THE GODS IN THE TEMPLE LISTS AND IN THE LEGAL AND COMMERCIAL DOCUMENTS.
Besides the historical texts in the proper sense, there is another
source for the study of the Babylonian pantheon.
Both for the first and for the second periods we now have a large number
of lists of offerings made to the temples of Babylonia and of thousands
of miscellaneous legal documents. De Sarzec found a number of such
documents at Telloh some years ago, and quite recently some thirty
thousand tablets of the temple archives have come to light.[183] At
Tell-Sifr, Abu-Habba, and elsewhere, many thousands also have been
found, belonging chiefly to the second period. A feature of these
documents is the invocation of the gods, introduced for various
purposes, at times in connection with oaths, at times as a guarantee
against the renewal of claims. Again, certain gods are appealed to as
witnesses to an act, and in the lists of temple offerings, gods are
constantly introduced. Since many of the commercial transactions
recorded in these documents, moreover, concern the temples of Babylonia,
further occasions were found for the mention of a god or gods. The
proper names occurring in these documents, compounded as these names in
most cases are with some deity,[184] furnish some additions to the
pantheon of Babylonia. Naturally, a distinction is to be made between
deities introduced in temple lists and in the course of legal
proceedings, and such as are merely known through forming an element in
proper names. The former constitute a part of what might be called the
'active' pantheon of the time. Deities that are actually invoked by
contracting parties for whatever purpose are such as are endowed with
real significance; and if any of these are not mentioned in the
historical texts proper, the omission is due to the lack of material.
The testimony of the legal documents in this respect is fully as valid
as is that of the historical texts. In proper names the case is
different. Custom being a prominent, if not a controlling, factor in the
giving of names, it may happen that the deity appearing as an element in
a name is one who, for various reasons, is no longer worshipped, or
whose worship has diminished in significance at the time we meet with
the name. Again, deities of very restricted local fame, deities that
occupy the inferior rank of mere spirits or demons in the theological
system of the Babylonians, may still be incorporated in proper names.
Lastly, in view of the descriptive epithets by which some deities are
often known, as much as by their real names, it frequently happens in
the case of proper names that a deity otherwise known is designated by
one of his attributes. Thus we find in legal documents of the second
period a goddess, Da-mu-gal, who is none other than the well-known Gula,
the great healing deity; Ud-zal, who is identical with Ninib, and so
written as the god of 'the rising sun';[185] and Mar-tu (lit., 'the west
god'), which is a designation of Ramman.[186] Bearing in mind all these
considerations, we find in the tablets of the first period, so far as
published,[187] the same deities that are met with in the historical
inscriptions: En-lil, Bau, En-zu (or Sin), Nin-girsu, Nin-gish-zida,
Nin-mar, Nana, Nina, Shul-pa-uddu, and others. No doubt a complete
publication of the Telloh archives will furnish some--not many--new
deities not occurring in the historical texts of this period. A rather
curious feature, illustrated by these temple archives, and one upon
which we shall have occasion to dwell, is the divine honors that appear
to have been paid towards the end of the first period of Babylonian
history to some of the earlier rulers, notably Gudea and Dungi.[188]
Alongside of wine, oil, wheat, sheep, etc., offered to Bau,
Nin-gish-zida, and Shul-pa-uddu, the great kings and _patesis_ of the
past are honored. More than this, sanctuaries sacred to these rulers are
erected, and in other respects they are placed on a footing of equality
with the great gods of the period. Passing on to the lists and the legal
documents of the second period,[189] we may note that the gods in whose
name the oath is taken are chiefly Marduk, Shamash,[190] A, Ramman, and
Sin. Generally two or three are mentioned, and often the name of the
reigning king is added to lend further solemnity to the oath. Other gods
directly introduced are Nana, Ishtar, Nebo, Tashmitum, and Sarpanitum,
after whom the years are at times designated, probably in consequence of
some special honors accorded to the gods. The standing phrase is 'the
year of the throne,' or simply 'the year' of such and such a deity.
Nin-mar appears in the days of Hammurabi as the daughter of Marduk.
Among gods appearing for the first time are Khusha[191], Nun-gal, and
Zamama. Mentioned in connection with the gates of the temple where the
judges held court, the association of Khusha with Marduk, Shamash, Sin,
and Nin-mar points to a considerable degree of prominence enjoyed by
this deity. Of his nature and origin, however, we know nothing. Nun-gal
signifies the 'great chief.' His temple stood in Sippar,[192] and from
this we may conclude that he was one of the minor gods of the place
whose original significance becomes obscured by the side of the
all-powerful patron of Sippar--the sun-god. A syllabary describes the
god as a 'raging' deity, a description that suggests solar functions.
Nun-gal appears, therefore, to be the ideograph proper to a deity that
symbolized, like Nergal, Ninib, and A, some phase of the sun. The
disappearance of the god would thus be naturally accounted for, in view
of the tendency that we have found characteristic of the religion,
whereby powerful gods absorb the functions of weaker ones whose
attributes resemble their own. But while the god disappears, the name
survives. Nun-gal with the plural sign attached becomes a collective
designation for a group of powerful demons.[193] In this survival and
use of the name we have an interesting example of the manner in which,
by a species of differentiation, local gods, unable to maintain
themselves by the side of more powerful rivals, sink to the lower grade
of demons, either beneficent or noxious. In this grade, too,
distinctions are made, as will be pointed out at the proper place. There
is a 'pantheon' of demons as well as of gods in the Babylonian theology.
Nun-gal accordingly recovers some of his lost dignity by becoming an
exceptionally powerful demon--so powerful as to confer his name upon an
entire class. The god Zamama appears in connection with a date attached
to a legal document of the days of Hammurabi. The building of a
sanctuary in honor of this deity and his consort was of sufficient
importance to make the year known by this event. Zamama is occasionally
mentioned in the religious hymns. He belongs to the deities that form a
kind of court around Marduk. From syllabaries, we learn that he was a
form of the sun-god, worshipped in the city of Kish in northern
Babylonia, and it also appears that he was identified at one period with
Ninib. The temple to Zamama--perhaps only a shrine--stood in the city of
Kish, which was remodeled by Hammurabi. The shrine, or temple, bore the
significant name 'house of the warrior's glory.' The warrior is of
course the god, and the name accordingly shows clearly the character of
the god in whose honor the sanctuary was built. Elsewhere, he is
explicitly called a 'god of battle.' Associated with Zamama of Kish was
his consort, who, however, is merely termed again in a general way,
'Ninni,' _i.e._, 'the lady.' In the case of such a deity as Zamama, it
is evident that the absence of the name in historical texts is
accidental, and that we may expect to come across it with the increase
of historical material. In the proper names, all of the prominent
deities discussed in this and the previous chapters are found, though
with some notable exceptions. Anu, _e.g._, is not met with as an element
in proper names, but among those occurring may be mentioned Shamash, A,
Ishtar, Ramman (also under the forms Im-me-ru and Mar-tu), Marduk,
sometimes called Sag-ila after his temple in Babylon, Nabu, Ishum,
Shala, Bau, Nin-ib, Nin-girsu, Sin, Bunene, Annuit, and Ea. Among gods
appearing for the first time in connection with the names, it is
sufficient to record a goddess Shubula, who from other sources[194] we
know was the local patron of the city Shumdula, a goddess Bashtum,[195]
a goddess Mamu (a form of Gula), Am-na-na, Lugal-ki-mu-na, E-la-li
(perhaps an epithet for the fire-god Gibil), Ul-mash-shi-tum, and a
serpent god Sir. Most of these may be safely put down as of purely local
origin and jurisdiction, and it is hardly likely that any of them embody
an idea not already covered by those which we have discussed. From the
lists of gods prepared by the Babylonian scholars, it is clear that the
number of local deities whose names at least survived to a late period
was exceedingly large, ranging in the thousands; and since, as seems
likely, these lists were prepared (as so much of the lexicographical
literature) on the basis of the temple lists and of the commercial and
legal documents, we may conclude that all, or at any rate most, of these
deities were in use as elements in proper names, without, however,
having much importance beyond this incorporation.
FOOTNOTES:
[183] The museums of Europe and America have secured a large proportion
of these through purchase.
[184] The longer names consist of three elements: subject,
verb, and object. The deity is generally the subject; _e.g._,
Sinacherib=Sin-akhe-irba, _i.e._, may the god Sin increase the brothers.
But there are many variations. So the imperative of the verb is often
used, and in that case, the deity is in the vocative case. Instead of
three elements, there are frequently only two, a deity and a participle
or an adjective; _e.g._, Sin-magir, _i.e._, Sin is favorable, or a
person is called 'the son' or 'the servant' of a god. The name of the
deity alone may also constitute a proper name; and many names of course
do not contain the mention of a deity at all, though such names are
often abbreviations from longer ones in which some god was introduced.
[185] Jensen, _Kosmologie_, p. 458.
[186] Arnold, _Ancient Babylonian Temple Records_, p. 5, is of the
opinion that Id-nik-mar-tu is also a designation of Ramman. His view is
plausible, but it still remains to be proved.
[187] Scheil, "Le Culte de Gudea sous le II^e Dynastie d'Ur" (_Recueil
des Travaux, etc._ xviii. 64-74). W. R. Arnold, _Ancient Babylonian
Temple Records_ (New York, 1896). The Telloh tablets appear to be
largely lists of offerings made to the temples at Lagash, and temple
accounts. (See now Reisner, Tempelurkunden aus Telloh (Berlin, 1901).)
[188] See besides Scheil's article (above), Lehmann's note, _Zeits. fuer
Assyr._ x. 381.
[189] Our knowledge of the documents of this period is due chiefly to
Strassmaier and Meissner.
[190] At times under rather curious forms, _e.g._, Shush-sha;
Strassmaier, Warka, no. 30, l. 21. The form Sha-ash-sha also occurs in
nos. 43 and 105 (_cf._ Meissner's note, _Beitraege zum Altbabylonischen
Privatrecht_, p. 156).
[191] Meissner, no. 42. Also in a proper name, Khusha-ilu, _i.e._,
'Khusha is god.'
[192] Meissner, nos. 40 and 118.
[193] See chapter xi.
[194] IIR. 60, 18a. Pinches (_Journal Victoria Institute_, xxviii. 36
reads Shu-gid-la; Hommel, _ib._ 36, Shu-sil-la).
[195] For this deity, see a paper by the writer, "The Element _Bosheth_
in Hebrew Proper Names," in the _Journal of Bibl. Liter._ xiii. 20-30.