CONTEMPORARY THOUGHT--CONCLUSION
+Miscellaneous Ideas.+--Although the native literature of our period
consists almost entirely of the begging-letters and reports in the
Amarna Tablets, yet even from the language addressed to the human
representative of the Sun-God, we may gain some idea of the
intellectual environment, some hints, it may be, suggestive of the
religious thought of the age.[1] The Egyptian monarch is addressed not
only as king of lands, king of battle but as a god (pp. 63, 78). His
commands are as powerful as the Sun (Shamash) in Heaven; he is like the
Sun which rises over the lands every day, and, as for the rising of the
Sun in Heaven, so the writers await the words which come from his
mouth. They keep the king's command day and night and acknowledge that
the king will curse {99} the man who does not serve him. He who
hearkens not to the word of the king, his lord, his city and house go
to ruin, and his name will not be in the land for ever; but (says the
writer, the king of Tyre) the servant who hearkens to his lord, his
city and house flourish, and his name is unto eternity, 'for thou art
the Sun which rises over me and the wall of bronze which is lifted up
for me.'
[1] It need hardly be remarked that the paragraphs classifying the more
interesting ideas in the letters from Palestine and Syria have been
made as literal as possible.
The vassals do obeisance seven and seven times; they prostrate
themselves upon breast and back. (Both attitudes are illustrated in
the rather later tomb of Harmheb.) They call themselves the throne on
which the king sits, his footstool, the dust of his feet and of the
soles of his sandals. They are the ground upon which he treads, the
dirt over which he walks; his yoke is upon their neck and they bear it.
'Whether we mount up to heaven or descend to earth, our head is still
in your hand,' writes one, and he makes the following striking
acknowledgement: 'I look here and I look there and there is no light,
but I look to my lord the king and there is light; and though a brick
move away from under its coping, I will not move away from under the
feet of my lord.' These phrases, which were evidently popular, are
used by two {100} other writers. A vassal thus declares his fidelity:
'I have not sinned in aught against the king my lord, I have not
sinned; may the lord my king know his evil-doers.' Another seeks the
way to his lord, and from his lord deserts not. A confident vassal
prays the king not to take anything to heart; let not thy heart be
pained, he writes. One writer asks if he is a dog that he should not
obey the royal commands, and a second emphasises his remarks by a
repetition of the oath 'as the king, my lord, liveth.'
The king of Byblos, who calls his city the king's faithful handmaid,
complains of a deed against his city which had not been done since
eternity; the dogs (_i.e._ his adversaries) act after their hearts and
cause the king's cities to go up in smoke. The fields are like a wife
without a husband through lack of sustenance. He himself is caught
like a bird in a cage. Again, he is old and stricken with disease; the
gods of Byblos are enraged, and the illness is very severe, but, he
continues, 'I have opened (confessed) my sins to the gods.' He
declares that since the day he received favour from the king his heart
had not changed, his face is (fixed) to serve him; if the king's heart
is for his city (or, elsewhere, if it is on his heart) let him send
help.
{101}
The vassals write that they stretch out their hand to the king's feet,
or pray that the king may extend his hand unto them. The citizens of
Tunip assert: 'thy city weeps and its tears flow; there is no seizing
of the hand (help) for us.' The ruler of Beirut trusts that the royal
troops may shatter the heads of the king's enemies, while his servant's
eyes gaze (_i.e._ with pleasure) upon the king's life. The elders of a
city entreat: 'May the king our lord hearken to the words of his true
servants, and give a present to his servants, while our enemies look on
and eat the dust; let not the king's breath depart from us.' The king
is the breath of his vassals' lives; they rejoice when it reaches them,
for without it they cannot live. The thought was a common one, and in
an Egyptian text the defeated Hittites are represented as saying to
Ramses II. 'in praising the Good God (_i.e._ the king) "Give to us the
breath that thou givest, lo, we are under thy sandals."' Equally
interesting are the words of the prince of Sidon on the receipt of
tidings from the king, 'my heart rejoiced, my head was uplifted and my
eyes shone.'
Finally, the king of Jerusalem in his letters to his god, his Sun,
protests that one has slandered him (_lit._ eaten the pieces). While
other writers {102} disclaim guilt or sin (_khitu_), _i.e._ rebellion,
he asserts that he has been loyal (_saduk_) in his dealings. He
acknowledges that neither his father nor his mother appointed him in
his place, the king's strong arm has set him up in his father's house,
he has 'put his name upon Jerusalem for ever,' therefore he cannot
abandon its territory. Indeed, his recognition of Pharaoh's supremacy
is unique, and in one of his communications to the king his Sun, after
the usual obeisance ('at the feet of my lord, seven times and seven
times I fall'), he declares that his lord 'has put his name upon the
East and upon the West.'
+The Underlying Identity of Thought+ throughout the old Oriental world
shows itself alike in Egyptian texts and in Hittite tablets from
Boghaz-keui. The literature of Babylonia, Assyria, and often, too, of
Egypt so frequently has analogies and parallels in the Old Testament,
that we may assume that similar points of contact would be found, had
we some of the religious writings of the Palestine of our period.
Though we do not know how the Palestinian addressed his gods, the
evidence whether direct or indirect partially enables us to fill the
gap. Even the simplicity and poverty of Oriental pastoral life have
never {103} been accompanied by a corresponding inferiority of
expression or dearth of religious reflection. An unbiased examination
of the external religious literature shows the position which the
deities held in the thoughts of their groups of worshippers. Religion
was quite part of life, and the same fundamental conceptions underlay
the manifold social-religious systems whether tribal or monarchical.
To their head each group looked for all the gifts of nature and also
for protection and succour; him they were loyally prepared to sustain,
and they expected a corresponding loyalty on his part.
A topical example of the identity of thought is furnished by a hymn of
the monotheist Ikhnaton in honour of Aton. The deities are largely
what circumstances make them; the extension of Egypt's empire extended
the supremacy of the national-god, the situation encouraged the
conception of a world-god. Now, this domesticated and somewhat weak
monarch, holding himself aloof from politics, endeavoured to found a
cult of the sun-disc which was characteristically devoid of the usual
association of the sun with the destructive aspect of the storm- or
weather-god. Like other individual faiths, it was stamped with a
profound spirit of humanity. Ikhnaton's deity {104} was the sole god,
beside whom there was no other; the beginning of life, the creator of
'the countries of Syria, Nubia, the land of Egypt'; the maker of all
mankind diverse in speech, and of all that is upon the earth and on
high. It was a despotic and ill-timed monotheism. It introduced a
cult which was too far from ordinary worship, one which threatened to
overthrow the old-established deities. What was probably more
important was the fact that the deity had not the forceful and
dominating attributes of the old sun-god. He was not a god of war,
and, from the current standpoint, would be of no avail in the political
storms which were beating upon the Egyptian empire in Asia. But this
remarkable attempt at a reform claims attention especially because the
cult was as little upon traditional and specifically Egyptian lines as
was the idea of the beneficent life-giving sun whose rays were not
confined to Egypt alone. As Professor Breasted has observed, the hymn
is especially interesting for its similarity in thought and sequence
with the late Psalm civ. There is no evidence, however, that any
effort was made to spread Ikhnaton's cult over the Egyptian dominions
in Western Asia, and the possibility of Asiatic influence upon the
shaping of the cult cannot be altogether excluded. We quote a {105}
few lines from Professor Breasted's translation to illustrate
Ikhnaton's conceptions of the sun-god, whose worship was one of the
most popular in Babylonia and Assyria, who, indeed, was regarded there
not merely as an illuminator but as a supreme and righteous judge, the
god of truth and justice.
'When thou risest in the eastern horizon of heaven,
Thou fillest every land with thy beauty.
* * * * *
When thou settest in the western horizon of heaven,
The world is in darkness like the dead.
* * * * *
Bright is the earth when thou risest in the horizon,
When thou shinest as Aton by day.
The darkness is banished, when thou sendest forth thy rays.
* * * * *
How manifold are all thy works,
They are hidden from before us,
O thou sole god, whose powers no other possesseth,
Thou didst create the earth according to thy desire,
While thou wast alone.
* * * * *
The world is in thy hand,
Even as thou hast made them.
When thou hast risen, they live.
When thou settest, they die.
For thou art duration, beyond thy mere limbs,
By thee man liveth,
And their eyes look upon thy beauty,
Until thou settest.'[2]
[2] See further the appreciative account of the reform by J. H.
Breasted, _History of Egypt_, _pp._ 355-378.
{106}
+The Influence of Babylonia.+--The fact that Palestine used the script
and language of Babylonia suggests that it shared other features of its
culture. Among the Amarna Tablets were Babylonian mythological texts
which had been carefully studied or used for reading-exercises in
Egypt. One, the myth of Eresh-ki-gal and Nergal, narrating the descent
of the latter into Hades, recalls the story of Persephone. Another,
the myth of Adapa, tells how the hero who refused the food and water of
life in heaven was denied the gift of immortality. It is inconceivable
that Palestinian speculation did not turn to the mysteries of life and
death, or that a people should acknowledge Nergal--or any other
deity--without some formal beliefs. May we assume, therefore, that
Palestinian thought was pre-eminently Babylonian? The question is as
important for our period as for the Old Testament, and, in the absence
of texts wherewith to institute a comparison, we conclude with a brief
account of the bearing of the available evidence upon the problem.
The formulated beliefs, the theology, and the mythology which all races
possess to some degree or other have grown up from that primitive
philosophy of man which seeks to explain all that he saw about him.
The old question: {107} 'What mean ye by this service?' (Exod. xii. 26)
is typical of the inquiry which ritual (and indeed all other) acts
invariably demand; the danger lies in our assuming that the proffered
explanations necessarily describe their origin, and in confusing the
essential elements with those which are accidental and secondary. The
excavations at Gezer suggest an illustration. What rites were
practised in its caves or in the great tunnel which leads to the
subterranean spring cannot be asserted, but there is a living tradition
that the waters of the flood burst forth in the neighbourhood. Similar
flood-stories can be localised elsewhere. In Hierapolis water was
poured into a chasm below the sanctuary twice a year, and according to
the Pseudo-Lucian it was here that the waters of Deucalion's flood were
absorbed--hence the rite! But Melito reports that water was emptied
into a well in the city in order to subdue a subterranean
demon--evidently some earlier chthonic deity. Similar water-rites were
known in Palestine and Syria as a 'descent' or _Yerīd_, and it may
be presumed that an echo of the term survives in _'Ain Yerdeh_ at the
foot of Gezer. We do not reach the root of the matter, but we can
notice the diverse explanations of the same rite (which probably
originated in a charm {108} to procure rain), the ubiquity of certain
traditions, their persistence, and the ease with which they adjust
themselves. Further, it is instructive to observe how the rite has
been shaped in the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles and has been dressed in
accordance with specific religious beliefs (cp. Zech. xiv. 16 _sq._).
Some archæological details may next be summarised. An altar at
Taanach, with protuberances suggestive of horns, bore in bold relief
winged animals with human faces, lions, a tree with a goat on either
side, and a small human figure clutching a serpent. Though it may
belong to the eighth or seventh century, similar scenes recur upon
seals and other objects of all dates. Animals (especially of the deer
or gazelle kind) are common, either alone or in conjunction with trees
or men. Man-headed bulls with wings, sphinxes, and scenes of combat
also appear. The ubiquitous myth of the dragon-slayer finds a parallel
in the Egyptian scene of a foreign god (Sutekh) piercing the serpent
with his spear, or in the later grandiose representations of the sturdy
boy at Petra who grips the dragon.[3] One {109} seal shows a
seven-branched tree grasped by two men with the sun and moon on one
side and two stags on the other. In a second, a human figure stands
before a kind of pillar which is surmounted by an eight-rayed star. A
third had been impressed upon a tablet from Gezer which bore nineteen
distinct objects, including sun, moon, star, serpent, fish, crab,
animals, etc. Some of the signs were at once recognised as zodiacal,
and less elaborate specimens from Gezer and Megiddo furnish parallels.
But inscribed Babylonian boundary-stones of our period bear analogous
symbols; they are the emblems of the deities whose powers are thus
invoked by the inscription should the land-mark be damaged or removed.
The more gods, the more powerful the charm.
[3] The former is given by F. L. Griffith, _Proceedings of the Society
of Biblical Archæology_, xvi. p. 87, the latter by A. Jeremias, _Alte
Test._, etc., p. 456 _sqq._, fig. 151.
Such objects with all their Babylonian associations may in certain
cases have been imported or copied from foreign originals; the scenes
could have been absolutely meaningless or even subject to a new
interpretation. But it is as difficult to treat every apparently
foreign object as contrary to Palestinian ideas, as it is to determine
how sacrificial and other scenes would otherwise have been depicted.
Religion found its expression in art; art was the ally of idolatry, and
the later uncompromising attitude of Judaism towards {110} display of
artistic meaning implies that the current symbolism, etc., reflected
intelligible religious conceptions. But it does not follow that these
conceptions were everywhere identical.
Again, when a scimitar from a tomb at Gezer resembles that which a
priest holds in a sacrificial scene upon a Gezer seal, we may suppose
that the seal represents a familiar Palestinian ceremony. But the same
type of weapon is found in Assyria and Egypt in the age of the
Nineteenth Dynasty, and it is therefore impossible to treat it or the
scene as _distinctively_ Palestinian. The ubiquity of the
dragon-conflict, too, warns us that the same underlying motive will
present itself in a great variety of external shapes, and it is
interesting to find that the idea of the slayer as a _child_ actually
points away from Babylonia. Features which find their only parallel in
the accumulation of Babylonian evidence are not inevitably of
Babylonian origin. Our land was exposed to diverse influences, an
illustration of which is afforded by certain seals with cuneiform
characters. The owner of one is styled a servant of Nergal (see p.
93); it bears Egyptian symbols (those of life and beauty), and a scene
of adoration, partly Egyptian and partly Babylonian in treatment. It
has been ascribed to the First Dynasty of Babylon. Later {111} come
the seals of the Sidonian Addumu 'beloved of the gods (?)' and his son;
on one is an Egyptianised representation of Set, Horus, and Resheph.
Yet another combines two conventional scenes, the priest leading a
worshipper before a deity (Babylonian), a king slaying a kneeling enemy
(Egyptian).[4] In the presence of such fusion the problem becomes more
complex. If, in the Greek age, it is found that Adonis and Osiris or
Astarte of Byblos and Isis resembled each other so closely that it was
sometimes difficult to determine which deity was being celebrated, the
relation between the Baalath of Byblos and Hathor, or between Shamash
and Amon-Re could have been equally embarrassing in our period. In
fact, as Palestine continues to be brought into line with other lands
the task of determining _specific_ external influences becomes more
intricate.
[4] See (_a_), Sellin, _Tell Ta'annek_, fig. 22, _pp._ 27 _sq._, 105
(Vincent, _Canaan_, fig. 117, p. 170 _sq._); (_b_) Winckler,
_Altorient. Forschungen_, iii. p. 177 _sq._; and (_c_) E. J. Pilcher,
_Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch._, xxiii. p. 362.
Finally, whatever was the true effect of the early Babylonian
supremacy, both Palestine and Syria, when not controlled by Egypt, were
influenced by the northern power of Mitanni and by the Hittites who
preserve distinctive features {112} of their own. According to
Professor Sayce most of the seals we have been noticing are Syrian
modifications of the Babylonian type, and 'the more strictly
archæological evidence of Babylonian influence upon Canaan is
extraordinarily scanty.'[5] It is obvious that one must allow for the
direct influence exerted upon the religious conditions from a quarter
of which very little is known as yet. The fact that Babylonian was
used in Palestine and among the Hittite peoples clearly does not allow
sweeping inferences. Indeed, so far from the script or language having
been imposed from without, the people of Mitanni apparently borrowed
the cuneiform script and adapted it to their own language; while, in
the Amarna Tablets, the native tongue of Palestine and Syria has left a
distinct impress upon the Babylonian.[6] This individuality repeats
itself in Palestinian pottery, which has neither originality of concept
nor fertility of resource. But it has vigour and vitality, and has not
developed into the superior art with which it came into contact. In
general the archæological evidence shows very {113} clearly that
Palestine was not absorbed by Babylonian culture, still less by that of
Egypt.[7]
[5] A. H. Sayce, _Archæology of the Cuneiform Inscriptions_ (London,
1907), _pp._ 151 _sq._
[6] For Mitanni, see Sayce, _op. cit._, p. 167; and for the dialect of
the Amarna letters, Zimmern, _Keilinschr. u. d. Alte Test._, p. 651.
[7] Cp. Vincent, _op. cit._, p. 341 (also p. 439 and note 1).
+Conclusion.+--Recent research gives us a glimpse of the Religion of
Ancient Palestine which becomes more distinct as it is found to be in
general harmony with Oriental religions. The picture, as we see it, is
neither Egyptian nor Babylonian, and if the latter colours it, this was
inevitable, partly through the still obscure relations under the First
Babylonian Dynasty, partly (though indirectly) through the influence of
the northern peoples, and again partly because both (as opposed to
Egypt) are Semitic. The picture, nevertheless, has distinctive traits
of its own. By the side of sacred places of cult and rites often cruel
and gross appear those indications of loftier elements which prove that
we have no mere inchoate nature-worship. This co-existence need cause
no surprise. The institutions which combine to make civilisation do
not necessarily move at the same rate or in parallel lines, either with
each other or with the progress of religious thought. A variety of
stages of development--such as can be observed in a single province of
modern India--could have been easily found amid {114} conflicting
political groups, or in the presence of foreign mercenaries or
settlers. One may also assume that then, as now, there were the usual
contrasts between the exposed sea-ports and the small inland townships,
between the aristocracy and the peasantry, between the settled
agriculturists and the roaming sons of the desert.
The fundamental religious conceptions have from time to time been
elevated and ennobled by enlightened minds; but what European culture
was unable to change in the age of Greek and Roman supremacy,
influences of Oriental origin could not expel. Official cults,
iconoclastic reforms, new positive religions have left the background
substantially unaltered, and the old canvas still shows through the
coatings it has received.
Our evidence has taken us down through the age of Egyptian supremacy,
which can be traced to the time of Ramses III., if not to the days of
Wenamon and Zakarbaal (1100 B.C.). With the decay of Egypt we reach
the close of a period which corresponds broadly to that wherein
Israelite history has placed the Patriarchs, Moses, Joshua, and the
Judges. The picture which the external sources furnish was not effaced
at a stroke. But the transformation from Egypt's suzerainty to an
independent Israelite monarchy, {115} from the polytheism of the Amarna
age to the recognition of a single God does not belong to these pages.
The rise of Yahweh as the national God, and the development of
conceptions regarding his nature must be sought in the native Israelite
records themselves, and in such external evidence as the future may
produce. Our task is finished when we point out that the external
(archæological) evidence does not reveal that hiatus which would have
ensued had there been a dislocation of earlier conditions by invading
Israelite tribes; earlier forms are simply developed, the evolution is
a progressive one.[8]
[8] Cp. R. A. S. Macalister, 'Excavation of Gezer,' _Quarterly
Statements_, 1904, p. 123; 1907, p. 203; Sellin, _op. cit._, p. 102;
_id._, _Der Ertrag der Ausgrabungen in Orient für die Erkenntnis der
Entwicklung der Religion Israels_ (Leipzig, 1905), _pp._ 33, 36 _sq._,
39 _sq._, see, in general, Vincent, _op. cit._, _pp._ 19 _sq._, 147
_sqq._, 199-204, 225, 345, 352 _sq._, 463 _sq._, and S. A. Cook,
_English Historical Review_, 1908, _pp._ 325 _sq._
{116}
PRINCIPAL SOURCES AND WORKS OF REFERENCE
For the Excavations: R. A. S. Macalister, 'Reports on the Excavation of
Gezer,' in the _Quarterly Statements_ of the Palestine Exploration Fund
(October 1902-October 1905; July 1907-July 1908); _id._, _Bible
Side-lights from the Mound of Gezer_ (London, 1906, numerous
illustrations); Ernst Sellin, 'Tell Ta'annek,' in the _Denkschriften_
of the Vienna Academy (1904-5); W. M. Flinders Petrie, _Researches in
Sinai_ (London, 1906); Hugues Vincent, _Canaan d'après l'Exploration
Recente_ (Paris, 1907; a valuable account, from the archæological
standpoint, of the results of excavation contained in the above works
and elsewhere); G. Schumacher, _Tell el-Mutesellim_ (Leipzig, 1908),
vol. i., text and plates.
Evidence from Babylonian or Assyrian Texts: H. Winckler, _The
Tell-el-Amarna Tablets_ (London, 1896); new edition by J. A. Knudtzon,
_Die El-Amarna-Tafeln_ (Leipzig, 1907-8; Parts i.-x.); H. Zimmern, _Die
Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament_ (Berlin, 1903; pp. 345-643); A.
Jeremias, _Das Alte Testament im Lichte des Alten Orients_ (Leipzig,
1906); M. Jastrow, _Die Religion Babyloniens und Assyriens_ (Giessen,
1905--).
Egyptian Sources: W. M. Müller, _Asien und Europa nach Alt-ägyptischen
Denkmälern_ (Leipzig, 1893); {117} J. H. Breasted, _History of Egypt_
(London, 1906); _id._, _Ancient Records of Egypt: Historical Documents_
(1906-7); _Zeitschrift fur Aegyptische Sprache_, etc. etc.
Of general works, W. R. Smith, _Lectures on the Religion of the
Semites: the Fundamental Institutions_ (London, 1894), is naturally
indispensable. Important, also, are G. A. Barton, _A Sketch of Semitic
Origins, Social and Religious_ (New York, 1902); Marie-Joseph Lagrange,
_Études sur les Religions Sémitiques_ (Paris, 1905); J. G. Frazer,
_Adonis, Attis, and Osiris: Studies in the History of Oriental
Religion_ (London, 1907). For Modern Semitic Religion there is a large
mass of scattered evidence; the most illuminating works are those of C.
M. Doughty, _Arabia Deserta_ (Cambridge, 1888); S. I. Curtiss,
_Primitive Semitic Religion To-day_ (London, 1902); A. Jaussen,
_Coutumes des Arabes au Pays de Moab_ (Paris, 1908). For the history
of the period may be consulted the works of G. Maspero (_Histoire
Ancienne_; Paris, 1904, etc.), or the popular account, with typical
illustrations, by G. Cormack, _History of Palestine in Early Times_
(forthcoming).
For those unacquainted with modern comparative study in the field of
religion, one of the most serviceable introductory books is J. A.
Macculloch's _Comparative Theology_ (Churchman's Library, London, 1902).
{118}
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
The following dates are based upon the latest researches, but are to be
regarded as provisional. Some Biblical dates are added for comparison,
those marked with an asterisk follow the margin of the Authorised
Version.
FIRST BABYLONIAN DYNASTY (the
'Khammurabi age') between . . . . . . . . . . . . 2060-1800 B.C.
TWELFTH EGYPTIAN DYNASTY, began about . . . . . . . 2000.
Abram enters Canaan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1921*.
Descent of Jacob into Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . 1706*.
Hyksos invasion of Egypt, about . . . . . . . . . . 1680.
EIGHTEENTH EGYPTIAN DYNASTY . . . . . . . . . . . . 1580-1350.
Thutmose III. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1500.
Exodus of Israel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1491*.
Invasion of Palestine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1451*.
Amenhotep III. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1411.
Amenhotep IV. (Ikhnaton) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1375.
NINETEENTH EGYPTIAN DYNASTY . . . . . . . . . . . . 1350-1200.
Sety I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1320.
Ramses II. (? Pharaoh of the oppression,
Exod. i. 11) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1310.
Merneptah (? Pharaoh of the Exodus;
defeats Israel in Palestine) . . . . . . . . . . . 1244.
TWENTIETH EGYPTIAN DYNASTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1200-1090.
Ramses III. (first mention of Philistines) . . . . . 1200-1169.
Ramses XII. (? age of Eli) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118.
Tiglath-pileser I., about . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100.
Saul, King of Israel (? 1025) . . . . . . . . . . . 1095*.
David, King of Judah (? 1010) . . . . . . . . . . . 1056*.
Solomon, about . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970.
{119}
INDEX
ADDU, weather-god, 79, 89 _sq._, 95.
Adonis, 36, 47, 92, 111.
Aegean isles, 6, 8.
Agriculture, 7, 9 _sq._, 11, 33 _sq._, 88, 90.
Allah, 21, 61, 68.
Altar, 18 _sqq._, 27, 39, 108.
Amarna tablets, 6 8, 10, 33, 63, 76, 78, 92, 96, 98 _sqq._, 106, 112,
etc.
Amenhotep II., 44.
Amenhotep III., 5 _sq._, 56, 70 _sq._, 81, 118.
Amenhotep IV. _See_ Ikhnaton.
Amon, the god, 54 _sq._, 61, 71, 74 _sqq._, 77 _sq._, 81, 95, 111.
_See_ Re.
Amulets, 17, 32, 35, 38, 51 _sq._
Anath, goddess, 85.
Ancestor-worship, 57 _sqq._
Animals, 22, 30 _sq._, 39_sq._, 43 _sqq._, 47 _sqq._, 50, 61, 85, 108
_sq._
Animism, 60.
Anointing, 14, 27, 42, 64, 76, 79.
Anubis, 96.
Anthropomorphism, 28, 49.
Apollo, 23, 84.
Arabia, 7, 87 _sq._, 92.
Archæology, 2, 7 _sq._, etc.
Arts, 8 _sq._, 112 _sq._
_Ashērah_, 26, 87.
Ashirat, Ashirta, goddess, 53, 87.
Tell 'Ashtarah, 77, 81.
Ashur, the god, 53, 87 _sq._, 92.
Assyria, 5, 7, 39, 62, 78, 87 _sqq._, 92, 102.
Astarte, 29 _sq._, 45, 49, 70, 73, 86 _sq._
Atargatis, 31.
Aton, 103 _sqq._
BAAL (title 'lord'), 66 _sq._ _See_ Heaven.
Baal (proper name), 33, 84, 89.
Baalath (title 'lady'), 66, 86. _See_ Byblos.
Baal-Zephon, 86.
Babylonia, 4 _sq._, 10, 30, 62, 70, 87, 90 _sqq._, 94, 102, 106 _sqq._,
110 _sqq._, 118.
Bes, 96.
Blood-revenge, 42.
Bludan (near Damascus), 46.
Broken offerings, 45 _sq._
Bull, 32, 90 _sq._
Burial, 15, 17 _sq._, 36 _sq._, 40. _See_ Dead.
Byblos, 66, 74 _sq._, 83, 100. _See_ Zakarbaal.
CAMEL, 17, 45, 48.
Cannibalism, 38.
Carthage, 3, 27, 31, 34 _sq._, 39, 41, 43, 72.
Caves, 15 _sq._, 19 _sq._, 24, 34, 38, 41, 46, 53, 107.
Charms, 32, 38, 51 _sq._, 107, 109.
Cobra, model of, 15, 48.
Cremation, 34, 40, 56.
Cup-marks, 14, 16, 20, 26, 35 _sq._
Curse, 72, 90, 98.
DAGON, 92.
Dead, disposal of, 22, 34 _sqq._; in religion, 55 _sqq._, 58 _sqq._, 75.
Demons, 50 _sq._, 64, 71.
Derceto, 31.
Dog, 22, 100.
Dreams, 25, 52 _sq._
EGYPT, historical sketch, 4 _sqq._; influence of national cult, 74
_sqq._, 95 _sqq._; received Asiatic gods, 83 _sqq._, etc.
El (title 'god'), 66 _sq._, 69.
El (proper name), 91, 93 _sq._
Emblems, 32, 72, 109.
FETISH, 27, 32.
Fish, 31 _sq._, 109.
Foundation sacrifice, 39 _sq._, 43.
GAD (the god), 92.
Gaza, 33.
Gezer, 6, 8 _sq._, 13 _sqq._, 17, 19, 28, 30, 34, 37 _sqq._, 44 _sqq._,
76, 80, 88, 107, 109 _sq._
Gods. _See_ chaps. vi. and vii.; gods and animals, 47 _sqq._; demons
and spirits, 50, 64; kinship with men, 61 _sqq._; their human
representatives, 54 _sq._, 57, 59, 62 _sqq._; their vicissitudes, 66
_sqq._; subordinate gods, 68, 69 _sq._, 96 _sq._; national gods, 64
_sq._, 67 _sqq._; lord or king of gods, 74, 77, 84, 95. _See_ Saints.
Gudea, 62.
HADAD, 57, 89 _sq._ _See_ Addu.
Hathor, 26, 30, 70, 76, 81, 85, 111.
Heaven, king or lord of (title), 66, 72 _sqq._, 84, 87 _sqq._, 91; lady
or mistress of, 70 _sq._, 73, 85 _sq._
Hittites, 5 _sq._, 71, 73 _sq._, 78, 81, 88, 90 _sq._, 96, 101 _sq._,
111 _sq._
Holy, sacred, 34, 46 _sqq._, 85.
Horus, 111.
Horus-eyes, 52.
Human sacrifices, 38 _sqq._, 42 _sq._
Hyksos invasion, 4 _sq._, 82 _sq._, 118.
IDOLS, 17, 26, 28 _sq._, 31 _sq._, 49, 53 _sq._, 71 _sq._, 77.
Ikhhaton, 5, 42, 103 _sqq._, 118.
Infant burial or sacrifice, 15 _sqq._, 36 _sqq._, 93 _sq._
Ishtar, 70 _sq._, 87 _sq._, 95.
Isis, 96, 111.
Israel, Israelite religion, 1 _sqq._, 6, 8, 10 _sq._, 17, 33 _sq._, 36,
39 _sqq._, 42 _sq._, 47 _sq._, 64, 80, 86, 88, 94, 102, 104, 106, 108
_sq._, 114 _sq._
JEHOVAH. _See_ Yahweh.
Jericho, 8, 10, 32, 88.
Jerusalem, 5, 14, 20, 53, 92, 96, 101 _sq._
_Jinn_ (demon, _q.v._), 40, 54.
_Kādēsh_ ('holy'), 34, 85.
Khammurabi, 62, 72, 78, 90 _sq._, 118.
Khiba, 96.
Khonsu, 71.
Kings, divinity of, 59, 61 _sqq._, 78 _sq._, 98; their breath or
spirit, 101.
Kinship with supernatural beings, 60 _sq._, 62 _sq._, 83 _sq._
LACHISH, 7, 30.
Lamps, 25, 35, 40 _sq._, 94.
Lebanon, 28, 77, 87.
Legends, 23, 49. _See_ Myths.
Lion, 49, 84.
Loyalty (_s-d-k_), 102 _sq._
MAGIC, 34, 38, 51, 53, 55.
Megiddo, 8, 17, 28, 31, 40, 49, 76, 79, 109.
Melek (king), 94.
Merneptah, 6, 33, 53, 118.
Mesha, king of Moab, 11, 80.
Messianic ideals, 64.
Mitanni, 5, 70, 111 _sq._
Mohammedanism, 21 _sq._, 40, 68 _sq._ _See_ Palestine.
Molech, 94.
Monotheistic tendencies, 5, 23, 67 _sqq._, 72 _sq._, 81, 95 _sq._, 103
_sq._
Moon god, 88 _sq._
Murder, 42.
Myths, 49, 62, 86, 106 _sqq._, 110 _sq._
NAME, 44, 57 _sq._, 60, 81, 99, 102.
Nebo, 92.
Nergal, 93, 106, 110.
Nin-gal, 89.
Ninib, 47, 92.
Nusku, 89, 94.
OATH, 21, 100.
Oracles, 25, 52 _sq._
Oriental thought, 11, 102, 113.
Ornaments, 52.
Osiris, 26, 38, 47, 75, 96.
PALESTINE, history, 4 _sqq._; land and people, 8 _sqq._; modern
religion, 21 _sqq._, 25, 37, 39 _sqq._, 43 _sq._, 46, 50, 53, 59, 68
_sq._; its gods, chaps. vi. _sq._; thought, 98 _sqq._; chronology, 118.
Petra, 19 _sq._; 108.
Philistines, 7, 80. _See_ Dagon.
Phoenician gods, 72, 92 _sq._
Pillars, 13 _sqq._, 26 _sq._, 109.
Politics and religion, 64 _sq._, 67 _sq._, 72, 78, 80.
Prophets, 54 _sq._, 86.
Ptah, 53, 96.
RAM, 30.
Ramman, 87, 89.
Ramses II., 6, 44, 58, 62, 71, 73, 77, 81, 85, 101, 118.
Ramses III., 7, 70, 77, 114, 118.
'Ransom,' the, 43 _sq._
Re, 63, 71, 73. _See_ Amon.
Resheph, 84 _sq._, 87, 92, 111.
SACRIFICE, 15 _sqq._, 22, 25, 27, 36, 38 _sqq._, 41 _sqq._, 79.
es-Sāfy, 7, 17, 19, 30.
Saints (welis, etc., in modern Palestine); virtually local gods, 21
_sqq._, 24 _sq._; their vicissitudes, 23; resemble those of the gods,
67 _sq._; appear in animal form, 22, 50; physical fathers, 59, 61.
_See_ Gods, Tombs.
Samson, 88.
Sanctuaries, 13 _sqq._, 77; their persistence, 19 _sqq._; in modern
religion, 21 _sqq._, 24, 37.
Seals, 93, 108 _sqq._
Sebek, 96.
Serabit el-khadem (Sinaitic peninsula), 7, 15, 19, 26 _sq._, 32, 41,
45, 52, 69, 84.
Seraph, 93.
Serpents, 15, 32, 48, 108.
Set. _See_ Sutekh.
Sety I., 6, 58, 77, 118.
Shalem, 92.
Shamash, sun (-deity), 70 _sq._, 78 _sqq._, 88 _sqq._, 93, 95 _sq._,
98, 111. _See_ Sun.
Shamshi-Adad, 91.
Sin, 55, 100, 102.
Sin (the god), 66, 88 _sq._
Sinuhe, 9, 35.
Soul, the, 37, 41, 45, 57.
Spirits, 50 _sqq._
Stones, 13 _sqq._, 26 _sq._, 32.
Sun-god. _See_ Amon, King, Re, Shamash.
Susa (in Elam), 38, 54.
Sutekh (Set), title and proper-name (cp. Baal, El), 73 _sq._, 82, 84,
108, 111.
Swine, 16, 48, 92.
Symbols. _See_ Emblems.
TAANACH, 8, 18, 29, 40, 53, 93 _sq._, 108.
Teshub, 70 _sq._, 89.
Thought, Oriental, 11, 102 _sqq._
Thutmose III., 5, 9, 28, 77, 85, 94, 118.
Tiglath-pileser I., 7, 81, 118.
Tombs, 19, 21 _sqq._, 35 _sqq._, 46, 59.
Trees, 25 _sq._
Tushratta (King of Mitanni), 56, 70 _sq._
UNCLEAN, 47 _sq._
VOWS, 46.
WAR, 22, 39, 72, 80, 82, 84 _sqq._, 90, 93, 95, 104.
Water-rites, 107 _sq._
Weli (patron). _See_ Saint.
Wenamon. _See_ Zakarbaal.
YAHWEH, 94 _sq._ _See_ Israel.
ZAKARBAAL, 54, 56, 74 _sq._, 78, 114.
Tell Zakariya, 31.
Printed by T. and A. CONSTABLE, Printers to His Majesty
at the Edinburgh University Press
RELIGIONS: ANCIENT AND MODERN.
ANIMISM.
By EDWARD CLODD, Author of _The Story of Creation_.
PANTHEISM.
By JAMES ALLANSON PICTON, Author of _The Religion of the Universe_.
THE RELIGIONS OF ANCIENT CHINA.
By Professor GILES, LL.D., Professor of Chinese in the University of
Cambridge.
THE RELIGION OF ANCIENT GREECE.
By JANE HARRISON, Lecturer at Newnham College, Cambridge, Author of
_Prolegomena to Study of Greek Religion_.
ISLAM.
By SYED AMEER ALI, M.A., C.I.E., late of H.M.'s High Court of
Judicature in Bengal, Author of _The Spirit of Islam_ and _The Ethics
of Islam_.
MAGIC AND FETISHISM.
By Dr. A. C. HADDON, F.R.S., Lecturer on Ethnology at Cambridge
University.
THE RELIGION OF ANCIENT EGYPT.
By Professor W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE, F.R.S.
THE RELIGION OF BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA.
By THEOPHILUS G. PINCHES, late of the British Museum.
BUDDHISM. 2 vols.
By Professor RHYS DAVIDS, LL.D., late Secretary of The Royal Asiatic
Society.
HINDUISM.
By Dr. L. D. BARNETT, of the Department of Oriental Printed Books and
MSS., British Museum.
SCANDINAVIAN RELIGION.
By WILLIAM A. CRAIGIE, Joint Editor of the _Oxford English Dictionary_.
CELTIC RELIGION.
By Professor ANWYL, Professor of Welsh at University College,
Aberystwyth.
THE MYTHOLOGY OF ANCIENT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.
By CHARLES SQUIRE, Author of _The Mythology of the British Islands_.
JUDAISM.
By ISRAEL ABRAHAMS, Lecturer in Talmudic Literature in Cambridge
University, Author of _Jewish Life in the Middle Ages_.
SHINTO. By W. G. ASTON, C.M.G.
THE RELIGION OF ANCIENT MEXICO AND PERU.
By LEWIS SPENCE, M.A.
THE RELIGION OF THE HEBREWS.
By Professor JASTROW.
Transcriber's notes:
Plus signs (+) denote +bolded+ characters.
Underscores (_) denote _italics_.
Page numbers are shown in curly braces, e.g. "{4}".
Footnote numbers are shown in square brackets, e.g. "[4]".