The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria Part 10

Anu, Bel, and Ea.

The theory of the triad succeeds in maintaining its hold upon Babylonian minds from a certain period on, through all political and intellectual vicissitudes. To invoke Anu, Bel, and Ea becomes a standing formula that the rulers of Babylonia as well as of a.s.syria are fond of employing.

These three are the great G.o.ds _par excellence_. They occupy a place of their own. The kings do not feel as close to them as to Marduk, or to Ashur, or even to the sun-G.o.d, or to the moon-G.o.d. The invocation of the triad partakes more of a formal character, as though in giving to these three G.o.ds the first place, the writers felt that they were following an ancient precedent that had more of a theoretical than a practical value for their days. So among a.s.syrian rulers, Ashur-rish-is.h.i.+ (_c._ 1150 B.C.) derives his right to the throne from the authority with which he is invested by the triad. Again, in the formal curses which the kings called down upon the destroyers of the inscriptions or statues that they set up, the appeal to Anu, Bel, and Ea is made. Ashurnasirbal calls upon the triad not to listen to the prayers of such as deface his monuments.

Sargon has an interesting statement in one of his inscriptions, according to which the names of the months were fixed by Anu, Bel, and Ea. This 'archaeological' theory ill.u.s.trates very well the extraneous position occupied by the triad. The months, as we shall see, are sacred, each to a different G.o.d. The G.o.ds thus distinguished are the ones that are directly concerned in the fortunes of the state,--Sin, Ashur, Ishtar, and the like. Anu, Bel, and Ea are not in the list, and the tradition, or rather the dogma according to which they a.s.sign the names is evidently an attempt to make good this omission by placing them, as it were, beyond the reach of the calendar. In short, so far as the historical texts are concerned which reflect the popular beliefs, the triad represents a theological doctrine rather than a living force. In combination, Anu, Bel, and Ea did not mean as much, nor the same thing, to a Babylonian or an a.s.syrian, as when he said Marduk, or Nabu, or Ashur, or Sin, as the case might be. It was different when addressing these G.o.ds individually, as was occasionally done. The a.s.syrians were rather fond of introducing Anu by himself in their prayers, and the Babylonians were prompted to a frequent mention of Ea by virtue of his relations.h.i.+p to Marduk, but when this was done Anu and Ea meant something different than when mentioned in one breath along with Bel.

Belit.

One might have supposed that when Bel became Marduk, the consort of Bel would also become Marduk's consort. Such, however, does not appear to be the case, at least so far as the epoch of Hammurabi is concerned. When he calls himself 'the beloved shepherd of Belit,' it is the wife of the old Bel that is meant, and so when Agumkakrimi mentions Bel and Belit together, as the G.o.ds that decree his fate on earth, there is no doubt as to what Belit is meant. In later days, however, and in a.s.syria more particularly, there seems to be a tendency towards generalizing the name (much as that of Bel) to the extent of applying it in the sense of 'mistress' to the consort of the chief G.o.d of the pantheon; and that happening to be Ashur in a.s.syria accounts for the fact, which might otherwise appear strange, that Tiglathpileser I. (_c._ 1140 B.C.) calls Belit the 'lofty consort and beloved of Ashur.' Ashurbanabal (668-626 B.C.) does the same, and even goes further and declares himself to be the offspring of Ashur and Belit. On the other hand, in the interval between these two kings we find Shalmaneser II. (860-825 B.C.) calling Belit 'the mother of the great G.o.ds' and 'the wife of Bel,' making it evident that the old Belit of the south is meant, and since Ashurbanabal on one occasion also calls the G.o.ddess 'the beloved of Bel,'[155] it follows that in his days two Belits were still recognized, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say two uses of the term,--one specifically for the consort of the Babylonian Bel, the G.o.d of the earth, with his ancient seat at Nippur; the other of a more general character, though still limited as 'lady' to the consort of the _chief_ G.o.ds, just as 'Bel,' while acquiring the general sense of 'lord,' was restricted in actual usage to the _greatest_ 'lords' only. An indication of this distinction, somewhat parallel to the addition of Dagan to Bel, to indicate that the old Bel was meant,[156] appears in the sobriquet 'of Babylonia,'[157] which Ashurbanabal gives to the G.o.ddess in one place where the old Belit is meant. Under the influence of this a.s.syrian extension of the term, Nabopola.s.sar, in the Neo-Babylonian period, applies the t.i.tle to the consort of Shamash at Sippar, but he is careful to specify 'Belit of Sippar,' in order to avoid misunderstanding.

Besides being applied to the consorts of Ashur and of Shamash, 'Belit,'

in the general sense of 'mistress,' is applied only to another G.o.ddess, the great Ishtar of the a.s.syrian pantheon--generally, however, as a t.i.tle, not as a name of the G.o.ddess. The important position she occupied in the a.s.syrian pantheon seemed to justify this further modification and extension in the use of the term. Occasionally, Ishtar is directly and expressly called 'Belit.' So, Ashurbanabal speaks of a temple that he has founded in Calah to 'Belit mati,'[158] 'the Belit (or lady) of the land,' where the context speaks in favor of identifying Belit with the great G.o.ddess Ishtar. Again Ashurbanabal, in a dedicatory inscription giving an account of improvements made in the temple of Ishtar, addresses the G.o.ddess as Belit 'lady of lands, dwelling in E-mash-mash.'[159]

Anu and Anatum.

In the second period of Babylonian history the wors.h.i.+p of the supreme G.o.d of heaven becomes even more closely bound up with Anu's position as the first member of the inseparable triad than was the case in the first period. For Hammurabi, as has been noted, Anu is only a half-real figure who in a.s.sociation with Bel is represented as giving his endors.e.m.e.nt to the king's authority.[160] The manner in which Agumkakrimi introduces Anu is no less characteristic for the age of Hammurabi and his successors. At the beginning of his long inscription,[161] he enumerates the chief G.o.ds under whose protection he places himself. As a Ca.s.sitic ruler, he a.s.signs the first place to the chief Ca.s.site deity, Shukamuna, a G.o.d of war whom the Babylonian scholars identified with their own Nergal.[162] Shukamuna is followed by the triad Anu, Bel, and Ea. Marduk occupies a fifth place, after which comes a second triad, Sin, Shamash "the mighty hero," and Ishtar[163] "the strong one among the G.o.ds." The inscription is devoted to the king's successful capture of the statues of Marduk and Sarpanitum out of the hands of the Khani, and the restoration of the shrines of these deities at Babylon. At the close, the king Agumkakrimi appeals to Anu and his consort Anatum,[164] who are asked to bless the king in heaven, to Bel and Belit who are asked to fix his fate on earth, and to Ea and Damkina, inhabiting the deep,[165] who are to grant him long life. As in the beginning of the inscription, the thought of the triad--Anu, Bel, Ea--evidently underlies this interesting invocation, but at the same time the a.s.sociation of a consort with Anu brings the G.o.d into closer relations.h.i.+p with his fellows. He takes on--if the contradiction in terms be permitted--a more human shape. His consort bears a name that is simply the feminine form to Anu, just as Belit is the feminine to Bel. 'Anu,' signifying 'the one on high,'--a feminine to it was formed, manifestly under the influence of the notion that every G.o.d must have a consort of some kind. After Agumkakrimi no further mention of Anatum occurs, neither in the inscriptions of Babylonian nor of a.s.syrian rulers. We are permitted to conclude, therefore, that Anatum was a product of the schools, and one that never took a strong hold on the popular mind. Among the a.s.syrian kings who in other respects also show less dependence upon the doctrines evolved in the Babylonian schools, and whose inscriptions reflect to a greater degree the purely popular phases of the faith, we find Anu mentioned with tolerable frequency, and in a manner that betrays less emphasis upon the position of the G.o.d as a member of the triad. Still, it is rather curious that he does not appear even in the inscriptions of the a.s.syrian kings by himself, but in a.s.sociation with another G.o.d. Thus Tiglathpileser I. (_c._ 1130 B.C.) gives an elaborate account of an old temple to Anu and Ramman in the city of Ashur that he restores to more than its former grandeur.[166] This dedication of a temple to two deities is unusual. Ramman is the G.o.d of thunder and storms, whose seat of course is in the heavens. He stands close, therefore, to Anu, the supreme G.o.d of heaven. In the religious productions, this relations.h.i.+p is expressed by making Ramman the son of Anu. From a pa.s.sage descriptive of this temple it would appear that the old temple founded by King Samsi-Ramman, who lived several centuries before Tiglathpileser, was dedicated to Ramman. It looks, therefore, as though the a.s.sociation of Anu with Ramman was the work of the later king. What his motive was in thus combining Anu with Ramman it is difficult to say, but in his account of the restoration of the sanctuary, he so consistently mentions Anu and Ramman together,[167] designating them unitedly as 'the great G.o.ds my lords,' that one gains the impression that the two were inseparable in his mind, Ramman being perhaps regarded simply as a manifestation of Anu. The supposition finds some support in the closing words of the inscription, where, in hurling the usual curses upon those who should attempt to destroy his monuments, he invokes Ramman alone, whom he asks to punish the offender by his darts, by hunger, by distress of every kind, and by death.

Elsewhere Anu appears in a.s.sociation with Dagan, of whom we shall have occasion to speak in the chapter on the a.s.syrian pantheon. Suffice it to say here that Dagan in this connection is an equivalent of Bel. When, therefore, Ashurbanabal and Sargon call themselves 'the favorite of Anu and Dagan,' it is the same as though they spoke of Anu and Bel. Apart from this, Anu only appears when a part or the whole of the a.s.syrian pantheon is enumerated. Thus we come across Anu, Ramman, and Ishtar as the chief G.o.ds of the city of Ashur,[168] and again Anu, Ashur, Shamash, Ramman, and Ishtar.[169] Finally, Sargon who names the eight gates of his palace after the chief G.o.ds of the land does not omit Anu, whom he describes as the 'one who blesses his handiwork.' Otherwise we have Anu only when the triad Anu, Bel, and Ea is invoked. Once Ramman-nirari I.

(_c._ 1325 B.C.) adds Ishtar to the triad. After Sargon we no longer find Anu's name at all among the deities wors.h.i.+pped in a.s.syria. On the whole, then, Anu's claim to reverence rests in a.s.syria as well as in Babylonia upon his position in the triad, and while a.s.syria is less influenced by the ancient system devised in Babylonia whereby Anu, Bel, and Ea come to be the representatives of the three kingdoms among which the G.o.ds are distributed, still Anu as a specific deity, ruling in his own right, remains a rather shadowy figure. The only temple in his honor is the one which he shares with Ramman, and which, as noted, appears to have been originally devoted to the service of the latter. One other factor that must be taken into account to explain the disappearance of Anu is the gradual enforcement of Ashur's claim to the absolute heads.h.i.+p of the a.s.syrian pantheon. Either Anu or Ashur had to be a.s.signed to this place, and when circ.u.mstances decided the issue in favor of Ashur, there was no place worthy of Anu as a specific deity. Ashur usurps in a measure the role of Anu. So far as Babylonia was concerned, there was still in the twelfth century B.C. a city 'Der' which is called the 'city of Anu.' The city is probably of very ancient foundation, and its continued a.s.sociation with Anu forms an interesting survival of a local conception that appears to have been once current of the G.o.d.

In the religious literature, especially in that part of it which furnishes us with the scholastic recastings of the popular traditions, Anu is a much more prominent figure than in the historical texts. From being merely the personification of the heavens, he is raised to the still higher dignity of symbolizing, as Jensen puts it,[170] the abstract principle of which both the heavens and earth are emanations.

All the earliest G.o.ds conceived of by popular tradition as existing from the beginning of things are viewed as manifestations of Anu, or of Anu and Anatum in combination. He gives ear to prayers, but he is not approached directly. The G.o.ds are his messengers, who come and give him report of what is going on.[171] He is a G.o.d for the G.o.ds rather than for men. When his daughter Ishtar is insulted she appeals to her father Anu; and when the G.o.ds are terrified they take refuge with Anu. Armed with a mighty weapon whose a.s.sault nothing can withstand, Anu is surrounded by a host of G.o.ds and powerful spirits who are ready to follow his lead and to do his service.

Ramman.

With Ramman we reach a deity whose introduction into the Babylonian pantheon and whose position therein appears to be entirely independent of Marduk.

The reading of the name as Ramman (or Rammanu) is provisional. The ideograph _Im_ with which the name is written designates the G.o.d as the power presiding over storms; and while it is certain that, in a.s.syria at least, the G.o.d was known as Ramman, which means 'the thunderer,' it is possible that this was an epithet given to the G.o.d, and not his real or his oldest name. It is significant that in the El-Amarna tablets (_c._ 1500 B.C.), where the G.o.d _Im_ appears as an element in proper names, the reading _Addu_ is vouched for, and this form has been justly brought into connection with a very famous solar deity of Syria,--Hadad. The wors.h.i.+p of Hadad, we know, was widely spread in Palestine and Syria, and there is conclusive evidence that Hadad (or Adad), as a name for the G.o.d _Im_, was known in Babylonia. Professor Oppert is of the opinion that Adad represents the oldest name of the G.o.d. Quite recently the proposition has been made that the real name of the deity was _Immeru_.[172] The ideograph in this case would arise through the curtailment of the name (as is frequently the case in the cuneiform syllabary), and the a.s.sociation of _Im_ with 'storm' and 'wind' would be directly dependent upon the nature of the deity in question. The material at hand is not sufficient for deciding the question. Besides Immeru, Adad, and Ramman, the deity was also known as _Mer_--connected apparently with Immeru.[173] So much is certain, that Ramman appears to have been the name currently used in a.s.syria for this G.o.d. Adad may have been employed occasionally in Babylonia, as was _Mer_ in proper names, but that it was not the common designation is proved by a list of G.o.ds (published by Bezold[174]) in which the _foreign_ equivalent for _Im_ is set down as Adad. We may for the present, therefore, retain Ramman, while bearing in mind that we have only proof of its being an epithet applied to the G.o.d, not necessarily his real name and in all probabilities not the oldest name.

We meet with the G.o.d for the first time in the hymn to which reference has already been made,[175] and where the G.o.d is mentioned together with Shamash. If the suggestion above thrown out is correct, that the hymn is older than the days of Hammurabi, Ramman too would be older than his first mention in historical texts. However, it is worthy of note that in this hymn each of the other G.o.ds mentioned receives a line for himself, and that Ramman is the only one who is tacked on to another deity. It is not strange that in making copies of older texts, especially those of a religious character, the scribes should have introduced certain modifications. At all events, the G.o.d does not acquire any degree of prominence until the days of Hammurabi; so that whatever his age and origin, he belongs in a peculiar sense to the pantheon of Hammurabi rather than to that of the old Babylonian period. The successor of Hammurabi, Samsu-iluna, dedicates a fort, known as Dur-padda, to Ramman whom he addresses as his 'helper', along with several other G.o.ds.

Despite this fact, his wors.h.i.+p does not appear to have been very firmly established in Babylonia, for Agumkakrimi, who follows upon Samsu-iluna, does not make mention of Ramman. During the reign of the Ca.s.site dynasty, however, the wors.h.i.+p of Ramman appears to have gained a stronger foothold. Several kings of this dynasty have incorporated the name of this deity into their own names, and in an inscription dealing with events that transpired in the reign of one of these kings, Ramman occupies a prominent place. Immediately after the great triad, Anu, Bel, and Ea, there is enumerated a second, Sin, Shamash, and Ramman, and only then there follows Marduk.[176] More than this, Ramman is introduced for a second time in conjunction with Shamash, as in the hymn of Hammurabi.

The two are appealed to as 'the divine lords of justice.' The conqueror of the Ca.s.sites, Nebuchadnezzar I., also holds Ramman in high esteem.

For him, Ramman is the G.o.d of battle who in companions.h.i.+p with Ishtar abets the king in his great undertakings. He addresses Ramman as the great lord of heaven, the lord of subterranean waters and of rain, whose curse is invoked against the one who sets aside the decrees of Nebuchadnezzar or who defaces the monument the king sets up. While acknowledging the supremacy of Marduk, upon whose appeal he proceeds to Babylonia to rid the country of its oppressors, Nebuchadnezzar nevertheless shows remarkable partiality for Ramman, perhaps as a matter of policy to offset the supposed preference shown by Ramman towards the previous dynasty. Ramman with Nergal and Nana are also enumerated as the special G.o.ds of Namar--a Babylonian district which caused the king considerable annoyance, and which may have been one of the strongholds whence the Ca.s.sitic kings continued their attacks upon Nebuchadnezzar.

In order to determine more precisely the nature of this deity, it is necessary to turn to a.s.syria, where his wors.h.i.+p dates from the very earliest times, and where he appears consistently in a single role,--that of the G.o.d of storms, more particularly of thunder and lightning. The oldest a.s.syrian ruler known to us is Samsi-Ramman (_c._ 1850 B.C.), whose name, containing the G.o.d as one of its elements, points to the antiquity of the cult of Ramman in the north. Another king who has frequently been mentioned, Ramman-nirari (_i.e._, Ramman is my helper), bears evidence to the same effect, and Tiglathpileser I. speaks of a temple to Ramman whose foundation carries us back several centuries beyond the period of these two kings--almost to the days of Hammurabi.

The theory has accordingly been advanced that the wors.h.i.+p of Ramman came to Babylonia from the north, and since the cult of this same G.o.d is found in Damascus and extended as far south as the plain of Jezreel, the further conclusion has been drawn that the G.o.d is of Aramaic origin and was brought to a.s.syria through Aramaic tribes who had settled in parts of a.s.syria. The great antiquity of the Ramman cult in a.s.syria argues against a foreign origin. It seems more plausible to regard the Ramman cult as indigenous to a.s.syria; but reverting to a time when the population of the north was still in the nomadic state of civilization, the cult may have been carried to the west by some of the wandering tribes who afterwards established themselves around Damascus. Up to a late period Aramaic hordes appear from time to time in western a.s.syria; and in a higher stage of culture, contact between Aramaeans and a.s.syrians was maintained by commercial intercourse and by warfare. Since the earliest mention of Ramman's cult is in the city of Ashur, it may be that he was originally connected with that place. As already intimated, he was essentially a storm-G.o.d, whose manifestation was seen in the thunder and lightning, and the G.o.d was known not merely as 'the thunderer,' but also as Barku, _i.e._, lightning. Perhaps it was because of this that he was also brought into a.s.sociation with the great light of heaven,--the sun-G.o.d. In many mythologies, the sun and lightning are regarded as correlated forces. At all events, the frequent a.s.sociation of Shamash and Ramman cannot have been accidental. This double nature of Ramman--as a solar deity representing some particular phase of the sun that escapes us and as a storm-G.o.d--still peers through the inscription above noted from the Ca.s.site period where Ramman is called 'the lord of justice,'--an attribute peculiar to the sun-G.o.d; but in a.s.syria his role as the thunder-and storm-G.o.d overshadows any other attributes that he may have had.

There are two aspects to rainstorms in Babylonia. The flooding of the fields while committing much havoc is essential to the fertility of the soil. Ramman is therefore the carrier of blessings to the cities, the one who supplies wells and fields with water; but the destructive character of the rain and thunder and lightning are much more strongly emphasized than their beneficent aspects. Even though the fields be flooded, Ramman can cause thorns to grow instead of herbs. The same ideograph _Im_ that signifies Ramman also means distress. When the failure of the crops brings in its wake hunger and desolation, it is the 'G.o.d of the clouds,' the 'G.o.d of rain,' the 'G.o.d of the overflow,' whose wrath has thus manifested itself. It is he who (as a hymn puts it) 'has eaten the land.' No wonder that the 'roar' of the G.o.d is described as 'powerful,' and that he is asked to stand at the right side of the pet.i.tioner and grant protection. When Ramman lets his voice resound, misfortune is at hand. It was natural that he who thus presided over the battle of the elements should come to be conceived essentially as a G.o.d of war to a people whose chief occupation grew to be conquest. As such he appears constantly in the inscriptions of a.s.syrian kings, and to such a degree as to be a formidable rival, at times, to the head of the a.s.syrian pantheon. The final victory of the a.s.syrian arms is generally attributed to Ashur alone, but just before the battle and in the midst of the fray, Ramman's presence is felt almost as forcibly as that of Ashur. He shares with the latter the honor of invocations and sacrifices at such critical moments. In this capacity Ramman is so essentially an a.s.syrian G.o.d that it will be proper to dwell upon him again in the following chapter, when the specially a.s.syrian phases of the religion we are investigating will be taken up. The consort of Ramman also, the G.o.ddess Shala, will best be treated of in connection with the a.s.syrian phases of the Ramman cult.

Of the other G.o.ds whose names occur in the inscriptions of Hammurabi, but little of a special character is to be noted. The attributes that he gives them do not differ from those that we come across in the texts of his predecessors. It is sufficient, therefore, to enumerate them. The longest list is furnished by the hymn which has already been referred to. The text is unfortunately fragmentary, and so we cannot be sure that the names embrace the entire pantheon wors.h.i.+pped by him. The list opens with Bel (who, as we have seen, is the old Bel of Nippur); then follow Sin, Ninib, Ishtar, Shamash, Ramman. Here the break in the tablet begins and, when the text again becomes intelligible, a deity is praised in such extravagant terms that one is tempted to conclude that Hammurabi has added to an old hymn a paean to his favorite Marduk[177]. To Bel is given the honor of having granted royal dignity to the king. Sin has given the king his princely glory; from Ninib, the king has received a powerful weapon; Ishtar fixes the battle array, while Shamash and Ramman hold themselves at the service of the king. With this list, however, we are far from having exhausted the pantheon as it had developed in the days of Hammurabi. From the inscriptions of his successors we are permitted to add the following: Nin-khar-sag, Nergal, and Lugal-mit-tu, furnished by Samsu-iluna; Shukamuna, by Agumkakrimi; and pa.s.sing down to the period of the Ca.s.site dynasty, we have in addition Nin-dim-su, Ba-kad, Pap-u, Belit-ekalli, Shumalia.[178]

During the Ca.s.sitic rule, Marduk does not play the prominent part that he did under the native rulers, but he is restored to his position by Nebuchadnezzar I., who, it will be recalled, succeeds in driving the Ca.s.sites out of power. But besides Marduk, Nebuchadnezzar invokes a large number of other deities. For purposes of comparison with the pantheon of Hammurabi, and of his immediate successors, I give the complete list and in the order mentioned by him in the only inscription that we have of this king. They are Ninib, Gula, Ramman, Shumalia, Nergal, s.h.i.+r, Shubu, Sin, Belit of Akkad. Moreover, Anu is referred to as the especial G.o.d of Der, and a G.o.ddess Eria[179] is wors.h.i.+pped in Elam. Pa.s.sing still further down, we obtain as additional names, Malik and Bunene, from the inscription of Nabubaliddin (_c._ 883-852 B.C.).[180]

We may divide this long period from Hammurabi down to the time that the governors of Babylonia became mere puppets of the a.s.syrian rulers into three sections: (1) Hammurabi and his successors, (2) the Ca.s.site dynasty, (3) the restoration of native rulers to the throne. A comparison of the names furnished by the inscriptions from these three sections shows that the G.o.ds common to all are Marduk, Bel, Shamash, Ramman. But, in addition, our investigations have shown that we are justified in adding the following as forming part of the Babylonian pantheon during this entire period: Sarpanitum, Belit, Tashmitum, Sin, Ninib, Ishtar, Nergal, Nin-khar-sag, and the two other members of the triad, Anu and Ea, with their consorts, Anatum and Damkina. All these G.o.ds and G.o.ddesses are found in the texts from the first and third section of the period, and the absence of some of them from texts of the second section is simply due to the smaller amount of material that we have for the history of the Ca.s.site dynasty in Babylonia. Some of the deities in this list, which is far from being exhaustive,[181] are foreign, so _e.g._, Shukamuna and Shumalia, who belong to the Ca.s.sitic pantheon; others are of purely local significance, as s.h.i.+r and Shubu.[182] As for Sin, Ninib, and Ishtar, the wors.h.i.+p of none of these deities a.s.sumes any great degree of prominence during this period. No doubt the local cult was continued at the old centers much as before, but except for an occasional invocation, especially in the closing paragraphs of an inscription, where the writers were fond of grouping a large array of deities so as to render more impressive the curses upon enemies and vilifiers, with which the inscriptions usually terminated, they do not figure in the official writings of the time. Of Sin, it is of some importance to note that under the Ca.s.site dynasty he stands already at the head of a second cla.s.s of triads which consists of Sin, Shamash, and Ramman, or Ishtar (see note 3 on page 152), and that through the inscription of Nebuchadnezzar I., we learn of an additional district of Babylonia,--that of Bit-Khabban, where in a.s.sociation with Belit of Akkad, the consort of the older Bel, he was wors.h.i.+pped as the patron deity. Nebuchadnezzar himself does not enumerate Sin among the chief G.o.ds. Ninib appears in the familiar role as a G.o.d of war. After Hammurabi he is only mentioned once in inscriptions of the Ca.s.sitic period and then again in the days of Nebuchadnezzar I., who a.s.signs a prominent place to him. It is Ninib who, with the t.i.tle 'king of heaven and earth,' leads off in the long list of G.o.ds whose curses are invoked upon the king's opponents. Similarly, the belligerent character of Ishtar is the only phase of the G.o.ddess dwelt upon during this period.

While for Agumkakrimi, she still occupies a comparatively inferior rank, coming seventh in his list, Nebuchadnezzar places her immediately after Anu and before Ramman and Marduk. This advance foreshadows the superior role that she is destined to play in the pantheon during the period of a.s.syrian supremacy. The cult of Nergal does not figure prominently during this period. In fact, so far as the historical texts go, he disappears from the scene till the time of Nebuchadnezzar I., when he is incidentally invoked in a group with Ramman and Nana as the G.o.ds of a district in Babylonia known as Namar. Exactly where Namar lay has not yet been ascertained. Since Nergal, as was shown in the previous chapter, was the local patron of Cuthah, it may be that the latter city was included in the Namar district. At all events, we may conclude from the silence of the texts as to Nergal, that Cuthah played no conspicuous part in the empire formed of the Babylonian states, and that the cult of Nergal, apart from the a.s.sociation of the deity in religious texts with the lower world, did not during this entire period extend beyond local proportions. Lastly, it is interesting to note that Samsu-iluna, the son of Hammurabi, refers to Belit of Nippur as Nin-khar-sag, which we have seen was one of her oldest t.i.tles.

FOOTNOTES:

[116] The name is also written Ma-ru-duk, which points to its having been regarded (for which there is other evidence) as a compound of _maru_, 'son,' and an element, _duk_(_u_), which in religious and other texts designates the 'glorious chamber' in which the G.o.d determines the fate of humanity. Such an 'etymology' is, however, merely a play upon the name, similar to the plays upon proper names found in the Old Testament. The real etymology is unknown. The form Marduk is Semitic, and points to an underlying stem, _rdk_. Marduk appears under a variety of names which will be taken up at their proper place. See Schrader's _a.s.syrisch-Babyl. Keilschriften_, p. 129; and the same author's _Cuneiform Inscrip. and the O. T._ (p. 422) for other etymologies.

[117] Hommel's view that Gish-galla, in Gudea's inscriptions, is Babylon lacks convincing evidence, but the city may be as old as Gudea's days for all that.

[118] Near Sippar.

[119] _Bel matati_.

[120] Sayce, _Religion of the Ancient Babylonians_, pp. 98 _seq._; Jensen, _Kosmologie der Babylonier_, p. 88.

[121] So Delitzsch, _Beitrage sur a.s.syriologie_, ii. 623. The first part of the name is also used to designate the 'young bullock,' and it is possible, therefore, that the G.o.d was pictured in this way, as both Anu and Sin are occasionally called 'bulls.'

[122] Louvre Inscription II, col ii. ll. 12-17.

[123] There is also a G.o.ddess _Eria_ wors.h.i.+pped in Elam, who may be identical with Erua. The scribes in the days of Nebuchadnezzar (_c._ 1140 B.C.), at least, appear to have thought so, for they a.s.sociate her with Bel, just as Sarpanitum is a.s.sociated with Del-Marduk. (See the Inscription VR. 57, col. ii. ll. 11, 12.)

[124] Whether, however, this was the real meaning of the name is doubtful, for the name of the G.o.ddess is also written Aru and Arua, which points to a different verbal stem.

[125] See below under Tashmitum.

[126] There are indications also of an arrested amalgamation of Erua-Sarpanitum with Tashmitum, the wife of Nabu. (See Sayce, _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 112.)

[127] Rawlinson, ii. 60, 30.

[128] _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 117.

[129] See further on, _sub_ Ea.

[130] _Kosmologie_, p. 239.

[131] _Sub_ Nusku, chapter xiii.

[132] Tiele, _Geschichte d. Religion i. Alterthum_, i. 171 and 188, is of the opinion that Nabu is a late deity whose wors.h.i.+p dates from a period considerably subsequent to Hammurabi. This conclusion from the non-occurrence of the G.o.d in early inscriptions is not justified. There is no reason why Nabu should have been added as a deity in later times, and in general we must be on our guard against a.s.suming new deities subsequent to Hammurabi. It is much more plausible to a.s.sume the restored popularity of very old ones.

[133] Bel being Marduk, the t.i.tle was equivalent to that of 'governor of Babylonia.'

[134] So, Tiele, _Geschichte d. Religion i. Alterthum_, i. 191.

[135] The Hebrew word for prophet, _nabi_, is of the same stem as the a.s.syrian Nabu, and the popular tradition is placing the last scene in the life of Moses on Mt. Nebo is apparently influenced by the fact that Moses was a _nabi_.

[136] See above, p. 123.

[137] So in the cylinder of Shamash-shum-ukin (Lehmann's publication, pls. viii. _seq._).

[138] _E.g._, in the so-called Grotefend Cylinder, col. ii. 34.

[139] _Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde d. Morgenlandes_, iv. 301-307.

[140] We only know the name through Eusebius' extract from Alexander Polyhistor's digest of Berosus. The form, therefore, cannot be vouched for. The various modern attempts to explain the name have failed (see _e.g._, Lenormant's _Magic und Wahrsagekunst der Chaldaer_, 2d German edition, pp. 376-379). There may be some ultimate connection between Oannes and Jonah (see Trumbull in _Journal of Bibl. Liter._ xl. 58, note).