale _re_ Parsondes, 146-149;\n  reference to, 367\nCUNE-I-FORM TEXTS. Merodach and, 200\nCUNEIFORM WRITING. _See_ Writing\nCUSH, or CASH. _See_ equivalent, Chus\nCU'THAH. Temple of Nergal at, 82, 94, 105, 296\nCU-TH\u00c6'AN LEGEND, THE. Of creation, 294-296\nCYAXARES. Scythian king of Ecbatana, 36;\n  son of, dethroned by Ach\u00e6menid\u00e6, 333\nCYBE'L\u00c9. The mother-goddess, 132\nCYPRUS. Among the conquests of Sargon, 18;\n  communication between Babylonia and island of, 19;\n  worship of Ashtart at, 327\nCYRUS, KING. The worship of Bel and, 98-101\nCYRUS THE PERSIAN. Invasion of Babylonia by, 41;\n  the pretended avenger of Bel-Merodach, 41;\n  Cambyses, son of, 41;\n  conqueror of Babylon and saviour of Merodach's honour, 378\n\n\nD\n\nDA'DA. Abbreviated form of Abd-Hadad;\n  resemblances between Hadad, Dido, Davad, and, 189-191;\n  Shalmaneser (II) speaks of, 189\nDAG'AN. Palestinian form of Dagon;\n  a fish-god, same as Oannes or Ea, 216, 217;\n  associated with Bel, 217;\n  Anu and, 198\nDAG'ON. God Atargatus worshipped under the name of, 27;\n  a fish-god, 151, 152;\n  an Amorite deity, 325\nDAM'AS. One of the two eunuchs appointed to watch Rhodanes and Sinonis, 57\nDAM-AS'CI-US. The last of the Neoplatonists, 72;\n  author of _Doubts and Solutions of the First Principles_, 73\nDAM-AS'CUS. Worship of Hadad at, under name of Rimmon, 189;\n  worship of Ramman in, 220\nDAM'KU. One of the lesser Babylonian gods, 229\nDAN'I-EL. Babylonian appellation, Belteshazzar, 37;\n  Nebuchadrezzar and, 37-40;\n  Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego companions of, 38;\n  reference to a corrupted story of the deliverance of the three Hebrew\n  princes recorded by, 53;\n  Book of, 97;\n  the worship of Bel and, 98-101\nDA'ON. The shepherd king of Pantibiblon, 112\nDA-O'NUS or DAOS. King of Babylonia, _vide_ Berossus, 127\nDAR-I'US. Babylonia independence recovered after death of, 41;\n  defeated at Arbela, 378\nDA'VID. Resemblances between Hadad, D\u00e1da, Dido, and, 189-191;\n  variants, Dod, Dodo, 190\nDAW-KI'NA. Belos (Bel-Merodach), the son of Ea, and, 73;\n  saved from the deluge, 115;\n  Ishtar identified with, 127, 137;\n  consort of Ea, 197\nDE MORGAN. Unearths monument of Naran-Sin at Susa, 17;\n  copy of Khammurabi's code found by, 21\nDE SAR'ZEC, ERNEST. French vice-consul at Basra;\n  diorite statues of Gudea (2700 B.C.) found by, 47;\n  excavations of, at Tell\u00f4, 355, 356;\n  _D\u00e9couvertes en Chald\u00e9e par_, reference to, 356\nDEAD. The doctrine of ministering to, 181;\n  often left unburied in Babylonia, 269;\n  attitude of Burmese to, 269;\n  Canaanites and cult of the, 326;\n  Persians and their, 336;\n  Parsis and their, 336;\n  'House of the --,' at Nippur, 362\nDELLA VALLE, PIETRO. Cuneiform writing and, 61\nDELPHI. Worshippers of Apollo send offerings to, 330\nDELUGE, THE. Berossus' account of, 42-45;\n  reference to account of, in _Gilgamesh Epic_, 42;\n  analogies with Flood Myth, 45, 46;\n  Babylonian and Hebrew story of, have a common origin, 45, 323;\n  myth of, 112, 173-178;\n  refugees saved from--Ea, etc., 115\nDEMETER. Tanit compared with, 330\nDEMONOLOGY. Of Babylonia and Assyria, 257-288\nDEMONS. Many Babylonian gods evolved from, 268;\n  Babylonian, described, 276-278\nDESTINY. Mammetum, the maker of, 173;\n  Zu and the Tablets of, 193-195;\n  the Lia Fail, the Stone of, reference to, 248\nDEVIL-S. Possession by, 262\nDI-A'NA. Goddess, 235, 319\nDI-BARR'A. A variant of Nergal, 106;\n  a Babylonian deity placed in the Assyrian pantheon, 229\nDI'DO. Resemblances between Hadad, D\u00e1da, David, and, 189-191;\n  Queen of Carthage, 329;\n  Tanit identified with, 331\nDIS. Variant of Belus, 114\nDIVINATION. Practice of, by Babylonians and Assyrians, 281-288;\n  Shamash, Hadad, and Rimmon, 'lords of --,' 283;\n  Ph\u0153nicians' belief in, 329\nDIVINITIES, TRIBAL. The most outstanding, 94\nDIVS. Arch-demons and demons, 334\nDOD OR DODO. _See_ David;\n  worship of, by the side of Yahveh, 190\nDOG-S. The, in Babylonia;\n  five hounds of Assur-bani-pal, 290, 291;\n  legend of a, 291, 292\nDRAGON, THE. Bel and, 71;\n  China and, 80;\n  in Egypt, it is the serpent Apep, 80;\n  in India, the serpent Vritra (Ahi), 80;\n  in Australia and in parts of N. America a great frog, 80;\n  Beowulf and, 80;\n  Faffnir and, 80;\n  legend of Bel and, in the Apocrypha, 97;\n  Merodach's, 186;\n  the, in Zoroaster's religion, 337\nDREAM-S. Nebuchadrezzar's, and Daniel, 37-40;\n  of Gyges, King of Lydia, 302, 303\nDU-MU-ZI. A contraction of Du-mu-zi-apsu;\n  name of Tammuz derived from, 126\nDUN'GI. Gudea vassal of the throne of, 19\nDYNASTY. 'The First, of Babylon,' 21;\n  a Kassite, founded by Kandis, 21;\n  the First, of Ur, 101;\n  Khumbaba, and an Elamite, 166;\n  reference to Kassite, 248;\n  the Hammurabi, 325;\n  the Seleucid\u00e6 and the Arsacid\u00e6, 333\n\n\nE\n\nE'A, OR O'AN-NES. The Babylonian god of light and wisdom, 14;\n  held sway at Eridu, 14;\n  legendary father of Semiramis, 25;\n  source of all things and, 72;\n  Apsu (Zigarun), mother of, 72;\n  variant, Nudimmud, 73;\n  Tiawath and, 76;\n  Merodach and, 79;\n  displaced politically by Merodach, 86, 199;\n  name of Jonah may be compared with that of, 87;\n  fish-form of, 93;\n  the God of the deep, 93;\n  Eridu, city of, 94;\n  temple of, 102;\n  the god of the waters and of the abyss, 111-116;\n  father of Merodach, 111, 191;\n  Greek name, Oannes, 111;\n  instructions tending to humanize mankind, 112, 113;\n  writings of, 113-116;\n  myth _re_ creation of world and, 115;\n  variant, Nin-a-gal, 116;\n  variant, En-ki, 116;\n  Adapa, son of, 116;\n  Dagon (Dagan) same as, 151, 152, 216, 217;\n  Ut-Napishtim instructed by, 174, 176;\n  in later times, 191-193;\n  Dawkina, consort of, 197;\n  identified with a star in the constellation Argo, 236;\n  eclipses and, 255;\n  demons and name of, 263;\n  gazelles and, 292\nEA-BA'NI. Goddess Aruru and, 86;\n  temple maiden Ukhut and, 129, 163;\n  typifies primitive man in Gilgamesh epic, 155, 159, 160;\n  the monster Khumbaba and, 158;\n  slain by wrath of Ishtar, 158;\n  shade of, appears to Gilgamesh, 160;\n  a sort of satyr, 163;\n  the beguiling of, 163, 164;\n  Gilgamesh meets, 164-166;\n  death of, 170;\n  Gilgamesh laments, 179;\n  ghost of, designated _utukku_, 181\nEAGLE. Symbol of Kis, 294, 296;\n  Babylonian fable _re_ the, 296-298\nEA-LUR. Goddess;\n  amalgamated with Zarpanitum, 186\nE-ANNA. Temple of, at Erech, 250\nE-ANNA-TUM. Shamash first mentioned in reign of, 109;\n  'stele of vultures' erected by, discovered by de Sarzec, 355\nEARTH. The _Annunaki_, the spirits of, 90;\n  -mother, worship of, 318, 319\nE-BABB'ARA. 'The shining house';\n  name of Shamash's sanctuary, 109, 249\nEC-BA-TA'NA. Cyaxares, the Scythian king of, 36\nECLIPSE. Terror of, to Babylonians, 255, 256;\n  the fatal, in case of Assur-Dan III, 307-309\nE'DOM. Worship of Hadad extended from Carchemish to, 189\nE-GIG-UN-N\u00db. 'House of the Tomb';\n  the temple-tower of Nippur, 362\nEGYPT. Semitic immigrants in, 15;\n  conquered by Semiramis, 26;\n  Esar-haddon wars with, 31;\n  Nebuchadrezzar invades, 37;\n  cult of Ishtar in, 124;\n  Semitic religion in, 331;\n  excavations in, 339\nE-KUR. The temple of, 248, 253;\n  temples of E-Sagila and, 249\nE'LAM-ITES. Northern Mesopotamia and, overcome by Sargon, 17;\n  yoke of, thrown off by Khammurabi, 20;\n  name of Khumbaba argues enmity between Babylon and, 166;\n  Assur-bani-pal and gods of the, 204;\n  votive object from, 248\nEL-BUG\u00c2T. Feast of, 134\nEL-IS'SA. Dido confounded with, 190\n_El\u00f4him_. Term employed in Genesis, 327\nEN-KI. Variant of Ea, 116\nEN-LIL. The god, 14;\n  temple of, unearthed, 47;\n  Merodach and, 84;\n  earlier name of Bel, 95-97;\n  a god of vegetation, 96;\n  symbol of winged bull represents, 97;\n  word _lil_ signifies a 'demon,' 97;\n  Beltis (Nin-lil), wife of, 101;\n  Hadad resembled, 188;\n  Ramman, son of, 221;\n  temple of E-Kur sacred to, 248\nEN-MASH'TI. Name of Ninib translated by Canaanites as, 326\nE'NOCH, BOOK OF. Quoted, 294\nE'NOS. Son of Seth, 232\nEPH'ES-US. Patroness of, and Diana, 235\nEP-I-PHA'NI-US. His allegations _re_ Nimrod, 49\nER'ECH. Part of Nimrod's kingdom, 49;\n  temple of, 82;\n  Dibarra plunders, 106-109;\n  centre of Ishtar's cult, 124;\n  Gilgamesh, prince of, 154;\n  temple of Ishtar at, 248\nER'ESH-KI-GAL (Allatu). The mistress of Hades, 129\nER-I-DU. Babylonian civilization grouped round, 14;\n  the home of Ea, or Oannes, the god of light and wisdom, 14;\n  Ur a near neighbour of, 15;\n  culture of, and Babylon, 15;\n  'magical' hymns emanated from, 68;\n  worshippers of Ea at, 72;\n  temple of Ea at, 111;\n  the deluge and, 116;\n  supremacy of, passes to Babylon, 199;\n  Merodach originated at, 200\nE-SAG-I'LA. Nabonidus and the priests of, 41;\n  Nebo's shrine, E-Zila, in temple of, 185;\n  name of Merodach's temple at Babylon, 200;\n  temples of E-Kur and, 249;\n  temple of, 250, 368, 374, 375\nE-SAGILA. Tower in Babylon, 47, 374, 375\nE'SAR-HAD'DON. Son of Sennacherib, 31;\n  Assur-bani-pal succeeded, as King of Assyria, 34;\n  Ishtar and, 212;\n  'the most likeable' of the Assyrian kings, 306, 307;\n  palace built by, unearthed by Layard, 343\nESHM\u00dbN. The god of force and healing, 328, 330\nESHMUN-MEL'KARTH. Ph\u0153nician combination, 328\nES'THER. Ishtar and, 124, 140-144;\n  Book of, why written, 141;\n  equivalent, Ishtar, 142;\n  Lang, on story of, 142, 143;\n  Xerxes and, 143;\n  variant, Hadassah, 143;\n  Dr Jastrow on Book of, 143\nET-A'NA. The legend of, 195\nETHICS. Babylonian and Assyrian, 337, 338\nETHNOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES. Between the peoples of the northern and\n  southern culture-groups, 203\nEUPHRATES,\n1. River, 177, 368, 369;\n2. Bridge, 375\nEUPH-RA'TES-TIG'RIS. Valley;\n  civilization of, influenced Semitic field, 92\nEU-SE'BI-US. Sanchuniathon, Philo, and, 329\nEXCAVATION-S. Modern, in Babylonia and Assyria, 339-366;\n  in Egypt, 339;\n  map relating to, in Babylonia and Assyria, 341;\n  at Nineveh by George Smith, 347-354;\n  at Kouyunjik by Rassam, 354, 355;\n  of de Sarzec at Tell\u00f4, 355, 356;\n  Babylonian Exploration Fund instituted in America, 356-366;\n  under control of the University of Pennsylvania, 360-366;\n  recent, by German Oriental Society, 367-377\nE-ZI'DA.\n1. Temple of Nabu at, 250;\n  discovered by Rawlinson 346;\n2. Great tower of Nabu, 375\nE-ZILA. 'The firm house'; Nebo's shrine in temple of E-Sagila, 185\n\n\nF\n\nFABLE. A Babylonian, _re_ the eagle, 296-298\nFATE-S. The great gods Annunaki decree, 173;\n  the Chamber of, 185, 252, 253\nFATHER-SKY. Of primitive mythologies, 196\nFEAST-S. The Jewish, of Purim, 140;\n  Babylonian, 251, 252\nFESTIVAL-S. Of Adonis, 135;\n  of the Sac\u00e6a or Zakmuk, 141;\n  New Year; Nebo and, 185;\n  Babylonian; _Zag-muku_, sacred to Bau, 251, 252;\n  Scottish-Celtic, of Beltane, 317.\nFIELD. An expert Assyriologist, 358\nFIRE-GOD. Gibil, the, 225\nFIRE-WORSHIP. The central feature of Zoroastrian ritual, 335\nFISHER, MR. Architect in American exploration campaign, 360\nFLOOD. _See_ Deluge.\nFRA-VASH'I. Guardian spirit of the Persians, 336\nFRAZER, SIR JAMES. On the Greek way of representing Ashurbanapal\n  (_i.e._ Sardanapalus), 32;\n  on the real and the mock Sardanapalus, 34;\n  Tammuz, and his _Golden Bough_, 134;\n  Ishtar and, 137;\n  feast of Purim and, 140;\n  on Vashti, 143\nFRESNEL. French exploration expedition and, 347\n\n\nG\n\nGARDENS, HANGING. Of Babylon, 371\nGAR'MUS. King of Babylon;\n  romance of Sinonis and, 56-60;\n  Rhodanes and, 56-60\nGATHAS. The most ancient part of the Avesta, 333\nGA-TUM-DUG. Goddess; allied form of Bau, 145\nGA'ZA. Temple of Dagon at, 151\nGAZELLE. Goat and, gods, 292-294\nGEM'I-NI, SIGN. Gilgamesh and Eabani some relation to the, 182\nGENESIS, BOOK OF. Reference to, _re_ Nimrod, 49;\n  creation story in, 70, 289;\n  Abb\u00e9 Loisy and, 322, 323;\n  term _elohim_ in, 327\nGERMANY. Goat-demon adored in, 293\nGHOSTS. Assyrian, 277, 278\nGI'BI. Prayer and the god, 68\nGIB'IL. The god of fire;\n  Nusku and, 225\nGILGAMESH. Hero;\n  Nimrod identified with, 50, 156;\n  epic; goddess Aruru figures in, 86;\n  prince of Erech, 154-183;\n  provisional name _Gisdhubar_, or _Izdubar_, 156;\n  Shamash and, 156;\n  birth of, related by \u00c6lian, 156;\n  Rimatbelit, mother of, 158;\n  shade of Eabani appears to, 160;\n  Ishtar's love for, 167, 168;\n  mourning the loss of Eabani, 170;\n  his quest for the secret of perpetual life, 170-173;\n  his ancestor, Ut-Napishtim, 170;\n  Sin delivers, 170;\n  seeks from Ut-Napishtim the secret of perpetual life, 173-180;\n  Adad-Ea and, 178, 179\nGIL-GA'MESH EPIC, THE. Account of deluge in, reference to, 42;\n  one of the greatest literary productions of ancient Babylonia, 154-183;\n  Ishtar in, 213\nGIR'SU. Beltis' sanctuary at, 101\nGIS-DHU'BAR or IZDU'BAR. Gilgamesh's provisional name, 156\nGISH-ZI'DA. One of the guardians of the gates of heaven, 118\nGOATS. Gazelle and, gods, 292-294\nGOD-S. Ea, or Oannes, 14, 25, 72, 73, 76, 79, 86, 87, 93, 94, 102,\n  111-116, 216, 229;\n  En-lil, 14, 47, 84, 95-97, 101;\n  Babylonian kings the direct vice-regents of the, on earth, 17;\n  Babylonian, Merodach, 41, 47, 50, 68, 76-82, 81, 84, 86, 93, 94,\n  103, 106, 184-198, 199-202;\n  Bel, Babylonian sun-, 41, 196, 197;\n  the birth of the, 71-87;\n  Tiawath, Apsu, and Mummu, a trinity of, 74;\n  Horus, reference to, 75;\n  Kingu; Tiawath and, 75;\n  Merodach, the creator of the, 82;\n  Semites and, 89;\n  spirits and, in ancient Babylonia, 89-91;\n  Anu, most ancient of Babylonian, 90, 121-123, 197, 198, 217;\n  invoked by Assyrian kings, 90;\n  Kis, the sun-, 93, 294;\n  under animal forms, 92, 93;\n  the great, 93-153;\n  Sin, moon-, 94, 109, 128, 170, 325;\n  tribal divinities, 94;\n  pantheon that held sway prior to Khammurabi, 94, 95;\n  description of Bel, 96;\n  a trinity of (Bel, Ea, and Anu), 97;\n  Sibi, 108;\n  Shamash, the sun-, 41, 94, 109, 187, 222, 223, 325;\n  Nergal, 82, 94, 105, 106, 151, 180, 235, 326, 328, 329;\n  Adapa, 116-121;\n  Ishtar, 123-144;\n  Tammuz, sun-god of Eridu, 126-144;\n  Ishtar and Persephone, 131-135;\n  Nin-Girsu, 144;\n  Bau, 144;\n  Pap-sukal, messenger of the, 130;\n  Ga-tum-dug, 145;\n  Nannar, the moon-god of Ur, 145-149;\n  Dagon, a fish-, 151, 152, 216, 217, 325;\n  Nirig, or Enu-Res-tu, 153;\n  Gilgamesh, a sun-, 157;\n  Eabani, a sun-, 159;\n  Later Pantheon of Babylonia, 184-198;\n  Nebo, 184-186, 326;\n  Ramman, 187-189, 195, 217-222, 325;\n  Hadad or Adad, 187-191, 325;\n  Baal, a sun-, 189, 327, 328;\n  D\u00e1da, Dido, Dodo, 189-191;\n  Zu, a storm-, 193-195;\n  Merodach originally a sun-, 199;\n  the great, of Assyria, 205-229;\n  Asshur, 94, 124, 206-211;\n  Nin-ib, war-god and hunter-, 214-216, 326;\n  the moon-, 94, 109, 128, 170, 180, 223, 224;\n  Nusku, 224, 225;\n  Gibil, the fire-, 225;\n  Bel-Merodach, 225;\n  prisoner-, 225, 226;\n  Belit alluded to as 'Mother of the Great --', 228;\n  procession of--_see_ illustration, 230;\n  ideograph the same for 'star' and, 234;\n  planets identified with, 235;\n  Nabu and Merodach, 228;\n  Dibbarra, 229;\n  Damku and Sharru-Ilu, 229;\n  many Babylonian, evolved from demons, 268;\n  gazelle- and goat-, 292-294;\n  Hellenic departmental, 315;\n  departmental characteristics of the, of Babylonia and Assyria, 315, 316;\n  general equivalent, '_el_,' used by Canaanites and Hebrews, 325, 326;\n  of light--Uru, 325;\n  of the Ph\u0153nicians, 327-329;\n  Resheph, a Canaanite, 326, 328;\n  Melkarth of Tyre, 327;\n  Ashtart, 326, 327, 330;\n  Eshmun, god of vital force, 328;\n  Moloch, 328;\n  Carthaginian Moloch, 330;\n  Patechus, a monster, 330;\n  Illat, 330;\n  Sakon, 330;\n  Tsaphon, 330;\n  of Babylon more dignified than those of the Greeks or Norsemen, 338;\n  the Twilight of the, 377-380\nGODDESS-ES. Ishtar, 28, 94, 101, 106, 107, 111, 123-144, 158,\n  165-168, 176, 211-214, 326;\n  'Ishtar' a generic designation for, 124;\n  Nan\u00e2 and Anunit, 124;\n  Samkhat -- of joy, 131;\n  Cybele, the mother-, 132;\n  Bau, 'mother of Lagash,' 144, 145;\n  Ga-tum-dug, allied form of Bau, 14;\n  Azalu, 149-151;\n  Sabitu, a sea-, 172;\n  Ealur, amalgamated with Zarpanitum, 186;\n  Innana or Ninni, 187;\n  Dawkina, 197;\n  worship of great mother, 318, 319;\n  Tanith, 328;\n  Ashtart, 326, 327, 328;\n  Isis (Astarte), 328;\n  Tanit, the moon, 330;\n  Rabbat Umma, 330;\n  Tanit, 330\nGRAIN-GOD. Nebo as, 186\nGREECE. Cult of Ishtar in, 124\nGREEKS. Babylonia ruled over by, 378\nGROTEFEND, GEORG. Cuneiform writing and, 62-64\nGU-BARR'A. Prayer and god, 68\nGU-DE'A. A vassal of the throne of Dungi, 19;\n  high-priest of Lagash, 19;\n  his building and architectural ability, 19, 247;\n  diorite statues of, found by de Sarzec, 47;\n  Bau alluded to in ancient inscriptions of, 144;\n  worship of Innana by, 187;\n  Nin-girsu favourite of, 251;\n  hepatoscopy and, 283;\n  de Sarzec and, 355\nGU'LA. Consort of Ninib, 216\nGY'GES. King of Lydia;\n  Assur-bani-pal and, 302, 303;\n  George Smith's discoveries _re_, 352\n\n\nH\n\nHABB'AC-UC. A prophet; sent to feed Daniel, 100\nHA'DAD or ADAD. Ramman or Rimmon identified with, 187-191;\n  resemblances between D\u00e1da, Dido, David and, 189-191;\n  the supreme Baal, 189;\n  a Canaanitish god, 325\nHA'DAD-NA'DIN-AKHI. Placed on throne of Babylon by Assur-nazir-pal, 23;\n  kills the Assyrian monarch, Bel-kudur-uzur, 23\nHAD-ASS'AH. Variant of Esther, 143\nHA'DES. Descent of Ishtar into, 125, 126, 128-131;\n  Eresh-ki-gal (Allatu), mistress of, 129\nHAL'LA-BI. Innana's temple at, 187\nHAM'AN. The Book of Esther and, 141;\n  accepted identity with Humman or Homman, 142\nHAMMURABI. Dynasty, 325\nHAN'NI-BAL. Carthaginian hero, 330, 332;\n  Baal's name in, 330\nHA-O'MA. Deposited on the celestial mountain, 335\nHAR-AN'. Abram's youngest brother, 52\nHAR' RAN. A centre of lunar adoration, 250, 283\nHAS'DRU-BAL. Carthaginian hero; Baal's name in, 330\nHAUG, DR. Translator of the G\u0101th\u0101s, 333\nHAYNES. Excavations of, at Nippur, 360-366\nHAYNES, MR J.H. Sent in 1889 to excavate at Nippur, 47\nHEAVEN. The _Igigi_ the spirits of, 90\nHEBREW-S.\n1. Symbol; the serpent the, for mischief, 285;\n2. Religion; Babylonian influence upon, 321, 322\nHE-PAT-OS'CO-PY. Ritual and practice of, 282-288\nHER'AC-LES. Melkarth equated with, 328\nHER'CU-LES. Reference to, 87\nHER-O'DOT-US. Statements of, _re_ Semiramis, 28;\n  account of, _re_ temple of Bel, 101, 103;\n  marriage customs in Babylonia described by, 312;\n  reference to, 367, 374\nHEZ-EK-I AH. King of Judah, 30, 37;\n  Sennacherib's campaign against, 30;\n  praise of, sung by Byron in his _Hebrew Melodies_, 30\nHI-ER-A'POL-IS. Memorials of Semiramis preserved at, 27\nHILPRECHT, PROFESSOR. An expert Assyriologist, 345, 357, 360-363\nHINKS, REV. EDWARD. Language found at Persepolis deciphered by, 65\nHO'RUS. The Egyptian god of light; Tiawath reminds of, 75\n'HOUSE OF NO RETURN.' Equivalent, Hades, 126\nHUITZILOPOCHTLI (pron. _Hweet-zil-o-potch-tlee_). Reference to, 144\nHUR-AK-\u00c2N. The storm-god alluded to in the _Popol Vuh_, 97\nHYMN-S. To Adar, 68;\n  to Nebo, 69;\n  to Nusku, 69;\n  'magical,' emanated from Eridu, 68;\n  Akkadian, in which Tammuz is addressed, 126;\n  of Khammurabi, 219;\n  to Ramman, 220\n\n\nI\n\nI-AM'BLI-CHUS. Author of a _Babylonica_, 56\nIDOLATRY. Legend _re_ origin of, 232;\n  Laban's images, 266-268\n_IG'I-GI_, THE. Spirits of heaven, 90\nIK-SU'DA (Grasper). Attendant hound of Merodach, 202\nIL-A-BRAT. Minister of Anu, 117\nILL'AT. Carthaginian deity, 330\nIL-TE'HU (Holder). Attendant hound of Merodach, 202\nIMAGE-S. Stars and, 233\nIM-G\u00dbR-BEL. City of, 354\n'INCANTATION OF ERIDU.' The ceremony of the, 270\nINDIA-NS. Semiramis makes war on Strabrobates, King of, 26, 27;\n  followers of Zarathustra fled to; descendants, the Parsis of, 334;\n  Araucanian, of Chile, 336\nIN'ESH. The pilot of Eridu, 115\nIN'MAR-MA'ON. City of, 108\nINSCRIPTION-S. Of Shalmaneser I, 351;\n  of Tukulti-ninip, 351\nIR'KAL-LA. The abode of;\n  the house of darkness, 128, 169\nIR'NI-NA. A form of Ishtar, 165\nIS-AI'AH. Jerusalem described by, 191;\n  reference to Sargon's expedition against Ashdod mentioned by, 350\nISH'NU, Ura's counsellor, 269\nISH'TAR. Goddess;\n  fame of Semiramis mingled with that of the, 28;\n  goddess of Nineveh, 94, 212;\n  court of Zamama and, 101;\n  witnesses plunder of Erech by Dibarra, 106, 107;\n  both male and female, 111;\n  significance, 123-144;\n  generic designation for goddess, 124;\n  equivalents, Ashteroth or Astarte, 124, 327;\n  cult of Aphrodite began in that of, 124;\n  Esther and, 124, 140-144;\n  identified with Venus, 124, 235;\n  identified with Nin-lil, 124;\n  the consort of Asshur, 125;\n  descent into Hades of, 125-126;\n  war-goddess, 127, 213, 214;\n  consort of Tammuz, 127;\n  consort of Merodach and Assur, 127;\n  identified with Dawkina, 137;\n  a goddess of vegetation, 137, 138;\n  slays Eabani, 158;\n  Ir-nina a form of, 165;\n  love of, for Gilgamesh, 167, 168;\n  Anu father of, 168;\n  Anatu mother of, 168;\n  Lady of 'the Gods,' 176;\n  Assyrians and, 211-214;\n  Assur-nazir-pal and, 214;\n  confusion between Belit and, 228;\n  Aphrodite and, connected, 235;\n  sixth month sacred to, 236;\n  temple of E-anna dedicated to, 250;\n  magic and, 258;\n  variant, Ashtart, 326, 327, 330;\n  great gate of, discovered by Dr Koldewey, 372\nISH'UM. Attendant of Dibarra, 106-108\nI'SIS. Osiris and, 133;\n  journey to, as Astarte, 328\nISRAELITES. Worship of Dodo, or Dod, by the side of Yahveh, by the, 190\nI'YAR. The second month, sacred to Ea, 236\nIZ-DU'BAR or GISDHUBAR. Provisional name of Gilgamesh, 156\n\n\nJ\n\nJA'COB. Laban and, 267\nJE-HO'IA-KIM. King of Jerusalem; Nebuchadrezzar puts to death, 37\nJE'HU. Son of Omri (_sic_);\n  obelisk of Shalmaneser and, 343\nJEN'SEN. View of, _re_ Hamon, 142, 143;\n  explanation of, _re_ Ninib, 216\nJERUSALEM. Reference to deliverance of, from Sennacherib, 30;\n  King Nebuchadrezzar wars against, 37;\n  Isaiah describes, 191\nJEW-S. Nebuchadrezzar leads into captivity, 37;\n  feast of Purim and, 140;\n  Mordecai name of a real, 143\nJEWISH. Religion;\n  Babylonian influence on, 319-329\nJO'NAH. Story of, and supposed allusion to Babylonian cosmology, 86;\n  Tiawath and the 'fish' of, 87\nJOP'PA. Place, 86\nJUDAISM. Initiated by the Semitic race, 313\nJU'PIT-ER. The planet;\n  represented Merodach, 202, 235;\n  controlled stars under name Nibir, 235;\n  the 'Planet of the Bull of Light,' 290\n\n\nK\n\nKAA'BA (Temple). The celebrated, at Mecca, 52\nKAN'DIS. A Kassite dynasty founded by, 21\n_Kas'sa-pu_ or _Kas'sap-tu_. Names by which the wizard and\n  the witch were known, 261\nKASS'ITE. Dynasty;\n  founded by Kandis, 21;\n  King of Babylonia marries daughter of Assur-yuballidh of Assyria, 22;\n  dynasty, reference to, 248;\n  rulers and temple at Nippur, 248;\n  votive objects found by Dr Peters, 358, 359, 364, 365\nKHAM-MUR-A'BI THE GREAT.\n  Most famous name in Babylonian history, 20;\n  art and literature blossomed under care of, 20;\n  is to be regarded as the Babylonian Alfred, 21;\n  pantheon that held sway prior to, 94;\n  worship of Merodach and, 184;\n  Nebo, Tashmit, and, 186;\n  Shamash and, 187;\n  goddess Innana or Ninni and, 187;\n  age of, fertile in writers, 192;\n  Hymn of--Ramman and Shamash appealed to in, 219;\n  builder of sanctuaries, 247;\n  city of, discovered, 376\nKHARSAG-KURKURA. 'Mountain of the World,' 362\nKHI-KHI. Mountain of, 108\nKHOR'SA-BAD. City;\n  residence of Asshur, 207;\n  M. Botta and mounds of, 339;\n  Victor Place's work at, 340\nKHUM'BA-BA. Monster, overcome by Gilgamesh and Eabani, 158, 160, 166, 167\nKHUR'SAG KUR'KUR-A. The birthplace of the gods, 242\nKID'MU-RU. Ishtar's shrine in, 212\nKING, PROFESSOR, 371, 376\nKING-S. Of Babylonia and Assyria--Sargon of Akkad, 16-21, 47, 210,\n  211, 340, 350, 352;\n  'of the Four Zones'--Naram-Sin, 17;\n  of Ur--Dungi, 19;\n  of Lagash--Gudea, 19;\n  of Babylonia--Khammurabi the Great, 20, 21, 109;\n  of Babylonia (Kassite dynasty)--Kandis, 21;\n  of Egypt--Amen-hetep IV, 22;\n  of Babylonia--Burna-buryas, 22;\n  of Assyria--Shalmaneser I, 22, 351;\n  of Assyria--Tukulti-in-Aristi, 22;\n  of Babylon--Bitilyasu, 22;\n  of Babylon--Hadad-nadin-akhi, 23;\n  of Assyria--Bel-kudur-uzur, 23;\n  of Assyria--Tiglath-pileser I, 23, 346;\n  of Assyria--Assur-nazir-pal III, 23, 214-216, 223, 343, 351;\n  of Assyria--Shalmaneser II, 24, 343, 351;\n  of Israel--Ahab, 24;\n  of Assyria--Samsi-Rammon, 24;\n  of Assyria--Ninus, 25;\n  of Armenia--Barsanes, 25;\n  of India--Strabrobates, 26;\n  'of the World, etc., etc.'--Semiramis, 29;\n  of Assyria--Tiglath-pileser III, 29;\n  of Assyria--Shalmaneser IV, 30;\n  of Judah--Hezekiah, 30, 37;\n  of Assyria--Sennacherib, 30;\n  of Assyria--Esar-haddon, 31, 306, 307, 343, 350;\n  of Assyria--Assur-bani-pal (Sardanapalus), 31, 32, 301-306, 346;\n  of Assyria--Ashurbanapal, 33;\n  of Assyria--Sin-sar-iskin, 36;\n  of Ecbatana--Cyaxares, 36;\n  of Babylonia--Nebuchadrezzar II, 36-40, 47, 104;\n  of Babylonia--Nabonidus, 40, 249;\n  Cyrus the Persian, 41;\n  of Babylon--Cambyses, 41;\n  Alexander the Great, 42;\n  of Chaldea--Nimrod, 52;\n  Rammannirari I, 90;\n  of Persia--Cyrus, 98;\n  Daon, the shepherd, of Pantibiblon, 112;\n  of Persia--Xerxes, 141;\n  of Babylonia--Sokkaros, 157;\n  of Babylonia--Mili-Shikhu, 187;\n  the Moabite--Mesha, 190;\n  of Ashdod--Azuri, 210, 211;\n  of Babylonia, and soothsayers, 260;\n  tales of Babylonian and Assyrian, 299-312;\n  Nabu-Usabi, King of Sarrapanu, 300;\n  Gyges, King of Lydia, 302;\n  Tiglath-pileser II, 299-301;\n  of Assyria--Assur-Dan III, 308;\n  of Assyria--Adad-Narari IV, 308;\n  a royal 'day,' 309-312;\n  of Assyria--Ur-Gur, 359, 366;\n  of Assyria--Ur-Ninib, 366\nKIN'GU. God;\n  'only husband' of Tiawath, 75;\n  bound by Merodach, 78;\n  son of Tiawath, 194\nKIS. The Babylonian sun-god, 93, 294\nKI'SAR. God;\n  birth of, 71\nKOLDEWEY, DR. German explorer, 356, 367;\n  great gate of Ishtar discovered by, 372;\n  temple of E-Sagila and, 374, 375\n_Kosmologie_. Jensen's, 216\nKOU-YUN-JIK. M. Botta and mound of, 339;\n  Layard's searches in mound of, 344, 345;\n  George Smith's excavations at, 351;\n  Rassam's excavations at, 354, 355\nKUK-UL-CAN. Reference to the god, 224\n\n\nL\n\nLAB'AN. Jacob and, 267\nLAB'AR-TU. The hag-demon, 271, 277\nLADY OF THE GODS. Ishtar the, 176\nLAG'ASH. The modern Tel-lo, earliest Semite monuments come from, 16;\n  the priests of became kings, 16;\n  Gudea high-priest of, 19, 355;\n  Bau 'mother of,' 145\nLA'HA-M\u00c9. God;\n  birth of, 71\nLAH'MU. God;\n  birth of, 71\nLAM-AS'SU. A spirit of similar type to the Sedu, 277\nLAMENTATION-S. For Tammuz, 135, 136, 140;\n  Rituals, 253-255\nLANGUAGE. The Akkadian, 13, 14;\n  Babylonian priesthood preserved old Akkadian tongue as a sacred, 14;\n  Sumerians borrowed from rich Semitic tongue, 15;\n  cuneiform writing, 60-66, _see_ Writing;\n  Median, 65;\n  Susian, 65;\n  Assyrian, 65;\n  Longp\u00e9rier's translation of Assyrian, 66;\n  of Babylonia and Assyria, compared, 205\nLAR'SA. Shamash worshipped at, 109;\n  Khammurabi's improvements at, 187\nLA'YARD, Sir HENRY. Assur-bani-pal's library at Nineveh and, 35, 46;\n  arch\u00e6ological researches at Nineveh, 46, 155, 344, 346;\n  researches of, at Nimr\u00fbd, 340, 342-344, 346\nLEGEND-S. Jewish, _re_ Abram and Nimrod, 51;\n  Persian, _re_ Abram and Nimrod, 52, 53;\n  the creation, 193-195;\n  of Etana, 195;\n  of the origin of star-worship, 232-3;\n  the, of Ura, 268-270;\n  of a dog, 291, 292;\n  'Cuth\u00e6an, of creation,' 294-6\nLENORMANT. Hebrew and Assyrian poetry and, 322\nLEO, SIGN OF. Recalls the slaying of Khumbaba, 182\nLETTER-S. Franked by clay seals bearing name of Sargon, 18\nLEVI, ELIPHAS. The Baphomet goat and, 293\nLIA FAIL, THE. The Stone of Destiny; reference to, 248\nLIBRARY. Assur-bani-pal's, 35, 46, 71, 261, 282, 346;\n  the temple in 'Tablet Hill,' 363\nLIGHT. Merodach and Tiawath, and the primal strife between darkness and, 79\nLITERATURE. Babylonian art and, under Khammurabi the Great, 20;\n  Assur-bani-pal and Babylonian, 35;\n  sacred, of Babylonia, 67-69\nLIVER-READING. By priests, 281-283\nLOFTUS, WILLIAM KENNET. Successor of Mr Hormuzd Rassam, 346, 347\nLO'KI. God of fire; Nergal not unlike, 106\nLU'GAL-BAN'DA. Storm-bird god; like Prometheus, 93\nLU'GAL-ZUG-GI'SI. King of Erech; famous text of, found by Hilprecht, 366\n\n\nM\n\nMAAT. Reference to, 222\nMAGI. Confounded by Zoroaster, 333\nMAGICAL TEXTS. Dawkina alluded to in the, 197;\n  Anu mentioned in, 198;\n  of Babylonia and Assyria, 257, 288;\n  alluded to in Bible, 266, 267;\n  circle, the, 275, 276\nMAGICIAN-S. The word of power and, 263;\n  Ea, the great, of the gods, 268\nMAHOMET-AN. 'Baphomet' a corruption of, 293;\n  conquest, 333\nMAI-MON'I-DES. Jewish rabbi, friend of Averroes;\n  his commentary on the _Mischnah_, 232\n'MAK'LU.' A series of texts known as, 261\n_Mam'it_. Equivalent for taboo, 278\nMAM-MET'UM. The maker of destiny, 173\nMAN-KIND. Creation of, by Merodach, 80, 81;\n  goddess Aruru assists in the creation of, 82, 86;\n  humanizing of, 112, 113\nMARAZION. Signifies in Semitic, 'Hill by the Sea,' 331\nMAR-CHESH-UAN. Merodach's month, 251\nMAR'DUK. _See_ Merodach, 175, 200\nMARRIAGE. Customs in Babylonia, 312\nMARS. Identified with Nergal, 235\nMAS'HU. The Mountain of Sunset, 171\nMAZ'DA. One of the spiritual powers in Zoroaster's religion, 337\nMEC'CA. Reference to the celebrated Kaaba (temple) at, 52\nMEDE. Zoroaster a, 333\nME'DI-A. Subdued by Ninus, 25\nMEDICINE. Ea, a god of, 192\nMEG-ID'DO. The Canaanitish fortress of, 189\nME-LI'LI\n1. Queen; wife of Benani, 82;\n2. Mother of the monsters, 295, 296\nMEL'I-SHIP'OK II. Houses found dating from period of, 376\nMELK ('KING'). Variant of Moloch, 328\nMEL'KARTH. Ph\u0153nician god of Tyre, 327, 328;\n  worship of, in Carthage, 330\nMEL'KARTH-RESH'EF. Ph\u0153nician combination, 328\nMEM-AN-GAB. Leader of the monsters, 295, 296\nMEM'PHIS. Assyrians enter, 31\nMEN'KES MOUND, 376\nMER-AG-A'GA. Variant of Merodach, 202\nMER'CURY. Identified with Nabu, 235\nMER'OC. Yaran flees to, 210, 211\nMER'O-DACH. Babylonian god, 41;\n  temple of, 47, 374;\n  Nimrod identified with, 50;\n  prayer and god, 68;\n  Tiawath and, 76-82;\n  creates man, 81;\n  the central figure of a popular myth, 84;\n  god Ea displaced by, 86, 199;\n  may have been a bull-god, 93;\n  worshipped at Babylon, 94;\n  Asshur identified with, 94;\n  Nebuchadrezzar and, 104;\n  Diabarra and, 106;\n  the name Mordecai a form of, 142;\n  great festival of, the Zakmuk, 141;\n  worship of, first prominent in days of Khammurabi, 184-198;\n  association with Nebo, 184-186;\n  the Chamber of Fates in temple of, 185;\n  Zarpanitum, wife of, 186, 202;\n  supremacy of, 192;\n  variant Marduk, 194, 200;\n  Shamash and, 200;\n  variants, Amaruduk, Asari, Saragagam, and Mer-agaga, 202;\n  attendant hounds of, 202;\n  usurped place of Bel, 227;\n  Bel paired with, 228;\n  Jupiter, identified with, 235;\n  eighth month ruled over by, 237;\n  month Marcheshuan belonged to, 251;\n  eclipses and, 256;\n  demons and the name of, 263;\n  four dogs of, 291;\n  head of the Babylonian Pantheon, 377;\n  Nabonidus, 377\nMER'O-DACH-BAL-A-DAN I. Houses found dating from period of, 376\nMESH'A. The Moabite king; Chemosh, god of, 190\nMESH'ACH. One of Daniel's companions, 38\nMES-O-POT-A'MI-A. Elam and Northern --, overcome by Sargon, 17;\n  Semitic religion in, 331;\n  excavations in, 339, ff.;\n  George Smith dispatched to, 351;\n  recent research in, 366-376\nMEXICO. Reference to religious system of ancient, 204;\n  reference to temples, on, 243\nMIC'AH. Reference to his teraphim, 268\nMIDDLE AGES. The Sabbatic goat of the witchcraft of the, 293\nMI-LI-SHIK'HU. Babylonian monarch; Shamash and, 187\n_Misch'nah_. Commentary on the, 232\nMITANI. Provinces of, conquered by Shalmaneser I, 308\nMITH'RA. Rashnu and, 337\nMIT-RA-PHER'NES. Artaios' eunuch, 149\nMOFFLAINES. Wood of, 293\nMOHAMMEDANISM. Initiated by the Semitic race, 313, 332\nMOLOCH. Magic and, 258;\n  worship of, in Ph\u0153nicia, 328;\n  worship of, in Carthage, as Baal-ammon, 330;\n  children sacrificed to, 331\nMOMMU TI-A-WATH. The primeval ocean, 71. _See_ Moumis\nMONSTER-S. Mythological animals and, of Chaldea, 289-298;\n  the dog, 290, 291;\n  invasion of the, 294-296;\n  Patechus, 330\nMONTH-S. Titles of, by Babylonians, 236-238\nMOON. Babylonian religion and, 236;\n  city; Ur, the, 249, 250;\n  Abram, probably a moon-worshipper, 249;\n  eclipses and the, 256\nMOON-DEITIES. Osiris, 138;\n  Aphrodite, 138;\n  Proserpine, 138;\n  Ph\u0153nician Ashtoreth, 138;\n  Nannar, moon-god of Ur, 145-149;\n  Sin, 94, 109, 128, 170, 223, 224, 250;\n  Tanit, 330\nMOR'DE-CA-I. The Book of Esther and, 141;\n  a form of Marduk or Merodach, 142\nMOS\u00dbL. M. Botta French Consul at, 339;\n  Layard's researches at, 340-344\nMOTHER-EARTH. Of primitive mythologies, 197\nMOTHER-GODDESS. Theory, 318, 319;\n  compounded of various types, 326\n'MOTHER OF THE GREAT GODS,' Belit alluded to as, 228\nMOU'MIS or MUM'MU. Son of Tiawath and Apsu, 73;\n  name at one time given to Tiawath, 73\nMOUNTAIN. Of the Sunset, Gilgamesh journeys to, 158, 159, 171;\n  of the Sunrise, 253;\n  of the Earth, 305;\n  of the Wind, 362;\n  of the World, 362\nMUL-LIL. The 'gazelle god' of Nippur, 292\nMU-RASH'U AND SONS. Bankers and brokers at Nippur, 366\nMU'RO. Worship of Ramman originated at, 220\nMEYER, JOSEPH A. An American architect who assisted Haynes at Nippur, 365\nMYRRH. Used at the Adonia festival, 136;\n  -tree and Adonis, 137\nMYTH-S. Of Sardanapalus, reference to, 32;\n  analogies with Flood-, 45;\n  North American Indian, reference to, 46, 122;\n  Algonquin, reference to, 46;\n  Babylonian, of creation, 70-87;\n  confusing, connected with Ea, 112;\n  of deluge, 111, 173-178;\n  of Merodach and Tiawath, reference to, 78, 114, 199;\n  Mexican, reference to, 115;\n  Greek, reference to, 122, 315;\n  of Tammuz, 126-129;\n  Tammuz and Ishtar, groundwork of those of Greece and Rome, 131;\n  of Adonis, 131-133;\n  Egyptian, _re_ quest of Isis, 133;\n  Tammuz-Ishtar, 135;\n  various strata underlying the Gilgamesh, 159, 160;\n  of the slaughter of Tiawath, 201;\n  of Persephone and of Osiris, 201;\n  a toothache-, 262, 263;\n  Ph\u0153nician, little known _re_, 328;\n  Indo-Germanic, reminiscences in Zarathustra's religion, 334;\n  character of Babylonian, compared with that of Hellenic and\n  Scandinavian, 338\n\n\nN\n\nNA-BO-NI'DES. Arch\u00e6ology fashionable in time of, 363\nNABONIDOS. _See_ Nabonidus, 364\nNA-BO-NI'DUS. The last of the Babylonian kings, 40, 110, 283;\n  displaced by Cyrus, 41;\n  cults of Merodach, Nabu, and Shamash, and, 377\nNAB'O-POL-AS'SER. Reference to inscriptions of, 368;\n  father of Nebuchadrezzar, 369, 370;\n  Euphrates bridge, work of, 375;\n  god Merodach and, 377\nNAB'U, 175;\n  Nusku and, connected, 225;\n  Merodach and, paired, 228;\n  Bel paired with, 228;\n  Ramman-Nirari and, 228;\n  called by Sargon 'the Seer who guides the gods,' 228;\n  Mercury and, 235;\n  tenth month sacred to, 237;\n  tower of, 375;\n  Nebuchadrezzar and, 377;\n  Nabonidus and, 377\nNAB'U-BALIDDIN. Shamash's temple restored by, 249\nNABU-QUA'TI-ZA'BAT. Assur-bani-pal and, 304\nNAB'U-USA'BI, King. Crucified by Tiglath-pileser II, 300\nNA-B\u00db-Z\u00c8R-L\u00ce-SHIR. Scribe, 363\nNAM'TAR. The plague-demon, 129\nNAN\u00c2. Merged in conception of Ishtar, 124;\n  Assur-bani-pal and, 304\nNAN'NAR. The moon-god of Ur, 145-149\nNANN'AR-OS. Satrap of Babylon, 146-149\nNANN'A-RU. The new moon, established by Merodach, 79\nNA'RAM-SIN. Son of Sargon; title, 'King of the Four Zones,' 17, 19;\n  Nabonidus and, 41;\n  bricks discovered with name of, on, 47;\n  'Builder of the Temple of En-lil,' 247;\n  omens and, 283;\n  'mould' of an inscribed stone belonging to Sargon I in palace of, 363\nNE'BO. Hymn to, 69;\n  son of Bel, 102;\n  shrine sacred to, 102;\n  Tashnit, wife of, 102, 185, 186;\n  association with Merodach, 184-186;\n  chief seat, Borsippa, 184, 326;\n  as grain-god, 186;\n  the altars of Yahveh dragged from, 190;\n  temple of, 306, 346, 348\nNEB'ROD. _See_ Nimrod\nNE-BICH-AD-REZ'ZAR I. Ramman and, 219\nNEBUCHADREZZAR II (or NEBUCHADNEZZAR). King of Babylonia, reign of, 36-40;\n  invades Egypt, 37;\n  wars against Jerusalem, 37;\n  puts Jehoiakim to death, 37;\n  sets up Zedekiah as King of Jerusalem, 37;\n  Daniel and, 37-40;\n  his dreams, 37-40;\n  Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and, 38;\n  ruins of palace of, explored in 1899, 47;\n  Sir H. C. Rawlinson's discovery _re_, 104;\n  Shamash's temple restored by, 249;\n  Dr Andrae's discovery _re_, 356;\n  Merodach and, 377\nNEBUCHADREZZAR III. King of Babylonia, 41\nNEM'ART. _See_ Nimrod\nNER'GAL. Temple of, at Cuthah, 82, 296;\n  of Cuthah, 94;\n  patron god of Cuthah, 105;\n  not unlike Loki, 106;\n  Dibarra, variant of, 106;\n  Aralu and, 150, 151;\n  shade of Eabani, and, 180;\n  Mars and, 235;\n  Canaanitish war-god, 326;\n  worshipped by Ph\u0153nicians, 328\nNEW YEAR. Assembly of gods at Babylon on first day of, 201;\n  Merodach and, 201;\n  Bau and, 251;\n  Gudea and, 251\nNI-BI'RU, Merodach's star, 79\nNIM'ROD. The mighty hunter, 49-56;\n  son of Chus, the \u00c6thiop, 49;\n  a reputed descendant of Ham, 49;\n  figures in Biblical and Babylonian tradition, 49;\n  built Babylon, 50;\n  Greek named Nebrod or Nebros, 50;\n  identified with Merodach, Gilgamesh, and Orion, 50;\n  name found in Egyptian documents of XXII Dynasty as 'Nemart,' 50;\n  derivation of name may mean 'rebel,' 50;\n  legends of, related by Philo in his _De Gigantibus_, 50;\n  Abram and, 51-56;\n  King of Chaldea, 52;\n  suggested identity with Gilgamesh, 156\nNIM'R\u00dbD. Sir Henry Layard's excavations at, 340, 342-344;\n  Rassam's searches at, 344;\n  George Smith's searches at, 348-354\nNIN-A-GAL. Variant of Ea, 116\nNIN'EV-EH. Built by Sennacherib, 31;\n  Assur-bani-pal's library at, 35, 71, 154, 346;\n  arch\u00e6ological researches of Layard and Botta at, 46;\n  George Smith's labours at, 46;\n  Mr Hormuzd Rassam's work at, 47;\n  built by Asshur, 49;\n  tablet written for temple of Nergal discovered at, 82;\n  residence of Asshur, 207;\n  Ishtar's shrine in, 212;\n  M. Botta and site of, 339, 340;\n  Layard and, 344;\n  plan of, 357\nNIN-GIR'SU. Name means 'Lord of Girsu,' 144;\n  known as Shulgur ('Lord of the corn heaps'), 144;\n  identified with Tammuz, 144;\n  variant, Ninib, 214, 216;\n  favourite of Gudea, 251;\n  temple of, 283\nNIN'IB, 84, 175;\n  a war-god, 214;\n  variant of, Nin-girsu, 214, 216;\n  Tiglath-pileser I, Assur-rishishi, Assur-nazir-pal, and, 214;\n  as hunter-god, 216;\n  extolled by Tiglath-pileser I, 216;\n  invoked by Assur-nazir-pal, 216;\n  Gula, consort of, 216;\n  Saturn and, 235;\n  translated as En-Mashti by Canaanites, 326\nNIN-IGI-NAG'IR-SIR. Saved with Ea, etc., from deluge, 115\nNIN-LIL. Variant of Beltis, 101;\n  consort of En-lil; Ishtar and, 124\nNIN'NI. Variant of Innana, 187\nNIN'SUM. Gilgamesh resorts to, 180\nNI'NUS. King of Assyria, 25;\n  Semiramis, wife of, 25;\n  Ninyas, son of, 26\nNIN'YAS. Son of Ninus; during minority of, Semiramis assumed\n  the regency, 26\nNIPPUR. Babylonian civilization grouped round, 14;\n  god En-lil and, 14;\n  city of Ur colonized by, 15;\n  Mr Haynes' excavations at, 47, 359, 360, 365, 366;\n  temple of, 82;\n  cosmological tales at, 84;\n  of Sumerian origin, 96;\n  preferred to Babylon, 196;\n  lamentation ritual at, 199, 200;\n  temple of E-Kur at, 248;\n  business quarter of, unearthed, 359, 360;\n  stage-tower of, 361;\n  temple-tower of, 362\nNIR'IG. God; variant, Enu-Restu; Bel, father of, 153\nNIZ'AN. First month; sacred to Anu and Bel, 236\nNO'AH. Patriarch, reference to, 45;\n  legend of deluge and Ea, 115;\n  variant, Ut-Napishtim, 116\nNO-RETURN. Land of, 128\nNU-DIM-MUD. Variant of name of Ea, 73;\n  Tiawath and, 76\nNUMBERS. Assigned to each of the gods, 237, 238\nNUS'KU. The messenger of Mul-lil, 68;\n  hymn to, 69;\n  temple of, 102;\n  of the 'Brilliant Sceptre,' 224, 225;\n  Nabu and, connected, 225;\n  eclipses and, 255\n\n\nO\n\nO-AN'NES. _See_ Ea, 14\nOBELISK. Of Shalmaneser II, 343\nO-DA'CON. Appears from sea of Eruthra, 112\nOMEN-S. Library of Sargon contained book dealing with, 18;\n  divination by, 281, 282\nO-MOR'CA. Chaldaic equivalent, Thalath;\n  Greek, _thalassa_, 114\nON'NES. One of Ninus' generals, husband of Semiramis, 25\nOPPERT. French exploration expedition and, 347\nO-RI'ON. Nimrod identified with, 50\nO-SI'RIS. Isis and, reference to, 133;\n  reference to, 201, 228\n'O-ZY-MAN'DI-AS.' Shelley's sonnet on, 307\n\n\nP\n\nPAINTINGS. Discovered in Sennacherib's palace at Kouyunjik, 345\nPALACE-S. Built at Nineveh by Sargon; M. Botta unearths, 340;\n  Assyrian, two discovered at Nimr\u00fbd, 340;\n  built by Esar-haddon, unearthed by Layard, 343;\n  of Sennacherib, found by Layard, 345;\n  Assur-bani-pal's, discovered by Rawlinson, 346;\n  of Nimr\u00fbd, George Smith's excavations in, 348, 349;\n  Nebuchadrezzar's, excavated, 369-371\nPALESTINE. Syria and, invaded by Sargon, 17;\n  worship of Hadad in, 188;\n  the Canaanites first dwellers in, 324\nPALL'AS A-TH\u00ca-N\u00c9. Reference to, 222, 315\nPAN'THE-ON, ASSUR-BANI-PAL'S. Belit and Asshur in, 228\nPANTHEON OF ASSYRIA, 203-230;\n  differences between the Babylonian and, 203, 204;\n  Dagon in, associated with Anu, 216, 217;\n  Bel-Merodach absorbed in the, 225;\n  Ea in the, 229;\n  Dibbarra, in the, 229\nPANTHEON OF BABYLONIA.\n1. Early. Prior to Khammurabi, 94, 95.\n2. Later. General changes in and additions to, 184-198;\n  Bel's place usurped in the, by Merodach, 227;\n  spiritistic nature of, 318\nPAP-SUK'AL. The messenger of the gods, 130\nPARADISE. The Abyss and, 82\nPAR'S\u00ceS. Of Bombay, 334\nPAR-SON'DES. Ctesias' tale _re_, 146-149\nPAT-E'CHUS. God; a repulsive monster, 330\nPATRIARCH, THE. _See_ Abram\nPER-SEPH'O-N\u00c9 or PROS'ER-PINE. Reference to, 132, 201;\n  corresponds to Allatu, 132\nPER-SE'POLIS. Reference to, 61;\n  language found at, deciphered by L\u00f6wenstern and Hinks, 65;\n  Longp\u00e9rier translated language found at, 66\nPER'SE-US. Reference to, 87\nPERSIAN-S. Signs in connexion with cuneiform writing, 60-66;\n  religion of (Zoroaster's), 332-336, etc.;\n  fear of defilement, 335\nPETERS, DR. Director of American expeditions, 358, 359, 364, 365\nPHIL-IS'T'I-A. Sargon's expedition against, 210, 211\nPH\u0152-NIC'I-A. Worship of Moloch in, 328\nPH\u0152NICIAN-S. The Gods of the, 326-329;\n  religion; Egyptian influence, 328\nPICTURE-WRITING. Cuneiform and, 66. _See_ Writing\nPIR-\u00c6'US. Port of Athens, 328\nPIS'CES, SIGN OF. Eabani and, 183\nPLACE, VICTOR. Botta's work at Khorsabad, continued by, 340\nPLANET-S. Identified with gods, 235\nPLUTARCH. Isis (Astarte) and, 328\nPLU'TO. Reference to, 133\nPOETRY. Assyrian, 321, 322\nPOLGARTH. Ph\u0153nician word 'city' and, 331\nPOL-Y-HIS'TOR, ALEXANDER. God Ea and, 112, 113\nPOLYTHEISM. Semitic, 313\n_Pop'ol Vuh_. Reference to, 97, 151\nPOS-EI'DON. Greek god, 315\nPRAYER-S. To the sun-god, etc., 67, 68\nPRIEST-S. Akkadian tongue preserved by Babylonian, 14;\n  those of Lagash became kings, 16;\n  high, of Asshur, took title of king, 21, 208;\n  sole mythographers, 191;\n  -hood, cult and temples, 239-241;\n  wizards and, 260;\n  -magician; the chamber of the, 270-275;\n  liver-reading by, 282;\n  of Thebes, Memphis, and On, 314;\n  of Nippur and Erech, 314\nPRIESTESSES. In Babylonia, 240, 241\nPRIEST-HOOD. _See_ Priests\nPRISONER-GODS. Assyrian rulers and, 225, 226\nPRO-ME'THE-US. Lugalbanda and, 93;\n  Zu and, 195\nPSALMS, BOOK OF THE. National, not individual, 320;\n  Poetical form of, 322\nPU'NIC. Religion, 330\nPURIFICATION, 270;\n  by water, in connexion with Babylonian magic, 270\nP\u00dbRIM. Feast of, 140, 141\n\n\nQ\n\nQAL'AT SHER'QAT. Annals of Tiglath-pileser I discovered by Rawlinson, 346;\n  Dr Andrae's excavations at, 356\n\n\nR\n\nRA. Worship of, in Egypt, 223\nRAB'BAT UM'MA. 'The Great Mother,' 330\nRAB-I'SU. A lurking demon, 276, 277\nRACES. Asia Minor peopled with diverse, 324\nRACHEL. The stolen images and, 266-268\nRACH'MET. Reference to, 61\nRAM'MAN, 175; equivalent, Rimmon;\n  identified with Hadad or Adad, 187-189;\n  the Tablets of Destiny and, 195;\n  popularity and functions, 217-222;\n  weapons of, 218;\n  worship of, in days of Khammurabi and Nebuchadrezzar I, 219;\n  Assur-nazir-pal and, 219;\n  Attributes and signification, 218-222;\n  eleventh month sacred to, 237\nRAM'MAN-NIR-A'RI I. The _Annunaki_ and _Igigi_ and, 90\nRAM'MAN-NI-RA'RI III. Nabu exalted at expense of Asshur by, 228\nRASH'NU. Mithra and, 337\nRASS'AM, MR HOR'MUZD. Assur-bani-pal's library at Nineveh and, 35;\n  his arch\u00e6ological researches at Nineveh and at Abu-habba, 47;\n  stone tablet found at Sippard by, 292;\n  researches at Nimr\u00fbd, 342, 344. 346, 354. 355\nRAWLINSON, MAJOR (SIR) HENRY. Cuneiform writing and, 64-66;\n  his discovery _re_ Nebuchadrezzar, 104;\n  Layard and, 342, 344, 345, 346\nRED INDIANS. Titles of months and, 236\nREINACH. Reference to, 334\nRELIGION-S. Akkadian tongue used as a sacred language by Babylonian\n  priesthood, 14;\n  early Babylonian, 88-153;\n  Jewish, 88;\n  of ancient Mexico, 88;\n  Vedic, of India, 88;\n  Semitic influence on Babylonian, 91, 92;\n  official system of Babylonian and Assyrian, 92;\n  Semitic, Euphrates-Tigris influence on, 92;\n  totemism in Babylonian, 92;\n  system of, in Babylonia, overshadowed by Merodach, 199;\n  Jastrow's _Religion in Babylonia and Assyria_ quoted, 199, 212;\n  star-worship, the origin of, 237;\n  _of the Semites_ quoted, 91, 241, 332;\n  cult of the gods, 292;\n  comparative value of the, of Babylonia and Assyria, 313-336 and on;\n  Teutonic and Celtic, comparisons, 316;\n  Babylonian, typically animistic, 317, 318;\n  worship of great earth-mother, 318, 319;\n  Jewish, 319-329;\n  Canaanite, 324-326;\n  Carthaginian, 329;\n  Semitic, 329, 331;\n  Punic, 330;\n  Mohammedanism, 313, 332;\n  of the Persians (Zoroaster), 332-337;\n  of Babylonians, 338;\n  decay of Babylonian, 378, 379\nRESH'EPH. Known to the Canaanites, 326;\n  the lightning god; origin; identified with Apollo, 328\nRHO-DA'NES. Romance of Sinonis and, 56-60\nRIM'AT-BEL'IT. Mother of Gilgamesh, 158;\n  interprets Gilgamesh's dream, 164\nRIM'MON. _See_ Rammon\nRITUAL. Lamentation at Nippur, 199, 200;\n  of hepatoscopy, 283-288;\n  Zoroastrian fire worship central feature of, 335\n\n\nS\n\nSABBATIC GOAT. Witchcraft of Middle Ages and the, 293\nSAB-I'TU. The sea-goddess; Gilgamesh and, 172;\n  sign Capricornus and, 183\nSAC'A. One of the two eunuchs appointed to watch Rhodanes and Sinonis, 57\nSAC-\u00c6'A. The Asiatic equivalent of the Saturnalia, 33;\n  Festival of Zakmuk, or, 141\nSACRIFICE-S. Babylonian, 241, 242\nSADI-RAB'U-MA-TA'TI. The great mountain of the earth, 305\nSAG'GAL. Temple of Merodach, 305\nSAK'ON. Carthaginian deity, 330\nSAM-AS-SUM-YU'KIN. Viceroy of Babylonia, 34;\n  raises revolt in Assyrian empire, 34;\n  his death, 34\nSAM'KHAT. Goddess of joy, 131\nSAM-MUR'A-MUT. Assyrian title of Semiramis. _See_ Semiramis\nSAM'SI-A'DAD IV. Rawlinson discovers stele of, 346\nSAM'SI-RAM'MON. Son of Shalmaneser II;\n  succeeds his father as King of Assyria, 24;\n  Sammuramat favourite of, 24;\n  Asshur mentioned in inscription of, 208\nSANCH-UN-I-A'THON. Philo and, preserved in works of Eusebius, 329\nSAOSHYANT. The saviour, in Zoroaster's religion, 337\nSAR-AG-AG'AM. Variants of Merodach, 202\nSAR-A'KOS. Greek equivalent for Sin-sarkin, 36\nSAR-DA-NA-PAL'US THE SPLENDID. Assur-bani-pal known to Greek legend as, 31;\n  King of Assyria, 31;\n  reference to, in _The Golden Bough_, 32;\n  Sir James Frazer on, 32, 34;\n  prominent features in legends of, 33;\n  weaving of legend of, 34\nSAR'GON.\nI. Of Akkad, founds first great Semitic empire in Babylonia, 16;\n  a Babylonian Arthur, 16, 21;\n  the legend of his birth, 16, 17;\n  invasions of Syria and Palestine, 17;\n  Elam and N. Mesopotamia overcome by, 17;\n  Naram-Sin son of, 17, 19;\n  letters franked by clay seals bearing name of Sargon, 18;\n  first founder of Babylonian library, 18;\n  bricks discovered with name of, on, 47;\n  Asshur's conquering power and, 210, 211;\n  King Azuri and, 210;\n  Ahimiti and, 210;\n  Yaran and, 210;\n  Sin and, 223;\n  Bel and, 227;\n  Nabu termed 'that Seer who guides the gods,' 228;\n  'Builder of the Temple of En-lil,' 247;\n  hepatoscopy and, 283;\n  palace built by, unearthed at Nineveh, 340;\n  George Smith finds fragments of history of, 352.\nII. Usurping general, claimed descent from Sargon the Great, 30;\n  father of Sennacherib, 30\nSAR'RA-PAN-U. Tiglath-pileser II captures, 299\nSASS-AN'I-AN. Rulers, 333\nSAT'URN. Identified with Ninib, 235\nSAUL-MU-GI'NA. Rebellious brother of Assur-bani-pal, 304\nSCHRADER. Assyrian poetry and, 321, 322\nSCIENCE. Star-worship the origin of, 237;\n  the roots of, 259\nSCILLY ISLANDS. Ph\u0153nicians in, 331\nSCOR'PIO, SIGN OF. Gilgamesh and, 182\nSCOTLAND. Goat-demon adored in, 293\nSCULPTURE-S. Discovery of, glorifying Assur-nazir-pal, 343;\n  Babylonian, discovered by de Sarzec, 355\nSCYTHIAN-S. Penetrate into Assyria, 36\nSED'U. A guardian (sometimes an evil) spirit invoked with the Lamassu, 277\nSEL-EU'CI-A. City, built out of ruins of Babylon, 42\nSEM-IR'A-MIS THE GREAT. Assyrian Queen, 24-29;\n  legendary origin, 25;\n  wife of Onnes, and later of Ninus, 26;\n  Ninyas son of, 26;\n  engages in battle Strabrobates, King of India, 27;\n  fame of, 28, 29;\n  Sammuramat, her Assyrian title, 29;\n  wife of Samsi-Rammon, 29;\n  mythical connexion with Ishtar, 29;\n  worshipped by the Syrians, 27;\n  esteemed as the daughter of Dercatus, 27;\n  district round Lake Van called after, Shamiramagerd, 28\nSEMITES. Germs of culture received from Akkadians by Babylonian, 13;\n  their love of wisdom, 14, 15;\n  Babylon entered by, 15, 16;\n  believed to have come from Arabia, 15, 16;\n  made by the code of Khammurabi, 21;\n  ancient, and gods, 89;\n  serpent loathed by, 289;\n  animistic influences;\n  appeal of, to, 318\nSEMITIC. Empire, first great, founded in Babylonia by Sargon of Akkad, 16;\n  religious thought, 235;\n  worship and, lamentations, 253;\n  polytheism, 313;\n  conservatism, 316;\n  cults; Babylonian influence upon, 324;\n  religion, 329, 331;\n  peoples; a 'peculiar people,' 332;\n  faith, includes various manifestations, 332\nSEN-NACH'E-RIB. Son of usurping general Sargon, 30;\n  campaign of, against Hezekiah, 30;\n  Nineveh built by, 30;\n  Esar-haddon son of, 31;\n  takes nucleus of Assur-bani-pal's library from Calah, 154;\n  soothsayers and his death, 260;\n  Layard's discoveries in palace of, 345\nSERPENT. The ancients and the, 289;\n  equivalent, Aibu ('the enemy'), 289\nSET. Osiris and, reference to, 133\nSET-A'PO. A wealthy Babylonian who harbours Sinonis, 59\n'SEVEN SPHERES, THE STAGES OF.' A building, the wonder of Borsippa, 104\nSEVEN TABLETS. Of creation; primary object of, 71\nSHAD'RACH. One of Daniel's companions, 38\nSHAL-MA-NE'SER I. King of Assyria, 22, 308;\n  Tukulti-in-Aristi, son of, 22;\n  Nusku and, 224;\n  inscription of, unearthed by George Smith, 351\nSHAL-MA-NE'SER II. King of Assyria in succession\n  to Assur-nazir-pal III, 24;\n  Overthrows Ahab, King of Israel, 24;\n  Samsi-Rammon son of, 24;\n  the god D\u00e1da and, 189;\n  Merodach (Bel) and, 225, 227;\n  discovery of obelisk of, 343;\n  dedications of, unearthed, 351\nSHAL-MA-NE'SER IV. Successor of Tiglath-pileser III, 30\nSHAM'ASH.\n1. Temple of, at Sippar, restored by Nabonidus, 41;\n  adored at Sippar, 94;\n  the sun-god, 109-111;\n  son of Sin, 109;\n  Aa, consort of, 110;\n  Ishtar and, 130;\n  Gilgamesh and, 156, 165;\n  Khammurabi and, 187;\n  Zu captured by, 195;\n  Merodach and, 200;\n  cult of, in Assyria, 222, 223;\n  seventh month sacred to, 236;\n  a Canaanitish god, 325;\n  Nabonidus and, 377.\n2. The great idol of, 249\nSHAR'RU-ILU. One of the lesser Babylonian gods, 229\nSHATT-EN-N\u00ceL. Excavations along bank of, by Haynes, 365\nSHE'BA, QUEEN OF. Tiglath-pileser II quarrels with, 301\nSHEPHERD. The sun the, of the stars, 236;\n  En-lil, of the dark-headed people, 254\nSHEPHERD KING, THE. Daon, of Pantibiblon, 112\nSHI'NAR, PLAIN OF. Babylon built on, 52\nSHUL-GUR. Variant of Nin-Girsu, 144\nSHU-RIPP'AK.\n1. Son of Ubara-Tutu, 173.\n2. City of, 177, 178\nSHU'TU. Variant of South Wind, 117\nSI'BI. The god, 108\nSICILY. Worship of Ashtart (Ishtar) at, 327\nSID'DA. The temple, 306\nSI'DON. Tyre and, in touch with Assyria, 327;\n  Ashtart or Ishtar, temple of, in, 327;\n  Eshmun worshipped at, 328\nSIGN-S. Gemini, Leo, Virgo, Taurus, Scorpio, 182;\n  Capricornus, Aquarius, Pisces, 183\nSILENCE, TOWERS OF. Parsis' dead and the, 336\nSIN (perhaps pron. _Si\u00f1_). The moon-god, 94, 223, 224;\n  Ruled at Ur, 94;\n  Shamash son of, 109;\n  Ishtar daughter of, 128;\n  Gilgamesh delivered by, 170;\n  Gilgamesh resorts to, 180;\n  eclipses and god, 256;\n  a Canaanitish god, 325\nSIN-A-IT'IC PENINSULA. Semitic religion in, 331\nSI-NO'NIS. Romance of Garmus and, 56-60\nSIN-SAR-IS'KIN. Last King of Assyria, 36;\n  the Sarakos of the Greeks, 36\nSIN-SHAR-ISH'KUN. The last representative of the Assyrian dynasty, 364\nSIP'PAR. Shamash worshipped at, 109;\n  Aa worshipped at, 110;\n  Abu-Habbah, the ancient site of, 177;\n  Berossus substitutes, for Shurippak, 178;\n  Khammurabi's improvements at, 187;\n  Shamash's temple at, 249\nSIP'PA-RA. Temple of sun-god, Mr Rassam discovers, 47, 292\nSIS-U'THRUS. The Flood Myth and, 45\nSI'WAN. Month sacred to Sin, 236\nSMITH, GEORGE. Reference to arch\u00e6ological labours, 46, 155, 347-354;\n  discovery of, _re_ Bel, 101;\n  discovery of, _re_ Tiglath-pileser II, 299;\n  Babylonian and Assyrian poetry and, 322\nSMYR'NA. Mother of Adonis, reference to, 127\nSOUL. Supposed to reside in the liver, 281\nSPAIN. Mohammedanism in, 332\nSPEAKING HEAD, THE. Laban and, 267\nSPIRIT-S. Assyrian, 277, 278\nSOKK-A'ROS. First king to reign in Babylonia after the deluge, 157;\n  \u00c6lian the grandson of, 157\nSOOTHSAYERS. Sennacherib and, 260\nSOR-ACCH'US. Magistrate, who sends Sinonis to Babylon, 58\nSORCERERS. Chaldean, and the magic circle, 275, 276\nSRA-O'SHA. Soul carried by, to the beyond, 336, 337\nSTAR-S. Formed by Belus, 115;\n  Babylonian worship of, 231-238;\n  ideograph the same for 'god' and, 234;\n  the sun the shepherd of the, 236;\n  Anu the Pole, 236;\n  Bel the Pole (equator), 236;\n  Ea and star in constellation Argo, 236;\n  -gazers of Chaldea, 258\nST IL'YA. Tammuz compared with, 127\nSTONE. The Moabite, 190;\n  examined by Professors Socin and Smend, 190\nSTRA-BRO-BA'TES. King of India;\n  Semiramis makes war on, 26, 27\n'SU-ME'RI-AN.' Modern equivalent for the old expression 'Akkadian,' 15\nSUN. Merodach's ideograph is the, 202;\n  known as the 'Way of Anu,' 234;\n  the 'Bull of Light,' 290\nSUN-GOD. _See_ Gods.\nSUPERSTITION-S. In Chaldea, 280, 281\nSU'SA. Monument of Naram-Sin unearthed by de Morgan at, 17;\n  copy of Khammurabi's code found at, by J. de Morgan, 21\nSUS'I-AN. Language; alternative, Median, 65\nSUS'IN-AY. Idol of, 304\nSYRIA. Palestine and, invaded by Sargon, 17;\n  worship of Hadad in, 188;\n  the Canaanites first dwellers in, 324\nSYSTEM-S. Official, of religion in Babylonia and Assyria, 92;\n  of religion in Babylonia, 199;\n  religious, of ancient Mexico, Guatemala, and Yucatan;\n  reference to, 204;\n  Hellenic and Roman, 235;\n  religions--Judaism, Christianity, Mohammedanism, 313;\n  of religious races in Asia Minor, 324;\n  Zarathustra's moral, 334\n\n\nT\n\n'TABLET HILL.' Haynes' discoveries at, 360;\n  the temple library in, 363;\n  King Nabonidos' (Nabonidus) vase found at, 364\nTABLETS. Twelve, of the Gilgamesh epic, 155, 158, 159;\n  detailed examination of, 161-180;\n  of Destiny, 193-195;\n  cuneiform, dealing with magic, 261, 262;\n  Surpu and Maklu, series of, 262;\n  the deluge, discovered by Smith, 347, 351, 352;\n  discovered by Rassam, 354;\n  of Nabopolasser, Nebuchadrezzar, Nabonidus, Cyrus, Cambyses, and\n  Darius, 358\nTAB'OO. Prayers, etc., against, 262;\n  belief in, in Chaldea, 278;\n  known in Babylonia as _mamit_, 278\nTAM'MUZ. One of the guardians of the gates of heaven, 118;\n  Ishtar's search for, 126;\n  myth of, 126-129;\n  name derived from Dumu-zi, 126;\n  Professor Sayce and, 126;\n  addressed as 'shepherd and lord' in Akkadian hymn, 126;\n  Ishtar, consort of, 127;\n  Adonis myth related to that of, 131;\n  Sir James Frazer's _Golden Bough_ and, 134;\n  lamentations for, 135, 136, 140;\n  a god of vegetation, 137, 138;\n  Nin-Girsu (Shulgur) identified with, 144;\n  the bridegroom of Ishtar's youth, 167;\n  Dido and, 190;\n  Ninib and, 216\nTAM'MUZ-A-DO'NIS. Worshipped in Carthage, 330\nTAM'TU. Assyrian term signifying 'the deep sea,' 72\nTA'NIT. Goddess of the heavens and the moon;\n  compared with Demeter, 330;\n  inscriptions to, 330;\n  identified with Dido, 331\nTA'NITH. Goddess, honoured at Carthage, 328\nTASH'MIT. Nebo's consort, 102, 185, 186;\n  patron of writing, 185\nTAU'RUS, SIGN OF. Represented by the slaying of the celestial bull,\n  Alu, 182\nTELL AM'RAN. Mound of, 374\nTEL-L\u00d4. Ernest de Sarzec's researches at, 355, 356\nTEMPLE-S. Of Bel, 101-105, 227;\n  of Nebo and Tashmit, 102;\n  of Ea and Nusku, 102;\n  of Bel and Anu, 102;\n  of Belus, reference to, 103;\n  of Ea, 111;\n  of Belus, reference to, 114;\n  of Dagon, at Ashdod and Gaza, 151;\n  of Merodach, at Babylon, 185, 374;\n  of Asshur, 207;\n  of Sin, at Calah, 223;\n  priesthood, cult and, 239-241;\n  of Babylonia and Assyria, 242-251;\n  oldest, in Babylonia, was E-Kur, 248;\n  as banks, 250;\n  begun by Esar-haddon, 305;\n  Saggal, of Merodach, 305;\n  Sidda, 306;\n  of Ashtart or Ishtar, at Sidon and Askelon, 327;\n  to Apollo, 330;\n  Zoroastrian, 335;\n  of Nebo, 348;\n  of Babylon, 373-375\nTE'RAH. Father of Abraham, 51, 52\nTESTAMENT, OLD. Nergal mentioned in, 105;\n  Dagon in, 151, 152;\n  David of the, 190;\n  poetical form of, 322\nTEUTONIC. Celtic religion and, compared, 316, 317\nTEXTS, CUNEIFORM. _See_ Cuneiform\nTEXTS, MAGICAL. Dawkina alluded to in, 197;\n  Anu mentioned in, 197, 198;\n  a series known as 'Maklu,' 261, 262\nTEZ-CAT-LI-PO'CA. Reference to, 222\nTHAL-ATH. Chaldaic equivalent for Omorca, 114\nTHEIAS, KING. Reference to, 132\n_T'hom_ or 'DEEP.' Tiawath a parallel to the Old Testament expression, 72\nTHOMES. French exploration expedition and, 347\nTHOTH. Reference to, 185, 222, 224, 228\nTHUNDER-BIRD. North-American Indian conception, 193\nTHUNDER-GOD. Hadada, 188, 189\nTI'A-MAT. Variant of Tiawath, 71\nTI'AWATH. Variant, Tiamat, 71;\n  a parallel to Old Testament expression _T'hom_ (or 'deep'), 72, 73;\n  her ill-will toward the gods of heaven, 76-78;\n  her death by Merodach, 78, 199;\n  the 'fish' of Jonah and, 87;\n  chaos, 193;\n  slaughter of, enacted, 201;\n  the host of, 232;\n  not the only Babylonian monster, 289\nTIG'LATH-PIL-E'SER I. Alternative, Tukulit-pal-E-saria,\n  King of Assyria, 23;\n  god Bel (En-lil) and, 95;\n  Ishtar and, 212;\n  Ninib and, 214, 216;\n  Shamash and, 222;\n  Merodach and, 227;\n  Rawlinson discovers annals of, 346\nTIG'LATH-PIL-E'SER II. Tales of, 299-301\nTIG'LATH-PIL-E'SER III. Second Assyrian Empire commenced with, 29;\n  conquers Babylon and is invested with the sovereignty of 'Asia,' 36\nTIGRIS. The river, 206, 342\nTOL'TECS. Reference to Aztecs, and, 226, 227\nTONGUES. Babylonian towers and legend of confusion of, 47;\n  legend of confusion of, found in Central America, 48;\n  among African tribes some such myth found, 49;\n  certain Australian and Mongolian peoples possess a similar tradition, 49\nTOOTHACHE MYTH, A, 262\nTOTEMISM. Signs of, in Babylonian religion, 92\nTOWER OF BABEL. Legend of confusion of tongues and, 47. _See_ Babel\nTREE-S. Adonis and myrrh-, 137;\n  Osiris and tamarisk-, 137;\n  Attis and pine-, 137, 138;\n  Tammuz and cedar, 138\nTRIAD. _See_ Trinity\nTRIBAL DIVINITIES. The most outstanding, 94\nTRINITY, A. Tiawath, Apsu, and Mummu, 74;\n  Bel, Ea, and Anu, 97, 111, 191, 196-198;\n  En-lil, Ea, and Anu, 121;\n  of earth, air, and sea, 197;\n  Ramman, Sin, and Shamash, 219;\n  Ea, Anu, and Enlil evolved from demons, 268\nTSAI'DU. The hunter; Gilgamesh, Eabani, and, 163-166\nTSA'PHON. Carthaginian deity, 330\nTUK-UL'TI-IN-AR-IS'TI. Son of Shalmaneser I; takes Babylon\n  and slays its king, Bitilyasu, 22\nTUK-UL'TI-NIN'IP. Son of Shalmaneser I;\n  inscriptions of, 351\nTYRE. Sidon and, in touch with Assyria, 327\n\n\nU\n\nU-BA'RA-TU-TU. Shurippak son of, 173\nUB'SHU-KEN'NA (or Upshukkina-ku). The 'brilliant chamber' where the sun\n  takes his rise, 252, 253\nUK'HUT. Eabani and, 129, 163;\n  one of the sacred women of the temple of Ishtar, 163\nUKK'U-MU (Seizer). Attendant hound of Merodach, 202\nUNDERWORLD, THE, 125, 128-132, 136;\n  Eabani descends into, 160;\n  description of, in VIIth of Gilgamesh tablets, 169\nUR. City from whence Abram came, a near neighbour of Eridu, colonized\n  by Nippur, 15;\n  fall of the dynasty, 20;\n  Nannar, the moon-god, of, 145-149;\n  the moon-city, 249, 251\nU'ra. The legend of, 268-270\nUR-A-GAL, 175\nUR'BAU. Bau alluded to in inscriptions of, 144;\n  Zikkurat built by, at Nippur, 248\nUR'GA. A town in Mesopotamia; equivalents, Caramit and Diarbekr, 52\nUR-GUR. King of Assyria, 359, 366\nUR-NIN'IB. Reference to pavement of, 366\nU'ru. Canaanitish god of light; name found in Uru-Salim, 325\nURU-AZ-AG'GA. Bau's temple at, 145\nUR'UK. Place, 84\nURU-KAG-I'NA. Bau alluded to in inscriptions of, 144\nUT-NAP-ISH'TIM. Variant of Noah, 116, 160;\n  hero of Babylonian deluge myth, figures in Gilgamesh epic, 155, 158, 160;\n  Gilgamesh's ancestor, 170-173;\n  Gilgamesh seeks secret of perpetual life from, 173-178;\n  the deluge myth and, 173-178\nUT-UKKU. Ghost of Eabani designated, 181;\n  an evil spirit, 276\nUZ. God; worshipped under form of a goat, 93, 292\nUZZ'I-EL, JONATHAN, BEN. The targum of, 267\n\n\nV\n\nVAMPIRES. Babylonian, 264-266\nVAN. Lake, 331\nVASH'TI. Reference to, 142;\n  Frazer on, 143\nVED'IC GODS. Reference to, 77\nVEGETATION. En-lil (Bel), a god of, 96;\n  Ishtar, 'great mother' of, 123, 137, 138, 168;\n  seven gates of Aralu and the decay of, 137;\n  Tammuz, a god of, 137, 138, 140;\n  Adonis and Aphrodite connected with, 139;\n  Ceres, a corn-mother, 139;\n  Proserpine, same nature, 139;\n  Osiris introduced corn into Egypt, 139;\n  Mordecai as god of, 144;\n  Humman an Elamite god of, 144\nVE'NUS. Star;\n  Abram and, 55;\n  temple of, 58;\n  Ishtar and, 124, 235\nVIR'GO, SIGN OF. Ishtar and the, 182\n\n\nW\n\nWAR. Ishtar, goddess of, 127, 213, 214;\n  -god, Ninib a, 214;\n  -god, Ramman a, 221\nWAR-K\u00c2. Work of Loftus at, 346, 347\nWATER. Purification by, 270\nWATERS OF DEATH. Gilgamesh crosses, 158, 159\nWESTERGAARD. Median language and, 65\nWIND, SOUTH. Adapa and the, story of, 116-121;\n  variant, Shutu, 117\nWINDOWS. None in Nebuchadrezzar's palace at Babylon, 369\nWITCH. Known as _Kassaptu_, 261;\n  -finding, 272-275;\n  -orgies in France, 293\nWIZARDS. Priestly, 260-262;\n  known as _Kassapu_, 261\nWORD OF POWER, THE. The magicians of Chaldea and, 263\nWORSHIP. Of gods by gods, 77;\n  of gods under animal forms, 92, 93;\n  of Bel, 98-101;\n  of Shamash, 109;\n  of Aa, 110;\n  of Ishtar, 124;\n  of Dagon, 151;\n  of Merodach, 184, 185;\n  of Nebo, 184, 185;\n  of Hadad, in Syria, 188;\n  of the Sun-god in Canaan and Ph\u0153nicia, 190;\n  of Dodo or Dod, by the side of Yahveh, 190;\n  of Ramman, 219, 220;\n  of Aztecs and Toltecs, 226, 227;\n  of stars, Babylonian, 231-238;\n  lunar, 236;\n  moon-, 249;\n  Semitic, and lamentations, 253;\n  of the gazelle and goat, 292-294;\n  of great earth-mother, 318, 319;\n  of ancestors; Canaanites, 326;\n  of Moloch, 328;\n  Carthaginian, 329-332;\n  Zoroastrian, 332-336;\n  of fire, 335, etc.\nWRITING, CUNEIFORM. Restoration of, 60-67;\n  Josaphat Barbara and, 61;\n  Pietro della Valle and, 61;\n  Sir John Chardin and, 61;\n  Niebuhr and, 61;\n  Tychsen and, 61;\n  M\u00fcnter and, 61;\n  Georg Grotefend, and, 62;\n  Professor Lassen and, 63;\n  Burnouf and, 63;\n  Major Henry Rawlinson and, 64-66;\n  Westergaard and, 65;\n  Morris and, 65;\n  L\u00f6wenstern and, 65;\n  Hinks and, 65;\n  Longp\u00e9rier and, 66;\n  origin of, 66, 67;\n  on obelisk of Shalmaneser II, 343\nWRITING-S. Religions, of Babylonia, 67;\n  of Oannes, 113-116;\n  Nebo credited, like Ea, with the invention of, 185;\n  Tashmit patron of, 185;\n  stars, the, of heaven, 231;\n  Zarathustrian sacred, 334\n\n\nX\n\nXER'XES, KING. Reference to, 141;\n  Esther, the crown-name of Jewish wife of, 143\n\n\nY\n\nYAH'WEH. The Hebrew name of God, 49;\n  worship of, by the side of Dodo, by the Israelites, 190\nYAR'AN. Sargon and, 210, 211\nYEAR, NEW. _See_ New\n\n\nZ\n\nZAB. The river, 207\nZAG-MU'KU (_Zak-muk_). Festival of Sac\u00e6a or, 141;\n  goddess Bau and, 251\nZAK-MUK. _See_ Zag-muku.\nZA'MAMA. Court of Ishtar and, 101\nZA-RA-THUS'TRA. _See_ Zoroaster\nZAR-PA-NI'TUM. Goddess, wife of Merodach, 186, 202;\n  Ealur amalgamated with, 186\nZECH-A-RI'AH. Allusion of, to Hadad-Rimmon, 189\nZED-EK-I'AH. King of Jerusalem; Nebuchadrezzar and, 37\nZEUS. Reference to, 132, 315\nZIG-A-RUN. Variant of Apsu, 72\nZIK-KU-RAT-S. Staged towers;\n  described, 242, 246;\n  of Assur-bani-pal, 365\nZI'RAT-BA'NIT. The seat of, 306\nZIS-U'THROS, KING. Berossus substitutes, for Ut-Napishtim, 177, 178\nZO'DIAC. Signs of the, in the Babylonian astrological system, 183,\n  231, 232;\n  the goat, one of the signs of the, 292\nZOG-A'NES. The, of the Sac\u00e6a, 142\nZOR-O-AS'TER. The religion of, 332-;\n  earliest form of name Zarathustra, 333;\n  a Mede, 333;\n  good and evil principles of religion of, 334\nZU. The storm-god;\n  retained a bird-like form, 93, 193-195;\n  legend of, 193-195\nZU-BIRD. The bird roc, in _Arabian Nights_, a possible descendant of, 193","title":"Myths & Legends of Babylonia & Assyria","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":118917}