The Pantheon of Assyria, as befitted the religious system of a nation
of soldiers, was more highly organized than that of the kindred people
of Babylonia, the ranks and relationships of the gods who comprised
it were more definitely fixed, it was considerably more compact than
that of the southern kingdom, and its lesser luminaries were fewer. It
has been assumed that the deities of the Assyrians were practically
identical in every respect with those of the Babylonians, with the
single exception of Asshur, who equated with Merodach. With all
due respect to practical Assyriologists the student of Comparative
Religion may perhaps be granted leave to take exception to such a
statement. Ethnological differences (and these certainly existed
between the peoples of the northern and southern culture-groups),
climatic conditions, a different political environment--all these as
well as other considerations, as important if less obvious, must have
effected almost radical changes in the ideas of the gods as conceived
by the Assyrians. Exactly what these changes were we shall probably
never know. They are scarcely likely to be revealed by inscriptions
or sacred writings which undoubtedly conserve for us little more
than the purely ecclesiastical view-point, always anxious to embalm
with scrupulous care the cherished theological beliefs of an older
day. But little of the religious beliefs of a people can survive in
priestly inscriptions and the labours of priestly copyists, nor is it
safe or scientific to endorse the character of the faith of a race by
comparison or analogy with that of a neighbouring folk. If a striking
example were required of the danger of such a proceeding it might be
found in the vain attempt to discover an exact parallel between the
religious systems of ancient Mexico and those of Guatemala and Yucatan.
The city-states of the more northerly group of people had evolved a
separate system of worship for each pueblo or town, the deities of
which, with minor differences, were substantially identical. But when
the pantheons of the more southerly region come to be examined it will
be found that, although the gods which figure in them spring apparently
from the same stock as those of the Mexican people, and even possess
names which are mere translations of those of the gods of Mexico, their
attributes and characteristics differ profoundly from those of their
Mexican congeners. The reason for this dissimilarity is to be found
in variations of climate, culture, and politics, three sure factors
in the modification of religion. If, then, we are satisfied that such
differences existed in the religious systems of two race-groups almost
as closely connected as were the peoples of Babylonia and Assyria, may
we not be pardoned for the supposition that similar divergences existed
between the faiths of the two great races of Chaldea?
We find in the Assyrian pantheon numerous foreign deities whom the
Assyrian kings included among the national gods by right of conquest.
These we shall deal with later. It will suffice for the present to
mention Assur-bani-pal, who speaks of the capture of twenty gods of the
Elamites. It was, of course, only upon the rise of a distinct Assyrian
empire that the religion of the northern kingdom acquired traits that
distinguished it from that of Babylonia.
Having outlined the reasons for the differences which we believe to
have existed between the Babylonian and Assyrian faiths, let us
briefly consider the variation of type between the two peoples which
must have caused this divergence. The languages of the two races
were not more distinct than the dialects of northern and southern
England--indeed among scholars they are designated by the common name
of Assyrian. But the Assyrians had a pure strain of that Semitic blood
which has done so much to systematize religions ancient and modern.
The Semite cannot content himself with half-truths. It is essential to
his very life, that he must feel himself upon sure religious ground.
He hates doubt and despises the doubter. At an early time in his
ancient career he had so securely systematized religion as to supply
the earliest instances of pure dogma. There followed the relentless
abjuration of all the troublous circumstances of mistrust. A code
founded upon the rock of unquestioning faith was instituted. And in the
religious systems of Babylonia and especially of Assyria we observe a
portion of the process of evolution which assisted in the upbuilding of
a narrow yet highly spiritualized system.
The great gods in Assyria were even more omnipotent than in Babylonia.
One cause contributing to this was the absorption of the minor local
cults by deities associated with the great centres of Assyrian life.
Early religion is extremely sensitive to political change, and as a
race evolves from the tribal or local state and bands itself into a
nation, so the local gods become national and centralized, probably in
the great deity of the most politically active city in the state. Nor
is it essential to this process that the deities absorbed should be of
a like nature with the absorbing god. Quite often a divinity assumes
the name and attributes of one with whom he had little in common.
Asshur
The state religion of Assyria centres in Asshur, nor was any deity ever
so closely identified with an empire as he. On the fall of the Assyrian
state, Asshur fell with it. Moreover all the gods of Assyria may be
said to have been combined in his person. In Babylonia, Merodach was a
leader of hosts. In Assyria, Asshur personified these hosts, that is,
the other Assyrian gods had become attributes of Asshur, and we can
only understand the remaining Assyrian gods if we regard them as lesser
Asshurs, so to speak, as broken lights of the great god of battle and
conquest.
[Illustration: Symbols of the God Asshur.--From _Religious Belief and
Practice in Babylonia and Assyria_, by Prof. Jastrow (G.P. Putnam's
Sons.)]
Asshur originated in the city of his name situated on the west bank
of the Tigris, not far from the point where the lower Zab flows
into that river. It was not of course until the rise of this city to
political pre-eminence that its god figured as all-powerful. There are
conflicting estimates as regards his original nature, some authorities
holding that he was lunar, others that he symbolized fire or water. The
facts, however, point to the conclusion that he was solar in character.
Merodach had chiefly been worshipped in Babylon. As other Babylonian
territories became subject to that city we do not find them placing
the god of Babylon above their own local god. But it was different
with Asshur. We find temples to him broadcast over Assyria. Indeed
as Assyrian history advances, we see different cities alluded to as
the chief centre of his worship, and he resides now at Asshur, now at
Calah, now at Nineveh, now at Khorsabad. Wherever the Kings of Assyria
took up their official residence there Asshur was adored, and there
he was supposed to dwell. He was not symbolized by an idol or any
man-like statue which would serve to give the populace an idea of his
physical likeness, but was represented by a standard consisting of
a pole surrounded by a disc enclosed with two wings. Above the disc
was the figure of a warrior with bent bow and arrow on string. This
well symbolized the military nature of the Assyrian nation and of its
tutelar deity. At the same time indications are not wanting that this
pole and its accompanying symbols are the remains of a totem-standard
upon which has been superimposed the anthropomorphic figure of a
lightning- or tempest-god. The pole is a favourite vehicle for carrying
the totem symbols into battle, and it looks here as if the sun had at
one time been regarded as a tribal totem. The figure of the archer at
the top seems representative of a lightning- or storm-god--a mythic
character frequently associated with the sun, that 'strong warrior.' By
virtue of his possession of the lightning arrow the storm-god is often
accepted as a god of war.
The etymology of the name of Asshur throws little light upon his
character as a divinity. The city which took his name was in all
probability originally called 'The city of the god Asshur.' To call
it by the name of the god alone would not be unnatural. The name is
derived from a root meaning 'to be gracious,' and therefore means
'the gracious god,' 'the good god.' But there are indications that an
older form of the name had existed, and it has been asserted that the
form Anshar has priority. With Kishar, a god Anshar was created as the
second pair of deities to see the light, and according to one version
it is Anshar who dispatches Anu, Ea, and finally Merodach to destroy
the monster Tiawath. This Anshar, then, appears as possessed with
authority among the gods. But we find no mention of him in the ancient
texts and inscriptions of Babylonia. The version in which Anshar is
alluded to may of course have been tampered with, and his inclusion
in the creation myth may be regarded as a concession to Assyrian
greatness. Indeed in one creation tablet we find Merodach displaced by
Asshur as framer of the earth!
The Secret of Assyrian Greatness
Asshur is mentioned in the oldest Assyrian inscription known to us,
that of Samsi-Ramman (_c._ 1850 B.C.), the priest-chief of Asshur, who
ruled in the days when as yet the offices of king and high priest were
undivided. Indeed, when the title of 'king' had come into use some
350 years later, the monarchs of Assyria still retained the right to
call themselves 'priests of the god Asshur.' The entire faith in and
dependence on their beloved deity on the part of these early Assyrian
rulers is touching. They are his children and rely wholly upon him
first for protection against their cruel enemies the Kassites and
afterwards for the extension of their growing empire. No wonder that
with such a faith to stimulate her Assyria became great. Faith in her
tutelar god was, indeed, the secret of her greatness. The enemies of
Assyria are 'the enemies of Asshur,' her soldiers are 'the warriors
of Asshur,' and their weapons are 'the weapons of Asshur.' Before his
face the enemies of Assyria tremble and are routed, he is consulted
oracularly as to the making and conduct of war, and he is present on
the battle-field. But the solitary nature of Asshur was remarkable.
Originally he possessed 'neither kith nor kin,' neither wife nor child,
and the unnaturalness of his splendid isolation appears to have struck
the Assyrian scribes, who in an interesting prayer attempted to connect
their divinity with the greater gods of Babylonia, to find him a wife,
ministers, a court and messengers.
A prayer to Asshur, the king of the gods, ruler over
heaven and earth,
the father who has created the gods, the supreme first-born
of heaven and earth,
the supreme muttallu who inclines to counsel,
the giver of the sceptre and the throne.
To Nin-lil, the wife of Asshur, the begetter, the creatress
of heaven and earth,
who by command of her mouth ...
To Sin, the lord of command, the uplifter of horns, the
spectacle of heaven,
To the Sun-god, the great judge of the gods, who causes
the lightning to issue forth,
To Anu, the lord and prince, possessing the life of Asshur,
the father of the great gods.
To Rammon, the minister of heaven and earth, the lord of
the wind and the lightning of heaven.
To Ishtar, the queen of heaven and the stars, whose seat
is exalted.
To Merodach, the prince of the gods, the interpreter of
the spirits of heaven and earth.
To Adar, the son of Mul-lil the giant, the first-born ...
To Nebo, the messenger of Asshur (Ansar) ...
To Nergal, the lord of might and strength ...
To the god who marches in front, the first-born ...
To the seven gods, the warrior deities ...
the great gods, the lords of heaven and earth.
Asshur as Conqueror
An incident which well illustrated the popularity of the Assyrian
belief in the conquering power of the national god is described in an
account of the expedition of Sargon against Ashdod stamped on a clay
cylinder of that monarch's reign. Sargon states that in his ninth
expedition to the land beside the sea, to Philistia and Ashdod, to
punish King Azuri of that city for his refusal to send tribute and
for his evil deeds against Assyrian subjects, Sargon placed Ahimiti,
nephew of Azuri, in his place and fixed the taxes. But the people of
Ashdod revolted against the puppet Sargon had placed over them, and
by acclamation raised one Yaran to the throne, and fortified their
dominions. They and the surrounding peoples sought the aid of Egypt,
which could not help them. For the honour of Asshur, Sargon then
engaged in an expedition against the Hittites, and turned his attention
to the state of affairs in Philistia (_c._ 711 B.C.), hearing which
Yaran, for fear of Asshur, fled to Meroc on the borders of Egypt, where
he hid ignominiously. Sargon besieged and captured the city of Ashdod,
with the gods, wives, children, and treasures of Yaran.
It is plain that this punitive expedition was undertaken for the
personal honour of Asshur, that he was believed to accompany the
troops in their campaign against the rebellious folk of Ashdod, and
that victory was to be ascribed to him and to him alone. All tribute
from conquered peoples became the property of Asshur, to whom it was
offered by the Kings of Assyria. Even the great and proud monarchs of
this warlike kingdom do not hesitate to affirm themselves the creatures
of Asshur, by whom they live and breathe and by whose will they hold
the royal authority, symbolized by the mighty bow conferred upon them
by their divine master. That these haughty rulers were not without an
element of affection as well as fear for the god they worshipped is
seen from the circumstance that they frequently allude to themselves
as the sons of Asshur, whose viceroys on earth they were. Asshur was,
indeed, in later times the spirit of conquering Assyria personalized.
We do not find him regarded as anything else than a war-god. We do not
find him surrounded by any of the gentler attributes which distinguish
non-militant deities, nor is it likely that his cult would have
developed, had it lasted, into one distinguished for its humanizing
influence or its ethical subtlety. It was the cult of a war-god pure
and simple, and when Asshur was beaten at his own business of war he
disappeared into the limbo of forgotten gods as rapidly as he had
arisen.
Ishtar in Assyria
Next to Asshur in the affections of the Assyrian people stood Ishtar.
As a goddess in Assyria she was absolutely identical with the
Babylonian Ishtar, her favourite shrines in the northern kingdom being
Nineveh, Arbela, and the temple of Kidmuru, also in Nineveh. The
Assyrians appear to have admitted her Babylonian origin, or at least
to have confessed that theirs was originally a Babylonian Ishtar, for
Tiglath-pileser I lays emphasis upon the circumstance that a shrine he
raised to Ishtar in his capital is dedicated to 'the Assyrian Ishtar.'
The date of this monarch is 1010 B.C., or near it, so that the above
is a comparatively early allusion to Ishtar in Assyrian history. The
Ishtars of Arbela and Kidmuru do not appear in Assyrian texts until the
time of Esar-haddon (681 B.C.), thus the Ishtar of Nineveh was much the
most venerable of the three. Arbela was evidently a religious centre of
importance, and the theory has been advanced that it became the seat
of a school of prophets connected with the worship of Ishtar. Jastrow
in his _Religion of Babylonia and Assyria_ (1898, p. 203), writing on
this point, says, "It is quite possible, if not probable, that the
three Ishtars are each of independent origin. The 'queen of Kidmuru,'
indeed, I venture to think, is the indigenous Ishtar of Nineveh, who is
obliged to yield her place to the so-called 'Assyrian Ishtar,' upon the
transfer of the capital of Assyria to Nineveh, and henceforth is known
by one of her epithets to distinguish her from her more formidable
rival. The cult of Ishtar at Arbela is probably, too, of ancient
date; but special circumstances that escape us appear to have led to
a revival of interest in their cults during the period when Assyria
reached the zenith of her power. The important point for us to bear in
mind is that no essential distinctions between these three Ishtars were
made by the Assyrians. Their traits and epithets are similar, and for
all practical purposes we have only one Ishtar in the northern empire."
Ishtar as a War-Goddess
Ishtar was frequently placed by the side of Asshur as a war-goddess.
Ere she left the plains of Babylonia for the uplands of Assyria she
had evinced certain bellicose propensities. In the Gilgamesh epic
she appears as a deity of destructive and spiteful character, if not
actually of warlike nature. But if the Babylonians regarded her first
and foremost as the great mother-goddess, the Assyrians took but little
notice of this side of her character. To them she was a veritable
Valkyrie, and as the Assyrians grew more and more military so she
became more the war-goddess and less the nature-mother of love and
agriculture. She appeared in dreams to the war-loving Kings of Assyria,
encouraging and heartening them with words of cheer to further military
exploits. Fire was her raiment, and, as became a goddess of battle, her
appearance was terrific. She consumed the enemies of Assur-bani-pal
with flames. Still, strangely enough, in the religious texts,
influenced probably by Babylonian sources, she was still to a great
extent the mild and bountiful mother of nature. It is in the historical
texts which ring with tales of conquest and the grandiloquent boastings
of conquering monarchs that she appears as the leader of armies and the
martial goddess who has slain her thousands and her tens of thousands.
So has it ever been impossible for the priest and the soldier to
possess the selfsame idea of godhead, and this is so in the modern no
less than in the ancient world. Yet occasionally the stern Assyrian
kings unbent, and it was probably in a brief interval of peace that
Assur-nazir-pal alluded to Ishtar as the lady who "loves him and his
priesthood." Sennacherib also spoke of the goddess in similar terms. It
is necessary to state that the name or title of Belit given to Ishtar
does not signify that she is the wife or consort of Bel, but merely
that she is a 'great lady,' for which the title 'Belit' is a generic
term. If she is at times brought into close association with Asshur
she is never regarded as his wife. She is not the consort of any god,
but an independent goddess in her own right, standing alone, equal
with Asshur and the dependant of no other divinity. But it was later
only that she ranked with Asshur, and purely because of her military
reputation.
Ninib as an Assyrian War-God
Such a deity as Ninib (another name for Nin-girsu, the god of Lagash)
was certain to find favour among the Assyrians by virtue of those
characteristics which would render him a valuable ally in war. We
find several kings extolling his prowess as a warrior, notably
Tiglath-pileser I, and Assur-rishishi, who allude to him as "the
courageous one," and "the mighty one of the gods." His old status
as a sun-and-wind god, in which he was regarded as overthrowing and
levelling with the ground everything which stood in his path, would
supply him with the reputation necessary to a god of battles. He is
associated with Asshur in this capacity, and Tiglath-pileser brackets
them as those "who fulfil his desire." But Ninib's chief votary was
Assur-nazir-pal (858-60 B.C.), who commenced his annals with a pæan of
praise in honour of Ninib, which so abounds in fulsome eulogy that we
feel that either he must have felt much beholden to the god, or else
have suffered from religious mania. The epithets he employs in praise
of Ninib are those usually lavished upon the greatest of gods only.
This proceeding secured immense popularity for Ninib and gave him a
social and political vogue which nothing else could have given, and
we find Shamsi-ramman, the grandson of Assur-nazir-pal, employing the
selfsame titles in honouring him.
The great temple of Ninib was situated in Calah, the official residence
of Assur-nazir-pal, and within its walls that monarch placed a tablet
recording his deeds, and a great statue of the god. He further endowed
his cult so that it might enjoy continuance.
We can readily understand how the especial favour shown to such a god
as Ninib by an Assyrian monarch originated. Asshur would be regarded by
them as much too popular and national a deity to choose as a personal
patron. But more difficult to comprehend are the precise reasons which
actuated the Assyrian kings, or indeed the kings of any similar ancient
state, in choosing their patrons. Does a polytheistic condition of
religion permit of the fine selection of patron deities, or is it
not much more probable that the artful offices of ecclesiastical and
political wire-pullers had much to do with moulding the preferences
of the King before and after he reached the throne? The education of
the monarch while yet a prince would almost certainly be entrusted
to a high ecclesiastical dignitary, and although many examples to
the contrary exist, we are pretty safe in assuming that whatever the
complexion of the tutor's mind, that of the pupil would to some extent
reflect it. On the other hand there is no resisting the conclusion that
the Assyrian kings were very often vulgar parvenus, ostentatious and
'impossible,' as such people usually are, and that, after the manner
of their kind, they 'doted' upon everything ancient, and, possibly,
everything Babylonian, just as the later Romans praised everything
Greek.
Ninib as Hunter-God
But Ninib ministered to the amusement of his royal devotees as well as
to their warlike desires. We find Assur-nazir-pal invoking him before
commencing a long journey in search of sport, and Tiglath-pileser I,
who was a doughty hunter of lions and elephants, ascribes his success
to Ninib, who has placed the mighty bow in his hands.
Jensen in his _Kosmologie_ points out that Ninib represents the
eastern sun and the morning sun. If this is so, it is strange to find
a god representing the sun of morning in the status of a war-god. It
is usually when the sun-god reaches the zenith of the heavens that
he slays his thousands and his tens of thousands. As a variant of
Nin-girsu he would of course be identified with Tammuz. His consort was
Gula, to whom Assur-nazir-pal erected a sanctuary.
[Illustration: Tiglath-Pileser I directed by Ninib.--Evelyn Paul.]
Dagan
Dagan the fish-god, who, we saw, was the same as Oannes or Ea,
strangely enough rose to high rank in Assyria. Some authorities
consider him of Philistian or Aramæan origin, and do not compare him
with Ea, who rose from the waters of the Persian Gulf to enlighten his
people, and it is evident that the Mesopotamian-Palestinian region
contained several versions of the origin of this god, ascribing it to
various places. In the Assyrian pantheon he is associated with Anu,
who rules the heavens, Dagan supervising the earth. It is strange
to observe a deity, whose sphere must originally have been the
sea, presiding over the terrestrial plane, and this transference it
was which cost Dagan his popularity in Assyria, for later he became
identified with Bel and disappeared almost entirely from the Assyrian
pantheon.
Anu
Anu in Assyria did not differ materially from Anu in Babylon, but
he suffered, as did other southern deities, from the all-pervading
worship of Asshur. He had a temple in Asshur's own city, which was
rebuilt by Tiglath-pileser I 641 years after its original foundation.
He was regarded in Assyria as lord of the Igigi and Anunnaki, or
spirits of heaven and earth, probably the old animistic spirits, and
to this circumstance, as well as to the fact that he belonged to the
old triad along with Bel and Ea, he probably owed the prolongation of
his cult. As an elemental and fundamental god opposition could not
possibly displace him, and as ruler of the spirits of air and earth he
would have a very strong hold upon the popular imagination. Gods who
possess such powers often exist in folk-memory long after the other
members of the pantheon which contained them are totally forgotten,
and one would scarcely be surprised to find Anu lingering in the
shadows of post-Assyrian folk-lore, if any record of such lore could be
discovered. Anu was frequently associated with Ramman, but more usually
with Bel and Eausas in Babylonia.
Ramman
Ramman enjoyed much greater popularity in Assyria than in Babylonia,
for there he exercised the functions of a second Asshur, and was
regarded as destruction personified. Says an old Assyrian hymn
concerning Ramman:
The mighty mountain, thou hast overwhelmed it.
At his anger, at his strength,
At his roaring, at his thundering,
The gods of heaven ascend to the sky,
The gods of the earth ascend to the earth,
Into the horizon of heaven they enter,
Into the zenith of heaven they make their way.
What a picture have we here in these few simple lines of a pantheon
in dread and terror of the wrath and violence of one of its number.
We can almost behold the divine fugitives crowding in flight, some
into the upper regions of air to outsoar the anger of the destroyer,
others seeking the recesses of the earth to hide themselves from the
fierceness of his countenance, the roar of his thunderbolts, and the
arrows of his lightning. Simple, almost bald, as the lines are they
possess marvellous pictorial quality, bringing before us as they do the
rout of a whole heaven in a few simple words.
The weapons of Ramman are lightning, deluge, hunger, and death, and
woe to the nation upon whom he visits his wrath, for upon it he visits
flood and famine. Thus his attributes as a storm-god are brought into
play when he figures as a war deity, for just as a weather-god of the
lightning wields it as a spear or dart in the fight, so Ramman as
storm-god brings to bear the horrors of tempest upon the devoted head
of the enemy.
So highly did the Assyrian kings value the assistance of Ramman that
they sacrificed to him during the stress and bustle of a campaign in
the field. They liken an attack of their troops to his onslaught,
and if they wish to depict the stamping out of an adversary, his
'eating up,' as Chaka's Zulus were wont to term the process, they
declare that their men swept over the enemy as Ramman might have
done. Assur-nazir-pal alludes to Ramman as 'the mightiest of the
gods,' but as in reality that phrase was employed in connexion with
all the principal deities at one time or another by kings or priests
who favoured them, there is no reason to suppose that anything more
is intended than that Ramman occupied a place of importance in the
Assyrian pantheon.
The worship of Ramman in later times came very much into prominence. It
was only in the days of Khammurabi that he came into his kingdom, as
it were, and even then his worship was not very firmly established in
Babylonia. With the rise of the Kassite dynasty, however, we find him
coming more into favour, and his name bestowed upon Babylonian kings.
He seems to have formed a triad with Sin and Shamash, and in the Hymn
of Khammurabi we find him appealed to along with Shamash as 'Divine
Lords of Justice.' Nebuchadrezzar I appears to have held him in high
esteem, although he was unfriendly to the dynasty which first brought
him into prominence, and this monarch couples him with Ishtar as the
divinity who has chiefly assisted him in all his great undertakings.
Indeed, Nebuchadrezzar evinced much partiality for Ramman, perhaps
feeling that he must placate the especial god of those he had cast from
power. He speaks of him as the 'lord of the waters beneath the earth,'
and of the rains from heaven.
The place of Ramman's origin seems obscure. We have already dealt with
his manifestations in more primitive days, but opinions appear to
differ regarding the original seat of his worship, some authorities
holding that it was Muru in Southern Babylonia, others that it is
necessary to turn to Assyria for traces of his first worship. His cult
is found in Damascus and extended as far south as the Plain of Jezreel.
As Milton says:
"... Rimmon, whose delightful seat
Was fair Damascus, on the fertile banks
Of Abbana and Pharphar, lucid streams.
He also 'gainst the house of God was bold
A leper once he lost, and gained a king,
Ahaz his sottish conqu'ror, whom he drew
God's altar to disparage and displace
For one of Syrian mode, whereon to burn
His odious offerings, and adore the gods
Whom he had vanquish'd."
This later theory would make him of Aramaic origin, but his cult
appears to have been of very considerable antiquity in Assyria, and it
might have been indigenous there. Moreover, the earliest mention of
his worship is in the city of Asshur. As has been indicated, he was
probably a storm-god or a thunder-and-lightning god, but he was also
associated with the sun-god Shamash. But whatever he may have been in
Babylonia, in Assyria he was certainly the thunder-deity first and
foremost.
A Babylonian text of some antiquity contains a really fine hymn to
Ramman, which might be paraphrased as follows, omitting redundancies:--
"O lord Ramman, thy name is the great and glorious Bull, child of
heaven, lord of Karkar, lord of plenty, companion of the lord Ea.
He that rideth the great lion is thy name. Thy name doth charm the
land, and covers it like a garment. Thy thunder shakes even the great
mountain, En-lil, and when thou dost rumble the mother Nin-lil
trembles. Said the lord En-lil, addressing his son Ramman: 'O son,
spirit of wisdom, with all-seeing eyes and high vision, full of
knowledge as the Pleiades, may thy sonorous voice give forth its
utterance. Go forth, go up, who can strive with thee? The father is
with thee against the cunning foe. Thou art cunning in wielding the
hail-stones great and small. Oh, with thy right hand destroy the enemy
and root him up!' Ramman hearkened to the words of his father and took
his way from the dwelling, the youthful lion, the spirit of counsel."
In later times in Babylonia Ramman seems to have typified the rain
of heaven in its beneficent as well as its fertilizing aspect. Not
only did he irrigate the fields and fill the wells with water, but
he was also accountable for the dreadful tempests which sweep over
Mesopotamia. Sometimes he was malevolent, causing thorns to grow
instead of herbs. The people, if they regarded him in some measure as a
fertilizing agent, also seem to have looked upon him as a destructive
and lion-like deity quite capable of desolating the country-side and
'eating up the land.' His roar is typical of him, filling all hearts
with affright as it does, and signifying famine and destruction. It is
not strange that Mesopotamian regions should have had so many deities
of a destructive tendency when we think of the furious whirlwinds
which frequently rush across the face of the land, raising sand-storms
and devastating everything in their track. Ramman was well likened to
the roaring lion, seeking what he may devour, and this seems to have
symbolized him in the eyes of the peasant population of the land.
Indeed, the Assyrians, impressed by his destructive tendencies, made a
war-god of him, and considered his presence as essential to victory.
No wonder that the great god of storm made a good war-god!
[Illustration: Assur-nazir-pal attended by a Winged Mythological Being.
--Bas-relief from the north-western palace at Nimrûd.--Photo W. A. Mansell
and Co.]
Shamash
The cult of Shamash in Assyria dates from at least 1340 B.C., when
Pudilu built a temple to this god in the city of Asshur. He entitled
Shamash 'The Protecting Deity,' which name is to be understood as that
of the god of justice, whose fiat is unchangeable, and in this manner
Shamash differed somewhat from the Babylonian idea concerning him. In
the southern kingdom he was certainly regarded as a just god, but not
as _the_ god of justice--a very different thing. It is interesting
as well as edifying to watch the process of evolution of a god of
justice. Thus in Ancient Mexico Tezcatlipoca evolved from a tribal
deity into a god who was beginning to bear all the marks and signs
of a god of justice when the conquering Spaniards put an end to his
career. We observe, too, that although the Greeks had a special deity
whose department was justice, other divinities, such as Pallas Athene,
displayed signs that they in time might possibly become wielders of
the balances between man and man. In the Egyptian heavenly hierarchy
Maat and Thoth both partook of the attributes of a god of justice,
but perhaps Maat was the more directly symbolical of the two. Now in
the case of Shamash no favours can be obtained from him by prayer or
sacrifice unless those who supplicate him, monarchs though they be, can
lay claim to righteousness. Even Tiglath-pileser I, mighty conqueror
as he was, recognized Shamash as his judge, and, naturally, as the
judge of his enemies, whom he destroys, not because they are fighting
against Tiglath, but because of their wickedness. When he set captives
free Tiglath took care to perform the gracious act before the face of
Shamash, that the god might behold that justice dwelt in the breast of
his royal servant. Tiglath, in fact, is the viceroy of Shamash upon
earth, and it would seem as if he referred many cases regarding whose
procedure he was in doubt to the god before he finally pronounced upon
them.
Both Assur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser II exalted the sun-cult of
Shamash, and it has been suggested that the popularity of the worship
of Ra in Egypt had reflected upon that of Shamash in Assyria. It
must always be extremely difficult to trace such resemblances at an
epoch so distant as that of the ninth century B.C. But certainly it
looks as if the Ra cult had in some manner influenced that of the old
Babylonian sun-god. Sargon pushed the worship of Shamash far to the
northern boundaries of Assyria, for he built a sanctuary to the deity
beyond the limits of the Assyrian Empire--where, precisely, we do not
know. Amongst a nation of warriors a god such as Shamash must have been
valued highly, for without his sanction they would hardly be justified
in commencing hostilities against any other race.
Sin in the Northern Land
We do not find Sin, the Babylonian moon-god, extensively worshipped
in Assyria. Assur-nazir-pal founded a temple to him in Calah, and
Sargon raised several sanctuaries to him beyond the Assyrian frontier.
It is as a war-god chiefly that we find him depicted in the northern
kingdom--why, it would be difficult to say, unless, indeed, it was
that the Assyrians turned practically all the deities they borrowed
from other peoples into war-gods. So far as is known, no lunar deity
in any other pantheon possesses a military significance. Several are
not without fear-inspiring attributes, but these are caused chiefly by
the manner in which the moon is regarded among primitive peoples as a
bringer of plague and blight. But we find Sin in Assyria freed from
all the astrological significances which he had for the Babylonians.
At the same time he is regarded as a god of wisdom and a framer of
decisions, in these respects equating very fully with the Egyptian
Thoth. Assur-bani-pal alludes to Sin as 'the first-born son of Bel,'
just as he is alluded to in Babylonian texts, thus affording us a clue
to the direct Babylonian origin of Sin.
Nusku of the Brilliant Sceptre
It is strange that although we know that Nusku had been a Babylonian
god from early times, and had figured in the pantheon of Khammurabi, it
is not until Assyrian times that we gain any very definite information
regarding him. The symbols used in his name are a sceptre and a
stylus, and he is called by Shalmaneser I 'The Bearer of the Brilliant
Sceptre.' This circumstance associates him closely with Nabu, to
designate whom the same symbols are employed. It is difficult, however,
to believe that the two are one, as some writers appear to think, for
Nusku is certainly a solar deity, while Nabu appears to have originally
been a water-god. There are, however, not wanting cases where the
same deity has evinced both solar and aqueous characteristics, and
these are to be found notably among the gods of American races. Thus
among the Maya of Central America the god Kukulcan is depicted with
both solar and aqueous attributes, and similar instances could be
drawn from lesser-known mythologies. Nusku and Nabu are, however,
probably connected in some way, but exactly in what manner is obscure.
In Babylonian times Nusku had become amalgamated with Gibil, the god
of fire, which perhaps accounts for his virtual effacement in the
southern kingdom. In Assyria we find him alluded to as the messenger of
Bel-Merodach, and Assur-bani-pal addresses him as 'the highly honoured
messenger of the gods.' The Assyrians do not seem to have identified
him in any way with Gibil, the fire-god.
Bel-Merodach
Even Bel-Merodach was absorbed into the Assyrian pantheon. To the
Assyrians, Babylonia was the country of Bel, and they referred to their
southern neighbours as the 'subjects of Bel.' This, of course, must be
taken not to mean the older Bel, but Bel-Merodach. They even alluded to
the governor whom they placed over conquered Babylonia as the governor
of Bel, so closely did they identify the god with the country. It is
only in the time of Shalmaneser II--the ninth century B.C.--that we
find the name Merodach employed for Bel, so general did the use of
the latter become. Of course it was impossible that Merodach could
take first place in Assyria as he had done in Babylonia, but it was a
tribute to the Assyrian belief in his greatness that they ranked him
immediately after Asshur in the pantheon.
Prisoner-Gods
The Assyrian rulers were sufficiently politic to award this place to
Merodach, for they could not but see that Babylonia, from which they
drew their arts and sciences, as well as their religious beliefs,
and from which they benefited in many directions, must be worthily
represented in the national religion. And just as the Romans in
conquering Greece and Egypt adopted many of the deities of these more
cultured and less powerful lands, thus seeking to bind the inhabitants
of the conquered provinces more closely to themselves, so did the
Assyrian rulers believe that, did they incorporate Merodach into their
hierarchy, he would become so Assyrian in his outlook as to cease to be
wholly Babylonian, and would doubtless work in favour of the stronger
kingdom. In no other of the religions of antiquity as in the Assyrian
was the idea so powerful that the god of the conquered or subject
people should become a virtual prisoner in the land of the conquerors,
or should at least be absorbed into their national worship. Some of the
Assyrian monarchs went so far as to drag almost every petty idol they
encountered on their conquests back to the great temple of Asshur, and
it is obvious that they did not do this with any intention of uprooting
the worship of these gods in the regions they conquered, but because
they desired to make political prisoners of them, and to place them in
a temple-prison, where they would be unable to wreak vengeance upon
them, or assist their beaten worshippers to war against them in the
future.
It may be fitting at this point to emphasize how greatly the Assyrian
people, as apart from their rulers, cherished the older beliefs of
Babylonia. Both peoples were substantially of the same stock, and any
movement which had as its object the destruction of the Babylonian
religion would have met with the strongest hostility from the populace
of Assyria. Just as the conquering Aztecs seem to have had immense
reverence for the worship of the Toltecs, whose land they subdued, so
did the less cultivated Assyrians regard everything connected, with
Babylonia as peculiarly sacred. The Kings of Assyria, in fact, were not
a little proud of being the rulers of Babylonia, and were extremely
mild in their treatment of their southern subjects--very much more so,
in fact, than they were in their behaviour toward the people of Elam
or other conquered territories. We even find the kings alluding to
themselves as being nominated by the gods to rule over the land of Bel.
The Assyrian monarchs strove hard not to disturb the ancient Babylonian
cult, and Shalmaneser II, when he had conquered Babylonia, actually
entered Merodach's temple and sacrificed to him.
The Assyrian Bel and Belit
As for Bel, whose place Merodach usurped in the Babylonian pantheon,
he was also recognized in Assyria, and Tiglath-pileser I built him a
temple in his city of Asshur. Tiglath prefixes the adjective 'old'
to the god's name to show that he means Bel, not Bel-Merodach.
Sargon, too, who had antiquarian tastes, also reverts to Bel, to whom
he alludes as the 'Great Mountain,' the name of the god following
immediately after that of Asshur. Bel is also invoked in connexion
with Anu as a granter of victory. His consort Belit, although
occasionally she is coupled with him, more usually figures as the
wife of Asshur, and almost as commonly as a variant of Ishtar. In a
temple in the city of Asshur, Tiglath-pileser I made presents to Belit
consisting of the images of the gods vanquished by him in his various
campaigns. Assur-bani-pal, too, regarded Belit as the wife of Asshur,
and himself as their son, alluding to Belit as 'Mother of the Great
Gods,' a circumstance which would go to show that, like most of the
Assyrian kings, his egoism rather overshadowed his sense of humour. In
Assur-bani-pal's pantheon Belit is placed close by her consort Asshur.
But there seems to have been a good deal of confusion between Belit and
Ishtar because of the general meaning of the word Belit.
Nabu and Merodach
As in Babylonia so in Assyria, Nabu and Merodach were paired together,
often as Bel and Nabu. Especially were they invoked when the affairs
of Babylonia were being dealt with. In the seventh century B.C. we
find the cult of Nabu in high popularity in Assyria, and indeed
Ramman-Nirari III appears to have made an attempt to advance Nabu
considerably. He erected a temple to the god at Calah, and granted
him many resounding titles. But even so, it does not seem that
Ramman-Nirari intended to exalt Nabu at the expense of Asshur. Indeed
it would have been impossible for him to have done so if he had
desired to. Asshur was as much the national god of the Assyrian people
as Osiris was of the Egyptians. Nabu was the patron of wisdom, and
protector of the arts; he guided the stylus of the scribe; and in
these attributes he is very close to the Egyptian Thoth, and almost
identical with another Babylonian god, Nusku, alluded to on pages 224,
225. Sargon calls Nabu 'the Seer who guides the gods,' and it would
seem from some notices of him that he was also regarded as a leader of
heavenly or spiritual forces. Those kings who were fond of erudition
paid great devotion to Nabu, and many of the tablets in their literary
collections close with thanksgiving to him for having opened their ears
to receive wisdom.
Ea
Ea was of course accepted into the Assyrian pantheon because of his
membership in the old Assyrian triad, but he was also regarded as a
god of wisdom, possibly because of his venerable reputation; and we
find him also as patron of the arts, and especially of building and
architecture. Threefold was his power of direction in this respect.
The great Colossi, the enormous winged bulls and mythological figures
which flanked the avenues leading to the royal places, the images of
the gods, and, lastly, the greater buildings, were all examples of the
architectural art of which he was the patron.
Dibbarra
Another Babylonian deity who was placed in the ranks of the Assyrian
pantheon was Dibbarra, the plague-god, who can only be called a god
through a species of courtesy, as he partook much more of a demoniac
character, and was at one time almost certainly an evil spirit. We have
already alluded to the poem in which he lays low people and armies by
his violence, and it was probably from one of the texts of this that
Assur-bani-pal conceived the idea that those civilians who had perished
in his campaigns against Babylonia had been slaughtered by Dibbarra.
Lesser Gods
Some of the lesser Babylonian gods, like Damku and Sharru-Ilu, seem to
have attracted a passing interest to themselves, but as little can be
found concerning them in Babylonian texts, it is scarcely necessary
to take much notice of them in such a chapter as this. Most probably
the Assyrians accepted the Babylonian gods on the basis not only of
their native reputation, but also of the occurrence of their names in
the ancient religious texts, with which their priests were thoroughly
acquainted, and though, broadly speaking, they accepted practically the
whole of the Babylonian religion and its gods in entirety, there is no
doubt that some of these by their very natures and attributes appealed
more to them than others, and therefore possessed a somewhat different
value in their eyes from that assigned to them by the more peace-loving
people of the southern kingdom.