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

A request of some kind being thus the motive that lies behind the
Babylonian prayers, it follows that the means taken to ascertain the
will or intention of the gods with regard to that request formed an
essential feature of the ritual. Indeed, to ascertain the will of a
deity constituted one of the most important functions of the
priest--perhaps _the_ most important function. The prayer was of no use
unless it was answered, and the priest alone could tell whether the
answer was afforded. The efforts of the priest were accordingly directed
towards this end--the prognostication of the future. What was the
intention of the deity? Would the hoped-for deliverance from evil be
realized? Would the demon of disease leave the body? Would the
symbolical acts, burning of effigies, loosening of knots, and the like,
have the desired effect? Upon the success of the priest in performing
this function of prognostication everything depended, both for himself
and for the petitioner.

The natural and indeed necessary complement to the priest as exorciser
is the priest as the forecaster of the future. Since no one, not even
the king, could approach a deity directly, the mediation of the priest
was needed on every occasion of a religious import. The ordinary means
at the disposal of the priest for ascertaining the divine will or
caprice were twofold,--directly through oracles or indirectly by means
of omens derived from an examination of the sacrifices offered. A
complete Babylonian ritual therefore required, besides the appeal made
by the petitioner through the priests or with their assistance, an
incantation introduced in some form, an offering, certain symbolical
acts and omens. The offerings and the symbolical acts, as a matter of
fact, appear to have preceded[491] the prayer and the incantation, but
in the prayers they are referred to again, and generally just before the
interpretation of the omens. The omens constituted the ulterior end in
view. Because of the looked-for omens the offering was brought, the
symbolical acts performed, the incantations recited. All these rites
formed the preparation for the grand _finale_. The worshipper waited
anxiously for the decision of the priest. Attached, therefore, to the
prayers we frequently find directions intended for the priests as to the
signs to which his attention should be directed, certain peculiarities
exhibited in parts of the animal sacrificed from which certain
conclusions may be drawn. The observation of these signs grows to the
dimensions of a science equal in extent to the observation of the
heavenly bodies whose movements, as indeed the whole of the natural
world, were supposed to exert an influence over the fate of mankind.

It does not of course follow that in the case of every prayer an
elaborate ritual was observed. Many of the prayers to the gods in their
present form do not embody omens, as indeed many contain no reference to
offerings or symbolical acts. While no conclusion can be drawn from this
circumstance, since the omission may be due to the point of view from
which in a given case a collection of prayers was made by the priest,
still we may well believe that for the exorcising of evil spirits the
utterance of sacred formulas was often considered quite sufficient. In
the earlier stages of the Babylonian religion the priest's function may
have ended when he had exorcised the demons by means of magic words. The
demons were forced to yield. If they nevertheless held out, so much the
worse for them or--for the priest, who, it was concluded, must have lost
his power over the spirits through some error committed by him. The
resort to omens has wider aspects, as will presently be shown, than the
connection with prayers and offerings, and a most reasonable view is
that omens were first introduced into prayers on occasions when a
worshipper wished to ascertain the will of a deity for a certain
purpose, and to regulate his own conduct accordingly. In petitioning the
deity a sacrifice was naturally offered. Through the sacrifice, which
was rendered acceptable to the deity by the mediation of the priest, the
desired answer to a question was obtained. From being resorted to in
such instances, omens would naturally come to form part of the ritual
for almost any occasion when a deity was appealed to, both in connection
with incantations and symbolical acts when the omens would form a
supplement to the magic element in the ritual, as well as in cases where
no specific incantations are introduced. In both cases the omens would
constitute the means resorted to for ascertaining whether the petitioner
might look for a favorable reply to a request proffered or, in a more
general way, find out anything that it may be important for him to know.
The occasions for consulting the deity would be of a public or private
character. How far it became customary for the general public to secure
the mediation of a priest for securing aid from the gods in matters
appertaining to personal welfare we have no means of definitely
determining. We find, for example, a son consulting an oracle on behalf
of his father in order to ascertain what day would be favorable for
undertaking some building operation,[492] and he receives the answer
that the fourth of the month will be propitious; and so there are other
occasions on which private individuals consult the priests, but in
general it was only on occasions of real distress that an individual
would come to the sanctuary,--to seek relief from bodily ills, to ward
off blows of adversity, to pacify a deity who has manifested his or her
displeasure. The expense involved--for the worshipper was not to appear
empty-handed--would of itself act as a deterrent against too frequent
visits to a sanctuary.

The public welfare occupied a much larger share in the Babylonian
worship. In order to ensure the safety of the state, occasions
constantly arose when the deities had to be consulted. It is no accident
that so many of the prayers--the hymns and psalms--contain references to
kings and to events that transpired during their reigns. In these
references the occasions for the prayers are to be sought. Remarkable as
is the expression which the consciousness of individual guilt finds in
the religious literature of Babylonia, the anger of the deity against
his land is much more prominently dwelt upon than the manifestation of
his wrath towards an individual. It could not be otherwise, since the
welfare of the state conditioned to so large an extent the happiness of
the individual. The startling phenomena of nature, such as an eclipse, a
flood, a storm, while affecting individuals were not aimed directly at
them, but at the country viewed as the domain of a certain god or of
certain gods. Blighted crops, famine, and pestilence had likewise a
public as well as a private aspect. On all such occasions the rulers
would proceed to the sanctuaries in order, with the assistance of the
priests, to pacify the angered god. It was not sufficient at such times
to pronounce sacred formulas, to make fervent appeals, but some
assurances had to be given that the words and the symbolical acts would
have the desired effect. Omens were sought for from the animals offered.
There were other occasions besides those stated, when for the sake of
the public welfare oracles were sought at the sanctuaries. If a public
improvement was to be undertaken, such as the building of a palace, or
of a temple, of a canal, or a dam, it was of the utmost importance to
know whether the enterprise was acceptable to the deity. A day had to be
carefully chosen for laying the foundations, when the god would be
favorably disposed towards his subjects,--the kings under whose auspices
such work was carried on. Similar precautions had to be taken to select
a favorable day for the dedication. This again was determined by means
of omens either derived from offerings or in some other way. The
Babylonians and Assyrians believed, as did the Jews upon their return
from the Babylonian exile, that 'unless the lord assists, the builders
work in vain.' When we come to military campaigns where the individual
disappears altogether in the presence of the majestic figure of the
state, the will and disposition of the gods had to be consulted at every
step,--regarding the plans of the enemy, at the enemy's approach, before
the battle, in the midst of the fray, and at its termination.

The frequency with which the gods were approached in the interests of
the state and the public weal, plied with questions upon which the fate
of the land depended, is shown by the stereotyped form which such
official solicitations in the course of time acquired. Dating from the
reigns of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanabal we have an elaborate series of
prayers addressed to the sun-god, all dealing with questions of a
political import. These prayers, so admirably edited and analyzed by
Knudtzon,[493] are all arranged according to a single pattern. Each one
opens with a question or series of questions which Shamash, the sun-god,
is asked to answer. The god is then implored not to be angry, but to
lend his aid against any errors unwittingly committed in the sacrificial
rites. For a second time the same question is put in a somewhat varying
form. Another appeal is made, and the various omens derived from the
inspection of animals are interpreted as a guide to the priests.
According to the application of these omens to the sacrifice before the
priest, a decision is rendered. It will be sufficient for our purposes
to present a single specimen of such a fixed ritual.[494]

Esarhaddon, being hard pressed by a group of nations to the northeast of
Assyria, led by a certain Kashtariti, and among whose followers the
Gimirrites, the Medes, and Manneans are the most prominent, asks for an
oracle from Shamash as to the outcome of the situation. The priest,
acting as mediator, addresses[495] the god:

O Shamash! great lord! As I ask thee, do thou in true mercy
answer me.

From this day, the 3d day of this month of Iyar[496] to the 11th
day of the month of Ab[497] of this year, a period of one
hundred days and one hundred nights is the proscribed term for
the priestly activity.[498]

Will within this period, Kashtariti, together with his soldiery,
will the army of the Gimirrites, the army of the Medes, will the
army of the Manneans, or will any enemy whatsoever succeed in
carrying out their plan, whether by strategy (?) or by main
force, whether by the force of weapons of war and fight or by
the ax, whether by a breach made with machines of war and
battering rams[499] or by hunger, whether by the power residing
in the name of a god or goddess,[500] whether in a friendly way
or by friendly grace,[501] or by any strategic device, will
these aforementioned, as many as are required to take a city,
actually capture the city Kishassu, penetrate into the interior
of that same city Kishassu, will their hands lay hold of that
same city Kishassu, so that it falls into their power? Thy great
divine power knows it.[502]

The capture of that same city, Kishassu, through any enemy
whatsoever, within the specified period, is it definitely
ordained by thy great and divine will, O Shamash! Will it
actually come to pass?[503]

It will be observed that, much as in a legal document, all contingencies
are enumerated. In other prayers, still more are mentioned. A definite
answer is required, and care is taken not to leave any loophole open by
means of which the deity may escape from the obligation imposed upon him
to manifest his intention. Shamash might answer that the city will not
be captured, with the mental reservation that it will surrender, or he
might throw Esarhaddon off his guard by announcing that "not by might
nor by strength" will the city be taken, and the king may be surprised
some morning to learn that the catastrophe has been brought about
through the power residing in the 'word.' These precautions were taken,
not so much because it was supposed that the gods and priests were
tricky, but because all conditions had to be carefully fulfilled in
order to ensure an answer, and, if at all possible, of course a
favorable answer. To the same end, great care had to be taken that in
the preparation of the offering which accompanied the prayer no mistake
should be made. The sacrificial animal--in the case before us a
lamb--had to be guarded against all imperfections, impurities, and
contaminations. The priest had to be careful to put on the proper dress,
to speak the proper words, and to be himself free from any ritualistic
impurity. Before proceeding to the inspection of the animal, in order to
forecast the future, the priest had to take care that nothing might
happen to interfere with the proper observation of the rites. This
section of the prayer is characterized by the word "_ezib_" repeated at
the beginning of every line, and which conveys the appeal that what
follows may be precluded from happening.[504] The priest first prays to
Shamash:

Preclude that after the specified period [the catastrophe may not come
to pass],
Preclude whatever they [_i.e._, the enemies] may plan may not be
carried out (?),
Preclude them from making a slaughter and from plundering....
Whether the decision of this day be good or bad, ward off a stormy
day with pouring rain.

This last phrase, which is somewhat obscure, seems to be a request made
in the contingency of an unfavorable omen being received. The sun-god is
asked, at all events, not to hide his countenance under clouds and rain
on the decisive day of battle. Coming after these preliminary requests
to the sacrifice, the priest continues:

Prevent anything unclean from defiling the place of inspection,[505]
Prevent the lamb of thy divinity, which is to be inspected, from being
imperfect and unfit.
Guard him who takes hold of the body of the lamb, who is clothed in
the proper sacrificial dress, from having eaten, drunk, or handled
anything unclean.

The priest thereupon repeats his question to the sun-god:

I ask thee, O Shamash! great lord! whether from the 3d day of
this month of Iyar, up to the 11th day of the month of Ab of
this year, Kashtariti, with his soldiers, whether the
Gimirrites, the Manneans, the Medes, or whether any enemy
whatsoever will take the said city, Kishassu, enter that said
city, Kishassu, seize said city, Kishassu, with their hands,
obtain it in their power.

The various terms used in describing the taking of a city are once more
specified, so as to fulfill all the demands of definiteness in the
question.

The priest is now ready to proceed with an examination of the animal
before him. A varying list of omens are introduced into the prayers
under consideration. That they are so introduced is a proof of the
official character of these texts. The omens were not, of course,
intended to be recited. They are enumerated as a guide to the priests.
The various signs that may be looked for are noted, and according to
what the priest finds he renders his decision. Knudtzon has made the
observation[507] that in the prayers published by him, the signs found
on the animal are noted but not interpreted. This rather curious
omission is again naturally accounted for on the assumption that these
prayers in their present form are part of a ritual compiled solely for
the benefit of priests attached to a Shamash sanctuary. Full directions
were not required. All that the priest needed was to know what to look
for. For the rest, he depended upon tradition or his own knowledge or
judgment. The omens themselves, or rather the signs, refer to the
condition in which certain parts of the animal are found or to
peculiarities in the composition of the animal.

The priest is instructed to observe whether 'at the nape on the left
side' there is a slit; whether 'at the bottom on the left side of the
bladder' some peculiarity[508] is found or whether it is normal; whether
'the nape to the right side' is sunk and split or whether the viscera
are sound. The proportions, too, in the size of the various parts of the
body appear to have been of moment; and in this way, a large number of
points are given to which the priest is to direct his attention. From a
combination of all peculiarities and signs in a given instance, he
divines the disposition of the god addressed, whether it is favorable or
not. The whole ceremony is brought to a close by another appeal to the
god to send an answer to the question put to him. The priest prays:

By virtue of this sacrificial lamb, arise and grant true mercy,
favorable conditions of the parts of the animal, a declaration
favorable and beneficial be ordained by thy great divinity.
Grant that this may come to pass. To thy great divinity, O
Shamash! great lord! may it[509] be pleasing,[510] and may an
oracle be sent in answer!

In some of the prayers a second series of omen indications are given.
What the oracle announced we are, of course, not told. The ritual is not
concerned with results.

From the analysis just given it will be seen that the consultation of a
deity was often entailed with much ceremony. No doubt the priests did
all in their power to add to the solemnity of such an occasion. The
kings on their side showed their lavishness in furnishing victims for
the sacrifice. Again and again does Esarhaddon solicit Shamash to reveal
the outcome of the military campaigns in which the king was engaged. The
same individual, Kashtariti, and the Gimirrites, Medes, etc., are
mentioned in many other prayers prepared in the course of the campaign;
and elsewhere other campaigns are introduced. What Esarhaddon did, no
doubt his successors also did, as he himself followed the example set by
his predecessors. We are justified, then, in concluding that a regular
'oracle and omen ritual' was developed in Babylonia and Assyria--how
early it is of course impossible to say. There is every reason to
believe that in some form such a ritual existed in Babylonia before the
rise of Assyria, but it is also evident that in a military empire like
Assyria, there would be more frequent occasion for securing oracles than
in Babylonia. The ritual may therefore have been carried to a greater
degree of perfection in the north. The Assyrian conquerors, if we may
judge from examples, were fond of asking for an oracle at every turn in
the political situation. The king intends to send an official to a
foreign land, but he is uncertain as to the wisdom of his decision.
Accordingly, he puts the case before the god. If this decision is taken,
he asks, Will the envoy carry out the orders of the king?

Thy great divinity knows it.
Is it commanded and ordained by thy great divinity,
O Shamash? Is it to come to pass?[511]

In a similar way, questions are asked with reference to the course of a
campaign. Will the Assyrian king encounter the king of Ethiopia, and
will the latter give battle? Will the king return alive from the
campaign? is a question frequently asked. Even for their quasi-private
affairs, the kings sought for an oracle. Before giving his daughter in
marriage to a foreign potentate, Esarhaddon desires to know whether the
one seeking this favor, Bartatua, the king of Ishkuza,[512]

is to be trusted, will he fulfill his promises, will he observe
the decrees of Esarhaddon, the king of Assyria, and execute them
in good faith?

Again, when the king is about to associate his son with himself in the
government, he first inquires whether this is agreeable to the
deity.[513] The king fears lest his son may cause trouble, may provoke
dissensions. Past experience prompts him to be careful before following
his inclination.

Is the entrance of Siniddinabal, the son of Esarhaddon, the king
of Assyria, whose name is written on this tablet, into the
government in accord with the command of thy great divinity? Is
it to come to pass?

The reference to the writing of the name is interesting. It would appear
that the question is actually written by the priest and placed before
the deity. The Greeks similarly put their questions to the Delphian
oracle in writing. May it be that among the Babylonians the answer of
the god was at times also handed down on a tablet, as the Greek and
Roman oracles were communicated in writing on the leaves of a tree?

If sickness entered the royal house, an oracle was likewise sought. The
king is sick. Is it ordained that he will recover? We are told in one
case that[514]

Nika, the mother of Esarhaddon, the king of Assyria, is sick.
She sees the hand of the goddess Nana of Uruk laid heavily upon
her.... Is it ordained that this hand will be lifted off from
the sufferer?

The occasions, it is evident, were exceedingly numerous when the
Assyrian rulers appealed to the priests for oracles. Naturally, this
appeal was not in all cases made with the elaborate formality
illustrated by Esarhaddon's petitions to Shamash. At times the monarch,
as the individual, would content himself with sending to the priest for
an answer to a question, and the priest would reply in an equally simple
and direct manner. Quite a number of such messages, sent by priests to
their master, are included in the valuable publication of 'Assyrian
Letters,' begun by Professor R. F. Harper.[515] The king's son wishes to
set out on a journey. The father sends to the astrologers Balasi and
Nabu-akheirba, and receives the reply:[516]

As for Ashur-mukinpalea, about whom the king, our lord, has sent
to us, may Ashur, Bel, Nabu, Sin, Shamash, and Ramman bless him.
May the king, our lord, witness his welfare (?). Conditions are
favorable for the journey. The second day is favorable, the
fourth day very favorable.

Similarly, the astrologers send reports regarding the appearance and
position of the moon and the stars, and of various phenomena that had to
be taken into account in moments where decisive action had to be taken.

Before leaving the subject, it may be of interest to point out that
among the literary remains of the Assyrian period there are "blank
formulas" for oracles, the names in each instance to be filled out by
the officiating priest. Such formulas were prepared, no doubt, for cases
of common occurrence. Thus Esarhaddon, before appointing a person to a
responsible position, took the precaution of ascertaining from some
deity whether the appointment was a wise one. The name of the individual
being written down, the priest asks the deity in a general way:[517]

Will the man whose name appears on this tablet, and whom he [the
king] is about to appoint to such and such a position, keep good
faith, or will he manifest hostility towards the king, inciting
to rebellion?

Esarhaddon may have had a special reason for using precautions against
his officials, and even his sons. He came to the throne during a
rebellion which involved the assassination of his father. Esarhaddon's
own brothers were the murderers. We may well suppose that he trembled at
every step he took, but his position is after all characteristic of the
Assyrian rulers in general, many of whom came to the throne by violence
and maintained themselves through force.

Other texts enable us to study the form of the oracles themselves. As
yet, no oracle texts have been found belonging to the older Babylonian
period, but we have again every reason to believe that what holds good
for the days of Assyrian power applies to a much earlier period, though
at the same time the greater frequency with which Assyrian rulers were
wont to ply their gods with questions would increase the number of those
whose special business it was to pronounce the oracles. The manifold
duties of the priesthood would tend towards a differentiation of the
priests into various classes. The priest, as exorciser, would become
distinct from the priest as the inspector of omens; and the latter
different again from the pronouncer of oracles. From the fact that
Marduk was regarded as the special god of oracles by the Assyrians as
well as the Babylonians,[518] we may conclude that this differentiation
of the priestly classes took place already in the south, or at all
events that oracle-giving as a distinct priestly function was recognized
in Babylonia and carried over to the northern empire. If we may draw a
general conclusion from the state of affairs in Esarhaddon's days, this
function was largely in the hands of women. We know from other evidence
that women were attached to the temple service from ancient times.[519]
As sorceresses, too, they occupied a quasi-priestly position, since
their help could be invoked in driving evil spirits into the person of
one's enemy. The oracle-giver and the sorcerer or sorceress are
correlated personages in religion. For various reasons--in part,
perhaps, because of her physical differences from man--woman was
invested with a certain mystery by ancient nations.[520] Hence the fact
that among so many nations witchcraft is associated with woman, and
similarly among many nations women perform the functions of the oracle.
In a series of eight oracles addressed to Esarhaddon,[521] six are given
forth by women. These oracles, it so happens, all issue from the goddess
Ishtar of Arbela. The cult of this goddess at Arbela stood in high favor
in the eighth century B.C. An influential body of priests congregated
there, and the eight oracles in question appear to be a part of a more
extensive collection made by the theologians of Arbela, of whose
intellectual activity there are other traces. Arbela appears to have
developed a special school of theology, marked by the attempt to accord
a superior position to the great goddess Ishtar.