[141] For fuller proof, see the chapter on "The Cosmology of the Babylonians."

[142] This, it will be remembered (see above, p. 118), is one of the t.i.tles of Marduk in one of Hammurabi's inscriptions,--an important point for the date of the episode in its present form.

[143] Literally, 'Ea shall be his name, his as mine.'

[144] According to Syncellus. In cuneiform texts the old Bel is at times invoked as the creator of mankind.

[145] _Kosmologie_, pp. 293, 294.

[146] _Aos_ and _Dauke_.

[147] Rawlinson, iv. 25.

[148] See p. 79.

[149] See Jensen, _Keils Bibl._. 3, 1, p. 108, note 5. Tiele, _Gesch._ p. 126, apparently identifies Innanna of Hallabi with Tashmit, but, so far as I can see, without sufficient reason.

[150] Here written En-lil, as the Bel of Nippur.

[151] Attached to the name here (Rawlinson, i. 4, no. xv-9), which is written ideographically En-Lil, is the designation _da-gan-ni_, which has occasioned considerable discussion. See Jensen, _Kosmologie_, pp.

449-456. It seems to me that the addition which emphasizes this ident.i.ty of Bel with another G.o.d, Dagan, is to indicate that the Bel of the triad, and not Bel-Marduk, is here meant. Somewhat in the same way Tiglathpileser I. (Rawlinson, i. 14, vi. 87) distinguishes the older Bel by calling him 'Bel latura,' _i.e._, 'Bel the older.'

[152] 'Governor of Bel' for governor of Babylonia, and 'subjects of Bel'

for subjects of Babylonia.

[153] See p. 89 and chapter vii.

[154] Occasionally a king (so _e.g._ Nabubaliddin, _c._ 883 B.C.) a.s.sociates Anu with Ea, and omits Bel (Rawlinson, v. 60, ii. 21), as though with the intent of avoiding confusion.

[155] Ra.s.sam, Cylinder ix. 75.

[156] See chapter xii., "The a.s.syrian Pantheon," p. 208.

[157] Ra.s.sam, Cylinder viii. 98, 99. 'Belit of Babylonia, honored among the great G.o.ds.'

[158] _Annals_, iii. 135.

[159] The name of the temple. See IIR. 66, ll. 1 and 10. The t.i.tle 'belit matati,' 'lady of the lands' is evidently introduced in imitation of 'bel matati,' 'lord of lands,' belonging to Bel and then to Marduk.

[160] Sayce's view (_Hibbert Lectures_, p. 186), according to which Anu was originally the local G.o.d of Erech, is erroneous.

[161] VR. pl. 33.

[162] Delitzsch, _Die Kossaer_, pp. 25, 27.

[163] The omission of Ramman here, though invoked at the close of the inscription, is noticeable. Ishtar takes the place that in the more developed system belongs to the G.o.d of storms, who with the moon-G.o.d and sun-G.o.d const.i.tutes a second triad. See p. 163.

[164] Written with the sign _An_, and the feminine ending _tum_, but probably p.r.o.nounced Anatum. The form Anat (without the ending) is used by many scholars, as Sarpanit and Tashmit are used instead of Sarpanitum and Tashmitum. I prefer the fuller forms of these names. Anum similarly is better than Anu, but the latter has become so common that it might as well be retained.

[165] VR. 33, vii. 34-44.

[166] IR. pl. 15, col. vii. 71-pl. 16, col. viii. 88.

[167] No less than nine times.

[168] Tiglathpileser I.

[169] Ramman-nirari I.

[170] _Kosmologie_, p. 274.

[171] See the list IIIR. 68, 26 _seq._

[172] Thureau-Dangin, _Journal Asiatique_, 1895, pp. 385-393. The name of this deity has been the subject of much discussion. For a full discussion of the subject with an account of the recent literature, see an article by the writer in _The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures_, xii. 159-162.

[173] Arising perhaps after _Im_ came into use as the ideographic form.

[174] _Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch._, xi. 173-174 and pl. 1, col. i. 7.

[175] See p. 145 and also p. 161.

[176] Belser in Haupt and Delitzsch, _Beitrage sur a.s.syriologie_, ii.

187 _seq._, col. vi. i. 3 _seq._

[177] The character of this part of the hymn is quite different from that which precedes.

[178] For further notices of these G.o.ds, see chapter x.

[179] See above, p. 122.

[180] One might include in the list also Nin-igi-nangar-bu, Gushgin-banda, Nin-kurra, Nin-zadim (from Nabubaliddin's Inscription), but these are only so many epithets of Ea or various _forms_ under which the G.o.d came to be worshipped. See p. 177.

[181] We may now look forward to finding many more G.o.ds in the rich material for this period unearthed by the University of Pennsylvania Expedition to Niffer.

[182] See chapter x.

CHAPTER IX.

THE G.o.dS IN THE TEMPLE LISTS AND IN THE LEGAL AND COMMERCIAL DOc.u.mENTS.

Besides the historical texts in the proper sense, there is another source for the study of the Babylonian pantheon.

Both for the first and for the second periods we now have a large number of lists of offerings made to the temples of Babylonia and of thousands of miscellaneous legal doc.u.ments. De Sarzec found a number of such doc.u.ments at Telloh some years ago, and quite recently some thirty thousand tablets of the temple archives have come to light.[183] At Tell-Sifr, Abu-Habba, and elsewhere, many thousands also have been found, belonging chiefly to the second period. A feature of these doc.u.ments is the invocation of the G.o.ds, introduced for various purposes, at times in connection with oaths, at times as a guarantee against the renewal of claims. Again, certain G.o.ds are appealed to as witnesses to an act, and in the lists of temple offerings, G.o.ds are constantly introduced. Since many of the commercial transactions recorded in these doc.u.ments, moreover, concern the temples of Babylonia, further occasions were found for the mention of a G.o.d or G.o.ds. The proper names occurring in these doc.u.ments, compounded as these names in most cases are with some deity,[184] furnish some additions to the pantheon of Babylonia. Naturally, a distinction is to be made between deities introduced in temple lists and in the course of legal proceedings, and such as are merely known through forming an element in proper names. The former const.i.tute a part of what might be called the 'active' pantheon of the time. Deities that are actually invoked by contracting parties for whatever purpose are such as are endowed with real significance; and if any of these are not mentioned in the historical texts proper, the omission is due to the lack of material.

The testimony of the legal doc.u.ments in this respect is fully as valid as is that of the historical texts. In proper names the case is different. Custom being a prominent, if not a controlling, factor in the giving of names, it may happen that the deity appearing as an element in a name is one who, for various reasons, is no longer worshipped, or whose worship has diminished in significance at the time we meet with the name. Again, deities of very restricted local fame, deities that occupy the inferior rank of mere spirits or demons in the theological system of the Babylonians, may still be incorporated in proper names.

Lastly, in view of the descriptive epithets by which some deities are often known, as much as by their real names, it frequently happens in the case of proper names that a deity otherwise known is designated by one of his attributes. Thus we find in legal doc.u.ments of the second period a G.o.ddess, Da-mu-gal, who is none other than the well-known Gula, the great healing deity; Ud-zal, who is identical with Ninib, and so written as the G.o.d of 'the rising sun';[185] and Mar-tu (lit., 'the west G.o.d'), which is a designation of Ramman.[186] Bearing in mind all these considerations, we find in the tablets of the first period, so far as published,[187] the same deities that are met with in the historical inscriptions: En-lil, Bau, En-zu (or Sin), Nin-girsu, Nin-gish-zida, Nin-mar, Nana, Nina, Shul-pa-uddu, and others. No doubt a complete publication of the Telloh archives will furnish some--not many--new deities not occurring in the historical texts of this period. A rather curious feature, ill.u.s.trated by these temple archives, and one upon which we shall have occasion to dwell, is the divine honors that appear to have been paid towards the end of the first period of Babylonian history to some of the earlier rulers, notably Gudea and Dungi.[188]