BABYLONIAN GODS PRIOR TO THE DAYS OF HAMMURABI.
With these preliminary remarks, we may turn, as the first part of our
subject, to a consideration of the oldest of the Babylonian gods. Our
main sources are the inscriptions of the old Babylonian rulers, above
referred to. These are, in most cases, of a dedicatory character, being
inscribed on statues, cylinders, or tablets, placed in the temples or on
objects--cones, knobs, stones--presented as votive offerings to some
god. Besides the inscriptions of the rulers, we have those of officials
and others. Many of these are likewise connected directly or indirectly
with religious worship.
The advantage of the historical texts over the purely religious ones
consists in their being dated, either accurately or approximately. For
this reason, the former must be made the basis for a rational theory of
the development of the Babylonian pantheon through the various periods
above instanced. The data furnished by the religious texts can be
introduced only, as they accord with the facts revealed by the
historical inscriptions in each period.
Taking up the group of inscriptions prior to the union of the Babylonian
States under Hammurabi, _i.e._, prior to 2300 B.C., we find these gods
mentioned: Bel, Belit, Nin-khar-sag, Nin-girsu, also appearing as
Shul-gur, Bau, Ga-tum-dug, Ea, Nin-a-gal, Nergal, Shamash, under various
forms A, who is the consort of Shamash, Nannar or Sin, Nana, Anunit,
Ishtar, Innanna or Ninni, Nina, Nin-mar, Dun-shagga, Gal-alim, Anu,
Nin-gish-zida, Nin-si-a, Nin-shakh, Dumu-zi, Lugal-banda and his consort
Nin-gul, Dumuzi-zu-aba, Nisaba, Ku(?)anna, Lugal-erima(?), Dagan, Ishum,
Umu, Pa-sag, Nin-e-gal, Nin-gal, Shul(or Dun)-pa-uddu, and
Nin-akha-kuddu.
Regarding these names, it may be said at once that the reading, in many
cases, is to be looked upon as merely provisional. Written, as they
usually are, in the ideographic "style," the phonetic reading can only
be determined when the deity in question can be identified with one,
whose name is written at some place phonetically, or when the ideographs
employed are so grouped as to place the phonetic reading beyond doubt.
The plan to be followed in this book will be to give the ideographic
reading[24] as provisional wherever the real pronunciation is unknown or
uncertain. The ideographic designation of a deity is of great value,
inasmuch as the ideographs themselves frequently reveal the character of
the god, though of course the additional advantage is obvious when the
name appears in both the ideographic and the phonetic writing. It will,
therefore, form part of a delineation of the Babylonian pantheon to
interpret the picture, as it were, under which each deity is viewed.
En-lil or Bel.
Taking up the gods in the order named, the first one, Bel, is also the
one who appears on the oldest monuments as yet unearthed--the
inscriptions of Nippur. His name is, at this time, written invariably as
En-lil. In the Babylonian theology, he is 'the lord of the lower world.'
He represents, as it were, the unification of the various forces whose
seat and sphere of action is among the inhabited parts of the globe,
both on the surface and beneath, for the term 'lower world' is here used
in contrast to the upper or heavenly world. Such a conception manifestly
belongs to the domain of abstract thought, and it may be concluded,
therefore, that either the deity belongs to an advanced stage of
Babylonian culture, or that the original view of the deity was different
from the one just mentioned. The latter is the case. Primarily, the
ideograph Lil is used to designate a 'demon' in general, and En-lil is
therefore the 'chief demon.' Primitive as such a conception is, it
points to some system of thought that transcends primitive Animism,
which is characterized rather by the equality accorded to all spirits.
The antiquity of the association of En-lil with Nippur justifies the
conclusion that we have before us a local deity who, originally the
protecting spirit merely, of a restricted territory, acquires the
position of 'chief demon' as the town of Nippur grows to be the capitol
of a large and powerful district. The fame and sanctity of Nippur
survives political vicissitudes; and, indeed, in proportion as Nippur
loses political prestige, the great deity of the place is released from
the limitations due to his local origin and rises to the still higher
dignity of a great power whose domain is the entire habitable universe.
As the 'lord of the lower world,' En-lil is contrasted to a god Anu, who
presides over the heavenly bodies. The age of Sargon (3800 B.C.), in
whose inscriptions En-lil already occurs, is one of considerable
culture, as is sufficiently evidenced by the flourishing condition of
art, and there can therefore be no objection against the assumption that
even at this early period, a theological system should have been evolved
which gave rise to beliefs in great powers whose dominion embraces the
'upper' and 'lower' worlds. It was because of this wide scope of his
power that he became known as Bel, _i.e._, the lord _par excellence_;
and it is equally natural to find his worship spread over the whole of
Babylonia. In the south, the patron deity of Lagash is designated by
Gudea as "the mighty warrior of Bel," showing the supremacy accorded to
the latter. A temple to En-lil at Lagash, and known as E-adda, 'house of
the father,' by virtue of the relationship existing between the god of
Nippur and Nin-girsu, is mentioned by Uru-kagina. The temple is
described as a lofty structure 'rising up to heaven.' In the north,
Nippur remains the place where his worship acquired the greatest
importance, so that Nippur was known as the "land of Bel." The temple
sacred to him at that place was a great edifice, famous throughout
Babylonian history as E-Kur, _i.e._, mountain house, in the construction
of which, a long line of Babylonian rulers took part. From Naram-Sin,
ruler of Agade, on through the period of Cassite rule, the kings of
Nippur proudly include in their titles that of 'builder of the Temple of
Bel at Nippur,' measuring their attachment to the deity by the additions
and repairs made to his sacred edifice.[25] Besides the kings of Agade,
the rulers of other places pay their devotions to Bel of Nippur. So, a
king of Kish, whose name is read Alu-usharshid by Professor
Hilprecht,[26] brings costly vases of marble and limestone from Elam and
offers them to Bel as a token of victory; and this at a period even
earlier than Sargon. Even when En-lil is obliged to yield a modicum of
his authority to the growing supremacy of the patron deity of the city
of Babylon, the highest tribute that can be paid to the latter, is to
combine with his real name, Marduk, the title of "Bel," which of right
belongs to En-lil. We shall see how this combination of En-lil, or Bel,
with Marduk reflects political changes that took place in the Euphrates
Valley; and it is a direct consequence of this later association of the
old Bel of Nippur with the chief god of Babylon, that the original
traits of the former become obscured in the historical and religious
texts. Dimmed popular traditions, which will be set forth in their
proper place, point to his having been at one time regarded as a
powerful chieftain armed with mighty weapons, but engaged in conflicts
for the ultimate benefit of mankind. On the whole, he is a beneficent
deity, though ready to inflict severe punishment for disobedience to his
commands. We must distinguish, then, in the case of En-lil, at least
four phases:
1. His original role as a local deity;
2. The extension of his power to the grade of a great 'lord' over a
large district;
3. Dissociation from local origins to become the supreme lord of the
lower world; and
4. The transfer of his name and powers as god of Nippur to Marduk, the
god of Babylon.
The last two phases can best be set forth when we come to the period,
marked by the political supremacy of the city of Babylon. It is
sufficient, at this point, to have made clear his position as god of
Nippur.
Nin-lil or Belit.
The consort of En-lil is Nin-Lil, the 'mistress of the lower world.' She
is known also as Belit, the feminine form to Bel, _i.e._, the lady _par
excellence_. She, too, had her temple at Nippur, the age of which goes
back, at least, to the first dynasty of Ur. But the glory of the goddess
pales by the side of her powerful lord. She is naught but a weak
reflection of Bel, as in general the consorts of the gods are. Another
title by which this same goddess was known is
Nin-khar-sag.[27]
which means the 'lady of the high or great mountain.' The title may have
some reference to the great mountain where the gods were supposed to
dwell, and which was known to Babylonians as the 'mountain of the
lands.' Bel, as the chief of the gods, is more particularly associated
with this mountain. Hence his temple is called the 'mountain house.'
From being regarded as the inhabitant of the mountain, he comes to be
identified with the mountain itself. Accordingly, he is sometimes
addressed as the "great mountain,"[28] and his consort would therefore
be appropriately termed 'the lady of the great mountain.' Besides the
temple at Nippur, Belit, as Nin-khar-sag, had a sanctuary at Girsu, one
of the quarters at Lagash (see under Nin-girsu), the earliest mention of
which occurs on an inscription of Ur-Bau. The latter calls the goddess
'the mother of the gods,' which further establishes her identity with
the consort of Bel. Entemena, another governor of Lagash, places his
domain under the protection of Nin-khar-sag. The worship at Nippur,
however, remained most prominent. The continued popularity of her cult
is attested by the fortress Dur-zakar, which a later king, Samsu-iluna
(_c._ 2200), erected in her honor.
Nin-girsu.
In the inscriptions of Gudea and of his time, the god most prominently
mentioned is the "Lord of Girsu." Girsu itself, as the inscriptions
show, is one of the four sections into which the capitol city of Lagash
was divided. It was there that the temple stood which was sacred to the
patron deity, and we may conclude from this that Girsu is the oldest
part of the city. Afterwards, Lagash became the general name for the
capitol through being the quarter where the great palace of the king was
erected. That Girsu was once quite distinct from Lagash is also evident
from the title of "king of Girsu," with which a certain Uru-kagina, who
is to be placed somewhat before Gudea, contents himself. The other three
quarters, all of which were originally independent cities, are
Uru-azagga, Nina, and apparently Gish-galla.[29]
Nin-girsu is frequently termed the warrior of Bel,--the one who in the
service of the 'lord of the lower world,' appears in the thick of the
fight, to aid the subjects of Bel. In this role, he is identical with a
solar deity who enjoys especial prominence among the warlike Assyrians,
whose name is provisionally read Nin-ib, but whose real name may turn
out to be Adar.[30] The rulers of Lagash declare themselves to have been
chosen for the high office by Nin-girsu, and as if to compensate
themselves for the degradation implied in being merely _patesis_, or
governors, serving under some powerful chief, they call themselves the
patesis of Nin-girsu, implying that the god was the master to whom they
owed allegiance. The temple sacred to him at Girsu was called E-ninnu,
and also by a longer name that described the god as the one 'who changes
darkness into light,'--the reference being to the solar character of the
god Nin-ib with whom Nin-girsu is identified. In this temple, Gudea and
other rulers place colossal statues of themselves, but temper the vanity
implied, by inscribing on the front and back of these statues, an
expression of their devotion to their god. To Nin-girsu, most of the
objects found at Tell-loh are dedicated; conspicuous among which are the
many clay cones, that became the conventional objects for votive
offerings. There was another side, however, to his nature, besides the
belligerent one. As the patron of Lagash, he also presided over the
agricultural prosperity of the district. In this role he is addressed as
Shul-gur or Shul-gur-an, _i.e._, the "god of the corn heaps"; Entemena
and his son Enanna-tuma in erecting a kind of storehouse which they
place under the protection of Nin-girsu, declare that their god is
Shul-gur;[31] and an old hymn[32] identifies him with Tammuz, the
personification of agricultural activity. Such a combination of
apparently opposing attributes is a natural consequence of the
transformation of what may originally have been the personification of
natural forces, into local deities. Each field had its protecting
spirit, but for the city as a whole, a local deity, whose rule mirrored
the control of the human chief over his subjects, alone was available.
To him who watched over all things pertaining to the welfare of the
territory coming under his jurisdiction, various attributes, as occasion
required, were ascribed, and quite apart from his original character,
the god could thus be regarded, as the warrior and the peaceful
husbandman at the same time.
Bau.
Perhaps the most prominent of the goddesses in the ancient Babylonian
period was Bau. One of the rulers of Lagash has embodied the name of the
goddess in his name, calling himself Ur-Bau. It is natural, therefore,
to find him more especially devoted to the worship of this deity. He
does not tire of singing her praises, and of speaking of the temple he
erected in her honor. Still, Ur-Bau does not stand alone in his
devotion; Uru-kagina, Gudea, and others refer to Bau frequently, while
in the incantation texts, she is invoked as the great mother, who gives
birth to mankind and restores the body to health. In the old Babylonian
inscriptions she is called the chief daughter of Anu, the god of heaven.
Among her titles, the one most frequently given is that of 'good lady.'
She is the 'mother' who fixes the destinies of men and provides
'abundance' for the tillers of the soil. Gudea calls her his mistress,
and declares that it is she who "fills him with speech,"--a phrase whose
meaning seems to be that to Bau he owes the power he wields. Locally,
she is identified with Uru-azagga (meaning 'brilliant town'), a quarter
of Lagash; and it was there that her temple stood. As a consequence, we
find her in close association with Nin-girsu, the god of Girsu. We may
indeed go further and assume that Girsu and Uru-azagga are the two
oldest quarters of the city, the combination of the two representing the
first natural steps in the development of the principality, afterwards
known as Lagash, through the addition of other quarters[33]. She is
indeed explicitly called the consort of Nin-girsu; and this relation is
implied also, in the interesting phrase used by Gudea, who presents
gifts to Bau in the name of Nin-girsu, and calls them 'marriage
gifts'.[34] It is interesting to find, at this early period, the
evidence for the custom that still prevails in the Orient, which makes
the gifts of the bridegroom to his chosen one, an indispensable
formality.[35] These gifts were offered on the New Year's Day, known as
Zag-muk, and the importance of the worship of Bau is evidenced by the
designation of this day, as the festival of Bau.
The offerings, themselves, consist of lambs, sheep, birds, fish, cream,
besides dates and various other fruits. When Uru-azagga becomes a part
of Lagash, Bau's dignity is heightened to that of 'mother of Lagash.' As
the consort of Ningirsu, she is identified with the goddess Gula, the
name more commonly applied to the 'princely mistress' of Nin-ib, whose
worship continues down to the days of the neo-Babylonian monarchy.
It is quite certain, however, that Bau is originally an independent
goddess, and that the association of Uru-azagga and Girsu[36] lead to
her identification with Gula. Regarding her original nature, a certain
index is her character as "daughter of Anu." Anu being the god of
heaven, Bau must be sought in the upper realm of personified forces,
rather than elsewhere; but exactly which one she is, it is difficult to
say. Hommel, indeed,[37] is of opinion that she is the personified
watery depth, the primitive chaos which has only the heavens above it;
but in giving this explanation, he is influenced by the desire to
connect the name of Bau with the famous term for chaos in Genesis,
_Tohu-wa-bohu_. There is, however, no proof whatsoever that Bau and Bohu
have anything to do with one another. A goddess who can hardly be
distinguished from Bau is
Ga-tum-dug.[38]
Indeed, from the fact that she is also the 'mother of Lagash,' it might
seem that this is but another name for Bau. However, elsewhere, in two
lists of deities invoked by Gudea (Inscr. B, col. ii. 17), Ga-tum-dug is
given a separate place by the side of Bau, once placed before and once
after the latter; and it is clear therefore that she was originally
distinct from Bau. For Gudea, Ga-tum-dug is the mother who produced him.
He is her servant and she is his mistress. Lagash is her beloved city,
and there he prepares for her a dwelling-place, which later rulers, like
Entena, embellish. She is called the 'brilliant' (_Azag_), but as this
title is merely a play upon the element found in the city, Uru-azagga,
sacred to Bau, not much stress is to be laid upon this designation.
Unfortunately, too, the elements composing her name are not clear,[39]
and it must be borne in mind that the reading is purely provisional. So
much, at least, seems certain: that Bau and Ga-tum-dug are two forms
under which one and the same natural element was personified. Bau is
called in the incantation texts, the mother of Ea. The latter being
distinctly a water god, we may conclude that in some way, Bau is to be
connected with water as a natural element. The conjecture may be
hazarded that she personifies originally the waters of the upper
realm--the clouds. Since Ea, who is her son, represents the waters of
the lower realm, the relation of mother and son reflects perhaps a
primitive conception of the origin of the deep, through the descent of
the upper waters. When we come to the cosmogony of the Babylonians, it
will be seen that this conception of a distinction between the two
realms of waters is a fundamental one. This character as a spirit of the
watery elements is shared by others of the goddesses appearing in the
old Babylonian inscriptions.[40]
En-ki or Ea.
This god, who, as we shall see, becomes most prominent in the developed
form of Babylonian theology, does not occupy the place one should expect
in the early Babylonian inscriptions. Ur-Bau erects a sanctuary to Ea,
at Girsu. Another of the governors of Lagash calls himself, priest of
Ea, describing the god as the "supreme councillor." From him, the king
receives "wisdom."[41] A ruler, Rim-Sin, of the dynasty of Larsa,
associates Ea with Bel, declaring that these "great gods" entrusted Uruk
into his hands with the injunction to rebuild the city that had fallen
in ruins. The ideograms, with which his name is written, En-ki,
designate him as god of that 'which is below,'--the earth in the first
place; but with a more precise differentiation of the functions of the
great gods, Ea becomes the god of the waters of the deep. When this
stage of belief is reached, Ea is frequently associated with Bel, who,
it will be recalled, is the 'god of the lower region,' but who becomes
the god of earth _par excellence_. When, therefore, Bel and Ea are
invoked, it is equivalent, in modern parlance, to calling upon earth and
water; and just as Bel is used to personify, as it were, the unification
of the earthly forces, so Ea becomes, in a comprehensive sense, the
watery deep. Ea and Bel assume therefore conspicuous proportions in the
developed Babylonian cosmogony and theology. In the cosmogony, Bel is
the creator and champion of mankind, and Ea is the subterranean deep
which surrounds the earth, the source of wisdom and culture; in the
theology, Ea and Bel are pictured in the relation of father and son,
who, in concert, are appealed to, when misfortune or disease overtakes
the sons of man; Ea, the father, being the personification of knowledge,
and Bel, the practical activity that 'emanates from wisdom,' as
Professor Sayce,[42] adopting the language of Gnosticism, aptly puts it;
only that, as already suggested, Marduk assumes the role of the older
Bel.
Confining ourselves here to the earlier phases of Ea, it seems probable
that he was originally regarded as the god of Eridu,--one of the most
ancient of the holy cities of Southern Babylonia, now represented by
Abu-Shahrein, and which once stood on the shores of the Persian Gulf.
Ur-Bau expressly calls the god the 'king of Eridu.' The sacredness of
the place is attested by Gudea, who boasts of having made the temple of
Nin-girsu as sacred as Eridu.[43] It is over this city that Ea watches.
The importance of the Persian Gulf to the growth of the city, would make
it natural to place the seat of the god in the waters themselves. The
cult of water-deities arises, naturally, at places which are situated on
large sheets of water; and in the attributes of wisdom which an older
age ascribed to Ea, there may be seen the embodiment of the tradition
that the course of civilization proceeds from the south. The superiority
of the Persian Gulf over the other waters of Babylon--over the two great
rivers with their tributary streams and canals--would be another factor
that would lead to the god of the Persian Gulf being regarded as the
personification of the watery element in general. For the Babylonians,
the Persian Gulf, stretching out indefinitely, and to all appearances
one with the great ocean whose ulterior shores could not be reached, was
the great 'Okeanos,' that flowed around the earth and on which the earth
rested. Ea, accordingly (somewhat like En-lil), was delocalized, as it
were, and his worship was maintained long after the recollection of his
connection with Eridu had all but disappeared. At the same time, for the
very reason that he was cut loose from local associations, no place
could lay claim to being the seat of the deity. Ur-Bau, when erecting a
sanctuary to Ea at Girsu, significantly calls the god 'the king of
Eridu.' The sanctuary is not, in this case, the dwelling-place of the
god.
We are justified, therefore, in going back many centuries, before
reaching the period when Ea was, merely, the local god of Eridu. Whether
Ea is to be regarded as the real name of the god, or is also an
ideograph like En-ki, is again open to doubt. If Ea is the real
pronunciation, then the writing of the name is a play upon the character
of the deity, for it is composed of two elements that signify 'house'
and 'water,'--the name thus suggesting the character and real seat of
the deity. A point in favor of regarding Ea as the real name, albeit not
decisive, is the frequent use of the unmistakable ideographic
description of the god as En-ki. The consort of Ea who is Dam-kina also
occurs in the historical texts of the first period.
The origin of Babylonian civilization at the Persian Gulf, together with
the dependence of Babylonia for her fertility upon the streams and
canals, account for the numerous water-deities to be found in the
ancient Babylonian pantheon, some of which have already been discussed.
We will meet with others further on. Every stream, large or small,
having its special protecting deity, the number of water-deities
naturally increases as the land becomes more and more dissected by the
canal system that conditioned the prosperity of the country.
Ea, as we shall see, appears under an unusually large number of
names.[44] One of these is
Nin-a-gal,
which, signifying 'god of great strength,' is given to him as the patron
of the smith's art.[45] A god of this name is mentioned by Ur-Bau,[46]
who speaks of a sanctuary erected in honor of this deity. But since the
king refers to Ea (as En-ki) a few lines previous, it would appear that
at this period Nin-agal is still an independent deity. The later
identification with Ea appears to be due to the idea of 'strength'
involved in the name of Nin-agal. In the same way, many of the names of
Ea were originally descriptive of independent gods who, because of the
similarity of their functions to those of the great Ea, were absorbed by
the latter. Their names transferred to Ea, are frequently the only trace
left of their original independent existence.
Nergal.
Nergal, the local deity of Cuthah (or Kutu), represented by the mound
Tell-Ibrahim, some distance to the east of Babylon, was of an entirely
different character from Ea, but his history in the development of the
Babylonian religion is hardly less interesting. The first mention of his
famous temple at Cuthah is found in an inscription of Dungi (to be read
Ba'u-ukin, according to Winckler[47]) who belongs to the second dynasty
of Ur (_c._ 2700 B.C.). Its origin, however, belongs to a still earlier
period. Such was the fame of the temple known as E-shid-lam, and the
closeness of the connection between the deity and his favorite seat,
that Nergal himself became known as shid-lam-ta-ud-du-a, _i.e._, the god
that rises up from E-shid-lam. It is by this epithet that the same Dungi
describes him in one of his inscriptions.[48] Down to the latest period
of Assyro-Babylonian history, Nergal remains identified with Kutu, being
known at all times as the god of Kutu.[49] When Sargon, the king of
Assyria, upon his conquest of the kingdom of Israel (_c._ 722 B.C.),
brought people from Babylon, Cuthah, Ava, and so forth, across to the
lands of the Jordan to take the place of the deported Israelites, the
Hebrew narrator (II Kings, xvii. 24-35) tells us in an interesting
manner of the obnoxious foreign worship which these people brought to
the land, each division bringing the gods of their place with them. The
men of Cuthah, he adds (v. 30), made a statue of Nergal. Singamil, of
the dynasty, having its capital at Uruk (_c._ 2750 B.C.), likewise
testifies to his devotion to Nergal by busying himself with improvements
and additions to his temple at Cuthah. His worship, therefore, was not
confined to those who happened to reside at Cuthah; and closely as he is
identified with the place, the character of the god is a general and not
a special one. The full form of his name appears to have been
Ner-unu-gal, of which Nergal, furnished by the Old Testament passage
referred to, would then be a contraction or a somewhat corrupt form. The
three elements composing his name signify "the mighty one of the great
dwelling-place," but it is, again, an open question whether this is a
mere play upon the character of the god, as in the name of Ea (according
to one of the interpretations above suggested), or whether it is an
ideographic form of the name. The Old Testament shows, conclusively,
that the name had some such pronunciation as Nergal. Jensen, from other
evidences, inclines to the opinion that the writing Ner-unu-gal is the
result of a species of etymology, brought about by the prominence given
to Nergal as the god of the region of the dead. It is in this capacity
that he already appears in the inscription of Singamil, who calls him
'king of the nether world.' The "great dwelling-place," therefore, is
clearly the dominion over which Nergal rules, and when we come to the
cosmogony of the Babylonians,[50] it will be found that this epithet for
the nether world--the great dwelling-place--accords with their
conception of the life after death. But while Nergal, with a host of
lesser demons about him, appears as the Babylonian Pluto, particularly
in the religious texts, his functions are not limited to the control of
the dead. He is the personification of some of the evils that bring
death to mankind, particularly pestilence and war. The death that
follows in his path is a violent one, and his destructive force is one
that acts upon large masses rather than upon the individual. Hence, one
of the most common ideographs used to express his name is that which
signifies 'sword.'
War and pestilence are intimately associated in the mind of the
Babylonians. Among other nations, the sword is, similarly, the symbol of
the deity, as the plague-bringer as well as the warrior.
To this day, a pestilence is the general accompaniment of war in the
East, or follows in its wake. Different from Nin-ib, who is also a god
of war, Nergal symbolizes more particularly the _destruction_ which
accompanies war, and not the strong champion who aids his subjects in
the fight. Nergal is essentially a destroyer, and the various epithets
applied to him in the religious texts, show that he was viewed in this
light. He is at times the 'god of fire,' again 'the raging king,' 'the
violent one' 'the one who burns'; and finally identified with the
glowing heat of flame. Often, he is described by these attributes,
instead of being called by his real name.[51] Dr. Jensen has recently
shown in a satisfactory manner, that this phase of his character must be
the starting-point in tracing the order of his development. As the
'glowing flame,' Nergal is evidently a phase of the sun, and Jensen
proves that the functions and aspects of the sun at different periods
being differentiated among the Babylonians, Nergal is more especially
the hot sun of midsummer or midday, the destructive force of which was
the chief feature that distinguished it. The hot sun of Babylonia, that
burns with fierce intensity, brings pestilence and death, and carries on
a severe contest against man. From being the cause of death, it is but a
step, and a natural one, to make Nergal preside over the region,
prepared for those whom he has destroyed. The course taken by Babylonian
theology is responsible for the prominence given to the latter role of
Nergal, which finally overshadows his other phases to the extent of
suggesting the fanciful interpretation of his name as the 'ruler of the
great dwelling place for the dead.' In the light of the facts set forth,
another explanation for his name must be looked for that would connect
the god with solar functions. The name may in fact be divided into two
elements, the first having the force of chief or ruler, the second
'great.' The combination would be an appropriate designation for the
sun, in the role of a destructive power. But Nergal, after all,
represents only one phase of the sun-god. The god who was worshipped as
the personification of the sun _par excellence_ and the sun as a whole,
was
Shamash.
Written with an ideograph that describes him as the 'god of the day,'
there is no deity whose worship enjoys an equally continued popularity
in Babylonia and Assyria. Beginning at the earliest period of Babylonian
history, and reaching to the latest, his worship suffers no
interruption. Shamash, moreover, maintains his original character with
scarcely any modification throughout this long period. For all that, he
bears a name which signifies 'attendant' or 'servitor,' and which
sufficiently shows the subsidiary position that he occupied in the
Babylonian pantheon. One of the rulers belonging to the dynasty of Isin
calls the sun-god, the offspring of Nannar,--one of the names of the
moon-god,--and the last king of Babylonia, Nabonnedos, does the same. In
combination with the moon-god, the latter takes precedence of
Shamash,[52] and in the enumeration of the complete pantheon, in the
inscriptions of both Assyrian and Babylonian kings, the same order is
preserved. Other evidence that points to the superior rank accorded to
Sin, the moon-god over the sun deity in Babylonia, is the reckoning of
time by the moon phases. The day begins with the evening, and not with
sunrise. The moon, as the chief of the starry firmament, and controlling
the fate of mankind, was the main factor in giving to the orb of night,
this peculiar prominence. The 'service,' accordingly implied in the name
of Shamash appears to have been such as was demanded by his subsidiary
position to the moon-god. Beyond the general recognition, however, of
this relationship between the two, it does not appear that the worship
paid to Shamash, was at all affected by the secondary place, that he
continued to hold in the theoretically constructed pantheon. Less than
is the case with the other gods, is he identified with any particular
city, and we therefore find in the most ancient period, two centers of
Southern Babylonia claiming Shamash as their patron saint,--Larsa,
represented by the mound of Senkereh, and Sippar, occupying the site of
the modern Abu-Habba. It is difficult to say which of the two was the
older; the latter, in the course of time, overshadowed the fame of the
former, and its history can be traced back considerably beyond the
sun-worship at Larsa, the first mention of which occurs in the
inscriptions of rulers of the second dynasty of Ur (_c._ 2900 B.C.).
Since Ur, as we shall see, was sacred to the moon-god, it is hardly
likely that the Shamash cult was introduced at Larsa by the rulers of
Ur. The kings of Ur would not have forfeited the protection of Sin, by
any manifestation of preference for Shamash. When Ur-Gur, therefore,
tells us that he 'built' a temple to Shamash at Larsa, he must mean, as
Sin-iddina of the dynasty of Larsa does, in using the same phrase, that
he enlarged or improved the edifice. What makes it all the more likely
that Ur-Gur found sun-worship at Larsa in existence is, that in the
various places over which this ruler spread his building activity, he is
careful in each case to preserve the status of the presiding deity. So
at Nippur, he engages in work at the temples of En-lil and of Nin-lil;
while at Uruk he devotes himself to the temple of Nana. In thus
connecting their names with the various sacred edifices of Babylonia,
the rulers emphasized, on the one hand, their control of the territory
in which the building lay, and on the other, their allegiance to the
deity of the place, whose protection and favor they sought to gain.
The mention of a temple to Shamash at Sippar reverts to a still earlier
period than that of its rival. Nabonnedos tells us that it was founded
by Naram-Sin. Sargon has put his name on some object[53] that he
dedicates to the sun-god at Sippar. That there was an historical
connection between the two temples may be concluded from the fact that
the name of the sacred edifices was the same in both,--E-babbara,
signifying the 'house of lustre.' Such a similarity points to a
dependence of one upon the other, and the transfer or extension of the
worship directly from one place to the other; but, as intimated, we have
no certain means of determining which of the two is the older. In view
of the general observation to be made in what pertains to the religion
of the Babylonians, that fame and age go hand in hand, the balance is in
favor of Sippar, which became by far the more famous of the two,
received a greater share of popular affection, and retained its
prominence to the closing days of the neo-Babylonian monarchy. We shall
have occasion in a succeeding chapter to trace the history of the
sun-temple at Sippar so far as known. It is interesting to note that
Nabonnedos, feeling the end of his power to be near, undertakes, as one
of the last resorts, the restoration of this edifice, in the hope that
by thus turning once more to the powerful Shamash, he might secure his
protection, in addition to that of Marduk, the head of the later
Babylonian pantheon.
In Ur itself, Shamash was also worshipped in early days by the side of
the moon-god. Eannatum, of the dynasty of Isin (_c._ 2800 B.C.), tells
of two temples erected to him at that place; and still a third edifice,
sacred to both Nannar (the moon god) and Shamash at Ur, is referred to
by a king of the Larsa dynasty, Rim-Sin (_c._ 2300 B.C.). The titles
given to Shamash by the early rulers are sufficiently definite to show
in what relation he stood to his worshippers, and what the conceptions
were that were formed of him. He is, alternately, the king and the
shepherd. Since the kings also called themselves shepherds, no especial
endearment is conveyed by this designation. In the incantations, Shamash
is frequently appealed to, either alone, or when an entire group of
spirits and deities are enumerated. He is called upon to give life to
the sick man. To him the body of the one who is smitten with disease is
confided. As the god of light, he is appropriately called upon to banish
'darkness' from the house, darkness being synonymous with misfortune;
and the appeal is made to him more particularly as the 'king of
judgment.' From this, it is evident that the beneficent action of the
sun, was the phase associated with Shamash. He was hailed as the god
that gives light and life to all things, upon whose favor the prosperity
of the fields and the well-being of man depend. He creates the light and
secures its blessings for mankind. His favor produces order and
stability; his wrath brings discomfiture and ruin to the state and the
individual. But his power was, perhaps, best expressed by the title of
"judge"--the favorite one in the numerous hymns that were composed in
his honor. He was represented as seated on a throne in the chamber of
judgment, receiving the supplications of men, and according as he
manifested his favor or withdrew it, enacting the part of the decider of
fates. He loosens the bonds of the imprisoned, grants health to the
sick, and even revivifies the dead. On the other hand, he puts an end to
wickedness and destroys enemies. He makes the weak strong, and prevents
the strong from crushing the weak. From being the judge, and, moreover,
the supreme judge of the world, it was but natural that the conception
of justice was bound up with him. His light became symbolical of
righteousness, and the absence of it, or darkness, was viewed as
wickedness. Men and gods look expectantly for his light. He is the guide
of the gods, as well as the ruler of men.
While there are no direct indications in the historical texts known at
present, that this conception of the sun-god existed in all its details
before the days of Hammurabi, there is every reason to believe that this
was the case; the more so, in that it does not at all transcend the
range of religious ideas that we have met with in the case of the other
gods of this period. Nor does this conception in any way betray itself,
as being due to the changed political conditions that set in, with the
union of the states under Hammurabi. Still, the age of the religious
texts not being fixed, it is thus necessary to exercise some caution
before using them without the basis of an allusion in the historical
texts.
Utu.
It but remains, before passing on, to note that the same deity appears
under various names. Among these are Utu[54] and apparently also
Babbar[55] in the old Babylonian inscriptions. For the latter, a Semitic
etymology is forthcoming, and we may therefore regard it as representing
a real pronunciation, and not an ideographic writing. Babbar, a
contracted form from Barbar, is the reduplication of the same stem
_bar_[56] that we have already met with, in the name of the temple
sacred to Shamash. Like E-babbara, therefore, Babbar is the "brilliantly
shining one,"--a most appropriate name for the sun, and one frequently
applied to him in the religious texts. As to Utu, there is some doubt
whether it represents a real pronunciation or not. My own opinion is
that it does, and that the underlying stem is _atu_, which in Babylonian
has almost the same meaning as _bar_ or _baru_, viz., 'to see.' 'Utu'
would thus again designate the sun as 'that which shines forth.'
It will be recalled, that other instances have been noted of the same
god appearing under different names. The most natural explanation for
this phenomenon is, that the variation corresponds to the different
localities where the god was worshipped. The identification would not be
made until the union of the various Babylonian states had been achieved.
Such a union would be a potent factor in systematizing the pantheon.
When once it was recognized that the various names represented, in
reality, one and the same deity, it would not be long before the name,
peculiar to the place where the worship was most prominent, would set
the others aside or reduce them to mere epithets.
It may well be that Shamash was the name given to the god at Sippar,
whereas at Ur he may have been known as Utu. Ur-Bau (of the first Ur
dynasty) calls him Utu also, when speaking of the temple at Larsa, but
it would be natural for the kings of Ur to call the sun-god of Larsa by
the same name that he had in Ur. That Hammurabi, however, calls the
sun-god of Larsa, Utu, may be taken as an indication that, as such he
was known at that place, for since we have no record of a sun-temple at
Babylon in these days, there would be no motive that might induce him to
transfer a name, otherwise known to him, to another place. The testimony
of Hammurabi is therefore as direct as that of Sargon, who calls the
sun-god of Sippar, Shamash. It is not always possible to determine, with
as much show of probability, as in the case of the sun-god, the
distribution of the various names, but the general conclusion, for all
that, is warranted in every instance, that a variety of names refers,
originally, to an equal variety of places over which the worship was
spread,--only that care must be exercised to distinguish between
distinctive names and mere epithets.
A.
A consort of the sun-deity, appearing frequently at his side in the
incantation texts, is A. It is more particularly with the Shamash of
Sippar, that A is associated. She is simply the 'beloved one' of the
sun-deity, with no special character of her own. In the historical
texts, her role is quite insignificant, and for the period with which we
are at present concerned she is only mentioned once by a North
Babylonian ruler, Ma-an-ish-tu-su,[57] who dedicates an object to her.
The reading of the ideogram A, or Nin-A (_i.e._, Lady A), is doubtful.
Malkatu ("mistress" or "queen") is offered as a plausible
conjecture.[58] Lehman (_Keils Bibl._ iii. I, 202) suggests _A-Ja_, but
on insufficient grounds. In any case A has the force of mistress, and
Nin-A simply designates the goddess as the lady, mistress, or queen. It
is likely that A was originally an independent deity, and one of the
names of the sun-god in a particular locality. It occurs in proper names
as a title of Shamash. Instead, however, of becoming identified with
Shamash, A degenerated into a pale reflection of Shamash, pictured under
the relationship of consort to him. This may have been due to the union
of Shamash with the place where A was worshipped. If, as seems likely,
that near Sippar, there was another city on the other side of the
Euphrates, forming a suburb to it (as Borsippa did to Babylon), the
conclusion is perhaps warranted that A was originally the sun-god
worshipped at the place which afterwards became incorporated with
Sippar.[59] Such an amalgamation of two originally male deities into a
combination of male and female, strange as it may seem to us, is in
keeping with the lack of sharp distinction between male and female in
the oldest forms of Semitic religions. In the old cuneiform writing the
same sign is used to indicate "lord" or "lady" when attached to deities.
Ishtar appears among Semites both as a male[60] and as a female deity.
Sex was primarily a question of strength. The stronger god was viewed as
masculine; the weaker as feminine.
Nannar and Sin.
Nannar, a reduplicated form like Babbar, with the assimilation of the
first r to n (nar-nar = nannar), has very much the same meaning as
Babbar. The latter, as we have seen, is the "lustrous one," the former,
the "one that furnishes light." The similarity in meaning is in keeping
with the similarity of function of the two deities, thus named: Babbar
being the sun and Nannar, the moon. It was under the name of Nannar that
the moon-god was worshipped at Ur, the most famous and probably the
oldest of the cities over which the moon-god presided. The association
of Nannar with Ur is parallel to that of Shamash with Sippar,--not that
the moon-god's jurisdiction or worship was confined to that place, but
that the worship of the deity of that place eclipsed others, and the
fame and importance at Ur led to the overshadowing of the moon-worship
there, over the obeisance to him paid elsewhere.
What further motives led to the choice of the moon-god as the patron of
Ur, lies beyond the scope of our knowledge. Due allowance must be made
for that natural selection, which takes place in the realm of thought as
much as in the domain of nature. Attention has already been called to
the predominance given by the Babylonians to the moon over the sun. The
latter is expressly called the "offspring of the lord of brilliant
beginning," that is, the moon-god (Delitzsch, _Assyr. Hdw._, p. 234
_a_). It is needless, therefore, to do more, at this place, than to
emphasize the fact anew. The moon serving much more as a guide to man,
through the regular character of its constant changes, than the sun, was
connected in the religious system with both the heavenly and the
terrestrial forces. In view of Nannar's position in the heavens, he was
called the "heifer of Anu." Anu, it will be recalled, was the god of
heaven (and heaven itself), while the "heifer"[61] is here used
metaphorically for offspring, the picture being suggested probably by
the "horn" that the moon presents at a certain phase. This 'horn'
constitutes his crown, and he is frequently represented on seal
cylinders with a crescent over his head, and with a long flowing beard,
that is described as having the color of lapislazuli. A frequent title
is the 'lord of the crown.' On the other hand, by virtue of its
influence on the earth, regulating, as the ancients observed, the tides,
the moon was connected by the Babylonians with the reckoning of time.
Because of this connection with the 'lower world,' it seems, he was also
regarded as the first-born of Bel. His sacred edifice at Ur was one to
which all rulers of the place devoted themselves. Ur-Gur, Nur-Ramman,
Sin-iddina, and Kudur-mabuk tell of their embellishment of the temple,
each one appropriating to himself the title of 'builder,' in which they
gloried. So close, again, was the identification of the city with the
deity, that the latter was frequently known simply as the god of Ur, and
the former, as the city of Nannar.
Another name of the moon-god was Sin,--the meaning of which escapes us.
At the side of Ur, Harran is the place most celebrated by reason of its
moon-worship, and there is every reason to believe that the name Sin was
originally attached to Harran. The migrations of the ancient Hebrews
were connected as we now know with political movements in Babylonia.
They proceed from Ur--or Ur-Kasdim, _i.e._, Chaldean Ur--northward to
Harran, which, by virtue of its position, became a town of much
importance. This association of Ur with Harran furnishes an indication
for historical relations of some sort, existing between the two places.
It is therefore not accidental, that the patron deity of both places was
the same. As yet, no excavations have been made at Harran, and we are,
therefore, dependent upon incidental notices for our knowledge of its
history. These sufficiently show that the place continued through a long
period to preserve its sacred character. The old temple there, was one
of the many that stirred up the religious zeal of Nabonnedos; and
previous to this, we find several Assyrian kings occupied in
embellishing and restoring the structure. An interesting reference to
Harran, bearing witness to its ancient dignity, is found in an
inscription of Sargon II. of Assyria (722-706 B.C.), who enumerates
among his claims to the favor of the gods, that he restored the "laws
and customs of Harran," by which he evidently means that he was
instrumental in giving the place, the dignity it once enjoyed. A curious
feature connected with Sin, is the occurrence of the name in Mount
Sinai, in the wilderness of Sin, as well as in an inscription of
Southern Arabia. May not this be a further testimony to the association
of Harran with Sin, since it is from Harran that the departure of the
Hebrews for the west took place? What more natural than that in the
migrations which carried the Hebrews to the west, the worship of Sin
should have been transferred to Arabia?[62] Important as Ur and Harran
are as sacred towns, politically they do not retain their prominence
after the days of Hammurabi. The amalgamation of Nannar with Sin, and
the almost exclusive occurrence of the latter name in later times, does
not of necessity point to a preponderating influence of Harran over Ur,
but may be due to the greater fame which the former place acquired as
the goal of religious pilgrimages. The situation of Harran--the name
itself signifies 'road'--as the highway leading to the west, must have
been an important factor, in bringing this about. However this may be,
Sin and Nannar are as thoroughly identical in the period following
Hammurabi, as Babbar and Shamash. The attributes of the one are
transferred to the other so completely, that a separation of the two is
no longer possible.
The ideographs with which the name of Sin is written show him to have
been regarded as the god of wisdom, but while wisdom and light may be
connected, it is Nannar's character as the "illuminator" that becomes
the chief trait of the god. No doubt the preeminence of Ea in this
respect, who is the personification of wisdom, _par excellence_, made it
superfluous to have another deity possessing the same trait. It is,
accordingly, as the god of light, that Sin continues to be adored in the
Babylonian religion; and when he is referred to, in the historical texts
and hymns, this side of his nature is the one dwelt upon. Through his
light, the traps laid by the evil spirits, who are active at night, are
revealed. In later times, apparently through Assyrian influence, the
reckoning of time was altered to the extent of making the day begin with
sunrise, instead of with the approach of night; and this, together with
the accommodation of the lunar cycle to the movements of the sun,
brought about a partial change of the former conditions, and gave
somewhat greater prominence to Shamash. As a consequence, the role of
Sin is not as prominent in the hymns that belong to a later period as in
those of earlier days.
The oracles of the Assyrian kings are addressed to Shamash, and not to
Sin. Moreover, the personal factor in the case of Sin, if one may
express oneself thus, is not as strong as in that of some other gods.
His traits are of a more general kind. He is supreme; there is none like
him, and the spirits are subservient to his will. But terms of
endearment are few, while on the mythological side, comparatively little
is made of him. He is strong and he is holy. He is called upon to clothe
the evil-doer with leprosy, as with a dress. In a robe, befitting his
dignity, he stalks about. Without him, no city is founded, no district
restored to former glory. Sin is called the father of the gods, but in a
metaphorical rather than in a real sense. The only one of his children
who takes an important part in the later phases of Babylonian-Assyrian
worship is his daughter Ishtar. She seems to have taken to herself some
of the traits of right belonging to Sin, and the prominence of her
worship may be regarded as an additional factor in accounting for the
comparative obscurity to which Sin gradually is assigned. At all events,
Sin is a feature of the earlier period of the Babylonian religion rather
than of the later periods.
Innanna.
The secondary position held by the female deities in the Babylonian
pantheon has been repeatedly referred to. This trait of the religion
finds an illustration not only in the 'shadowy' character of the
consorts of the gods, but also in the manner in which goddesses,
originally distinct from one another and enjoying an existence
independent of any male consort, lose their individuality, as it were,
and become merely so many forms of one and the same deity. Indeed, as we
approach the moment when the gods of the Babylonian pantheon are ranged
into a system, the tendency becomes pronounced to recognize only _one_
goddess, representative of the principle of generation--one 'great
mother,' endowed with a variety of traits according to the political and
social conditions prevailing at different times in Babylonia and
Assyria. In the earliest period which we are now considering, we can
still distinguish a number of goddesses who afterwards became merged
into this one great goddess. These are Ninni (or Innanna), Nana, and
Anunit.
Ninni and Innanna are names that appear to have a common origin.[63]
Both embody the notion of 'ladyship.' The worship of this goddess
centers in the district of Lagash. Ur-Bau (c. 3000 B.C.), who addresses
her as 'glorious and supreme,' builds a temple in her honor at
Gishgalla, and Gudea refers to a temple known as E-anna, _i.e._,
heavenly house in Girsu.[64] For Gudea, Ninni is the "mistress of the
world." Another ruler of Lagash whose name is doubtfully read as
E-dingir-ra-na-gin,[65] but who is even earlier than Ur-Bau, declares
that he has been 'called' by Innanna to the throne. She is mentioned by
the side of Nin-khar-sag. We are still in the period where local
associations formed a controlling factor in ensuring the popularity of a
deity, and while the goddesses attached to the gods of the important
centers are still differentiated, the tendency already exists to
designate the female consorts simply as the 'goddess,'--to apply to all,
the traits that may once have been peculiar to one. As we pass from one
age to the other, there is an increasing difficulty in keeping the
various local 'goddesses' apart. Even the names become interchangeable;
and since these goddesses all represented essentially the same principle
of generation and fertility, it was natural that with the union of the
Babylonian states they should become merged into one great
mother-goddess. A 'local' goddess who retains rather more of her
individuality than others, is
Nana.
Her name is again playfully interpreted by the Babylonians--through
association with Nin--as 'the lady' _par excellence_. She was the chief
goddess of the city of Uruk. Her temple at Uruk is first mentioned by
Ur-Gur, of the second dynasty of Ur. It is restored and enlarged by
Dungi, the successor of Ur-Bau, and so thoroughly is she identified with
her edifice known as E-anna (again a play upon her name), that she
becomes known as the Lady of E-anna.[66] She appears to have had a
temple also at Ur, and it is to this edifice that later rulers of
Larsa--Kudur-Mabuk and Rim-Sin, as well as the kings of the Isin
dynasty, Gamil-Ninib, Libit-Ishtar, and Ishme-Dagan--refer in their
inscriptions.
The members of the Isin dynasty pride themselves upon their control over
Uruk, and naturally appear as special devotees to Nana, whose chosen
"consort" they declare themselves to be, wielding the sceptre, as it
were, in union with her. Already at this period, Nana is brought into
connection with the moon-god, being called by Kudur-Mabuk the daughter
of Sin. The relationship in this case indicates, primarily, the
supremacy exercised by Ur, and also a similarity in the traits of the
two deities. In the fully developed cosmology, Nana is the planet Venus,
whose various aspects, as morning and evening star, suggested an analogy
with the phases of the moon.
Venus, like the moon, served as a guide to man, while her inferiority in
size and importance to the former, would naturally come to be expressed
under the picture of father and daughter. In a certain sense, all the
planets appearing at the same time and in the same region with the moon
were the children of the latter. Sin, therefore, is appropriately called
the father of gods, just as Anu, the personification of the heaven
itself, is the supreme father of Sin and Shamash, and of all the
heavenly bodies. The metaphorical application of 'father' as 'source,'
throughout Oriental parlance, must be kept in mind in interpreting the
relationship between the gods. Still another name of the goddess is
Anunit, which appears to have been peculiar to the North Babylonian city
Agade, and emphasizes her descent from "Anu," the god of heaven. Her
temple at Agade, known as E-ul-mash, is the object of Sargon's devotion,
which makes her, with Bel and Shamash, the oldest triad of gods
mentioned in the Babylonian inscriptions. But the name which finally
displaces all others, is
Ishtar.
Where the name originated has not yet been ascertained, as little as its
etymology,[67] but it seems to belong to Northern Babylonia rather than
to the south.
In time, all the names that we have been considering--Innanna, Nana, and
Anunit--became merely so many designations of Ishtar. She absorbs the
titles and qualities of all, and the tendency which we have pointed out
finds its final outcome in the recognition of Ishtar as the one and only
goddess endowed with powers and an existence independent of association
with any male deity, though even this independence does not hinder her
from being named at times as the associate of the chief god of
Assyria--the all-powerful Ashur. The attempt has been made by Sayce and
others to divide the various names of Ishtar among the aspects of Venus
as morning and evening star, but there is no evidence to show that the
Babylonians distinguished the one from the other so sharply as to make
two goddesses of one and the same planet.
It is more in accord with what, as we have seen, has been the general
character of the Babylonian pantheon, to account for the identification
of Ninni, Nana, and Anunit with Ishtar on the supposition that the
different names belonged originally to different localities. Ishtar was
appropriately denominated the brilliant goddess. She is addressed as the
mother of gods, which signals her supreme position among the female
deities. 'The mistress of countries' alternating with 'the mistress of
mountains,'[68] is one of her common titles; and as the growing
uniqueness of her position is one of the features of the
Babylonian-Assyrian religion, it is natural that she should become
simply _the_ goddess. This was especially the case with the Assyrians,
to whom Ishtar became a goddess of war and battle, the consort, at
times, of the chief god of the Assyrian pantheon. At the same time it is
important to note that the warlike character of the goddess goes back to
the time of Hammurabi (_Keils Bibl._ 3, 1, 113), and is dwelt upon by
other Babylonian kings (_e.g._, Nebuchadnezzar I., c. 1130 B.C.) prior
to the rise of the Assyrian power. How Ishtar came to take on so violent
a character is not altogether clear. There are no indications of this
role in the incantation texts, where she is simply the kind mother who
is appealed to, to release the sufferer from the power of the
disease-bringing spirits. In the prayers, as will be shown in the proper
place, she becomes the vehicle for the expression of the highest
religious and ethical thought attained by the Babylonians. On the other
hand, in the great Babylonian epic,[69] dealing with the adventures of a
famous hero, Gilgamesh, Ishtar, who makes her appearance at the summer
solstice, is a raging goddess who smites those who disobey her commands
with wasting disease. Starting with this phase of the goddess'
character, one can at least understand the process of her further
development into a fierce deity presiding over the fortunes of war. The
epic just referred to belongs to the old Babylonian period. It embodies
ancient traditions of rivalry between the Babylonian principalities,
though there are traces of several recastings which the epic received.
The violent Ishtar, therefore, is a type going back to the same period
as the other side of her character that is emphasized elsewhere. Since,
moreover, the Ishtar in the Gilgamesh epic is none other than the chief
goddess of Uruk, all further doubt as to the union of such diverging
traits in one and the same personage falls to the ground. In this same
epic, Ishtar appears as sympathizing with the sufferings of mankind, and
bewailing the destruction that was at one time decreed by the gods. It
is noteworthy that the violent Ishtar appears in that portion of the
epic which, on the assumption of a zodiacal interpretation for the
composition, corresponds to the summer solstice, whereas, the
destruction which arouses her sympathy takes place in the eleventh
month. It is quite possible, therefore, that the two aspects of Venus,
as evening and morning stars, corresponding, as they do, to the summer
and winter seasons, are reflected in this double character of the
goddess. We are not justified, however, in going further and assuming
that her double role as daughter of Sin and daughter of Anu is to be
accounted for in the same manner. In the Gilgamesh epic, she is found in
association with Anu, and to the latter she appeals for protection as
her father, and yet it is as the daughter of Sin that she enters the
world of the dead to seek for the waters that may heal her bridegroom,
Tammuz.[70] Evidently, the distinction between Ishtar as the daughter of
Anu and as the daughter of Sin is not an important one, the term
daughter in both cases being a metaphor to express a relationship both
of physical nature and of a political character. Of the various forms
under which the goddess appears, that of Anunit--a feminine form
indicating descent from and appertaining to Anu--attaches itself most
clearly to the god of heaven, and it may be that it was not until the
assimilation of Anunit and Nana with Ishtar that the goddess is viewed
as at once the daughter of Anu and of Sin. If this be so, there is
surely nothing strange in the fact that a planet like Venus should be
regarded in one place as the daughter of heaven and in another brought
into relationship with the moon. She actually belongs to both.
Just as in Babylonia, so in Assyria, there were various Ishtars, or
rather various places where the goddess was worshipped as the guardian
spirit, but her role in the north is so peculiar that all further
consideration of it must be postponed until we come to consider, in due
time, the Assyrian pantheon. There will be occasion, too, when treating
of the Gilgamesh epic, to dwell still further on some of her traits. All
that need be said here is to emphasize the fact that the popularity of
the Babylonian Ishtar in Assyria, as manifested by Esarhaddon's zeal in
restoring her temple at Uruk, and Ashurbanabal's restoration of Nana's
statue (_c._ 635 B.C.) which had been captured by the Elamites 1635
years before Ashurbanabal's reign, is largely due to the effected
identity with the goddess who, for the Assyrians, was regarded chiefly
as the goddess of war and strife. In worshipping the southern Ishtars,
the Assyrian kings felt themselves to be showing their allegiance to the
same deity to whom, next to Ashur, most of their supplications were
addressed, and of whom as warriors they stood in dread.
Nina.
A goddess who, while sharing the fate of her sister goddesses in being
overshadowed by Ishtar, yet merits a special treatment, is one whose
name is plausibly conjectured to be read Nina. The compound ideogram
expressing the deity signifies 'house of the fish.' The word 'house' in
Semitic parlance is figuratively extended to convey the idea of
'possessing or harboring.' Applied to a settlement, the ideogram would
be the equivalent of our 'Fishtown.' It is with this same ideogram that
the famous capitol of Assyria, Nineveh, is written in the cuneiform
texts, and since the phonetic reading for the city, Ni-na-a, also
occurs, it is only legitimate to conclude that the latter is the correct
reading for the deity as well. As a matter of course, if the goddess
bears a name identical with that of a city, it cannot be the Assyrian
city which is meant in the old Babylonian inscriptions, but some other
place bearing the same name. Such a place actually occurs in the
inscriptions of Gudea. It is, in fact, one of the three towns that
combined with Shirpurla to create the great capitol bearing the latter
name; and Jensen[71] has called attention to a passage in one of Gudea's
inscriptions in which the goddess is brought into direct association
with the town, so that it would appear that Nina is the patron of Nina,
in the same way that Nin-girsu is the protector of Girsu. In keeping
with this we find the mention of the goddess limited to the rulers of
Lagash. Several of them--En-anna-tuma, Entemena, and Gudea--declare
themselves to have been chosen by her. She is said to regard Gudea with
special favor. She determines destinies. Another king, Ur-Nina, embodies
the name of the goddess in his own, and devotes himself to the
enlargement of her temple. From the manner in which she is associated
with Nin-girsu, aiding the latter in guarding his temple E-ninnu, and
uniting with the god in granting the sceptre to Gudea, one is tempted to
conclude that the two towns, Girsu and Nina, were amalgamated before
their absorption into Lagash, so that the god and goddess acquired the
relationship to one another of husband and consort. As for the
connection between this Babylonian Nina and the late Assyrian capital,
it is quite possible that the origin of the latter is to be traced to a
settlement made by inhabitants of the former, although it should be
added that there is no positive evidence that can be adduced in support
of this proposition. It accords, however, with the northward movement of
culture and civilization in Mesopotamia. If this connection between the
two Ninevehs be accepted, the question suggests itself whether, in time,
Nina did not become merely another form of Ishtar. The Assyrian capital
is frequently spoken of as the 'beloved city' of Ishtar, and unless it
be supposed that this epithet simply reflects the comparatively late
popularity of the distinctively Assyrian Ishtar, the most natural
explanation would be to propose the equation Nina = Ishtar.
In the incantation texts, Nina is frequently appealed to as the daughter
of Ea,--the god of the deep. This relationship, as well as the
interpretation of the ideogram above set forth, points to the original
character of the goddess as a water-deity. This goddess, therefore,
would be of an entirely different form from the ones discussed in the
previous paragraphs. Instead of being a member of the heavenly pantheon,
her place is with the kingdom over which Ea presides, and whose
dwelling-place is the watery deep. In any case, Nina is originally
distinct from Ishtar, Nana, and Anunit; and she retains an independent
existence to a later period than most of the other great goddesses that
have been discussed. In an inscription of the days of Belnadinaplu (_c._
1100 B.C.), published by Hilprecht,[72] Nina appears as the patron deity
of Der,--a city of Southern Babylonia. There too she is called the
'daughter of Ea,' the creator of everything. She is 'the mistress of
goddesses.' Attached to her temple there are lands that having been
wrongfully wrested from the priests are returned upon royal command,
under solemn invocation of the goddess. How her worship came to be
transferred to Der we do not know. She appears in the inscription in
question by the side of a goddess who--following Hommel--is none other
than Bau. Der is called the city of the god Anu, and we can only suppose
that it must at one time have risen to sufficient importance to harbor
in its midst a number of deities. It is presumably[73] the place whence
Nebuchadnezzar I. sets out in the twelfth century to drive the Cassites
off the throne of Babylonia. May it be that, during the days of the
foreign rule, priests attached to the service of various of the old gods
and goddesses transferred the worship of these deities to places more
secure from interference?
Be this as it may, if our Nina has any connection with the goddess of
Nineveh, it is certain that Ishtar has retained none of Nina's traits.
The fusion in this case has been so complete that naught but the
faintest tradition of an original and independent Nina has survived in
the North.
Anu.
This god, who, from a theoretical point of view (as will be shown in a
subsequent chapter), was regarded as standing at the head of the
organized Babylonian pantheon, figures only incidentally in the
inscriptions prior to the days of Hammurabi. Ur-Gur of the second
dynasty of Ur, in invoking Nannar, calls the latter 'the powerful bull
of Anu.' The reference is interesting, for it shows that already in
these early days the position of Anu, as the god of the heavenly
expanse, was fixed. The moon appearing in the heavens, and the
resemblance of its crescent to a bull's horn,[74] are the two factors
that account for the expressive epithet used by Ur-Bau. That the worship
of the god of heaven _par excellence_ should not have enjoyed great
popularity in the early days of the Babylonian religion might seem
strange at first sight. A little reflection, however, will make this
clear. A god of the heavens is an abstract conception, and while it is
possible that even in an early age, such a conception may have arisen in
some minds, it is not of a character calculated to take a popular hold.
As we proceed in our attempt to trace the development of the Babylonian
religion, we will find the line of demarcation separating the
theological system, as evolved by the schoolmen, from the popular phases
of the religion, becoming more marked. In the inscriptions of the old
Babylonian rulers, comparatively little of the influence of the
Babylonian theologians is to be detected. Even the description of the
moon as the bull of heaven falls within the domain of popular fancy. It
is different in the days after Hammurabi, when political concentration
leads to the focussing of intellectual life in the Euphrates Valley,
with all the consequences that the establishment of a central
priesthood, with growing powers over ever-increasing territory,
involves. It is to be noted, moreover, that the manner in which in the
old Babylonian inscriptions _Anu_ is written,[75] indicates that the
abstraction involved in the conception of a god of heaven had not yet
been reached, though some measure of personification was of course
inevitable at a time when animistic notions still held sway. A direct
indication of this personification of heaven without the deification
appears in the epithet 'child of Anu,' bestowed upon the goddess Bau.
The reference to the heavens in this connection is an allusion to Bau's
position as the patroness of that quarter of Lagash known as the
'brilliant town,'[76] and where Bau's temple stood. The transference of
the quality of 'brilliancy' from the town to the goddess would be
expressed by calling the latter the offspring of that part of visible
nature which is associated in the mind with 'brilliancy.' Somewhat
mysterious, and still awaiting a satisfactory explanation, is the title
'sacrificer,' or 'priest of Anu,' which one of the rulers of Lagash,
Ur-Nin-girsu, assumes. It is scarcely possible that the god of heaven
can be meant; and, on the other hand, if we are to assume merely a
personification of heaven, we encounter fresh difficulties. It seems to
me that the use of Anu[77] here is purely metaphorical for 'high' or
'lofty,' and that the king merely wishes to emphasize the dignity of his
station by declaring himself to be the heavenly priest, somewhat as we
should say 'priest by divine grace,' or 'supreme priest.'
Nin-si[78]-a.
Ur-Bau and Gudea alone of the ancient rulers refer to this god. The
former erects a temple in honor of the god in some quarter of his
capitol city, while the latter emphasizes the strength that the god has
given him. These references, however, show that the god must have been
of considerable importance, and in this case, his disappearance from the
later pantheon is probably due to the absorption of his role by the
greater god of Lagash,--Nin-girsu. Like Nin-girsu, Nin-si-a was a god of
war, and his worship, imported perhaps from some ancient site to Lagash,
falls into desuetude, as the attribute accorded to him becomes the
distinguishing trait of the chief deity of the place.
Gal-alim.
Among the various deities to whom Gudea gives praise for the position
and glory which he attains is Gal-alim.[79] From him he has received
great rule and a lofty sceptre. The phrase is of a very general nature
and reveals nothing as to the special character of the god in question.
An earlier king, Uru-kagina, refers to the temple of the god at Lagash.
Gal-alim may have been again a merely local deity belonging to one of
the towns that fell under Gudea's rule, and whose attributes again were
so little marked that this god too disappeared under the overshadowing
importance of Nin-girsu. He and another god, Dun-shagga, are viewed as
the sons of Nin-girsu.
* * * * *
Coming to some of the deities that we may designate as minor, it is to
be noted that in the case of certain ones, at least, it will be found
that they may be identified with others more prominent, and that what
seem to be distinct names are in reality descriptive epithets of gods
already met with. This remark applies more particularly to such names as
begin with the element Nin, signifying either 'lord' or 'lady,' and
which, when followed by the name of a place, always points to its being
a title, and, when followed by an ideographic compound, only diminishes
that probability to a slight degree. We have already come across several
instances; thus Nin-girsu, the lord of Girsu, has been shown to be a
form of Ninib, itself an ideogram, the reading of which, it will be
recalled, is still uncertain; and again, Nin-khar-sag has been referred
to, as one of the titles of the great goddess Belit. Similarly,
Nin-gish-zida, whose name signifies 'the lord of the right-hand (or
propitious) sceptre,' becomes a title and not a name, and when Gudea
speaks of this god as the one who leads him to battle, and calls him
'king,' he is simply describing the same god who is elsewhere spoken of
as Nin-girsu. By the side of Nin-girsu and Nin-gish-zida appears
Nin-shakh, who, as Oppert[80] has shown, is like Nin-girsu the prototype
of the well-known god of war, Ninib. However, Nin-shakh occupies, in
contradistinction to Nin-gish-zida and others, a position in the old
Babylonian pantheon of an independent character, so that it is hardly
justifiable, in such a case, to identify him completely with Ninib, and
place the name on a par with the epithets just referred to. The dividing
line between the mere title and an independent god thus becomes at times
very faint, and yet it is well to maintain it whenever called for. In
the following enumeration of the minor gods of the old Babylonian
pantheon, the attempt will be made to bring out this distinction in each
instance.
Beginning with
Nin-shakh
the element _Nin_, as has several times been mentioned, points to an
ideographic form. The second element signifies 'wild boar,' and from
other sources we know that this animal was a sacred one in Babylonia, as
among other Semitic nations.[81] Its flesh, on certain days of the
Babylonian calendar, was forbidden to be eaten, from which we are
permitted to conclude that these days were dedicated to the animal, and
the prohibition represents perhaps the traces of some old religious
festival. May Nin-shakh therefore have been a 'swine deity,' just as
Nergal is symbolized by the 'lion'? In both cases the animal would be a
symbol of the violent and destructive character of the god.
The ferocious character of the 'swine' would naturally result in
assigning to Nin-shakh warlike attributes; and as a matter of fact he is
identified at times with Ninib. His subordinate position, however, is
indicated by his being called the 'servant,' generally of En-lil,
occasionally also of Anu, and as such he bears the name of
Pap-sukal,[82] _i.e._, 'divine messenger.' Rim-Sin builds a temple to
Nin-shakh at Uruk, and from its designation as his 'favorite dwelling
place' we may conclude that Rim-Sin only restores or enlarges an ancient
temple of the deity. In the light of this, the relationship above set
forth between Nin-girsu, Nin-gish-zida, and Nin-shakh becomes somewhat
clearer. The former, the local deity of Girsu, would naturally be called
by the kings 'the lord of the true sceptre,' while the subordination of
Girsu as a quarter of Lagash finds its reflection in the relationship of
master and servant pictured as existing between En-lil and Nin-girsu.
Again, the warlike character of the patron deity of Girsu would lead to
an identification with Nin-shakh of Uruk, possessing the same traits;
and the incorporation of Uruk as a part of the same empire which
included Lagash and its quarters, would be the last link bringing about
the full equation between the three. With Ninib--the solar deity--coming
into prominence as the god of war, all three names, Nin-girsu,
Nin-gish-zida, and Nin-shakh, would be regarded by a later age as merely
descriptive of one and the same god.
Dun-shagga.
Gudea makes mention in one of his inscriptions, by the side of
Nin-gish-zida, of a god Dun-shagga,[83] whose name signifies the 'chief
hero,' but the phonetic reading of which it is impossible to
determine.[84] Like Nin-gish-zida, he is a warlike god, and from that
one might suppose that he too is only another form of Nin-girsu-Ninib.
At all events, he did not differ materially from the latter. It is from
him, that Gudea again declares his power to be derived, just as
elsewhere he accords to Nin-girsu this distinction. The element 'Dun,'
which is very much the same as 'Nin,' speaks in favor of regarding
Dun-shagga as a title; but, in default of positive evidence, it will not
be out of place to give him an independent position, and to regard his
identification with Nin-girsu as a later phase due to the extension of
Nin-girsu's jurisdiction and his corresponding absorption of a varying
number of minor gods. This tendency on the part of the greater gods to
absorb the minor ones is as distinctive a trait in the development of
the Babylonian religion, as is the subordination of one god to the
other, whether expressed by making the subordinate god the consort, the
chief, or the servant of a superior one. We have seen that such terms of
relationship correspond to certain degrees of political conditions
existing between the conquering and the conquered districts.
Amalgamation of two cities or districts is portrayed in the relation of
the two patron deities as husband and wife, the stronger of the two
being the former, the more subservient pictured as the latter. The more
pronounced superiority of the one place over the other finds expression
in the relation of father to child, while that of master and servant
emphasizes the complete control exercised by the one over the other.
Lastly, the absorption of one deity into another, is correlative either
with the most perfect form of conquest, or the complete disappearance of
the seat of his worship in consequence of the growing favor of one
possessing sufficiently similar qualities to warrant identification with
the other.
Lugal-banda.
Sin-gashid of the dynasty of Uruk makes mention of this deity at the
beginning of one of his inscriptions. To him and to his consort,
Nin-gul, a temple as 'the seat of their joy' at that place is devoted.
This association of the god with the town points again to a local deity,
but possessing a character which leads to the absorption of the god in
the solar god, Nergal, whom we have already encountered, and who will
occupy us a good deal when we come to the period after Hammurabi. The
identification of the two is already foreshadowed in an inscription of
another member of the same dynasty, Sin-gamil, who places the name of
Nergal exactly where his predecessor mentions Lugal-banda. The first
element in his name signifies 'king,' the second apparently 'strong,' so
that in this respect, too, the god comes close to Nergal, whose name
likewise indicates 'great lord.' The consort of Lugal-banda is
Nin-gul.
Her name signifies 'the destructive lady,'--an appropriate epithet for
the consort of a solar deity. It is Sin-gashid again who associates
Ningul with Lugal-banda, and emphasizes his affection for the goddess by
calling her his mother. In one inscription, moreover, Sin-gashid
addresses himself exclusively to the goddess, who had an equal share in
the temple at Uruk.
Dumuzi-zu-aba.
Among the deities appealed to by Ur-Bau appears one whose name is to be
interpreted as the 'unchangeable child of the watery deep.' The great
god of the deep we have seen is Ea. Dumuzi-zu-aba therefore belongs to
the water-deities, and one who, through his subordinate rank to Ea,
sinks to the level of a water-spirit. Ur-Bau declares himself to be the
darling of this deity, and in the town of Girsu he erects a temple to
him. Girsu, however, was not the patron city of the god, for Ur-Bau
gives Dumuzi-zu-aba, the appellation of 'the lord of Kinunira,'[85] a
place the actual situation of which is unknown. Dumuzi-zu-aba,
accordingly, is to be regarded as a local deity of a place which,
situated probably on an arm of the Euphrates, was the reason for the
watery attributes assigned to the god. The comparative insignificance of
the place is one of the factors that accounts for the minor importance
of the god, and the second factor is the popularity enjoyed by another
child of the great Ea, his child _par excellence_, Marduk, who is best
known as the patron god of the city of Babylon. By the side of Marduk,
the other children of Ea, the minor water-deities, disappear, so that to
a later generation Dumuzi-zu-aba appears merely as a form of Marduk.
With Dumuzi-zu-aba, we must be careful not to confuse
Dumu-zi,
who in the old Babylonian inscriptions is mentioned once by
Sin-iddina,[86] in connection with the sun-god. Dumu-zi, signifying
'child of life,' has a double aspect--an agricultural deity and at the
same time a god of the lower world. He plays an important part in the
eschatological literature of the Babylonians, but hardly none at all in
the historical and incantation texts. A fuller treatment may therefore
be reserved for a future chapter.
Lugal-erima.
A purely local deity, if the reading and interpretation offered by
Jensen, 'King of the city Erim,' is correct. The mention of the deity in
an inscription of Ur-Bau, who calls himself the 'beloved servant' of
this god, would be due to the circumstance that the district within
which the city in question lay was controlled by the rulers of Lagash.
To invoke as large a number of deities as possible was not only a means
of securing protection from many sides, but was already in the early
days of Babylonian history indulged in by rulers, as a means of
emphasizing the extent and manifold character of their jurisdiction.
Nin-e-gal and Ningal.
A temple was erected to Nin-e-gal by the wife of Rim-Sin, of the dynasty
ruling in Larsa. Her name as interpreted in the tablet dedicated to her,
signifies again, as in several cases already noted, 'great lady.' She
was probably therefore only the consort of some patron deity; and Nannar
being the most prominent god invoked by Rim-Sin, it would seem that the
goddess to whom the queen pays her respects is again one of the consorts
of the moon-god.[87] This conclusion is supported by the direct
association of Nannar of Ur and Ningal in an inscription emanating from
an earlier member of the same dynasty to which Rim-Sin belongs.
Nur-Ramman speaks of building temples to these deities in the city of
Ur. Hence the goddess is also represented as interceding with Sin on
behalf of those who appeal to her. The form Nin-e-gal is but a variant
of Nin-gal, so that the identification of the two lies beyond doubt, and
it may very well be that the temple erected by the consort of Rim-Sin is
the same as the one referred to by Nur-Ramman. In a land where polygamy
was a prevailing custom, the gods too might be represented as having a
number of consorts. There would of course be, just as in human
relations, one chief consort, but there might be others ranged at the
side of the latter.[88] Some of these may have been consorts of other
minor deities, worshipped in the same district, and who were given to
the more important divinity as he gradually overshadowed the others. In
this way, we may account for the large variety of 'ladies' and 'great
ladies' met with in the Babylonian pantheon, and who, being merely
'reflections' of male deities, with no sharply marked traits of their
own, would naturally come to be confused with one another, and finally
be regarded as various forms of one and the same goddess. A member of
the dynasty ruling in Isin, En-anna-tuma, earlier even than Nur-Ramman,
invokes Nin-gal in an inscription found in the ancient capital, Ur.
Here, too, the goddess appears in association with Nannar; but,
curiously enough, she is designated as the mother of Shamash. It will be
borne in mind that in the city of Ur, the sun-god occupied a secondary
place at the side of the moon-god. This relationship is probably
indicated by the epithet 'offspring of Nin-gal,' accorded to Shamash in
the inscription referred to. The moon being superior to the sun, the
consort of the moon-god becomes the mother of the sun-god.
Reference has several times been made to
Nin-gish-zida,
who, originally a distinct solar deity, becomes scarcely distinguishable
from Nin-girsu, and is eventually identified with the great Nin-ib.[89]
It is noticeable that these four deities, Nin-girsu, Nin-shakh,
Nin-gish-zida, and Nin-ib, who are thus associated together, all contain
the element _Nin_ in their names,--a factor that may turn out to be of
some importance when more abundant material shall be forthcoming for
tracing their development in detail. One of Gudea's inscriptions[90]
begins with the significant statement, 'Nin-gish-zida is the god of
Gudea'; and elsewhere when speaking of him, he is 'my god,' or 'his
god.' None of the ancient Babylonian rulers make mention of him except
Gudea, though in the incantation texts he is introduced and
significantly termed 'the throne-bearer' of the earth. The purely local
character of the deity is, furthermore, emphasized by the reference to
his temple in Girsu, on a brick and on a cone containing dedicatory
inscriptions, inscribed by Gudea in honor of the god.[91]
Shul (or Dun)-pa-uddu.
The wife of the famous Gudea, Gin-Shul-pa-uddu, bears a name in which
one of the elements is a deity, the phonetic reading of whose name is
still uncertain.[92] The elements comprising it, namely, 'lord' (?),
'sceptre,' and 'radiant,' leave little doubt as to the solar character
of the god. Besides Gudea's wife, a ruler, Ur-Shul-pa-uddu,[93]
belonging apparently to a somewhat earlier period, embodies this deity
in his name. The worship of the deity, therefore, belongs to a very
early epoch, and appears at one time to have enjoyed considerable
popularity within a certain district of Babylonia. To what region of
Babylonia he belongs has not yet been ascertained. Judging from
analogous instances, he represented some phase of the sun worshipped in
a particular locality, whose cult, with the disappearance of the place
from the surface of political affairs, yielded to the tendency to
concentrate sun-worship in two or three deities,--Shamash and Ninib more
especially. In the astronomy of the Babylonians the name survived as a
designation of Marduk-Jupiter.[94]
Nin-Mar.
A local deity, designated as the lady of Mar, is invoked by Ur-Bau, from
whom we learn that she was the daughter of Nina. _Mar_, with the
determinative for country, _Ki_, appears to have been the name of a
district extending to the Persian Gulf.[95] The capital of the district
is represented by the mound Tel-Id, not far from Warka. Her subsidiary
position is indicated in these words, and we may conclude that Nin-Mar
at an early period fell under the jurisdiction of the district in which
Nina was supreme. For all that, Nin-Mar, or the city in which her cult
was centralized, must have enjoyed considerable favor. Ur-Bau calls her
the 'gracious lady,' and erects a temple, the name of which,
Ish-gu-tur,[96] _i.e._, according to Jensen's plausible interpretation,
'the house that serves as a court for all persons,' points to Mar as a
place of pilgrimage to which people came from all sides. Gudea,
accordingly, does not omit to include 'the lady of Mar' in his list of
the chief deities to whom he pays his devotions; and on the assumption
of the general favor in which the city of Mar stood as a sacred town, we
may account for the fact that a much later ruler, Dungi, of the dynasty
of Ur,[97] erects a temple to her honor.
Pa-sag.
A deity, the phonetic reading of whose name is unknown, or at all events
uncertain,[98] is mentioned once by Gudea in the long list of deities
that has been several times referred to. The ideographs with which his
name is written designate him as a chief of some kind, and in accord
with this, Gudea calls him 'the leader of the land.' Pa-sag is mentioned
immediately after the sun-god Utu, and in view of the fact that another
solar deity, I-shum, whom we shall come across in a future chapter, is
designated by the same title[99] as Pa-sag, it seems safe to conclude
that the latter is likewise a solar deity, and in all probability, the
prototype of I-shum, if not indeed identical with him.
Nisaba (or Nidaba).
In a dream which the gods send to Gudea, he sees among other things, a
goddess, whose name may be read Nisaba or Nidaba.[100] Nina, who
interprets the dream to the ruler of Shirpurla, declares that Nisaba is
her sister. In a text belonging to a still earlier age, the deity is
mentioned as the begetter of a king whose name is read Lugal-zaggisi.[101]
From the manner in which the name of the goddess is written, as well as
from other sources, we know that Nisaba is an agricultural deity. In
historical texts she plays scarcely any role at all, but in incantations
she is often referred to; and from the fact that Nisaba is appealed to,
to break the power of the demons in conjunction with Ea, it would appear
that the position once occupied by her was no insignificant one.
Nin-girsu, it will be recalled, has also traits which connect him with
agricultural life, and Nina being the daughter of Nin-si-a, one of the
forms under which Ningirsu-Ninib appears, we may connect Nisaba directly
with the cults of which Lagash formed the center. Nisaba must have been
the consort of one of the agricultural gods, whose jurisdiction falls
within Gudea's empire. Lugal-zaggisi, as the king of Uruk, assigns to
the goddess a first place. Her origin must, therefore, be sought in this
region. In later days the name of the goddess is used to describe the
fertility of the soil in general. So Ashurbanabal, describing the
prosperity existing in his days, says that grain was abundant through
the 'increase of Nisaba.'[102]
KU(?)-Anna.
A goddess of this name--reading of the first sign doubtful--is mentioned
by Ur-Bau, who builds a temple to her in Girsu. If Amiaud is correct in
his reading of the first sign, the goddess was identified at one time by
the Babylonians with the consort of Ramman--the storm-god. This would
accord with the description that Ur-Bau gives of the goddess. She is the
one who deluges the land with water--belonging therefore to the same
order as Bau.
In a list of deities enumerated by a ruler of Erech, Lugal-zaggisi,[103]
are found (1) a local goddess,
Umu,
designated as the 'priestess of Uruk,'[104] and occupying an inferior
rank to (2) a goddess,
Nin-akha-kuddu,[105]
who is called 'the mistress of Uruk.' The importance of Erech in the
early history of Babylonia is emphasized by the inscriptions from
Nippur, recently published by Dr. Hilprecht. It is natural, therefore,
to find several deities of a purely local type commemorated by kings who
belong to this region. The goddess Umu is not heard of again. The great
goddess of Uruk, Nana, absorbs the smaller ones, and hence
Nin-akha-kuddu survives chiefly in incantation texts as 'the lady of
shining waters,' of 'purification,' and of 'incantations.'[106]
* * * * *
Lastly, a passing reference may be made to several deities to whom
sanctuaries are erected by Uru-Kagina in the great temple of Bau at
Uru-azaga, and whom Amiaud regards as sons of Bau.
Uru-Kagina enumerates three, Za-za-uru, Im-pa-ud-du, and
Gim-nun-ta-ud-du-a.[107] The element _ud-du_ in the last two names
signifies 'radiant' or 'rising up'; while _pa-ud-du_ (like in
Shul-pa-ud-du, p. 99) means 'radiant sceptre.' If to this, we add that
_Im_ is 'storm,' it will appear plausible to see in the second name a
form of a raging solar deity and perhaps also in the third; _gim nun_ in
the latter name may mean 'creating lord.' To these Amiaud[108] adds from
other sources, Khi-gir-nunna, Khi-shaga, Gurmu, and Zarmu. He takes
these seven deities as sons of Bau, but he offers no conclusive evidence
for his theory. Some of these deities may turn out to be synonymous with
such as have already been met with.
FOOTNOTES:
[24] Indicated by separating the syllables composing the name.
[25] At the period when the kings of Ur extend their rule over Nippur,
they, too, do not omit to refer to the distinction of having been called
to the service of the great god at his temple.
[26] The name signifies, 'He has founded the city,' the subject of the
verb being some deity whose name is omitted.
[27] Jensen, _Keils Bibl._ 3, 1, p. 23, proposes to read Nin-Ur-sag, but
without sufficient reason, it seems to me. The writing being a purely
ideographic form, an _epitheton ornans_, the question of how the
ideographs are to be read is not of great moment.
[28] We may compare the poetic application 'rock' to Yahweh in the Old
Testament, _e.g._, Job 1. 12, and frequently in Psalms,--lxii. 3, 7;
xcii. 16, 18, etc.
[29] Reading doubtful. Jensen suggests Erim. Hommel (_Proc. Soc. Bibl.
Arch._ xv. 37 _seq._) endeavored to identify the place with Babylon, but
his views are untenable. If Gish-galla was not a part of Lagash, it
could not have been far removed from it. It was Amiaud who first
suggested that Shir-pur-la (or Lagash) was the general name for a city
that arose from an amalgamation of four originally distinct quarters.
("Sirpurla" in _Revue Archeologique_, 1888.) The suggestion has been
generally, though not universally accepted.
[30] That Ninib is only an ideographic form is sufficiently clear from
the element NIN-, lord. The proof, however, that Ninib is Adar, is still
wanting. See Jensen, _Kosmologie der Babylonier_, pp. 457, 458.
[31] From the context (De Sarzec, _Decouvertes_, pl. 6, no. 4, ll.
13-21, and pl. 31, no. 3, col iii. ll. 2-6), there can be no doubt that
Shul-gur (or Shul-gur-ana) is an epithet of Nin-girsu. The ideographs
descriptive of the edifice suggest a corn magazine of some kind. One is
reminded of the storehouses for grain in Egypt. See Jensen's Notes,
_Keils Bibl._ 3, 1, pp. 15, 18, 73. A comparison of the two texts in
question makes it probable that Ab-gi and E-bi-gar are synonymous.
[32] Rawlinson, iv. 27, no. 6; 11, 45-46.
[33] It is noticeable that there is no mention made of a special god of
Lagash, which points to the later origin of the name.
[34] Inscr. D, col. li. 13; G, col. ii. ll. 1-8; iii. 4 _seq._
[35] See Gen. xxiv. 53. Burkhardt, _Notes on the Bedouins_, i. 109,
gives an example of the custom.
[36] The two names are used by Gudea (Inscr. G, col. iii. 12) in a way
to indicate that they embrace the whole district of Lagash.
[37] _Semit. Voelker_, p. 382.
[38] See Jensen, _Keils Bibl._ 3, 1, 28, note 2.
[39] The first signifies 'to make,' the third means "good, favorable,"
but the second, upon which so much depends, is not clear. Amiaud reads
_tum_ instead of _sig_.
[40] _E.g._, Nina (see below).
[41] De Sarzec, pl. 7, col. i. 12.
[42] _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 104.
[43] Inscr. D, col. iv. ll. 7, 8.
[44] In Rawlinson, ii. 58, no. 6, there is a list of some seventy names.
[45] Rawlinson, ii. 58, no. 6, 58.
[46] De Sarzec, pl. 8, col v. ll. 4-6.
[47] _Keils Bibl._ 3, 1, 80, note 3.
[48] Rawlinson, iv. 35, no. 2, 1.
[49] See a syllabary giving lists of gods, Rawlinson, ii. 60, 12. Dungi,
indeed, calls Nergal once the king of lawful control over Lagash
(Rawlinson, iv. 35, no. 2, ll. 2, 3). The exact force of the title is
not clear, but in no case are we permitted to conclude as Amiaud does
(_Rec. of the Past_, N.S., i. 59) that Shid-lam-ta-udda is identical
with Nin-girsu.
[50] See Jensen, _Kosmologie der Babylonier_, pp. 476-87.
[51] See Jensen, _Kosmologie der Babylonier_, pp. 476-87.
[52] So in the inscription of Rim-Sin (_Keils Bibl._ 3, 1, p. 97).
[53] Perhaps the knob of a sceptre. _Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch._ viii. 68.
[54] _E.g._, Hammurabi (_Revue d'Assyriologie_, ii. col. i. 21); but
also Gudea and a still earlier king.
[55] So Amlaud; and there seems some reason to believe that the name was
used by the side of Utu, though perhaps only as an epithet.
[56] Compare _birbiru_, 'sheen,' and the stem _baru_, 'to see,' etc.
[57] See _Keils Bibl._ 3, I, 100. Reading of name uncertain.
[58] Suggested by Rawlinson, ii. 57, 10. See Schrader, _Zeits. f.
Assyr._ iii. 33 _seq._
[59] On Sippar, see Sayce, _Hibbert Lectures_, etc., 168-169, who finds
in the Old Testament form "Sepharvayim" a trace of this double Sippar.
Dr. Ward's suggestion, however, in regard to Anbar, as representing this
'second' Sippar, is erroneous.
[60] _E.g._, in Southern Arabia. See W. Robertson Smith, _The Religion
of the Semites_, I. 59.
[61] In Rabbinical literature, the moon is compared to a 'heifer'
(Talmud Babli Rosh-hashana 22 _b_).
[62] That the name of Sin should have been introduced into Mesopotamia
through the 'Arabic' dynasty (see above, p. 39) is less probable, though
not impossible in the light of recent discoveries.
[63] Innanna may be separated into _In_ = lord or lady, and _nanna_;
_in_ and _nanna_ would then be elements added to "lady," conveying
perhaps the idea of greatness. See Jensen's remarks, _Keils Bibl._ 3, I,
20, note 4.
[64] _Rec. of the Past_, N.S., ii. p. 104.
[65] _Keils Bibl._ 3, I, 16. See Jensen's note on the reading of the
name.
[66] The fame of this temple outlasts the political importance of the
place, and as late as the days of the Assyrian monarchy is an object of
fostering care on the part of the kings.
[67] That the name is Semitic is no longer seriously questioned by any
scholar. The underlying stem suggests etymological relationship with the
god Ashur. If this be so, Ishtar may mean 'the goddess that brings
blessing' to mankind, but all this is tentative, as are the numerous
other etymologies suggested.
[68] The ideographs for 'country' and 'mountain' are identical Assyrian.
The alternation in the title of Ishtar must not be taken to point to a
mountainous origin of the goddess.
[69] A full account of this epic will be given at its proper place.
[70] Again, in the incantation texts she appears only as the daughter of
Anu, cooerdinate with Sin and Shamash.
[71] _Keils Bibl._ 3, 1, 72, note. Some scholars, as Hommel (_Gesch. d.
alt. Morgenlandes_, p. 68), propose to identify this place with the
Assyrian Nineveh, but the conjecture lacks proof and is altogether
improbable.
[72] _Old Babylonian Inscriptions_, I. pls. 30, 31. (See now Peiser,
_Keils Bibl._ 4, pp. 64-66.)
[73] Questioned by Peiser, _ib._
[74] Among many nations the moon is pictured as a horned animal. See
Robert Brown's interesting monograph on _The Unicorn_, pp. 27 _seq. et
passim_; also above, p. 76.
[75] Simply the sign AN (= god, heaven) and the phonetic complement
_na_.
[76] See above, p. 59.
[77] Written An-na, without the determinative for deity. De Sarzec,
_Decouvertes en Chaldee_, pl. 37, no. 8.
[78] The second element may also be read _dar_. See Jensen, _Keils
Bibl._ 3, 1, p. 24, note 1.
[79] Inscription B, col. ii. 19.
[80] See Hommel, _Semitische Kulturen_, p. 389.
[81] For the sacred character of the swine among the Semites, see W.
Robertson Smith's _The Religion of the Semites_, pp. 201, 272, 332, 457.
Rawlinson, iii. 68, 22, occurs a deity, 'swine of the right hand,'
_i.e._, propitious.
[82] Rawlinson, ii. 59, 23. The second element in Pap-sukal is the
common Babylonian word for 'servant,' or 'messenger;' other deities
therefore standing in a subsidiary position are also called Pap-sukal.
So _e.g._, Nebo and Nusku. See further on and compare Hommel, _Semiten_,
pp. 479, 480.
[83] Inscription B, col iii. 2.
[84] Uru-kagina, earlier than Gudea (de Sarzec, pl. 32), appears to have
built a temple to Dun-shagga, but the passage is not altogether clear.
The element also appears in the name of the ruler of Ur, _Dungi_,
_i.e._, 'the legitimate hero,' as Sargon is the 'legitimate king.'
[85] Signifying, according to Jensen, _Keils Bibl._ 3, 1, p. 25,
'fighting-place'.
[86] Published by Delitzsch, _Beitraege zur Assyr._ I. 301-311.
[87] So also Jensen, _Kosmologie_, p. 14, note 3.
[88] So Anu appears to have concubines.
[89] See above, pp. 92, 93.
[90] Inscription C.
[91] De Sarzec, pl. 37, no. 5; _Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch._ vi. 279.
[92] Jensen, _Kosmologie_, p. 127, proposes to read Umun-pauddu.
[93] Hilprecht, _Old Babylonian Inscriptions_, i. 2, no. 93. The name
also appears in syllabaries as Shul-pa-ud-du-a. For the element
_pa-udda_, see p. 103. In Nergal's name Shid-lam-ta-uddu-a (p. 65), the
same final elements are found which appear to be characteristic epithets
of solar deities. The first element in the name has also the value Dun
(as in Dun-gi).
[94] Jensen, _Kosmologie_, pp. 125, 126.
[95] See _Journal Asiatique_, September-October, 1895, p. 393.
[96] De Sarzec, pl. 8, col. v. ll. 8-12.
[97] IR. pl. 2, no. 4.
[98] Jensen regards Pa-sag as a possible phonetic form, but his view is
hardly tenable.
[99] See Zimmern, _Busspsalmen_, pp. 60, 61.
[100] Cylinder A, cols. iv. and v. Amiaud read the name _Nirba_.
[101] Just published by Hilprecht, _Old Babylonian Inscriptions_, i. 2,
pls. 38-47. _Cf._ p. 52
[102] VR. col. i. 48.
[103] See at close of chapter vi.
[104] Hilprecht, _ib._ no. 87, col i. 30.
[105] _Ib._ i. 32. Hilprecht reads Nin-a-gid-kha-du, but this can hardly
be correct.
[106] The two ideas, 'water' and 'incantation,' are correlated. The
'waters' meant are those used for purification purposes in connection
with the magic formulas.
[107] De Sarzec, pl. 32, col. ii. 9-11.
[108] _Records of the Past_, N.S., i. 59. Amiaud reads the second name
Im-ghud-ena and the third Gim (or Ur)-nun-ta-ena. The publication in De
Sarzec favors my readings.