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

Marduk addresses the moon, specifying its duties, what position it is to
occupy towards the sun at certain periods during the monthly course, and
the like. The tablet at this point becomes defective, and before the
address comes to an end, we are left entirely in the lurch. To speculate
as to the further contents of the fifth tablet and of the sixth (of
which nothing has as yet been found) seems idle. Zimmern supposes that
after the heavenly phenomena had been disposed of, the formation of the
dry land and of the seas was taken up, and Delitzsch is of the opinion
that in the sixth tablet the creation of plants and trees and animals
was also recounted. I venture to question whether the creation of the
'dry land and seas' was specifically mentioned. Esharra, the earth, is
in existence and the Apsu appears to include all waters, but that the
epic treated of the creation of plant and animal life and then of the
creation of man is eminently likely. We have indeed a fragment of a
tablet[755] in which the creation of the 'cattle of the field, beasts of
the field, and creeping things of the field' is referred to; but since
it is the 'gods who in unison' are there represented as having created
the animal kingdom, it is hardly likely that the fragment forms part of
our 'epic' in which all deeds are ascribed to Marduk. It belongs in all
probability to a different cosmological version, but so much can be
concluded from it, that the Babylonians ascribed the creation of animals
to some divine power or powers; and that therefore our 'epic' must have
contained a section in which this act was assigned to Marduk.

A similar variation exists with reference to the tradition of the
creation of mankind. There are distinct traces that the belief was
current in parts of Babylonia which made Ea the creation of
mankind.[756] Ea, it will be recalled, is the 'god of humanity' _par
excellence_, and yet in the seventh (and probably closing) tablet of the
series, Marduk is spoken of as the one "who created mankind."[757]

Variant traditions of this kind point to the existence of various
centers of culture and thought in rivalry with one another. The great
paean to Marduk would have been sadly incomplete had it not contained an
account of the creation of mankind--the crowning work of the
universe--by the head of the Babylonian pantheon. It is possible,
therefore, that a tablet containing the address of a deity to mankind
belongs to our series[758] and embodies orders and warnings given by
Marduk after the creation of man, just as he addresses the moon after
establishing it in the heavens. Purity of heart is enjoined as pleasing
to the deity. Prayer and supplication and prostration are also
commanded. It is said that

Fear of god begets mercy,
Sacrifice prolongs life,
And prayer dissolves sin.

The tablet continues in this strain. It is perhaps not the kind of
address that we would expect Marduk to make after the act of creation,
but for the present we must content ourselves with this conjecture, as
also with the supposition that the creation of mankind constituted the
final act in the great drama in which Marduk is the hero.

When Marduk's work is finished, the Igigi gather around him in
adoration. This scene is described in a tablet which for the present we
may regard[759] as the close of the series. No less than fifty names are
bestowed upon him by the gods, the number fifty corresponding according
to some traditions to the number of the Igigi. Marduk accordingly
absorbs the qualities of all the gods. Such is the purpose of this
tablet. The diction is at times exceedingly impressive.

God of pure life, they called [him] in the third place, the bearer of
purification.
God of favorable wind,[760] lord of response[761] and of mercy,
Creator of abundance and fullness, granter of blessings,
Who increases the things that were small,
Whose favorable wind we experienced in sore distress.
Thus let them[762] speak and glorify and be obedient to him.

The gods recall with gratitude Marduk's service in vanquishing Tiamat.
Marduk is also praised for the mercy he showed towards the associates of
Tiamat, whom he merely captured without putting them to death.

As the god of the shining crown in the fourth place, let them
[_i.e._, mankind] exalt him.
The lord of cleansing incantation, the restorer of the dead to life,
Who showed mercy towards the captured gods,
Removed the yoke from the gods who were hostile to him.

A later fancy identified the 'captured gods' with eleven of the heavenly
constellations.[763]

Mankind is enjoined not to forget Marduk

Who created mankind out of kindness towards them,
The merciful one, with whom is the power of giving life.
May his deeds remain and never be forgotten
By humanity, created by his hands.

Among other names assigned to him are 'the one who knows the heart of
the gods,' 'who gathers the gods together,' 'who rules in truth and
justice.' In allusion again to his contest with Tiamat, he is called
'the destroyer of the enemy and of all wicked ones,' 'who frustrates
their plans.'

With the help of a pun upon his having 'pierced' Tiamat; he is called
Nibir, _i.e._, the planet Jupiter.[764]

Nibir be his name, who took hold of the life of Tiamat.
The course of the stars of heaven may he direct.
May he pasture all of the gods like sheep.[765]

But the climax is reached when, upon hearing what the Igigi have done,
the great gods, father Bel and father Ea cheerfully bestow their own
names upon Marduk.

Because he created the heavens and formed the earth
'Lord of Lands'[766] father Bel called his name.
When he heard of all the names that the Igigi bestowed
Ea's liver rejoiced
That they had bestowed exalted names upon his son.
"He as I--Ea be his name.
The control of my commands be entrusted to him.
To him my orders shall be transmitted."

The historical background to this transference of the name of Bel has
been dwelt upon in a previous chapter.[767] This "Marduk hymn" is to
justify the transference of the role of the older Bel of Nippur to the
younger god Marduk. Throughout, the tablet describing the contest of
Marduk with Tiamat, Marduk is called Bel,[768] and while this name is
used in the generic sense of "lord," the transference of the name of Bel
to Marduk is evidently introduced to account for his assuming the
prerogatives belonging to another god. The original 'lord' was En-lil of
Nippur. The sacred significance of ancient Nippur made its patron deity
the most important rival of Marduk. Bel could not be disposed of as Ea,
who by virtue of his mythological relationships to Marduk--a solar
deity--could be retained as the father of Marduk. There was nothing left
but for Marduk to take the place of Bel. The constant introduction of
the epithet 'Bel' into the Tiamat story points to an older version in
which Bel was the hero. In popular traditions, Bel continued to be
pictured as armed with mighty weapons,[769] and, though ready to inflict
severe punishment for disobedience to his commands, he engages in
contests for the benefit of mankind. The earth being his special sphere
of action, what more natural than that he should have had a prominent
share in adapting it as a habitation for mankind. He would be directly
interested in fighting the powers of darkness.

In the weapons that Marduk employs, particularly the lightning and the
winds which belong to an atmospheric god rather than a solar deity, we
may discern traces of the older narrative which has been combined with
the Marduk-Tiamat nature myth.[770] It may be that Kingu represents
Bel's particular rival. In the narrative, it will be recalled, the
contest with Tiamat is sharply separated from that with Kingu and his
associates. The division that thus suggests itself between Marduk and
Tiamat, on the one hand, Bel and the monsters with Kingu at their head,
on the other, may certainly be termed a natural one. The solar deity
Marduk disposed of the storms and rains of the winter, whereas, a god of
"that which is below,"[771] _i.e._, the earth and the atmosphere
immediately above the earth, would appropriately be represented as
ridding the earth of the monsters in order to prepare it as a habitation
for mankind. Ea was not such a serious rival to Marduk as the older Bel.
Political rivalry between Nippur and Babylonia probably contributed
towards the disposition to have Marduk completely absorb the role of
Bel, whereas, this rivalry being absent in the case of Eridu (the
original seat of Ea worship) and Babylon, the mythological relations
between Ea and Marduk led, as already pointed out, in a perfectly
natural way to making Marduk the son of Ea. Still, while cheerfully
acknowledged by Ea as his equal, it is evident that in older traditions
Ea was far superior to Marduk, and the latter replaces Ea as he does
Bel. The real creator of mankind, according to certain traditions, is
Ea, just as in all probabilities a third tradition existed which arose
in Nippur giving to Bel that distinction. It is necessary, therefore,
for Ea to declare that Marduk's name (_i.e._, his power) is the same as
Ea. The alteration of the traditions is thus justified by a harmonistic
theology. Marduk has triumphed over Bel and Ea. The god of Babylon
reigns supreme, his sway acknowledged by those whom he supplants.
Marduk's declaration that in the event of his vanquishing Tiamat he will
assume authority over all the gods is thus formally confirmed. The epic
closes grandiloquently:

With fifty names, the great gods
According to their fifty names, proclaimed the supremacy of his
course.

The compiler has added to the epic what Delitzsch appropriately
designates an 'epilogue,'--a declaration of affection for Marduk. The
epilogue consists of three stanzas. All mankind--royalty and
subjects--are called upon to bear in mind Marduk's glorious deeds,
achieved for the benefit of the world.

Let the wise and intelligent together ponder over it.
Let the father relate it and teach it to his son.[772]
To leader and shepherd[773] be it told.
Let all rejoice in the lord of gods, Marduk
That he may cause his land to prosper and grant it peace.
His word is firm, his order irrevocable.
What issues from his mouth, no god can alter.

Marduk's anger, the poet says in closing, terrifies even the gods, but
he is a god upon whose mercy one may rely, though he punishes the
evil-doer.

Bearing in mind the general nature of the creation epic we have
discussed, we must of course in our conclusions distinguish between
those elements in it which reflect the intent of the compiler or
compilers to glorify Marduk at the expense of other gods and such parts
as bear the stamp of being generally accepted beliefs. Setting aside,
therefore, the special role assigned to Marduk, we find that the
Babylonians never developed a theory of real beginnings. The _creatio ex
nihilo_ was a thought beyond the grasp even of the schools. There was
always _something_, and indeed there was always a _great deal_--as much
perhaps at the beginning of things as at any other time. But there was
no cosmic order. Instead of a doctrine of creation, we have a doctrine
of evolution from chaos to the imposition of eternal laws. The
manifestation of these laws was seen first of all in the movements of
the heavenly bodies. There was a great expanse, presenting the
appearance of a stretched-out curtain or a covering to which the stars
and moon were attached. Along this expanse the wandering stars moved
with a certain regularity. The moon, too, had its course mapped out and
the sun appeared in this expanse daily, as an overseer, passing along
the whole of it. This wonderful system was the first to be perfected,
and to the solar deity,[774] which seemed to control everything, was
ascribed the distinction of having introduced the heavenly order. This
notion we may well believe was of popular origin, though elaborated in
the schools to conform to a developed astrological science.

The stars and moon never passed beyond certain limits, and, accordingly,
the view was developed which gave to the canopy of heaven fixed
boundaries. At each end of the canopy was a great gate, properly
guarded. Through one of these the sun passed in rising out of the ocean,
through the other it passed out when it had run its course. Learned
speculation could not improve upon this popular fancy. As the heavens
had their limitations, so also the great bodies of water were kept in
check by laws, which, though eternal, were yet not quite as inexorable
as those controlling the heavenly bodies. The yearly overflow of the
Euphrates and Tigris was too serious a matter to be overlooked, and we
shall see in a following chapter[775] how this phenomenon was
interpreted as a rivalry between Bel and Ea, deliberately caused by the
former in anger toward mankind. Still, as a general thing, the 'deep,'
presided over by Ea, kept within the limits assigned to it. The waters
above the canopy were under rigid control, and the lower waters flowed
around the earth and underneath it, and bordered the canopy of heaven at
its two ends.

The earth itself was a vast hollow structure, erected as a "place of
fertility" under the canopy of heaven and resting on the great 'deep.'
Its vegetation was the gift of the gods. 'Fertility' summed up the law
fixed for the earth. Much as in the Book of Genesis, "to multiply and
increase" was the order proclaimed for the life with which the earth was
filled.

The creation of mankind was the last act in the great drama. Assigned in
some traditions to Ea, in others as it would seem to Bel, the transfer
of the traditions to Marduk is the deliberate work of the schools of
theological thought. The essential point for us is that mankind,
according to all traditions, is the product of the gods. In some form or
other, this belief was popularly held everywhere. Its original form,
however, is obscured beyond recognition by the theory which it is made
to serve.

A second version of the course of creation[776] agrees in the main with
the first one, but adds some points of interest. In this version,
likewise, Marduk is assigned the most important role--an evidence that
it was produced under similar influences as the larger epic. So far as
preserved, the second version differs from the first in its brevity and
in the prominence given to such themes as the development of animal life
and the growth of civilization. It fills out to a certain degree the
gaps in the first version, due to the fragmentary condition of the fifth
tablet and the loss of the sixth. The brevity of the second version is
due in part to the fact that it is introduced into an incantation text,
and, what is more, incidentally introduced.

It begins as does the larger epic with the statement regarding the
period when the present phenomena of the universe were not yet in
existence, but it specifies the period in a manner which gives a
somewhat more definite character to the conception of this ancient time.

The bright house of the gods was not yet built on the bright place,
No reed grew and no tree was formed,
No brick was laid nor any brick edifice[777] reared,
No house erected, no city built,
No city reared, no conglomeration[778] formed.
Nippur was not reared, E-Kur[779] not erected.
Erech was not reared, E-Anna[780] not erected.
The deep[781] not formed, Eridu[782] not reared.
The bright house, the house of the gods not yet constructed as a
dwelling.
The world[783] was all a sea.

Again it will be observed that neither popular nor scholastic
speculation can picture the beginning of things in any other way than as
an absence of things characteristic of the _order_ of the universe.

The bright[784] house of the gods corresponds to Eshara and the canopy
of heaven in the first version. The gods are again identified with the
stars, and it is in the heavens--the bright place--that the gods
dwell.[785] The reference to the absence of vegetation agrees closely
with the corresponding passage in the larger creation epic. The
limitations of the cosmological speculations of the Babylonians find a
striking illustration in the manner in which the beginnings of human
culture are placed on a level with the beginnings of heavenly and
terrestrial phenomena. Nippur, Erech, and Eridu, which are thus shown to
be the oldest religious centers of the Euphrates Valley, were
indissolubly associated in the minds of the people with the beginning of
order in the universe. Such was the antiquity of those cities as seats
of the great gods, Bel, Ishtar, and Ea, that the time when they did not
exist was not differentiated from the creation of the heavens and of
plant life. This conception is more clearly emphasized by the
parallelism implied between Eridu and the 'deep.' The 'formation' of
Apsu corresponds to the 'structure' made by Marduk according to the
first version, as the seat of Ea. The waters were not created by Marduk,
but they were confined by him within a certain space. In a vague way,
the 'deep' itself rested in a vast tub. The waters flowed freely and yet
not without limitation.

The contest with Tiamat is not referred to in this second version, and
this may be taken as an indication that the 'nature' myth was not an
ingredient part of cosmological speculations, but only introduced into
the first version because of its associations with Marduk.

The appearance of dry land is described somewhat vaguely as follows:

There was a channel[786] within the sea.
At that time Eridu was erected, E-Sagila[787] was built,
E-Sagila in the midst of the 'deep,' where the god of the glorious
abode[788] dwells.

The mention of the channel appears to imply that the waters were
permitted to flow off in a certain direction.

The conception would then be similar to the view expressed in Genesis,
where the dry land appears in consequence of the waters being 'gathered'
into one place.[789] The temple at Eridu is regarded as synonymous with
the city, as the temples E-Kur and E-Anna are synonymous with Nippur and
Erech respectively. Eridu at the head of the Persian Gulf, which for the
Babylonians was the beginning of the great 'Okeanos' surrounding the
world,[790] is the first dry land to appear and hence the oldest place
in the world. At this point in the narrative a line is interpolated
which clearly betrays the lateness of the version. The mention of
E-Sagila suggests to a Babylonian, naturally, the great temple of Marduk
in the city of Babylon--'the lofty house.' Local pride and the desire to
connect Babylon with the beginning of things leads to the insertion:

Babylon was reared, E-Sagila built.

With this mention of Babylon, the connecting link is established which
leads easily to the glorification of Babylon and Marduk. The thought
once introduced is not abandoned. The rest of the narrative, so far as
preserved, is concerned with Marduk. Eridu alone is beyond his
jurisdiction. Everything else, vegetation, mankind, rivers, animals, and
all cities, including even Nippur and Erech, are Marduk's work.

The Anunnaki[791] he[792] created together
And bestowed glorious epithets upon the glorious city, the seat dear
to their heart.

The 'glorious city' is Eridu, though the compiler would have us apply it
to Babylon.

With the founding of Eridu, a limit was fixed for the 'deep.' The rest
of the dry land is formed according to the theory of the writer by the
extension of this place.

Marduk constructed an enclosure around the waters,
He made dust and heaped it up within the enclosure.[793]

The _naivete_ of the conception justifies us in regarding it as of
popular origin, incorporated by the theologians into their system.

But this land is created primarily for the benefit of the gods.

That the gods might dwell in the place dear to their heart.

Naturally not all of the gods are meant,--perhaps only the
Anunnaki,--for the great gods dwell in heaven. The creation of mankind
is next described, and is boldly ascribed to Marduk.

Mankind he created.[794]

In the following line, however, we come across a trace again of an older
tradition, which has been embodied in the narrative in a rather awkward
manner. Associated with Marduk in the creation of mankind is a goddess
Aruru.

The goddess Aruru created the seed of men together with him.[795]

We encounter this goddess Aruru in the Gilgamesh epic,[796] where she is
represented as creating a human being,--Eabani; and, curiously enough,
she creates him in agreement with the Biblical tradition, out of a lump
of clay. It has already been pointed out that according to one tradition
Ea is the creator of mankind,[797] and the conjecture has also been
advanced that at Nippur, Bel was so regarded. In Aruru we have evidently
a figure to whom another tradition, that arose in some district,
ascribed the honor of having created mankind. The Gilgamesh story is
connected with the city of Erech, and it is probable that the tale--at
least in part--originated there. It becomes plausible, therefore, to
trace the tradition ascribing the creation of man to Aruru to the same
place. A passage in the Deluge story, which forms an episode of the
Gilgamesh epic, adds some force to this conjecture. After the dreadful
deluge has come, Ishtar breaks out in wild lament that mankind, her
offspring, has perished: "What I created, where is it?"[798] She is
called 'the mistress of the gods,'[799] and if Jensen is correct in an
ingenious restoration of a defective text,[800] Aruru is given the same
epithet in a lexicographical tablet. The Ishtar occurring in the
Gilgamesh story is the old Ishtar of Erech. I venture to suggest,
therefore, that Aruru and Ishtar of Erech are one and the same
personage. Ishtar is, of course, as has been pointed out, merely a
generic name[801] for the 'great goddess' worshipped under many forms.
The more specific name by which Ishtar of Erech was known was Nana, but
Nana again is nothing but an epithet, meaning, as the Babylonians
themselves interpreted it, the 'lady' _par excellence_. Have we perhaps
in Aruru the real name of the old goddess of Erech? At all events, the
occurrence of Aruru in this second 'creation' story points to her as
belonging to the district of which Erech was the center. In this way,
each one of the three most ancient sacred towns of Babylonia would have
its 'creator,'--Bel in Nippur, Ea in Eridu, and Aruru in Erech. The
chief deity of Erech, it will be recalled, was always a goddess,--a
circumstance that supports the association of Aruru with that place.
Aruru being a goddess, it was not so easy to have Marduk take up her
role, as he supplanted Bel. Again, Erech and Babylon were not political
rivals to the degree that Nippur and Babylon were. Accordingly a
compromise was effected, as in the case of Marduk and Ea. Aruru is
associated with Marduk. She creates mankind with Marduk, and it would
seem to be a consequence of this association that the name of Marduk's
real consort, Sarpanitum, is playfully but with intent interpreted by
the Babylonian pedants as 'seed-producing.'[802]

Our second version thus turns out to be, like the first, an adaptation
of old traditions to new conditions. Babylon and Marduk are designedly
introduced. In the original form Nippur, Eridu, and Erech alone figured,
and presumably, therefore, only the deities of these three places. Among
them the work of creation was in some way parceled out. This
distribution may itself have been the result of a combination of
independent traditions. In any early combination, however, we may feel
certain that Marduk was not introduced.

After this incidental mention of Aruru, the narrative passes back
undisturbed to Marduk.

The animals of the field, the living creatures of the field he
created,
The Tigris and Euphrates he formed in their places, gave them good
names,
Soil (?), grass, the marsh, reed, and forest he created,
The verdure of the field he produced,
The lands, the marsh, and thicket,
The wild cow with her young, the young wild ox,
The ewe with her young, the sheep of the fold,
Parks and forests,
The goat and wild goat he brought forth.

The text at this point becomes defective, but we can still make out that
the clay as building material is created by Marduk, and that he
constructs houses and rears cities. Corresponding to the opening lines,
we may supply several lines as follows:

Houses he erected, cities he built,
Cities he built, dwellings he prepared,
Nippur he built, E-Kur he erected,
Erech he built, E-Anna he erected.

Here the break in the tablet begins.

The new points derived from this second version are, (_a_) the details
in the creation of the animal and plant world, (_b_) the mention of
Aruru as the mother of mankind, and (_c_) the inclusion of human culture
in the story of the 'beginnings.'

Before leaving the subject, a brief comparison of these two versions
with the opening chapters of Genesis is called for. That the Hebrew and
Babylonian traditions spring from a common source is so evident as to
require no further proof. The agreements are too close to be accidental.
At the same time, the variations in detail point to independent
elaboration of the traditions on the part of the Hebrews and
Babylonians.