and thus to combine a god or hero of vegetation (which Eabani is
bound to be) with a mortal king, and a supreme god--and, oh, _why_
is he whipped and hanged? Taking the theory of iii. 177-179 it seems
to run thus, in combination with all that has gone before: The king
was burned alive annually. His royal substitute was next burned alive
annually. His criminal substitute was burned alive annually, till this
was commuted for whipping and hanging, with or without burning. The
king (before the feast of Zakmuk was brought from Erech to Babylon)
had incarnated some god or other (I presume of vegetation). After the
Eabani feast at Erech became the Marduk feast at Babylon, the king, I
think, but I may be wrong, represented Eabani _plus_ Marduk. If he
did, so, too, does the victim at the Sacæa. But Eabani, in a Babylonian
poem, has a resurrection: though I cannot find it in Jastrow's account
of the poem. The victim then, being a personation of Eabani, of Marduk,
and of the king, has a resurrection--after he has been hanged under the
name of Humman, a god of the Elamites. He owes _that_ name, Mr. Frazer
thinks, to a popular misconception, for he really is the king, _plus_
Eabani, _plus_ Marduk. Dying as king, and as Marduk, under the _alias_
of Humman (Haman), he is feigned, according to the theory, to rise
under the name of Marduk (Mordecai). The Mordecai of one year becomes
the Haman of the next, is hanged, and so on.
This is an hypothesis of some complexity. An effort is needed to
maintain the mental equilibrium as we contemplate this hypothesis.
However, by thus amalgamating the ideas of Jensen and of Mr. Frazer,
one gets in the mock royalty (from the king), the scourging and hanging
(from the mitigation of burning alive), the divinity of vegetation
(from Eabani, who lends that part of his attributes to Marduk), and
the resurrection from Eabani, who, in the Babylonian poem, rose
again: though I own that in Dr. Jastrow's account of the poem I am
unable to discover this incident. The spirit of Eabani is conjured
up, indeed, in the poem, but 'there is a tone of despair in the final
speech of Eabani.'[10] This is hardly a resurrection. However, I am
but poorly seen in Babylon and its poetry, and no doubt Eabani had
his resurrection. From that or a similar resurrection Mr. Frazer
deduces the probability that the Sacæan victim in his resurrection
was represented by Mordecai.[11] He, like Haman, had a sacred bride,
Esther. In the Book of Esther, to be sure, she is Mordecai's cousin
and adopted daughter. Mr. Frazer knows better.