The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria

M >> Morris Jastrow >> The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61

The combined invocations are found usually at the beginning and at the
end of the inscriptions--at the beginning for invoking the aid of the
gods, at the close for invoking their curses upon those who would
attempt to destroy the ambitious monuments set up by the kings. Often,
however, the narrative is interrupted for the purpose of making
acknowledgment to a larger or smaller series of gods for victory,
granted or hoped for. In these combined references a separate place
belongs to the triad, Anu, Bel, and Ea. While not occupying the
prominent position they have in Babylonian inscriptions, still the kings
often mention Anu, Bel, and Ea separately, or Anu and Bel alone,
ascribing victory to them, putting them down as the originators of the
calendar system, and declaring themselves to have been nominated by them
to rule over Assyria. Sargon, with his antiquarian zeal, appears to have
made an effort to reinstate the triad as a special group in the
pantheon. In general, however, they take their place with other gods. So
Ramman-nirari I. invokes the curse of Ashur, Anu, Bel, Ea, and Ishtar,
together with the Igigi and Anunnaki; but, what is more important,
already at an early period the triad disappears altogether from the
pantheon, except for the artificial attempts of Sargon to revive
interest in them. In both the longer and shorter lists of gods
enumerated by the kings from the time of Tiglathpileser, the triad is
conspicuous for its absence.

As for the other gods, it is to some extent a matter of caprice which
ones happen to be invoked, though just as frequently we see the motive
for selecting certain ones of the pantheon. Thus, when proceeding to
Babylonia for war or sacrifices, the gods of Babylonia are invoked,
either Marduk and Nabu alone, as the chief gods, or Bel (_i.e._,
Marduk), Sarpanitum, Nabu, Tashmitum, Nana, Nergal, with Ashur, or Ashur
and Marduk, or Marduk and Nabu in combination with Ashur. At other times
it depends upon the gods to whom certain kings may be especially
attached, or with whom they may have special dealings in their
inscriptions. Thus Tiglathpileser I., when speaking of the temple of Anu
and Ramman, contents himself with invoking these two gods alone at the
close of his great inscription. Elsewhere, when referring to the special
gods of his city, he combines Anu and Ramman with Ishtar; but again, for
no special reason, his prayer is addressed to Ashur, Shamash, and
Ramman. The pantheon of Ramman-nirari I. consists either of the longer
one above enumerated, or of Anu, Ashur, Shamash, Ramman, and Ishtar. As
we proceed down the centuries, the formal lists at the beginning of
inscriptions have a tendency to grow larger. Ashurnasirbal's pantheon
consists of Bel and Nin-ib, Anu and Dagan, Sin, Anu, Ramman, and, of
course, Ashur, though on special occasions, as when speaking of his
achievements in the chase, he contents himself with a mention of Nin-ib
and Nergal. He loves, too, to vary the style of his inscriptions by
naming various groups of deities in pairs: now Ashur and Shamash, again
Ashur and Nin-ib, or Ashur and Bel; then Shamash and Ramman, or a group
of three deities, Ashur, Shamash, and Ramman, or Sin, Anu, and Ramman.
His successors imitate this example, though each one chooses his own
combinations. Shalmaneser II.'s pantheon embraces Ashur, Anu, Bel, Ea,
Sin, Shamash, Nin-ib, Nergal, Nusku, Belit, and Ishtar--eleven in all.
Sargon's practice varies. The best list is furnished by his account of
the eight gates of his palace and of two walls, which he names after the
gods in the following order:[328]

Shamash, who grants victory. } As the names for the
Ramman, who brings superabundance. } eastern gates.
Bel, who lays foundations. } For the northern gates.
Belit, who brings fertility. }
Anu, who blesses handiwork. } For the western
Ishtar, who causes the inhabitants to flourish. } gates.
Ea, who unlocks fountains. } For the southern
} gates.
Belit ilani,[329] who increases the offspring. }
Ashur, who permits the king to grow old, and protects the troops.--For
the inner wall.
Nin-ib, who lays the foundations of the city.--For the outer wall.

The order here is dictated by the directions of the gates. Elsewhere he
sets up the group Ea, Sin, Shamash, Nabu, Ramman, Nin-ib, and their
consorts.

Sennacherib's fuller group consists of Ashur, Sin, Shamash, Bel (_i.e._,
Marduk), Nabu, Nergal, Ishtar of Nineveh, and Ishtar of Arbela--only
eight. But at the close of one of his building inscriptions[330] he
invokes some twenty deities, adding to these eight, Nusku, Khani, Gaga,
Sherua, Nin-gal, a god Azag-sir, and Nin-ib under three different forms;
but it is evident that most of these are added to give effect and
solemnity. They do not form part of the active pantheon. His successor,
Esarhaddon, sets up various groups. At one time he enumerates Ashur,
Sin, Shamash, Nabu, Marduk, Ishtar of Nineveh, Ishtar of Arbela; at
another he prefers different combinations of these gods. Ashurbanabal is
more consistent than most of the Assyrian rulers, and furnishes at the
same time the best list. While he, too, frequently mentions only a few
deities, grouping three or four together, his longer series consists,
with but one or two exceptions, invariably of the following, and who
always occur in the same order: Ashur, Belit, Sin, Shamash, Ramman, Bel
(_i.e._, Marduk), Nabu, Ishtar of Nineveh, the queen of Kidmuru, Ishtar
of Arbela, Nin-ib, Nergal, and Nusku--thirteen in all. Of these, as we
have seen, only some were actively worshipped at all times in Assyria;
as for the others, the popularity of their cult varied from age to age,
now being actively carried on under the stimulus afforded by the
erection or improvement of an edifice sacred to the god, and again
falling into comparative insignificance; but formally, at least, all
these gods were regarded at all times as forming part of the pantheon of
the 'great gods.' The testimony of Ashurbanabal thus becomes valuable as
a proof that to the latest days of the Assyrian monarchy, the attachment
to these gods was still strong enough to merit the formal
acknowledgments of the king to them on all occasions, and that through
their combined aid the glorious achievements of the past and present
were attained.

FOOTNOTES:

[328] Cylinder, ll. 67-73.

[329] Ea's consort; see above, p. 231.

[330] Meissner-Rost, _Bauinschriften Sanherib's_, p. 99.

CHAPTER XIV.

THE NEO-BABYLONIAN PERIOD.

When upon the fall of the Assyrian empire, in 606 B.C., Babylonia
regained her full measure of independence, Marduk once more obtained
undisputed sway at the head of the pantheon. True, so far as Babylonia
was concerned, Marduk was always the acknowledged head, but during the
period that Assyria held Babylonia in a more or less rigid form of
subjection it was inevitable that Ashur should lower the prestige of
Marduk. When the kings of Assyria paid their respects to Marduk, it was
always as second in rank to Ashur; and, what is more, they claimed
Marduk and the other gods of Babylonia as their own, and as upholders of
their own sovereignty. When the kings feel impelled to invade the
southern districts, they not only claim to be under the protection of
the Babylonian gods, but they carry these gods with them into the land
to be invaded. 'Bel and the gods of Akkad leave Assyria and go to
Babylonia' is the official term in which a campaign against Babylonia is
described.[331] In the eyes of the Babylonians such a haughty assumption
on the part of the Assyrians must have been regarded as humiliating to
Marduk, Nabu, and their associates.

The state of affairs changed when Nebopolassar at the end of the seventh
century once more claimed independent control over Babylonia. Marduk
triumphs over Ashur. He is once more the great god, lord of gods,
supreme king of the Igigi, the father of the Anunnaki--all titles that
the Assyrians were fond of heaping upon Ashur. One feels the anxiety of
Nebopolassar to emphasize the new order of things by attributing once
more to Marduk what was formerly claimed for Ashur. The successor of
Nebopolassar, the great Nebuchadnezzar, continues the policy of his
father. He neglects no opportunity for exalting Marduk as the king, the
creator, the leader of the gods, the lord of everything, the merciful
one, the light of the gods, the all-wise. Nabu shares the honors with
Marduk. Nebopolassar, indeed, accords to Nabu an equal share, and he
does not hesitate at times to place the name Nabu before that of
Marduk.[332] He does not speak of Nabu as the son of Marduk, and seems
to be at particular pains to emphasize the equality of Nabu with Marduk.
In this respect Nebopolassar presents a contrast to Hammurabi, who, it
will be recalled, made an attempt to suppress the Nabu cult.[333]
Nebopolassar, however, does not go to the extent of endeavoring to make
Nabu supersede Marduk. He contents himself with manifesting his
partiality for the former, and it is probably no accident that both his
official name and that of his son contain the god Nabu as one of their
elements, and not Marduk. One is inclined to suspect that this
popularity of the Nabu cult is a trace of Assyrian influence. But
whatever may have been Nebopolassar's intention in exalting Nabu at the
cost of Marduk, Nebuchadnezzar restores the old relationship between the
two. For him Nabu is again merely the son of Marduk, and he honors Nabu
in this capacity. Like the Assyrian Nabu, the god places the sceptre in
the king's hands, but he is, after all, only the supreme messenger of
Marduk. In the closing days of the Babylonian monarchy a more serious
attempt, it would appear, was made to displace Marduk. Nabonnedos formed
the design of replacing both Marduk and Nabu by the cult of Shamash. He
incurs the ill-will of the priests by paying much more attention to the
restoration of the various Shamash temples in Babylonia than would
appear to be consistent with devotion to Marduk. Cyrus, therefore, in
his conquest of Babylonia, sets up the claim of being the savior of
Marduk's honor.[334]

The Neo-Babylonian period may properly be designated as a religious age.
The rulers, anxious to manifest their gratitude to the gods, and
prompted in part, no doubt, by the desire to emulate the glorious
architectural achievements of the Assyrian monarchs, devote themselves
assiduously to the improvement of the great temples of the city of
Babylon, and to the restoration or enlargement of those scattered
throughout the country. Nebopolassar sets the example in this respect,
which is considerably improved upon by Nebuchadnezzar. Over forty
temples and shrines are mentioned in the latter's inscriptions as having
been improved, enlarged, or restored by him; and the last king of
Babylonia, Nabonnedos, endeavors to continue this royal policy of
temple-building. In this respect the Neo-Babylonian rulers present a
contrast to the Assyrian rulers, who were much more concerned in rearing
grand edifices for themselves. While the gods were not neglected in
Assyria, one hears much more of the magnificent palaces erected by the
kings than of temples and shrines. In fact, as compared with Babylonia,
Assyria was poor in the number of her temples. The chief sanctuaries to
which the Neo-Babylonian kings devoted themselves were, in the first
instance, E-sagila of Babylon and E-zida of Borsippa. Nebopolassar and
his successors are fond of giving themselves the title of 'beautifier of
E-Sagila and E-zida.' In these great temples sacred to Marduk and Nebo,
there were shrines to Sarpanitum, Tashmitum, Nusku, Ea and others, which
also engaged the energies of the rulers.

After Babylon came the old sanctuaries in the ancient religious centers
of the south,--the temples to Shamash and his consort at Sippar and
Larsa, the temples to Sin at Ur and Harran, to the old Ishtar or Anunit
at Agade, to Nana in Erech. Thirdly, the cities of Babylon and Borsippa,
to which the kings, especially Nebuchadnezzar, are deeply attached, were
enriched with many sanctuaries more or less imposing, sacred to a
variety of deities. So Shamash, Sin, Nin-makh,--_i.e._, the great lady,
or Ishtar,--Nin-khar-shag, Gula, also appearing as Nin-Karrak,[335] have
their temples in Babylon, while Ramman has one in Borsippa, and Gula no
less than three sanctuaries--perhaps only small chapels--in Borsippa.
Fourthly, there are sanctuaries of minor importance in other quarters of
Babylonia. Among these we find mention of the improvement of sanctuaries
to the local deity of Marad, whom Nebuchadnezzar simply calls
Lugal-Marada, _i.e._, king of Marad, to Bel-sarbi, or Shar-sarbi, in
Baz,--perhaps a title of Nergal,--to Nin-ib in Dilbat, to Ramman in
Kumari(?).

Most of these sanctuaries are referred to in the inscriptions of
Nebuchadnezzar--a circumstance which, in connection with the many other
gods whom he invokes on various occasions, points to a great revival of
ancient cults in his days. Some of these cults had never reached any
degree of importance prior to his time. Hence it happens that we come
across deities in his inscriptions of whom no mention is found
elsewhere. It is probable that such gods were purely local deities, some
of them, if not many, being at the same time personifications of the
powers or phenomena of nature, while others may be familiar gods,
masquerading under strange attributes. Unfortunately most of these gods
are written in ideographic fashion, so that we cannot be certain of the
reading of their names. Among these are Nin-lil-anna, a goddess called
by Nebuchadnezzar 'the lady who loves me,'[336] and Tur-lil-en,[337] a
god who is described as 'breaking the weapons of enemies.' As for
Bel-sarbi, or Shar-sarbi, the god of Baz,[338] they appear to be titles
rather than names. Dibbarra, Nergal and his consort Laz, and Zamama are
also included in the pantheon of Nebuchadnezzar.

In regard to none of these deities do we find any conceptions different
from those developed in the period of Hammurabi, any more than in the
conceptions of those gods who occupy a more prominent place in the
pantheon. Shamash is the judge, Sin is the wise one, Ramman the
thunderer, and so on throughout the list. It was not a period favorable
to the production of new religious thought, but only to the more or less
artificial revival of old cults.

* * * * *

With the conquest of Babylonia by Cyrus in 539 B.C., we reach the close
of the period to be embraced in a history of the Babylonian-Assyrian
religion. True, the Marduk and Nabu cults were upheld by the Persian
rulers, and the policy of the latter in not disturbing the religious
status was continued by the Greeks when they in turn succeeded the
Persians in their control of Babylonia, but the presence of strange
civilizations with totally different religious trains of thought was
bound to affect the character of the old faith, and in time to threaten
its existence. At all events, it ceases to have any interest for us.
There are no further lines of development upon which it enters. The
period of decay, of slow but sure decay, has set in. The cuneiform
writing continues to be used till almost the beginning of our era, and
so the religious cults draw out their existence to a late period; but as
the writing and the civilization yield before new forces that entirely
alter the character of Oriental culture, so also the religion, after
sinking ever lower into the bogs of superstition, disappears, much as
the canals and little streams of the Euphrates valley, through the
neglect which settled over the country, become lost in the
death-breeding swamps and marshes.

FOOTNOTES:

[331] Babylonian Chronicle B, col. iv. ll. 34, 35.

[332] _Zeitschrift fuer Assyriologie_, II. 72, col. i. ll. 2, 3.

[333] See above, p. 127.

[334] See a paper by Tiele, on "Cyrus and the Babylonian Religion," in
the _Proceedings of the Amsterdam Academy_, 1896.

[335] For the identity of Nin-Karrak and Gula, see the 'Shurpu'
Incantation Series, iv. l. 86 (ed. Zimmern), where the former is called
the 'great physician,'--the epithet peculiar to Gula.

[336] East India House Inscription, col. iv. l. 44.

[337] VR. 34, col. ii. l. 26, or simply Tur-lil (East India House
Inscription, col. iv. l. 49, not Tur-e, as Winckler, _Keils Bibl._ 3, 2,
18, reads).

[338] _I.e._, king or lord of Sarbi. Pognon (_Les Inscriptions
Babyloniennes de Wadl Brissa_), p. 46, is of the opinion that _sarbi_ is
the palm, but he fails to bring sufficient proof, and his theory is
improbable. The stem _sarabu_ means to burn, and the "fiery lord" is
certainly an epithet belonging to some solar deity.

CHAPTER XV.

THE RELIGIOUS LITERATURE OF BABYLONIA.

The pantheon of a religion presents us with the external phases of the
religion in question. In order to penetrate further towards the core of
the religion, and to see it at its best, the religious thought as
manifested in the national literature constitutes our most valuable
guide. The beginnings of Babylonian literature are enveloped in
obscurity. We have seen that we are justified in passing beyond the
period of Hammurabi[339] for these beginnings, but exactly when and
precisely how the literary spirit first manifested itself in Babylonia
will probably remain for a long time, if not for always, a matter of
conjecture. The great political and religious centers of Babylonia, such
as Ur, Sippar, Agade, Eridu, Nippur, Uruk, perhaps also Lagash, and
later on Babylon, formed the foci of literary activity, as they were the
starting-points of commercial enterprise. This intimate connection of
religion with literature left its impress upon all branches into which
the Babylonian literature was in the course of time differentiated. In a
certain sense all the literature of Babylonia is religious. Even the
legal formulas, as embodied in the so-called contract tablets, have a
religious tinge. The priests being the scribes, a contract of any kind
between two or more parties was a religious compact. The oath which
accompanied the compact involved an invocation of the gods. The decree
of the judges in a disputed suit was confirmed by an appeal to the gods.
The terms in which the parties bound themselves consisted largely of
religious phrases, and finally the dating of the tablet often contained
a reference to some religious festival or to some event of religious
import--such as the building of a sanctuary. Science, so far as it
existed in Babylonia, never loosened the leading-strings that bound it
to the prevailing religious thought. The observation of the stars was
carried on under the belief of the supposed influence exerted by the
heavenly bodies upon the fate of man; and surprising as we find the
development of astronomical calculations and forecasts to be,
mathematics does not pass beyond the limits of astrology. Medicine was
likewise the concern of the priests. Disease was a divine infliction
supposed to be due to the direct presence in the body, or to the hidden
influence, of some pernicious spirit. The cure was effected by the
exorcising of the troublesome spirit through prescribed formulas of
supposed power, accompanied by symbolical acts. There is indeed no
branch of human knowledge which so persistently retains its connection
with religious beliefs among all peoples of antiquity as the one which
to-day is regarded as resting solely upon a materialistic basis. As a
consequence the Babylonians, although they made some progress in
medicinal methods, and more especially in medical diagnosis, never
dissociated medicinal remedies from the appeal to the gods. The recital
of formulas was supposed to secure by their magic force the
effectiveness of the medical potions that were offered to the sufferer.

As for the historical texts, the preceding chapters have illustrated how
full they are of religious allusions, how at every turn we meet with the
influence exerted by the priests as the composers of these texts. Almost
all occurrences are given a religious coloring. That these texts furnish
us with such valuable material, and such a quantity of it, is indeed to
be traced directly to the fact that the historical literature is also
the direct production of the religious leaders and guides of the people,
acting at the command of rulers, who were desirous of emphasizing their
dependence upon the gods of the country, and who made this dependence
the basis of the authority they exerted.

Such being the general aspect of Babylonian literature, it is not always
possible to draw a sharp line separating religious productions from such
as may properly be termed secular. For example, the zodiacal system of
the Babylonians, which we shall have occasion to discuss, although
presenting a scientific aspect, is in reality an outcome of the
religious thought; and so at other points it is necessary to pass over
into the region of secular thought for illustrations of the religious
beliefs. Bearing this in mind, we may set up a fivefold division of the
religious literature of the Babylonians in the stricter sense: (1) the
magical texts, (2) the hymns and prayers, (3) omens and forecasts, (4)
the cosmology, (5) epics and legends. It will be apparent that the first
three divisions represent a practical part of the literature, while the
two latter are of a more purely literary character. The magical texts,
as well as the hymns and prayers and omens, we can well imagine were
produced as circumstances called them forth, and one can also understand
how they should, at an early age, have been committed to writing. The
incantations serving the practical purpose already referred to of
securing a control over the spirit, it will be readily seen that such as
had demonstrated their effectiveness would become popular. The desire
would arise to preserve them for future generations. With that natural
tendency of loose custom to become fixed law, these incantations would
come to be permanently associated with certain temples. Rituals would
thus arise. The incantation would be committed to writing so that one
generation of priests might be certain of furnishing orthodox
instruction to the other; and, once written, they would form part of the
temple archives, finding a place in these archives by the side of the
contract tablets, for which the sacred edifices of the country also
served as depositories. The large quantity of incantation texts that
have been found in Ashurbanabal's library,[340] as well as the
variations and contrasts they present when compared with one another,
are probably due to the various sources whence the scribes of the king,
who were sent to the libraries of the south, collected their material.
It is only reasonable to suppose that each great temple acquired in the
course of time a ritual of its own, which, while perhaps not differing
in any essential points from that introduced in another place, yet
deviated from it sufficiently to impart to it a character of its own. In
the case of some of the texts that have been preserved, it is still
possible to determine through certain traits that they exhibit in what
religious center they were produced. With considerable more guarantee of
accuracy can this be done in the case of the hymns and prayers.
Addressed as the latter were to certain deities, it stands to reason
that they were written for use in the temples sacred to those deities,
or, if not to be used, at least composed in honor of certain sanctuaries
that contained the images of the deities thus exalted. Again, in the
historical inscriptions of the Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian periods,
prayers are introduced, and we are as a general thing expressly told on
what occasion they were composed and in what sanctuary they were
uttered. We may therefore conclude that those which have been preserved
independently also served a practical purpose, and were written, not
merely for certain occasions, but for certain places. The practical
purpose served by texts containing omens and forecasts derived from the
observation of the planets and stars, from monstrosities--human and
animal--from strange occurrences, accidents, and the like, is too
obvious to require demonstration. But while duly emphasizing the
practical purpose that gave rise to the incantation texts, the hymns,
the prayers and omens, we must be careful not to press this point too
far. The rituals of the various temples once being fixed, the impulse to
literary composition would still go on in an age marked by intellectual
activity. The practical purpose would be followed by the pure love of
composition. The attachment to certain sanctuaries or certain deities
would inspire earnest and gifted priests to further efforts.
Accordingly, while we cannot be certain that among the actual remains of
magical texts and hymns we may not have specimens that belong to this
class, there is no reason to question that such must have been produced.
The guarantee for this hypothesis is furnished by the compositions that
reflect the cosmological beliefs, the epics and legends that form the
second half of the religious productions of Babylonia.