A woman of valor : Jerusalem Ancient near Eastern studies in honor of Joan Goodnick Westenholz [1 ed.] 8400091337, 9788400091330

Citation preview

A WOMAN OF VALOR: JERUSALEM ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN STUDIES IN HONOR OF JOAN GOODNICK WESTENHOLZ

EDITED BY

WAYNE HOROWITZ, URI GABBAY Y FILIP VUKOSAVOVIĆ

BIBLIOTECA DEL PRÓXIMO ORIENTE ANTIGUO 8 Director Manuel Molina Secretario José Manuel Galán Allué Comité Editorial Guillemette Andreu (Musée du Louvre) John Baines (University of Oxford) Miguel Civil (University of Chicago) Ignacio Márquez Rowe (CSIC) Miquel Molist Montañà (UAB) Walther Sallaberger (Universität München) José Miguel Serrano Delgado (Universidad de Sevilla) Consejo Asesor Marilina Betrò (Università di Pisa) Barbara Böck (CSIC) Andrés Diego Espinel (CSIC) Raymond Johnson (University of Chicago) Bertrand Lafont (CNRS - IFPO) David I. Owen (Cornell University) Richard Parkinson (British Museum) Wilfred van Soldt (Rijksuniversiteit Leiden)

A WOMAN OF VALOR: JERUSALEM ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN STUDIES IN HONOR OF JOAN GOODNICK WESTENHOLZ

EDITED BY

WAYNE HOROWITZ, URI GABBAY Y FILIP VUKOSAVOVIĆ

CONSEJO SUPERIOR DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTÍFICAS MADRID 2010

Reservados todos los derechos por la legislación en materia de Propiedad Intelectual. Ni la totalidad ni parte de este libro, incluido el diseño de la cubierta, puede reproducirse, almacenarse o transmitirse en manera alguna por medio ya sea electrónico, químico, óptico, informático, de grabación o de fotocopia, sin permiso previo por escrito de la editorial. Las noticias, los asertos y las opiniones contenidos en esta obra son de la exclusiva responsabilidad del autor o autores. La editorial, por su parte, sólo se hace responsable del interés científico de sus publicaciones.

Catálogo general de publicaciones oficiales http://publicaciones.060.es

~

GOBIERNO DE ESPAÑA

MIN ISTERIO DE CIENCIA E INNOVACIÓN

.a:

1

©CSIC © Wayne Horowitz, Uri Gabbay y Filip Vukosavovié NIPO: 472-10-130-5 ISBN: 978-84-00-09133-0 Depósito Legal: M-30764-2010 Impreso en: Solana e Hijos, A.G., S.A. Impreso en España. Printed in Spain En esta edición se ha utilizado papel ecológico sometido a un proceso de blanqueado ECF, cuya fibra procede de bosques gestionados de forma sostenible.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword ................................................................................................................................. Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................... Conventions ............................................................................................................................. I. Mother and Child or Sexual Mates ............................................................................... Tzvi Abusch II. “The Bride of the Sea”: The Traditions about Astarte and Yamm in the Ancient Near East ......................................................................................................... Noga Ayali-Darshan III. Incised Scapulae in a Cultic Context from Philistine Ekron ........................................ Trude Dothan and Alexandra S. Drenka IV. The King of the Demons: Pazuzu, Bagdana and Ašmedai ........................................... Uri Gabbay V. Stars, Cows, Semicircles and Domes: Astronomical Creation Myths and the Mathematical Universe ......................................................................... Wayne Horowitz VI. Name Midrashim and Word Plays on Names in Akkadian Historical Writings .......... Victor Avigdor Hurowitz VII. Decapitation of Statues and Mutilation of the Image’s Facial Features ....................... Natalie N. May VIII. Divine Love: Nanna, Ningal and their Entourage on a Clay Plaque ............................ Tallay Ornan IX. “Damkianna shall not bring back her burden in the future!”: A New Mythological Text of Marduk, Enlil and Damkianna ................................................... Takayoshi Oshima X. Gates of the Netherworld .............................................................................................. Shalom M. Paul XI. Democratie Primitive? .................................................................................................. Marcel Sigrist XII. Private Collection of Cuneiform Tablets in Jerusalem (II) ........................................... Filip Vukosavović XIII. A New Look at the Nippur Homicide Trial .................................................................. Raymond Westbrook ‫ז״ל‬ XIV. Enki And Ninmaḫ: An Interpretation ............................................................................ Aage Westenholz XV. A Syrian Clay Figurine in the of Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv ................................ Irit Ziffer

7

9 11 12 13

19 35 57

73 87 105 119

145 163 171 183 195 201 205

FOREWORD

This volume is for our friend Joan, a true Woman of Valor. Joan has been involved in the work of Assyriology for a lifetime that has brought her from the great centers of American Assyriology in Philadelphia and Chicago, to the holy city of Jerusalem where she recently retired from her position as Chief Curator of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem. In honor of Joan’s many contributions to the field, and her countless personal kindnesses – including those wonderful dinners at her apartment – we, Joan’s friends with ties to Jerusalem, have come together in this modest mode of appreciation. We look forward to many more years of fruitful contacts with Joan both here in the byways of Jerusalem, and beyond. Wayne Horowitz Uri Gabbay Filip Vukosavović

9

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Joan Goodnick Westenholz came to Chicago to study in the PhD program of the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations and completed her dissertation in 1971 on “Some Aspects of Old Babylonian Syntax” under the supervision of Erica Reiner. She came back to Chicago to work as a Research Associate on the Assyrian Dictionary Project in 1978, and over the next thirty years Joan returned to Chicago at least eight times to lend her expert skills to the production of the Dictionary volumes. Joan has had a hand in the preparation of CAD volumes N, Q, P, R, S, T, Š, and U/W, ranking her among the most prolific “outside collaborators” along with Hermann Hunger, Burkhart Kienast, and Johannes Renger. The scholarly imprint on the Dictionary left by each of these long-term and repeat visitors may be invisible to the larger academic community but is highly esteemed by the cognoscenti. In addition, I always have been grateful for Joan’s contribution to the daily life of the project – her smile, her unflagging enthusiasm, her diligence and perseverence, and her frequent cries of triumph when a particularly vexing lexicographic knot was untangled. With my gratitude for Joan’s contributions to the Assyrian Dictionary and for her friendship over the decades, Martha T. Roth *** Joan Westenholz always set the highest of standards for scholarship. Serving as Chief Curator of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem for two full decades, she had the opportunity to expand beyond her own expertise of Assyriology and delve into later periods and a wide variety of ancient cultures. Joan joined the Museum before the building itself was completed. Together with Museum Founder, the late Dr. Elie Borowski, and a team of expert professionals including scholars, exhibition designers and various consultants, she pored over the research and wrote labels and panels for the artifacts that were to fall into the poetic rhythm of the chronological galleries of the Museum. What today is presented as an excellent flow and connection of concept, history and Bible all in their symbiotic stance in the galleries, began as a sea of information that required thorough research and study before being able to pull together into a cohesive exhibition. What makes the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem different than other Museums? It tells a story: a universal story for people of all faiths. The Biblical narrative and its historical context are revealed as each gallery in the Permanent Exhibition presents yet another stage in the development of civilization.

11

She was a phenomenal resource of knowledge and information, with keen attention to detail. Working with Joan was a learning experience, as she imbued her work with serious content and thorough research in order to make each new exhibition an educational experience for scholar and layperson alike. In August 2006, Dr. Joan Goodnick Westenholz was awarded the Curators Prize by the Israeli Ministry of Culture for her work as Chief Curator of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem. The prize specifically recognized her "contribution to understanding the history of the People of Israel against the background of the cultures of the ancient near east." This was first time that the Curators Prize was awarded to a curator of ancient art and archaeology. Having had the privilege of working directly with Joan for so many years, this professional recognition of her work came as no surprise. On behalf of everyone at the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem, I wish Joan the very best of luck in all of her future endeavors and hope that the road ahead continues to enrich both the scholarly world and inspire all the rest of us. Amanda Weiss Managing Director Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem

12

I MOTHER AND CHILD OR SEXUAL MATES TZVI ABUSCH

It is a pleasure to honor Joan Goodnick Westenholz with this modest contribution. Joan is a distinguished philologist and cultural historian. Though most of her specialized work is centered on Mesopotamia – especially on the literature and lives of elite women in that culture, her scholarship has a breadth that few attain, extending from Mesopotamia across the Near East to Egypt and the Mediterranean. Joan is also a friend; so I wish to propose a solution to a small problem that was once addressed by Joan (and Aage Westenholz) in a study of an Old Akkadian incantation. And if I have arrived at a different solution, this study is no less a mark of my respect and admiration for Joan’s philological and literary work, and it is perhaps an appropriate gift to a friend of over forty years with whom I share various interests as well as occasional disagreements. The problem I have in mind is the meaning of Maqlû VII 24.1 In synoptic form, line 24 reads: K 2950 + K 8968 (+) K 5350 + VAT 10059 N 1423 + Ni 2927 +

U8 [ ] [làḫ]-ri [ ] [ [

im-mer-šá ⌈UDU⌉.NÍTA-šá UDU.NÍTA-šá UDU.NÍTA

ar-ma-šá ar-ma-šá ár-m[aAMAR.MAS.DÀ ] M]AS.DÀ ar-ma-šu MAS.DÀ MAS.DÀ MAS.DÀ MAS.DÀ

MÍ.ANŠE MÍ.ANŠE MÍ.ANŠE ⌈a⌉-ta-nu [ .A]NŠE

mu-ur-šá m[u] ] mu-ur-šú mu-ur-šá ⌈mu⌉-ur-šú

This line is part of the incantation VII 22-28. 22 23 24 25 26

ÉN araḫḫēka ramānī araḫḫēka pagrī2 kīma dŠakkan irḫû būlšu laḫru/a immerša ṣabītu/a armâša a atānu/a mūrša epinnu erṣeti irḫû erṣeti imḫuru zēraša addi šipta ana ramāniya

1

The line count follows my edition of the text. Line 24 = line 25 in Meier's edition: G. Meier, 1937, 1966.

2

line 24 a var. ḫuzāla. line 28 a var. lissuḫ (unless suḫ here has the cvcv value suḫu) | b–b absent | c + ÉN, te ÉN.

13

TZVI ABUSCH 27 28

lirḫe ramānīma lišēṣi lumnu u kišpī ša zumriya lissuḫū a b- ilū rabûtu -b | c Incantation. I impregnate you, my self, I impregnate you, my body. As Šakkan impregnated his herd, ............., (As) the plow impregnated the earth, the earth received its seed, So I cast the spell on my self. May it impregnate myself and expel the evil, And may the great gods extirpate the witchcraft of my body. (TU6 ÉN)

Scholars have been divided over the meaning of line 24, most of all as regards which member of each pair of animals is the subject of the action. One opinion holds that the male was the actor; accordingly, the male would have to have been an adult animal, not a young one, and would have impregnated the female, as Š akkan impregnated his herd: “her ram the ewe, her buck the gazelle, her donkey the jenny.” For example: – AHw I, p. 73 s. arwium (“Gazellenbock”): “wie befruchtet hat ṣabīta ar-ma-šá (Nom.).” – CAD A/2, s. armu A, p. 293b: “kīma Sumuqan irḫû būlšu laḫra immerša ṣabīta ar-ma-ša (var. AMAR-ša) atāna mūrša just as Šumuqan impregnated his cattle, (so did) the (lit. her) ram (impregnate) the ewe, the buck the gazelle, (and) the ass the jenny.” – CAD M/2, s. mūru, p. 229: “kīma DN irḫû būlšu laḫru immerša SAL.ANŠE mu-ur-ša just as Šakkan has impregnated his cattle, its ram, the ewe, its stallion, the she-donkey.” – Joan and Aage Westenholz, 1977: 214-215: As Šakan (god of the wild animals) made his herds pregnant, The goat (was made pregnant by) her buck,3 The ewe (by) her ram, The jenny (by) her donkey. – Jerrold S. Cooper, 1996: 50: Like Šakkan inseminates his flock, The ewe its ram, the gazelle its buck, the she-ass its foal.

The objections to this translation are: 1) the order is unexpected; we expect the actor to come first, especially if we accept the parallelism of this line with the previous one (kīma d Šakkan irḫû būlšu). 2) If the male is the actor, the pronominal suffix should have been attached to the female rather than to the male. 3) Lexically, the males in two of the three pairs seem to represent a young male and not a sexual mate: young fits the meaning of mūru, and the variant AMAR.MAŠ.DÀ: ḫuzālu indicates that armû here represents a young gazelle. Note that the authors combined Maqlû VII 22-24 and AMT 67/3: 3-5 (the latter from MSL VIII/1, p. 31) and read: enza kazzaša laḫra immerša atāna mūrša.

3

14

MOTHER AND CHILD OR SEXUAL MATES

Perhaps having some of these considerations in mind, others have concluded that the mother was the subject but have understood reḫû of the previous line as not denoting sexual impregnation: – Knut. L. Tallqvist, 1895: 93: wie der Flurengott sein vieh lieb hat, wie die schaafmutter ihr lämmchen, die gazelle ihr kindchen, die eselin ihr füllen. – Antoine Cavigneaux, 1999: 266: As Šamkan impregnates his herd, the ewe her lamb, the gazelle her young, the jenny her donkey foal.

Cavigneaux does not take the verb reḫû here to mean sexual impregnation; rather, he understands it as referring to the mother licking her child, and thereby caring for it and protecting it (for Cavigneaux’s discussion of reḫû, see especially pp. 260, 269-270).4 The objection to this understanding of our passage is that it might not do justice to the meaning of the verb in line 23 and the context of impregnation in the surrounding lines, for reḫû here certainly seems to refer to sexual impregnation. Obviously, J. Goodnick Westenholz, A. Westenholz, and J. Cooper (and others) would disagree with this translation. But, interestingly enough, they do think that this translation comes close to representing the original meaning of the text, for J. Goodnick Westenholz and A. Westenholz, followed by Cooper, are not oblivious to the fact that according to their translation the Maqlû text has an awkward word order (object-subject), and thus – influenced certainly by the Old Akkadian text in the service of which our Maqlû passage was mentioned (’enzum kalūmiśa laḫrum puḫādsa atānum mūraś) – they suggest that the original text had the order and meaning mother-child and probably had re’û rather than reḫû, but that the shift of re’û to reḫû occasioned the replacement of the young by the male mate (“Help for Rejected Suitors,” p. 215 n. 31). To this Cooper adds the observation that the replacement was incomplete, for the last pair retained the relationship mother-young (“Magic and M(is)use,” p. 51). It seems to me that there is a more obvious solution to the problem under study, a solution that both preserves the normal meaning of reḫû (to impregnate sexually) and accords with the order of female-male, the attachment of the suffix to the male, and the occurrence of male young. Line 24 takes its meaning from the surrounding lines that describe Šakkan fertilizing/impregnating his Herd, and Plow fertilizing Earth and Earth receiving Seed. On the face of it, line 24 seems to complete the thought of the line that precedes it (line 23), a thought that is paralleled by the following line (line 25). Actually, line 25 provides the solution to our problem:

Cavigneaux is thus in fundamental agreement with Tallqvist. It would appear that the first named editor of the volume in which Cavigneaux's essay appeared probably failed to point out Tallqvist's translation to the author. Mea culpa. 4

15

TZVI ABUSCH epinnu erṣeti irḫû erṣeti imḫuru zēraša The plow impregnated the earth, the earth received its seed.

Line 25 expands and explicates lines 23 and 24; more specifically, line 25a parallels line 23, and line 25b parallels line 24. As regards 25b //24: the earth of 25b parallels the female animals of 24; the seed of 25b parallels the male animals of 24. The latter half of line 25 indicates that line 24 treats the relationship of a mother animal to her young rather than the relationship of a male to his mate: just as the earth receives seed, so the female receives her young. This agrees with the fact that the nomenclature for the males is best understood as designating young offspring, with the female-male order, and with the definition of the male by its suffix as belonging to the female. Still, there remains some uncertainty about how to interpret line 24, for the female animals are parallel not only to erṣetu (earth) of line 25 but also to būlu (herd) of line 23. If line 24 is simply an expansion of line 23, then the female animals are representatives of the herd būlu, the verb reḫû carrying over also to line 24. If so, the mothers are the understood object of the preceding verb, i.e., the female animals stand in apposition to būlu, so that both the female and male animals are in the accusative case (i.e., a double accusative): as Šakkan impregnates his herd, each female mother with her young.5 Alternatively, if line 24 is to be read in the same manner as line 25b, then the mothers, rather than being the object of impregnation, are the recipients of the young: just as the earth receives the seed, so the mothers receive their young. The female animals are still in apposition to būlu, and just as erṣetu occurs twice, first as an object and immediately following as a subject, so the female animals—collective būlu—are impregnated and then individual mothers receive the young. If so, line 24 contains an ellipsis: maḫāru is to be understood as the omitted verb (X (receives) her Y), and the female animals are to be construed in the nominative case and the young in the accusative case. But we need not decide this last point. For whatever the case, we have seen that line 25 explicates the meaning of lines 23-24 and has allowed us to resolve our problem. Line 25 indicates that line 24 treats not sexual mates but rather mothers and children, but that all the same it does deal with impregnation rather than just caring. Accordingly, line 24 should be translated: “the ewe her lamb, the gazelle her young, the jenny her donkey foal.”

While going over my notes for this article I noticed Meier’s translation and realized that probably he had already arrived at this conclusion: “wie Sumuqân befruchtet sein Vieh, das Schaf mit seinem Lamm, die Gazelle mit ihrem Jungen, die Eselin mit ihrem Füllen” (p. 47). 5

16

MOTHER AND CHILD OR SEXUAL MATES

Bibliography Cavigneaux, A. 1999

“A Scholar’s Library in Meturan? With an edition of the tablet H 72 (Textes de Tell Haddad VII),” in: T. Abusch and K. van der Toorn (eds.), Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretative Perspectives (AMD I), Groningen: 251-273.

Cooper, J. S. 1996 “Magic and M(is)use: Poetic Promiscuity in Mesopotamian Ritual,” in: M. E. Vogelzang and H. L. J Vanstiphout (eds.), Mesopotamian Poetic Language: Sumerian and Akkadian (CM 6), Groningen: 47-57. Meier, G. 1937 Die assyrische Beschwörungssammlung Maqlû (AfO Beiheft 2), Berlin. 1966 “Studien zur Beschwörungssammlung Maqlû,” AfO 21: 71-81. Tallqvist, K. L. 1895 Die assyrische Beschwörungsserie Maqlû, Vol. I (ASSF 20/6), Leipzig. Westenholz, J. and A. 1977 “Help for Rejected Suitors: The Old Akkadian Love Incantation MAD V 8,” Orientalia NS 46: 198-219.

17

II “THE BRIDE OF THE SEA” THE TRADITIONS ABOUT ASTARTE AND YAMM IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST* NOGA AYALI-DARSHAN

Some of the many different versions of the story of “Baal and Yamm,” that were common in the ancient Near East,1 contain a peculiar story of how the sea, or certain sea creatures, was aroused by the sight of the goddess. The Egyptian versions – the “Astarte Papyrus” and an episode from the tale “The Two Brothers” – suggest the seduction of Yamm by Astarte. The Hurro-Hittite versions mention the seduction of Ullikumi and Hedammu – two creatures who were created in the sea to fight the storm god – by the storm god’s sister, who is known as “IŠTAR, Queen of Nineveh.” The Hittite and Egyptian versions, and their affinity to one another, have been studied in modern research.2 However, the meaning of the narrative, i. e., the sea’s (Yamm) seduction by the goddess (Astarte), has not been fully investigated. Furthermore, the fact that a story about Yamm and Astarte is never mentioned in any of the tablets unearthed at Ugarit,3 the only culture which told the story of Baal and Yamm in its original West-Semitic language, is indeed puzzling. In the following pages, I will review all the texts which mention the connection between Astarte and Yamm, particularly the SyroMesopotamian sources, which have not yet been discussed satisfactorily in this context.4 I believe that in these very sources lies the significance of the story of Astarte in the cycle of the tales of Baal and Yamm.

* I am pleased to dedicate this article to Dr. Joan Goodnick Westenholz, who has taught us much about the great goddesses of the ancient Near East. My sincere gratitude goes also to Prof. Wayne Horowitz and Prof. Edward L. Greenstein for their valuable comments on earlier versions of this article. For a brief discussion about the dispersion of the story of Baal and Yamm in the ancient Near East, see: Greenstein 1982: 195–216; Schwemer 2001: 226–237; Schwemer 2008: 24–27; Smith 1994: 20–36, 58–114; Wyatt 1998: 833–882. This topic will be fully investigated in my upcoming Hebrew University Ph. D. dissertation: “The Dispersion of the Story of the Combat between Baal and Yamm in the Ancient Near East: Sources, Traditions and History,” under the supervision of Prof. E. L. Greenstein and Prof. W. Horowitz. 1

See, e. g., Helck 1983: 215–223; Houwink ten Cate 1992: 118–119; Schneider 2003: 606–607; Schwemer 2001: 450-454.

2

3

Nevertheless some scholars had tried to find our narrative there. See e. g.: Gaster 1952: 82–85.

A very limited discussion can be found in: Oliva 1993: 94, but this does not include a discussion of the mythological sources, nor give a satisfactory overview.

4

19

NOGA AYALI-DARSHAN

A. The Egyptian Sources The most important Egyptian source concerning the matter is the “Astarte Papyrus”, which was written around the time of Amenhotep II.5 Here, among other deities, three of the heroes and heroines of the Baal cycle are mentioned: Yamm, Astarte and Seth – who is Baal.6 The fragmentary papyrus relates how the Egyptian gods feared Yamm (spelled ym), the ruler of the land, and sought to appease him with offerings. When this failed, they turned to Astarte, and asked her to approach him with an offering. The dilapidated state of the papyrus prevents us from knowing why Astarte had been chosen for this task, and what more was required of her. What does remain is the depiction of some of her actions in front of Yamm when he saw her, as follows (ll. 2, x 17-19): Then he (Yamm) lifted up [his face… and she (Astarte) was] singing and laughing at him. [… Then Yamm] saw Astarte while she was sitting on the edge of Yamm (p3 ym). Then he said to her: “Where have you come from, O daughter of Ptah, O angry and raging goddess? Have you worn out your sandals that are on your feet; have you frayed your clothes that are on you, by the going and coming that you have done from the sky and the earth?” Then [Astarte] said to him […]

Astarte’s words do not survive, nor do the rest of the lines (about 20), which probably contain her dialogue with Yamm. The papyrus is legible again at the end of the meeting between the two, in which Yamm probably asks her to convey his desire for her to the nine gods (ll. 3, y 2-1): [… say to Ptah before(?)] the Ennead: “If they give to me your [daughter(?)…], what would I do against them for my part?” Astarte heard what Yamm (p3 ym) said to her. She lifted herself up to go to the Ennead to the place where they were gathered.7

It seems that, as the plot progressed, something had gone wrong, requiring Geb and Nut to offer more tribute to Yamm. Once this had failed, Seth himself arrives and apparently fights Yamm and defeats him.8 The “Astarte Papyrus” tells us, therefore, of Astarte’s use of singing and laughter (l. 2, x 17: [...] ḥsi ḥr sbt im.f) and apparently even her nakedness (l. 2, x 19: in iw sd n3i ḥbsw nty ḥr.t). Yet, the broken state of the papyrus does not allow us to know how Yamm reacted to Astarte’s allurements; but it does seem that he has desires for her by the end of their meeting.

5

Collombert, Coulon 2000: 226–242.

There is an extensive bibliography on the Seth-Baal issue. See e. g.: Stadelmann 1967: 32-47, and recently: Wettengel 2003: 234-249. 6

7

The citations from “Astarte Papyrus” were translated by Ritner 1997: 35–36.

The last episode is very fragmentary, and cannot be deciphered. However, Seth is mentioned there, and some medical incantations (Hearst Papyrus; Berlin Papyrus 3038; The Leiden Magical Papyrus I 343 + I 345) reveal that Seth (or Baal) indeed defeated Yamm. Thus, we assume this occurred in the “Astarte Papyrus” as well. See e. g.: Posener 1953: 469. 8

20

“THE BRIDE OF THE SEA”: THE TRADITIONS ABOUT ASTARTE AND YAMM...

We also know of Yamm’s desire for the beautiful daughter of the gods of the Lebanon Valley from the tale “The Two Brothers” (p. d’Orbiney), which was written during the New Kingdom period. This narrative tells of two brothers who eventually became kings of Egypt. One of the episodes tells how the brother Bata fled from his brother Anubis to the Pine Valley (t3 int p3 ‘š), namely, the Lebanon Valley,9 where the gods had fashioned for him a beautiful woman (ll. 9, 7-8): Then Khnum made a companion for him, who was more beautiful in body than any woman in the whole land, for every god was in her.

Bata warned his wife with the following words: “Do not go outdoors, lest Yamm (p3 ym) snatch you.” However, a few days later, Bata’s wife went out and sat under a pine tree, and: Then she saw Yamm surging behind her, and she started to run before it and entered her house. Thereupon Yamm called to the pine, saying: “Catch her for me!” And the pine took away a lock of her hair. Then Yamm brought it to Egypt.10

The mention of Yamm, the Lebanon Valley (t3 int p3 ‘š) and a beautiful daughter of the gods (iw.st nfr m ḥ‘wt.st r st-ḥmt nbt… iw ntr nb im.s) surely points to a Northwest Semitic background for this episode. This point is strengthened even further by the comparison with papyrus Jumilhac, in which Bata there is named Seth.11 It seems, therefore, that the tale of “The Two Brothers” also contains the character Yamm, who yearns for the gods’ daughter, who resides in the Lebanon Valley. Her beauty, her divine origin and the traditions that link her to Seth and Yamm – all of them point to Astarte.

B. The Hurro-Hittite sources Many have compared the Egyptian versions above to two of the Hurro-Hittite texts from the story cycle of Kumarbi.12 In them, the sister of the storm god, who is identified by a Sumerogram IŠTAR, lures her brother’s enemies who live in the sea. “The Song of Hedammu” (CTH 348), which is compiled from a few fragments, tells about the sea creature Hedammu, who was born to Kumarbi, the adversary of the storm god, and Sertapsuruhi, the daughter of the sea god. After what seems to have been a lost battle between Hedammu and the storm god, Kumarbi plots together with the sea god, apparently against the storm god (fragment 9), while IŠTAR decides to use her charms to tempt Hedammu to leave the sea, apparently to an appropriate place where the storm god could fight against him (fragments 11-16):

9 10

Gardiner 1933: 128. The citations from “The Two Brothers” were translated by Lichtheim 1997: 87.

11 Kaiser 1962: 78-80; Redford 1990: 833; Schneider 2003: 624-625; Schneider 2008: 315–326; Wettengel 2003: 234-249; pace, e. g.: Tower Hollis 1990: 138-140. 12

See n. 2 above.

21

NOGA AYALI-DARSHAN

… She washed herself […] She anointed herself with fine perfumed oil. She adorned herself… IŠTAR held up her naked members before Hedammu. Hedammu began to speak words to IŠTAR: “What deity are you, that [you] do not […?] … Hedammu [sees(?) the beautiful goddess], and his penis spring forth… The valiant Hedammu came down from his throne, from the sea. He came out onto the dry land [...]

The last piece known to us from the Kumarbi cycle, “The Song of Ullikummi” (CTH 345), also tells of IŠTAR’s attempt to allure the rock Ullikumi, who was born to Kumarbi and a rock in the lake. Ullikumi was placed in the sea to be hidden from the storm god. But once discovered, the storm god, his servant and his sister climb Mount Hazzi (Mount ṣpn of Ugarit)13 to better see Ullikumi. The storm god’s spirit breaks upon seeing him, but IŠTAR immediately encourages him, and wishes again to seduce Ullikumi (B ii, 5-12): [IŠTAR] dressed and ornamented herself [with…]… She fumigated with cedar. She struck the BALAG.DI and the galgalturi. She set the “gold thing” in motion, and she took up a song, and heaven and earth echoed it back.14

This, however, is doomed to fail as the rock is now deaf and blind. At the end, it seems, the storm god defeats Ullikumi with the help of Ea.

C. The Ugaritic Sources Despite Astarte’s great importance in the Canaanite world, her appearance in Ugaritic myth is surprisingly rare. Even in the Baal cycle (KTU 1.1-6), she is hardly mentioned. In fact, she is documented on 1.2 tablet alone, which tells of Baal’s combat with Yamm. In her first appearance, she tries, along with Anat, to stop Baal from killing Yamm’s messengers, who had attempted to capture Baal and make him a slave to Yamm (KTU 1.2, ii, 38-41): Then Prince Baal is shaken. [He seize]s with his hand a striker, in his right hand a slayer. The lads he st[rikes(?). His right hand A]nat seizes, his left hand Astarte seizes (saying): “Why did [you st]rike [Yamm’s messengers, The lega]tion of Judge Nahar?”

In her second appearance, Astarte reprimands Baal a moment before his victory over Yamm is declared (ibid. iv, 28-32): By name Astarte rebukes (him) (gʻr): “Scatter (or: Be ashamed) (bt),15 O Mighty Ba[al], scatter (or: Be ashamed) (bt), O Cloudrider. For our captive is Prin[ce Yamm. For] our 13

Cf. RS 20.24: 5, KTU 1.118: 4.

14

The citations from the Hittites myths were translated by Hoffner 1998: 53-54, 60-61.

It is difficult to understand the verb bt in this context. Smith 1994: 324, and others, translated ‘to scatter’, deriving it from the Arabic verb batta, while Greenstein 1982: 204-205, and others, translated ‘to be ashamed’, deriving from the Hebrew bwš. Both of the explanations are complicated. The speech-opening formula of Astarte is gʻr, so it is difficult to understand why, according to the first translation, Astarte should rebuke Baal for not scattering Yamm, but only destroying him (l. 27: yqt b‘l w yšt ym ykly tpṭ nhr). On the other hand, according to the second translation, it is not obvious why Baal is to be ashamed. Olley 1976: 233-234, suggested that Astarte rebuked Baal because he took the life of a captive; Greenstein suggested it is because Baal already captured Yamm, therefore he shoud not kill him; Lambert 1985: 535-537, and Posener 1953: 469, thought that it is due to Astarte’s good 15

22

“THE BRIDE OF THE SEA”: THE TRADITIONS ABOUT ASTARTE AND YAMM... captive is Judge Nahar.” …and he goes out […] Mighty Baal scatters him (or: was ashamed) (ybtnn) and [s/he answers (?):] “Yamm surely is Dead! Baal rei[gns!(?)”].16

In these two sole appearances, there is no trace of Astarte’s allurements or of Yamm’s seduction by her, as is the case with the Egyptian and Hurro-Hittite versions. Nevertheless, she does appear in relation to Yamm. It should be noted that the beauty of Astarte and her seductive powers are documented in another Ugaritic myth, “Astarte the Hunter” (KTU 1.92). This myth tells how Astarte beautifies herself for a feast she makes upon her return from the hunt, a feast in which Baal covets her (ll. 25-28): [She had covered] her [body?] with a chemise of linen, [over] it she [placed] a coat of cypress-wooden mail [and] her [beau]ty wore a sheen like the male stars, [a sp]lendour(?) like the female stars of Kushan. [The v]irgin(?) – Baal desired her; he wanted to possess her [b]eauty – Demaron ([b]tlt b‘l yḥmdnh yrty [n]‘mh dmrn).17

The sources that have been reviewed thus far are from the lands to the south and north of Canaan. They clearly show that Astarte’s fidelity is to the storm god, who is her brother or her husband. However, the Egyptian and Hurro-Hittite texts hint at a unique relationship she shares with Yamm or other sea dwelling creatures, which are associated with lust and sexuality. It could be argued that Astarte was known for her sexual allurement, which may explain her use of sex as weapon. But if that is the case, why, then, is there no mention of this at Ugarit? Some have tried to solve this problem by claiming that the Egyptians borrowed these motifs from the Hittites, and so it is not Canaanite at all.18 Yet the following sources, from Syrian and Mesopotamian cities may suggest a new solution to this problem. These sources show that in the cities of north Syria, Astarte was perceived as Yamm’s consort: 1. In Emar, Yamm and Astarte are mentioned together in the list of deities, who are given offerings in the zukru festivities, which were held once every seven years (Emar 6/3 373:92):19 ana aštarti (dINANNA) ša abi dYāmi 2 tāpal KI.[MIN], To Astarte20 of abi (and) Yamm, two pairs (will be given) – ditto.

relationship with Yamm. In my opinion, none of these suggestions sound suitable. Furthermore, according to the second translation, it is difficult to understand the morphology of the verb bt when it refers to Baal in the next line (30): if it is a reflexive verb, why does it have the suffix nn (energic nun + h assimilated), and if it is causative, why is it without a consonant (y) between the two root consonants? Grammatically, the translation ‘to scatter’ is more suitable, but considering the conclusion of this article, this issue should be re-investigated elsewhere in length. See for the moment the discussion at Smith 1994: 357. 16

The citations from KTU 1.2 were translated by Smith 1994: 268, 324.

17

Translated by Dijkstra 1994: 117.

The main proponent of this solution is Helck 1983: 215–223. However, the absence of any typical Hurro-Hittite characteristics, as well as the use of Canaanite names – Astarte and Yamm, suggest Canaanite influence.

18

19

Arnaud 1986: 353, 360; Fleming 2000: 244-245 (l. 102).

20

For reading INANNA as aštarti see Emar 6/3 153: 2: [a]š-tar-ti ša ab-bi.

23

NOGA AYALI-DARSHAN

2. It seems that even Astarte’s title in the text, ša abi, is linked to the sea, and that she was known as “Astarte of the Sea.” Indeed, current research debates this point, and I shall discuss below a few of the opinions that have been offered.21 Arnaud, who was the first to publish the text, translated it as follows: “Astarte of the Sea”, apparently according to the Sumerian a.ab.ba and the Akkadian ayabba.22 However, the term abi occurs in Emar in other contexts, probably as a specific part of the temple (it is always written a-bi-i, and only once a-bi), where sacrifices and offerings were brought, particularly during the ceremonies of the month of Abu (Emar 6/3 452),23 and once in the month of Anna.24 Yet in all these occurrences as well, Arnaud translates ‘the sea’. Zadok too suggests interpreting the term abi in the context of temples as ‘the sea’, comparing it to the biblical Yam (1 Kg. 7:23-26), namely the “sacred pool of water” that stood in Levantine temples.25 However, since the word abi occurs many times in a text that deals with the ceremonies of the month of Abu (452; as a location, but also twice as the title of Astarte), many scholars have suggested to understand the term in the context of the ceremonies of the dead, rather than as ‘the sea’.26 Thus, some have interpreted it as a ‘hole in the ground’ which peers into the world of the dead (Hurrian: a-a-bi; Akkadian: apu; Sumerian: ab; Hebrew: ’ôb).27 Others suggested taking abi as an ‘ancestor’ (Akkadian: abu),28 or as an earth mound over the grave (albeit metaphorically), where the dead meet the living.29 On the other hand, in favor of abi as a place where gifts and offerings were brought, some have suggested ‘the father of the house’, who was the official responsible for the temples, and accepted his dues during the month of Abu;30 or as the place at the entrance to a temple where gifts were laid.31

21

See also Oliva 1993: 94.

22

Arnaud 1986: 353, 360. For ayabba and its origin, see below, n. 46.

E. g. in the temple of Dagan (452: 43’-46’: ina 27 ūmi… ana pāni a-bi-i ša bīt Dagan inaqqû (SISKUR-u)); in the temple of Ninkur (452: 33’: ana a-bi-i ša bīt Ninkur); in the temple of Alal (452: 50’: ana a-bi-i ša bīt Alal); in the palace (452: 39’: ana a-bi-i ša ekalli) and in bīt tukli (452: 52’ : ana a-bi-i ša bīt tukli).

23

24 Then they sacrificed at the abi of the temple of El (446: 79’: ana a-bi ša bīt DINGIR). Fleming 2000, translated DINGIR as gods, and compared it to bīt tukli. 25

Zadok 1991: 115. Cf. Lucian, De Dea Syria, 13 (Attridge, Oden 1976: 21).

For the connection between Abu and the ceremonies of the dead in Mesopotamia (and at Emar, according to some scholars) see e. g.: Cohen 1993: 319-321, 260-261, 454-455.

26

27

E. g., Sigrist 1993: 408; de Tarragon 1995: 209.

28

Fleming 1992: 300; Fleming 2000: 186-187.

29

Cohen 1993: 261, found an equivalent in the temples of Nippur (du6.kù).

30

Pitard 1996: 135-137

Pentiuc 2001: 24, derives it from the Hebrew ‘b I (1 Kgs 7: 6; Ezek 41: 25, 26) despite its vagueness in Hebrew (KBL 773 compares it to Egyptian ‘py: to stride through a place). Oliva 1993: 94, derives it from Ugaritic ap II.

31

24

“THE BRIDE OF THE SEA”: THE TRADITIONS ABOUT ASTARTE AND YAMM...

Most scholars sought to apply their interpretations on all the occurrences of the term abi in the text from Emar, either as a location name or as a title of Astarte.32 But I find it more plausible to assume that there are different terms which are homonyms, or that there is one single term which has more than one meaning. In either case, the first refers to a certain location in the temple (spelled a-bi-i, that is preceded by the prepositions ana or ana pāni only), and is associated mainly with the ceremonies of the month of Abu (though its exact meaning is vague). The second one, however, is the title of Astarte – Astarte of the Sea – which appears in different contexts and varies in its spelling ([a]š-tar-ti ša ab-bi [Emar 6/3 153:2]; iš8-tár ša a-bi [452:17’]; [iš8-t]ár a-ba-ú [274:9]; INANNA a-bi [384:2’]; INANNA ša a-bi [373:92’]). The variant ortography apparently stems from the non-Akkadian origin of the word, which prevented uniformity among the scribes.33 3. Support for the existence of a goddess called “Astarte of the Sea” may be found in Mesopotamia, where there are several occurrences of this title referring to Inanna-Ištar.34 This is the case in a Sumero-Akkadian god-list from Assyria: (KAV 73:4’+ KAV 145 rev. 3’): [dinn]i[n]-a-ab-baki=ia-bi-i-[tu];35 in a Babylonian list of temples, apparently from the Kassite period (CTL 439): bīt diš8?-t[ár?] ta-ma-[ti];36 and šumma ālu (CT 28 38, K 4079a: 11): diš8-tár a.ab.ba-ta. It is possible that two pre-Sargonic texts from Mari endow Ištar with the title: aš-tár KUR AB.BA;37 however, it is hard to determine the gender of the deity. Since there is no known connection between Ištar and Yamm or Tiamat at Mesopotamia, one has to conclude that those titles refer to “Astarte of the Sea” whom we found at Emar.38

Thus, for example, Fleming 1992: 298 (followed by. Feliu 2003: 226-228) suggested that text 452, which is dedicated to the month of Abu, was written by the priests of Astarte since she appears five times in the texts (in twice of which she bares the title ša abi). He has further emphasized the link between Inanna-Ištar and the netherworld in stories like Inanna’s descent to the underworld, and the like. However, Astarte appears in this text with other titles, while in other texts she is accompanied by the title ša abi. Furthermore, while Astarte’s connection to the underworld is clear, the connection of other deities to the abi of the underworld is not clear. 32

33

See below, n. 46.

The possibility that Inanna-Ištar in these examples reflect atrt, who is known in Ugaritic texts as atrt-ym is not commonly accepted, since the Mesopotamian atrt (ašratu, aširatu, aširtu) is associated with the mountains and the plains, through her consort Amurru (her title is hur-sag-gá mí-z[i]-dé-eš du11-ga and bēlet ṣēri). Her connection with Inanna-Ištar is known only from a mystical text of the second century BCE. See: Wiggins 1993: 135-150, and especially his words: “Mesopotamian Ashratu appears to have developed a connection with the plain and the mountain. We have no evidence that she was connected to the sea” (p. 150). For the identification of Astarte with Ištar, see already the Ugaritic tablet RS 20.24: 24. 34

35

Horowitz 1998: 304.

36

George 1993: 18, 34.

37

Charpin 1987: 74, n.9, V: 5-VI1; 78, n.17, III: 2-4.

38 Another equivalent to the title “Astarte of the sea” can be found in the Greek inscriptions and myths, where Aphrodite is called Ποντία, Eὔπλοια, Γαληναίη, Λιμευία, etc. This goddess was identified with Astarte (see Bonnet 1996: 147-150), and like her she was associated with lust and sexuality (and according to West: “she is a goddess of clearly Levantine provenance”, see: West 1997: 56-57, 291). Does Aphrodite’s title have any real connection to the Syrian Astarte? According to Parker this characteristic of Aphrodite was developed in Greece, and

25

NOGA AYALI-DARSHAN

4. Mari yields more evidence. A bowl dedicated to the River and to Astarte on behalf of the king of Mari, from the end of the Early Dynastic period or the beginning of the Old Akkadian period, bares an inscription (m. 2241), which reads as follows:39 ikūš-šamakan [šar] M[ari] šu-wed[a] šāqû (SILA3.ŠU.GABA) āpil bebu-BAD ga’iššu (GA.EŠ) dÍD daštarrat išruk Šu-weda the servant, the son of Bebu-bad the merchant, has offered (this bowl to the) River (and to) Astarte (on behalf of) Ikūš-šamakan, the king of Mari.

The importance of the river deity in Mari is also well known from later periods, and unlike the case in Mesopotamia, the River was regarded as male. Lambert argued that the inscription shows that in ancient Mari, Astarte was considered to be the consort of the river god.40 He claims that the male river deity of Mari parallels tpṭ nhr (Judge River) of Ugarit, who is also zbl ym (Prince Yamm), Baal’s adversary. If Lambert’s suggestion is correct, then Astarte as Yamm’s consort is documented in Mari already in the third Millennium B.C.E. All this evidence indicates that the inhabitants of Syria held a tradition, according to which Astarte – or to be more precise “Astarte of the Sea” – was perceived as Yamm’s consort. Indeed, under the influence of Ugarit, it has become customary to view Baal as representative of the positive force among the gods, while Yamm stands for the negative force. But the evidence from Emar and Mari, as well as evidence that I will present below, now show that Yamm was a major god in Canaan, maybe even a positive one, which makes possible his identification as consort of one of Canaan’s leading goddesses:41 1. In the Levant, from north to south, there were theophoric names with Yamm; in Ugarit (e.g. ‘bdym; ilym; mlkym),42 as well as in Mari (e.g. mu-tu-ya-ma; ha-ab-du-ú-mu),43 El-Amarna (iama), Alalah (ia-am-mu), Taanach (ahi-ia-mi)44 and even in ancient Israel (yəmû’ēl, and maybe ’ăbiyyām).45 2. The long inscription of Yahdun-Lim, the king of Mari of the Old Babylonian period, tells that when Yahdun-Lim reached the Mediterranean, he had made offerings there to the sea, and his armies bathed in it. As Malamat emphasized, these were ritual acts in honor of the sea. This practice differs from the Assyrian kings of the first millennium, who made offerings on the there is no connection between Astarte and the sea in the Near East. See: Parker 2002: 143-160. His argument now deserves renewed investigation. 39 Parrot 1967: 329. Parrot interpreted the words ga’iššu (GA.EŠ) ÍD as compound phrase and translated: “le grand merchand de l’Océan.” 40

Lambert 1985: 535-537.

For the divine nature of the sea, see also: Malamat 1992: 211–215; Malamat 1998: 24–32. The sources below include his findings and further examples.

41

42

F. Groendahl 1967: 104, 144, 316.

43

Durand 2007: 293–294. Cf. Huffmon 1965: 210-211.

44

Layton 1990: 63-66.

45

Gen 46: 10; Exod 6: 15; I Kgs 14: 31 – 15: 8. Cf. Cooper 1981: 382 (zz).

26

“THE BRIDE OF THE SEA”: THE TRADITIONS ABOUT ASTARTE AND YAMM...

shore, not to the sea, but to the gods in general. Likewise, their armies did not bath themselves in the waters of the sea, but only dipped their weapons into it. Although the scribe of the inscription did not put a divine determinative before the term ‘sea’ in the depiction of these ritual acts, he does refer to it as ayabba instead of ti’amtum (the Akkadian term for ‘sea’), which he had used in the beginning of the inscription (ll. 46-51: ana kišād ti’amtim illikma ana ayabba nīqi šarrūtišu rabîam iqqi u ṣābūšu ina qereb ayabba mê irmuk). Dossin and Malamat argue that the word ayabba is borrowed from Sumerian, which was used as a liturgical language. This then explains the scribe’s use of ayabba in the context of the ritual act in honor of the sea, due to its divine nature.46 Whatever might be the origin of this word, one cannot ignore its use in the inscription instead of the more common ti’amtum in the depiction of the ritual acts. 3. In the Ugaritic cycle of Baal, Yamm is referred to as “Prince Yamm” (zbl ym), “Judge River” (tpṭ nhr), and the “beloved one of El” (mdd il). Furthermore, the first tablet, which due to its fragmented state has hardly been translated, contains the following lines (KTU 1.1 iv, 1427): šm bny ym(!)47 ilt[…] wp’r šm ym[ …]… […] at adn tp‘r[…] ank ltpn il[ d pid] ‘l ydm p‘rt[…] šmk mdd i[l…] bt kspy d[…] bd aliyn b[‘l…] k d ynaṣn[…] gršnn lk[si mlkh lnḫt lkḥt] drkth […] whm ap l[tgršh lksih] ymḫṣk k [ ]. “Yamm is the name of my son […] and he proclaimed the honor of Yamm (lit.: the name of Yamm) […] … […] “You shall indeed proclaim [him…”] “I am the Compassionate, the god [of mercy], over my hands I proclaim [:…] ‘your name ‘beloved of E[l…]’. A house of silver […] from the hands of mighty B[aal …], for he has reviled me […] banish him from the throne [of his kingship from the seat] of his power. But if you won’t [drive him from his throne], he will beat you like […]”

These lines tell us that the myth perceived Yamm not as a usurper, but as the heir of his father, El.48

Dossin 1955: 26; Malamat 1992: 211–215. Dossin translated ayabba: ‘Océans’, and so A. L. Oppenheim, “Babylonian and Assyrian Historical Texts”, ANET3: 556. Frayne 1990: 604-608, translated: ‘Sea’ (and not just ‘sea’). Because of its resemblance to the Sumerian a.ab.ba, many scholars derived ayabba from the Sumerian, e. g. Horowitz 1998: 303. However, von Soden expressed doubts (AHw 23b) and CAD A/I disagreed with this derivation because of the different spelling, and its occurrences in Mari and El-Amarna. See also Artzi 1993: 27-28 (Heb.). Recently Durand (above, n. 43), 289, n. 345; 294 proposed to derive ayabba from the Akkadian ayābu (Heb: ‘ôyêb) and to translate it: ‘hostile area’ (with affinity, of course, to the evil Yamm) but his proposal is uncertain. Maybe one should consider again the hesitant proposal of Malamat that ayabba, when found in west Semitic area as at Mari, El-Amarna, and apparently Emar, derived from the Canaanite (Ha-y?)ym (and compare to the title of Ishtar: [dinn]i[n]-a-ab-baki=ia-bi-i-[tu]). 46

47

The tablet reads yw.

It should be noted that Yamm is also found in some Ugaritic canonical and sacrificial god-lists (KTU 1.46: 6; 1.47: 30; 1.48: 9; 1.118: 29; RS 20.24: 29), although his placement in those lists is low. 48

27

NOGA AYALI-DARSHAN

4. The mythic traditions of Canaan, which were preserved in Philo of Byblos, tied Yamm with Sidon and Beirut. Sidon, according to Philo, was the daughter of Pontos, the Greek sea (Eusebius, PE 10.27), while Beirut was given to Poseidon. The Kabeiri, the Hunters and the Fishers have “made the relics of Pontos and object of worship in Beirut” (Eusebius, PE 10.35).49 Between these two statements (about Sidon and Beirut), Philo told of a war that erupted between Damarous, who is known as Baal dmrn (cf. KTU 1.92 above) and Pontos, a war in which Baal is defeated (Eusebius, PE 10.28).50 This entire body of evidence allows one to deduce that, at some point in antiquity, Yamm was considered to be one of the major deities by the inhabitants of the coastal area of the Levant, and that this tradition reached inland to Syria. Further evidence shows that this tradition included Astarte as the consort of Yamm. However, this very tradition clashed, eventually, with another tradition, in which Astarte assists Baal, Yamm’s adversary.51 How can one bring to terms these two different traditions? It seems that the ancient Canaanite scribes already pondered over this problem, and came up with two solutions. The first solution was to keep both traditions, both the one which maintains Astarte’s connection to Yamm, and the one which reflects her loyalty to the storm god, portraying her sexual relationship with Yamm as a means to serve an end, namely, the victory of Baal over Yamm. The second solution was to ignore Astarte’s connection to Yamm completely, and not only that, but to put great emphasis on her aversion to Yamm. These kinds of solutions – either preserving the varying elements in the different traditions (the first solution), or blurring one tradition while emphasizing the opposite (the second solution) – are well known from ancient Near Eastern literature, including that of the Bible.52 If the second solution was common in the northern Levant and was found in Ugarit, it is possible that the first solution was common in the southern Levant, and from there it traveled as far as Egypt and the land of the Hittites. Unexpected proof for this assumption can arrive from the ancient Greeks, who told as well a story about a sea monster which was aroused by the sight of a beautiful girl who was captured on the sea shore. Although this story, Perseus and Andromeda, was well known in ancient Greece, it is not located in one of the many coastal

49

Translated by Attridge, Oden 1981: 53, 57.

50 The connections between Sidon, Beirut and the divine sea, were also discussed in: Baumgarten 1981: 207-209. One wonders if Philo knew a different tradition, originating in Beirut (the place of Sanchuniaton, whom Philo followed according to his testimony), which tells of the victory of Yamm over Baal. It might be that the coins which were found in Beirut, depicting Poseidon, Tyche and a ship, offer confirmation of this view. Further, these coins may also testify to the relationship between Yamm and Astarte, if this very Tyche is Astarte, as Bonnet 1996: 46, and others have supposed.

Cf. the unclear phrase ‘štrt šm b‘l in Ugarit and Phoenicia. Fleming 1992: 216-220, thought that Astarte and Baal were considered to be a couple at Emar, even though he didn’t find any epigraphic evidence. Perhaps the Biblical phrase ‘b#‘ālîm and ‘aštārôt’ (Ju 2: 13, 10: 6; 1 Sam 7: 4, 12: 10) hints to this relationship?

51

Cf. e. g. the solutions which were found by biblical authors for the existence of other gods than the God of Israel. Some took the first solution and accepted the gods after reducing them (e. g. Ps 82), while others blurred them completely and emphasized opposites, i. e., the uniqueness of the God of Israel (e. g. Deut 4), see Ayali 2005: 329330.

52

28

“THE BRIDE OF THE SEA”: THE TRADITIONS ABOUT ASTARTE AND YAMM...

sites in Greece or the islands around, but in Jaffa, one of the most important cities of the southern Levant, which was known as 'The bride of the sea' (from Arabic: ’urs ’al-baḥr).53 However, the first solution did not survive in a Canaanite language. It is the second solution – the one which sought to blur Astarte's connection to Yamm and emphasized her loyalty to Baal – which was preserved in Ugarit. Thus, evidence for the connections between Yamm and Astarte is nearly absent from the Ugraritic tablets,54 and so if it had not been for the preservation of this tradition in the neighboring cultures, we would have surely overlooked the fact that Astarte appears in the Ugaritic Baal cycle only on the tablet that relates Baal’s combat against Yamm.

Bibliography Arnaud, D. 1986 Recherches au pays d’aštata: Emar 6/3, Paris. Artzi, P. 1993 “A further Royal Campaign to the Mediterranean Sea?,” EI 24: 23-30 (Heb.) Attridge, H. W. and Oden, R. A. (eds.) 1976 The Syrian Goddess Attributed to Lucian, Missoula. Attridge, H. W. and Oden, R. A. 1981 Philo of Byblos: The Phoenician History, CBQMS 9. Washington. Ayali, N. 2005

“The Prayers for ‘Fear of God’ in the Biblical Literature and the Neo-Babylonian Inscriptions,” Tarbiz 74: 321–369 (Heb.).

Baumgarten, A. I. 1981 The Phoenician History of Philo of Byblos: A Commentary (Études préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire romain), Leiden. Bonnet, C. 1996 Astarté: Dossier documentaire et perspectives historiques, Roma. Charpin, D. 1987 “Tablettes présargoniques de Mari,” MARI 5: 65-127.

53

See Redford 1990: 832, who thinks that this story, among others, preserves the traditions of south Canaan.

54

In KTU 1.2 iii, it is even written: wn in att [l]k k[m ilm] “you (=Yamm) have no wife like the (other) gods.”

29

NOGA AYALI-DARSHAN

Cohen, M. E. 1993 The Cultic Calendars of the Ancient Near East, Bethesda. Collombert, E. and Coulon, P. 2000

“Les dieux contre la mer: le début du ‘papyrus d’Astarte’ (pBN 202),” BIFAO 100: 193-242.

Cooper, A. 1981 “Divine Names and Epithets in the Ugaritic Texts,” in: S. Rummel (ed.), Ras Shamra Parallels III (AnOr 51), Roma: 333-469. Dijkstra, M. 1994 “The Myth of Astarte, The Huntress (KTU 1.92),” UF 26: 113-126. Dossin, G. 1955 “L’inscription de fondation de Jahdun-Lim roi de Mari,” Syria 32: 1-28. Durand, J.-M. 2007

“La religion Ammorite en Syrie à l’époque des archives de Mari, ” in : G. del Olmo Lete (ed.), Mythologie et religion des sémites occidentaux, Vol. 1, Leuven: 163-708.

Feliu L. 2003 The God Dagan in Bronze Age Syria (trans. W. G. E. Watson), Leiden. Fleming, D. E. 1992 The Installation of Baal’s High Priestess at Emar (HSS 42), Atlanta. 2000

Time at Emar: the Cultic Calendar and the Rituals from the Diviner’s Archive, Winona Lake.

Frayne, D. R. 1990 Old Babylonian Period (RIM 4), Toronto. Gardiner, A. H. 1933 “Tanis and Pi Ramesse: A Retraction,” JEA 19: 122-128. Gaster, T. H. 1952 “The Egyptian “Story of Astarte” and the Ugaritic Poem of Baal,” BiOr 9: 82–85. George, A. R. 1993 House Most High: The Temples of Ancient Mesopotamia, Winona Lake. Greenstein, E. L. 1982 “The Snaring of Sea in the Baal Epic,” Maarav 3: 195–216.

30

“THE BRIDE OF THE SEA”: THE TRADITIONS ABOUT ASTARTE AND YAMM...

Groendahl, F. 1967 Die Personennamen der Texte aus Ugarit, Rome. Helck, W. 1983

“Zur Herkunft der Erzählung des sog. ‘Astarte papyrus’, ” in: M. Görg (ed.), Fontes atque pontes: Eine Festgabe für Hellmut Brunner, Wiesbaden: 215–223.

Hoffner, H. A. 1998 Hittite Myths2, Atlanta. Horowitz, W. 1998 Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, Winona Lake. Houwink ten Cate, P. H. J. 1992

“The Hittite Storm God: His Role and his Rule According to Hittite Cuneiform Sources,” in: D. J. W. Meijer (ed.), Natural Phenomena: Their Meaning, Depiction and Description in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the Colloquim, Amsterdam, 6–8 July 1989, Amsterdam: 83-148.

Huffmon, H. B. 1965

Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts:

a structural and lexical study. I, Baltimore.

Kaiser, O. 1962 Die mythische Bedeutung des Meeres in Ägypten, Ugarit und Israel, Berlin. Lambert, W. G. 1985 “The Pantheon of Mari,” MARI 4: 525-539. Layton, S. C. 1990

Archaic Features of Canaanite Personal Names in the Hebrew Bible (HSM 47), Atlanta.

Lichtheim, M. 1997

“The Two Brotherss,” in: W. W. Hallo and K. L. Younger (eds.), The Context of Scripture, Vol. 1, Leiden: 85-89.

Malamat, A. 1992

1998

“The Divine Nature of the Mediterranean Sea in the Foundation Inscription of Yahdunlim,” in: G. D. Young (ed.), Mari in Retrospect: Fifty Years of Mari and Mari Studies, Winona Lake: 211–215. “The Sacred Sea,” Mari and the Bible, Leiden: 24–32.

31

NOGA AYALI-DARSHAN

Oliva, J. 1993 “Ashtarte (ša) abi of Emar: A Basic Approach,” NABU 1993: 94 Olley, J. W. 1976 “A Forensic Connotation of bôš,” VT 26: 230-234. Parker, R. 2002 “The Cult of Aphrodite Pandamos and Pontia on Cos,” in: H. E. J. Horstnanshoff et al. (eds.), Kykeon: Studies in Honour of H. S. Versnel, Leiden: 143-160. Parrot, A. 1967 Les temples d’Ishtarat et de Ninni-Zaza, Mission archéologique de Mari III, Paris. Pentiuc, E. J. 2001 West Semitic Vocabulary in the Akkadian Texts from Emar (HSS 49), Winona Lake. Pitard, W. T. 1996 “Care of the Dead at Emar,” in: M. W. Chavalas (ed.), Emar: The History, Religion and Culture of a Syrian Town in the Late Bronze Age, Bethesda: 123-140. Posener, G. 1953 “La légende égyptienne de la mer insatiable,” AIPHOS 13: 461-478. Redford, D. B. 1990 “The Sea and the Goddess,” in: S. Israelit-Groll (ed.), Studies in Egyptology Presented to Miriam Lichtheim, Vol. 2, Jerusalem: 824-835. Ritner, R. K. 1997

“The Legend of Astarte and the Tribute of the Sea, P. Amherst xix–xxi,” in: W. W. Hallo and K. L. Younger (eds.), The Context of Scripture, Vol. 1, Leiden: 35–36.

Schneider, T. 2003 “Texte über den syrischen Wettergott aus Ägypten,” UF 35: 605-629. 2008

“Innovation in Literature on behalf of Politics: The Tale of the Two Brotherss, Ugarit, and the 19th Dynasty History,” Ä & L 18: 315–326.

Schwemer, D. 2001 Die Wettergottgestalten Mesopotamiens und Nordsyriens im Zeitalter der Keilschriftkulturen: Materialien und Studien nach den schriftlichen Quellen, Wiesbaden. 2008 “The Storm-Gods of The Ancient Near East: Summary, Synthesis, Recent Studies,” JANER 8: 1-44.

32

“THE BRIDE OF THE SEA”: THE TRADITIONS ABOUT ASTARTE AND YAMM...

Sigrist, M. “Gestes symboliques et rituels à Emar,” in: J. Quaegebeur (ed.), Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the International Conference, Leuven, 17th20th of April 1991, Leuven: 381-410. Smith, M. S. 1994 The Ugaritic Baal Cycle, Vol. 1, Leiden.

1993

Stadelmann, R. 1967 Syrisch- Palästinensische Gottheiten in Ägypten, Leiden. Tarragon, J.-M. de 1995

“Temples et pratiques rituelles,” in: M. Yon et al. (eds.), Le pays d’Ougarit autour de 1200 av. J.-C.: histoire et archéologie: actes du Colloque International, Paris, 28 juin1er juillet 1993, Paris: 203-210.

Tower Hollis, S. 1990

The Ancient Egyptian “Tale of Two Brothers”: The Oldest Fairy Tale in the World, Oklahoma.

West, M. L. 1997 The East Face of Helicon, Oxford. Wettengel, W. 2003 Die Erzählung von den beiden Brüden: Der Papyrus d’Orbiney und die Königsideologie der Ramessiden (OBO 195), Freiburg. Wiggins, S. A. 1993

A Reassessment of “Asherah”: A Study According to the Textual Sources of the First Two Millenia BCE (AOAT 235), Neukirchen-Vluin.

Wyatt, N. 1998 “Arms and the King,” in: M. Dietrich et al., (eds.), “Und Mose schrieb dieses Lied auf”: Studien zum Alten Testament und zum Alten Orient: Festschrift für Oswald Loretz zur Vollendung seines 70 (AOAT 250), Münster: 833–882. Zadok, R. 1991 “Notes on the West Semitic Material from Emar,” AION 51: 113-137.

33

III INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Several well-stratified incised bovine scapulae (shoulder blades), carved with a series of parallel notches along the upper edge, were found at Ekron of the Philistines, in a cultic context, in an Iron Age I shrine.1 This paper focuses on these scapulae, and places them within the broader context of incised scapulae found in Cyprus. Particular emphasis is given to their presence in Iron Age I sanctuaries and in nearby deposits associated with ceremonial/cultic activities. Incised scapulae have a wide geographic and chronological distribution.2 Their long tradition and popularity is manifest in their continuous appearance from the Paleolithic levels in Kebara Cave, Israel, through Neolithic Iraq and Iran, and their re-appearance in the occupational levels of the Late Bronze and Iron Ages in Cyprus and the Levant. The largest corpus of incised scapulae was recovered in Cyprus, where most were excavated in temples and shrines (Kition, Enkomi and Myrtou Pigadhes).3 The presence of incised scapulae in Philistia at Ekron, Ashkelon and Tell es-Sâfi/Gath, three of the Philistine pentapolis, as well as in the north at Tel Dor, the city of Sikilis, is evidence of their association with the Sea Peoples.4 The excavations at Ekron have yielded 17 incised scapulae, 11 of which are dated to the Iron Age I and four found in Iron Age II contexts (fig. 1). The other two were from unclear stratigraphic contexts. The Iron Age I scapulae were recovered in a continuous

The excavations at Ekron were conducted between 1981 and 1996, directed by Prof. Trude Dothan of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Prof. Seymour Gitin of the W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research in Jerusalem. The description of the shrine in Field I and stratigraphic context of the scapulae from Field I is based on excavation reports of the field archaeologist A. E. Killebrew (Dothan and Gitin 1982; Meehl, Dothan and Gitin 2006). 1

2

For an extensive list of the sites where incised scapulae have been found, see Reese 2002.

3 The incised bovine scapulae found in sanctuaries in Cyprus have been studied and published by Jennifer M. Webb (1977; 1985). 4 At Dor, at least three scapulae were found, but none in a clear stratigraphic context (Stern 2006). The Ashkelon excavations yielded several incised scapulae, only one of which was published (King and Stager 2001). At Tell es-Sâfi/Gath, four incised scapulae were recently discovered in a ninth-century BCE level (Zukerman et al. 2007). Reese (2002) mentioned incised scapula from Tell Abu Hawam, an ancient harbour with strong connections with Cyprus.

35

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

stratigraphic sequence from the initial Philistine settlement (Stratum VII) to the last phase of the Iron Age I (Stratum IVA). The largest concentration of the incised scapulae (ten) was found in Field I, on the periphery of the industrial belt, and in what was perhaps part of a residential quarter (figs. 2, 3). We will focus on the area where four scapulae — three incised and one unworked — were found in clear stratighraphic contexts, closely associated with cultic practices. In this area, a building complex shows an essentially unchanged plan from its initial settlement in Stratum VI, dating from the last quarter of the twelfth century BCE, through its last occupational level in Stratum VA, dating from the first half of the eleventh century BCE. In Stratum VI, Room 22 displayed architectural features and artefacts with cultic connotations (fig. 4).5 It included Platform 35048, Stone Pillar base 3073, and Pit 3074 (fig. 5 a, b), in which an unincised scapula Obj. No. 9674 and a kalathos (a basin) were found. The unworked scapula, found in situ, was the most significant cult-related artifact (fig. 6). It is a complete right bos (domestic cattle) scapula.6 Unincised scapulae are well known from contemporary sanctuaries in Cyprus, and have been found, for example, on the benches in the sanctuary of the Ingot god at Enkomi (see below). The special architectural features of the room 22, the finds and the presence of this earliest Iron Age I scapula at Ekron, suggest that this shrine may be one of the first cultic installations of the Sea Peoples/Philistines established in Philistia.7 The subsequent Stratum V, dated to the first half of the eleventh century BCE, yielded a rich assortment of cultic items, including three almost complete incised scapula found in shrine room 22c. The finds indicate a continuous cultic practice and associated ritual over extended periods of time. Indeed, this is not surprising, since once sanctified, a given area continued to be considered sacred.8 This tradition is also evident in Field IV, where a series of superimposed monumental public buildings with cultic rooms were excavated in Strata VI, V and IV.

Shrine Room 22c The shrine room of Stratum VA (figs. 7, 8, 9) was a part of a larger building complex with at least three other rooms (nos. 30, 33 and 20) and a passageway (21). Adjacent to the shrine room was a disposal area, where a significant amount of Philistine 1 (bichrome)

The interpretation of a building or room as cultic in nature is based on the presence of components of cultic practices, the proximity and configuration of which are taken as indications of a cultic function (Renfrew 1985: 25-26). In the initial settlement at Philistia, these components are not necessarily found in recognised characteristic configurations or within a single cultic area, as they may be in the later phases of settlement, when they become more cohesive (Gilmour 1995). 5

The scapulae from Ekron were analysed and published by Reese 2002. This one is F glenoid, with margo vertebralis, GLP 53.25, Ld 141.75, SLC 42.25, Hs 286.0. 6

7

Dothan 1990: 28; 1995: 48.

8

Dothan 2003.

36

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

pottery and special finds were uncovered, including an Ashdoda-type figurine and a lionheaded rhyton (figs. 10 a, b, 11). The latter, similar to a rhyton found at the Philistine temple at Tell Qasile and another found at Gath, was uncovered in a passageway at the entrance to the shrine. These cultic items were clearly associated with the ritual activities performed in the room, and they support its identification as a shrine. The rectangular room 22c (internal dimensions: 3.1 × 6.30 m) has an entrance in the south-west corner, partially closed by two large and irregularly-shaped stones (fig. 12). Stone 3027 (see plan fig. 7) was a hewn limestone block, which may have served as a step in the entranceway, while stone 3038, with a cut step and perforation, may have been used in association with the cultic installation of the shrine. These stones were probably in secondary use. The surface in the northern part of the room was cut away by a later pit, while the southern part was heavily coated with a white plaster floor running up to two basin-shaped depressions, most probably the negative impressions left by architectural installations which did not survive – perhaps the offering platform or bamah,9 a wellknown feature in Ekron shrines, as seen, for example, in Field I Stratum VII, Field IV Stratum VI (Building 353), and Field X.10 A prominent feature in Room 22c was free-standing Monolith 3017, possibly a baetyl, considered to have sacred significance (figs. 13 a, b). A supporting argument for the identification of this irregularly shaped stone as an aniconic cult object would be that it was found in situ, set into the floor, in close proximity to the floor-depression, where the offering platform / bamah stood. The long tradition of aniconism lasted through most of the Iron Age.11 At Ekron, the monolith which was found in Field IV, Stratum VI, Building 353,12 together with a raised rectangular hearth and bathtub, may possibly also be interpreted as baetyl.13 Near the south-east corner of the shrine room, two snake-shaped drainage channels were cut into the plaster floor. They may be related to water libation ceremonies. As mentioned above, two incised scapulae (Obj. Nos. 157 and 108) were found in Room 22c, where six small votive vessels were embedded in the white plaster floor. One of the scapulae, a complete bos scapula14 (Obj. No. 157; figs. 14 a, b, c) was recovered in the sediment extension composed of fill-like material of plaster Surface 3024 of Stratum VA.15 A series of 38 parallel and regularly spaced incisions are carved along the length of 9

The bamah was part of the local Canaanite tradition, but was also well known from Cyprus and the Aegaean.

10

Dothan 2003.

11

Mettinger 1995: 135-190; Gitin 2000: 279-295.

12

Dothan 2003: Fig. 14.

13

For a comprehensive study of a free-standing monoliths / baetyls found at Ekron see Dothan forthcoming.

F glenoid, max. L. 29.75 cm. The scapula has margo vertebralis, a missing part of tuber scapulae, right, L. c. 340, GLP 63.25 (Reese 2002). 14

In Dothan 1995: Fig. 3.11, this locus was tentatively assigned to Stratum VII, and subsequently, in Dothan 1990: 28, it was reassigned to Stratum VI. It was only when the square was more completely excavated that it was understood to belong to Stratum VA. 15

37

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

the posterior border of the ventral face. The incised area (16.5 cm. long) was polished over, indicating that the carving had been completed.16 Incisions are relatively narrow, with pointed terminals, and are consistent in the angle and depth of the notches. The precise execution – the sign of a skilled engraver – suggests that a thin and sharp implement was used. Another scapula (Obj. No. 108; figs. 15 a, b) was found in close proximity. It was excavated in a larger Pit 3022, which was cut into plaster Surface 3024, destroying most of its northern extension. The latest pottery in the pit was Philistine 1 (bichrome), associated with Stratum V.17 Scapula Obj. No. 108 – a bos scapula18 – can therefore be associated with this stratum. There are 46 surviving incisions on its surface: 23 on the glenoid fragment (L c 97.0), and 23 incisions on the larger fragment (L c 140.0), glenoid W 56.75.19 In addition, a lightly engraved vertical line encloses six horizontal incisions on the upper right-hand edge of the scapula. Parallel notches are executed in a regular pattern in terms of width, spacing and the angle of the incisions. There is a tendency to lengthen incisions as the ridge of the posterior border becomes less pronounced. As a final treatment, the incised area was polished over, like scapula Obj. No. 157. Like the other scapula, consistency in execution indicates that the craftsman was experienced and that a single engraving tool was used. On the same plastered Surface 3024, east of the floor depressions where a platform once stood, five pottery vessels were found in situ (figs. 16, 17 a, b). This assemblage, which lacked typical Philistine decoration, consisted of three bowls (fig. 17 b: 1-3), two miniature jugs (fig. 17 b:4, 5) and a rim (fig. 17 b:6), possibly of a stand.20 The vessels are smaller than is usual in such an assemblage. Similar, albeit larger, bowls are well known at Ekron. Examples were found in Cultic Building 350 in Field IV, used as foundation deposits. There, an oil lamp was found nestling within two bowls. Of special interest is one of the miniature jugs (fig. 17 b:5), with a high loop handle and debased base-ring. No exact parallels for this type are known in Philistia, but a similar jug was found in the sanctuary of the Ingot god at Enkomi, in connection with scapulae. The fourth scapula (Obj. No. 7632; figs. 18 a, b), also from general area of the shrine room, was found in a layer above plastered Surface 3024, in a construction fill (Locus 3011) that served as the foundation for the earliest Iron Age II occupation phase, but also included Iron I deposits. Therefore, although not found in its original place, this scapula – an incomplete bos scapula21 – may have belonged to the final phase of Surface 3024. At least 17 incisions are preserved on this scapula fragment, engraved along the length of the

16

This has been suggested by Webb 1985.

17

The pit was apparently cut from a post-Stratum VA level, and its contents consisted of Stratum V material.

18

It is a F glenoid, with the tuber scapulae sawn off; part of the left posterior and central region is missing.

19

Reese 2002.

20

The pottery from locus 3024 was analyzed and published by Gunneweg 1986: Fig. 2.6-11.

21

It is a F glenoid, right, glenoid and side piece W 58.25, L c225.0.

38

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

posterior border of the ventral face.22 Although an obvious attempt was made to arrange the incisions in a parallel manner with regular spacing, some incisions show considerable variation in length, depth and angle, possibly indicating less skilled craftsman. Cut-marks are relatively narrow, with pointed terminals, indicating execution with a sharp and thin engraving instrument.

Parallels As shown above, there is a clear relation between the incised scapulae at Ekron and a building with cultic connotations. Moreover, there is continuity from an earlier level, Stratum VI, where a pit was found with a complete unincised scapula, apparently awaiting treatment. The most significant parallels came from sanctuaries in Cyprus, most notably from the large and important shrine of the Ingot god at Enkomi (figs. 19 a, b)23. This cult complex, dated to the LCIIIB period, yielded over 27 incised scapulae, as well as numerous non-incised ones. The largest concentration of incised scapulae was found on a bench along the north wall and on the floor below the bench, in association with large amounts of ox skulls and pottery vessels, mainly bowls. This is the closest and most striking example of incised scapulae in a clear cultic context – a sanctuary dedicated to the Ingot god. At Kition, 12 fragmentary incised bovine scapulae were recovered in the sacred buildings of Area II, which served as the cultic quarter of the city. They range in date from the LCIIIA period through the Geometric, Archaic and Classical periods. Of special interest is the non-incised example found together with incised scapulae, as seen at Enkomi and Ekron as well. The earliest of the incised scapulae are dated, on the basis of their association with Myc. IIIC: 1 pottery, to the LCIIIA period. The majority of the scapulae was found in bothroi24 associated with Temples 1, 4 and 5.25 These bothroi deposits contained the votive material that included terracotta figurines, miniature vessels and scapulae – all objects with cultic connotations. The most complete Kition scapula came from Temple I, floor 2. It is a right scapula with 40 incisions, and traces of another five, regularly spaced, incisions along the posterior border of the ventral face.26 Like in the Ekron examples, the incised area was polished. The significant role of bovine incised scapulae is evident in their stratigraphic contexts in this sanctuary, which showed continuous use of these special objects over an extended period of time. The excavations of the sanctuary at Myrtou Pigadhes, dating from the beginning of the thirteenth to the mid-twelfth century BCE, yielded numerous fragmentary scapulae.

22

Scapula no. 7632 was published in Hesse 1986: 25, fig 4; and Reese 2002.

23

Courtois 1971: Figs. 2, 128.

Bothroi are shallow pits containing the temple offerings. Every time the temple was filled with offerings, they would be placed in such bothroi and covered up again. 24

25

Webb 1985.

26

Webb 1985: 319, Pl. B:5.

39

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Although found in a complex of rooms to the east of the sanctuary, the assumption is that they were associated with the ritual activities performed in the sanctuary. The connection between the Ekron incised scapulae and Cypriote examples is quite obvious, and provides an additional link between these regions, which shared a cultural affinity.

Discussion The numerous incised scapulae found within shrines confirm their sacred character, but their specific function and purpose is enigmatic. Various interpretations have been proposed, including the possibilities that they were used in prophecy or divination, associated with the public ritual in which the ox was the chief sacrificial animal,27 that they were record-keeping items, or that they were musical instruments.28 After studying the scapulae from the Cypriote sanctuaries in depth, Webb believes that “the Cypriot priests of the Late Bronze and Iron Ages practiced scapulomancy – a divination technique, also known as omoplatoscopy, during which the course of future events is determined by reference to the natural features of animal’s shoulder blades. In the case of the Cypriot ritual, the technique also appears to have involved a related procedure, the details of which are obscure, resulting in, or perhaps resulting from, the cutting of incisions or notches along the length of the bone.” 29 In contrast, Karageorghis is convinced, after conducting a successful experiment, that the incised scapulae served as a musical instrument: “The sound is very clear and acute, and when played rhythmically it produces the sort of “music” one might expect to accompany a religious dance.” 30 As for the choice of bone, Karageorghis explains: “The fact that bovine scapulae were preferred for producing sound during religious ritual may be interpreted as a result of the sacred character of the bull, and also because a more acute sound is produced when scraping a thin broad bone as opposed to a thick bone, e.g. from a leg.” 31

Conclusions Scapulae have been found in widespread locations in the ancient Near East, exhibiting a long history of use from the Palaeolithic to the Iron Age, and even later. Undoubtedly, the scapula was a convenient and inviting material to incise and to decorate, being readily available and tailor-made by nature. At the Philistine city of Ekron, we have been fortunate to find incised and unincised scapulae in situ, clearly associated with a twelftheleventh-century shrine. This mirrors, on a small scale, the evidence from sanctuaries in Cyprus, where many incised and non-incised scapulae were found in the contemporary 27

Dothan 1987 and 1992; Webb 1985.

28

Karageorghis 1990; Braun 2002.

29

Webb 1985: 324-325.

30

Karageorghis 1990: 159.

31

Ibid.

40

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

shrine of the Ingot god at Enkomi, as well as other shrines. The appearance of incised scapulae at Ekron, in conjunction with those found at other Iron Age I cities of Philistia – Ashkelon, Gath, and Dor – is yet another element providing a link between the settlement of the Sea Peoples in Canaan, Philistia, and Cyprus. Unlike the hallmarks of Philistine culture, which originate in the Aegean world, the distribution of these scapulae does not extend further west beyond Cyprus, and they are not to be found in the Aegean. It is to be hoped that the discovery of further scapulae will help clarify their function.

Bibliography Braun, J. 2002 Music in Ancient Israel/Palestine, Grand Rapids MI - Cambridge, UK. Courtois, J.-C. 1971

“Le Sanctuaire du Dieu au Lingot d’Enkomi-Alasia,” in: C. Schaeffer, Alasia I, Paris: 151-362.

Dothan, T. 1990 “Ekron of the Philistines, I: Where They Came From, How They Settled Down and the Place They Worshiped In,” BAR 16/1: 27-36. 1995 “Tel Miqne-Ekron: the Aegean Affinities of the Sea Peoples,” in: S. Gitin (ed.), Recent Excavations in Israel – A View to the West: Reports on Kabri, Nami, Miqne-Ekron, Dor, and Ashkelon, Archaeological Institute of America Colloquia and Conference Papers I, Dubuque: 41-59 2003 “The Aegean and the Orient: Cultic Interactions,” in: W. G. Dever and S. Gitin (eds.), Symbiosis, Symbolism, and the Power of the Past, Winona Lake: 189-213. Dothan, T. and Gitin, S. 1982

Tel Miqne (Ekron) Excavation Project Field Report. Field I NE – Areas 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Tel Miqne-Ekron Excavation and Publications Project, W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research and Institute of Archaeology, Jerusalem.

1987

“The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages (Ekron),” in: “The Rise and Fall of Ekron of the Philistines,” Biblical Archaeologist 50: 197-222.

Gilmour, G. H. 1995 “The Archaeology of Cult in the Southern Levant in the Early Iron Age: An Analytical and Comparative Approach” (Ph. D. Diss., University of Oxford). Gitin, S. 2000

“Israelite and Philistine Cult and the Archaeological Record in Iron Age II: The ‘Smoking Gun’ Phenomenon,” in: W. G. Dever and S. Gitin (eds.), Symbiosis, Symbolism, and the Power of the Past, Winona Lake: 279-296.

41

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Gunneweg, J., Dothan, T., Perlman, I. and Gitin, S. 1986 “On the Origin of Pottery from Tel Miqne-Ekron,” BASOR 264: 3-16. Hesse, B. 1986

“Animal Use at Tel Miqne-Ekron in the Bronze Age and Iron Age,” BASOR 264: 17-27.

Karageorghis, V. 1976 Kition, Mycenaean and Phoenician Discoveries in Cyprus, London. 1985 Excavations at Kition, V. The Pre-Phoenician Levels, Part II, Cyprus. 1990 “A Late Bronze Age Musical Instrument?,” Levant 22: 157-159. Killebrew, A. E. 1996 Tel Miqne-Ekron Report of the 1985-1987 Excavations in Field I: Areas 5, 6, 7. The Bronze and Iron Ages, S. Gitin (ed.), Ekron Limited Edition Series 6, W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research and Institute of Archaeology, Jerusalem. 1998 “Ceramic Typology and Technology of Late Bronze II and Iron I Assemblages from Tel Miqne-Ekron: The Transition from Canaanite to Philistine Culture,” in: S. Gitin et al. (eds.), Mediterranean Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Early Tenth Centuries BCE. In Honor of Professor Trude Dothan, Jerusalem: 379-405. King, Ph. J. and Stager, L. E. 2001 Life in Biblical Israel, Louisville. Maeir, A. 2006

“A Philistine ‘Head Cup’ (Ryhton) from Tell es-Safi/Gath,” in: Maeir and Miroschedji 2006: 335-345.

Maeir, A. and Miroschedji, P. (eds.) 2006

“I Will Speak the Riddles of Ancient Times.” Archaeological and Historical Studies in Honor of Amihai Mazar, Winona Lake.

Meehl, M., Dothan, T. and Gitin, S. 2006

Tel Miqne-Ekron Excavations 1995-1996, Field INE East Slop Iron Age I (Early Philistine Period). Tel Miqne-Ekron Excavation and Publications Project, W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research and Institute of Archaeology, Jerusalem.

Mettinger, T. N. D. 1995 No Graven Image? Israelite Aniconism in Its Ancient Near Eastern Context, (Coniectanea Biblica, Old Testament Series 42), Stockholm.

42

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

Reese, D. S. 2002

“On the Incised Cattle Scapulae from the East Mediterranean and Near East,” Bonner Zoologische 50/3: 183-198.

Renfrew, C. 1985 The Archaeology of Cult. The Sanctuary at Phlakopi, Athens. Stern, E. 2006

“Sea Peoples Cult in Philistia and Northern Israel,” in: Maeir and Miroschedji 2006: 385-398.

Webb, J. 1977

“A Scapula from Limassol – ‘Komissariato,’ No. 176, Appendix II,” in: V. Karageorghis, Two Cypriote Sanctuaries of the End of the Cypro-Archaic Period, Rome: 74-80, Pls. XXIII-XXIV.

1985

“The Incised Scapulae, Appendix VI,” in: V. Karageorghis and M. Demas, Excavations at Kition. The Pre-Phoenician Levels, Nicosia: 317-328.

Zukerman, A., Kolska-Horwitz, L., Lev-Tor, J. and Maeir, A. 2007

“A Bone of Contention? Iron Age IIA Notched Scapulae from Tell es-Safi/Gath, Israel,” BASOR 347: 57-81.

43

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Fig. 1. Tell Miqne-Ekron (photograph by Ilan Sztulman).

44

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

Fig. 2. Tell Miqne-Ekron Northest fields of excavation.

Fig. 3. Northeast Acropolis of Ekron: isometric view of levels of occupation from 13th to 6th centuries B.C.

45

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Fig. 4. Plan of the building complex in Field INE Stratum VIA and Room 22 which displayed architectural features and artifacts with cultic connotations: a platform (35048), a stone pillar base (3073) and a pit (3074), in which unincised scapula and a kalathos were found.

46

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

47

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Fig. 7. Plan of the building complex in Field INE Stratum V and the shrine Room 22c in which three incised scapulae were found

Fig. 8. The shrine 22c: the surface in the southern part of the room was heavily coated with white plaster, in which two incised scapulae and six small votive vessels were embedded.

48

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

Fig. 9. Reconstruction of the shrine showing the ofering platform / bamah, a monolith – possibly baetyl, and findspots of two incised scapulae, vessels and lion-headed rhyton.

Fig. 10 a, b. Clay figurine in the Mycenaean tradition was found in a disposal area adjacent to the shrine room.

49

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Fig. 11. A lion-headed rhyton was uncovered in a passageway (plan 21) at the entrance to the shrine.

Fig. 12. An entrance to the shrine 22c in the south-west corner was partially closed by two large and irregularly-shaped stones. Stone 3038, with a cut step and perforation may have been used in association with the cultic installation of the shrine, and Stone 3027 may have served as a step in the entranceway to Passageway 21.

50

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

Fig. 13 a, b. A prominent feature in the shrine 22c was a free-standing monolith (in section below Stone 3017), possibly a baetyl, considered to have sacred significance.

51

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Fig. 14 a, b, c. Scapula Obj. No. 157.

52

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

Fig. 15 a, b. Scapula Obj. No. 108.

53

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Fig. 17 a, b: no.1. a small, globular bowl with ring-base and red band on the rim; traces of firing on the rim indicate that it could have been used as a lamp-bowl; no. 2 is a bowl with ring base and slightly inverted rim; it is decorated with horizontal red band on the interior of the bowl; no. 3 is a bowl, base ring, it is decorated with concentric circles inside the bowl in two areas: one below the rim, and the other in center with spiral and concentric lines; no. 4 is a juglet with pinched rim, typical for Iron I, but smaller; no. 5 is a miniature jug, with high loop handle and debased base-ring; no. 6 is a rim, possibly of a stand.

54

INCISED SCAPULAE IN A CULTIC CONTEXT FROM PHILISTINE EKRON

Fig. 18 a, b. Scapula Obj. No. 7632.

55

TRUDE DOTHAN AND ALEXANDRA S. DRENKA

Fig. 19 a, b. Enkomi, the sanctuary of the Ingot God, and close-up showing a bench along the north wall of the sanctuary, where the largest concentration of incised scapulae were found, and in association with numerous ox skulls and pottery vessels.

56

IV THE KING OF THE DEMONS: PAZUZU, BAGDANA AND AŠMEDAI URI GABBAY

I. Introduction Aramaic incantation bowls of late antiquity manifest some connections to ancient Mesopotamian cuneiform culture, though to a very limited extent (Geller 2005).1 There are two types of connections with ancient Mesopotamian culture: the first are names and epithets of demons, loaned from ancient Mesopotamian names of gods, as well as from Akkadian vocabulary and phraseology (cf. Müller-Kessler and Kessler 1999; Müller-Kessler 2002: 194); the second type are typological, with the same type of phrases or types of demons appearing both in ancient Mesopotamian texts and in Aramaic incantation bowls from late antiquity, even though there may be no lexical equation. Thus, e.g., many specific types of Liliths found in the incantation bowls are actually connected to the figure of the ancient Mesopotamian demoness Lamaštu, even though the name Lamaštu is never mentioned in the texts (cf. Müller-Kessler 2001: 344-345; Geller 2005: 63-70), and the same holds true for other ancient Mesopotamian motifs and terms which can be found in the Aramaic texts (cf. e.g., Müller-Kessler 2000). The following contribution will attempt to suggest another typological non-lexical connection: an association between the king of the demons, often mentioned in the incantation bowls by the name or epithet Bagdana, and the ancient Mesopotamian king of the demons, Pazuzu.

II. The king of demons in Aramaic incantation bowls The epithet “king of demons” (with variants, see III-IV below) appears in Aramaic magical bowls in connection to various figures, the most prominent of which is Bagdana, but other names are mentioned as well: Iqarus/Tiqos, Buznay and the well known Ašmedai. Abbreviations are according to CAD (= A. L. Oppenheim et al., The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Glückstadt and Chicago, 1956-), except for the following reference: HALOT = L. Koehler and W. Baumgartner, subsequently revised by W. Baumgartner and J. J. Stamm, translated and edited under the supervision of M. E. J. Richardson, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, LeidenBoston-Köln 1994-2000. Some of the issues dealt with in this article are based on a seminar paper from 2000 presented to Prof. Nathan Wasserman. I thank Dr. James N. Ford for his assistance in the preparation of this article, and Prof. Mark Geller for reading and commenting on this article. Last but not least, I thank Dr. Joan Goodnick Westenholz, with whom I discussed several issues concerning Pazuzu over a decade ago. 1

57

URI GABBAY

Interestingly, many bowls refer to the kings of demons by different names even in the same text (e.g., Bagdana and Buznay, see below III, reference 1; Bagdana and Tiqos, see below III, reference 2). It would seem as if the figure of the “king of the demons” was a prototypical figure, who could bear various names, foremost among which is Bagdana (see Greenfield 1973: 153-154; Shaked 1995: 514-520), which is probably an epithet or a name of a type of a demon and not necessarily the unique personal name of the king of the demons (cf. Shaked 1997: 515).2

III. Bagdana, king of the demons Below is a list of various contexts in which Bagdana may appear in the incantation bowls:3 (1) Babgun Abugdana and the story of Bguzan-Lilit: This story, preserved on a Mandaic bowl in the Yale Babylonian Collection and on a Mandaic lead roll in the British Museum,4 was edited by Müller-Kessler 1996 (cf. Shaked 1997: 110-112). After introductory formulas, Bagdana (here called Babgun Abugdana) introduces himself in the first person (line 4): ’n’ hw b’bgwn ’bwgd’n’ d-hylpyt ‘l b’b qwbry’ w‘l q’rqptwn d-gṭyly’ … “I am Babgun Abugdana who slipped over the door of the graves and over the skulls of the killed ones…”

Bagdana then proceeds to tell the following story which he experienced. The story deals with Bguzan (or Buznay), daughter of Zanay-Lilith,5 who stayed in the house and slept with its master, killing his children, and attempting to separate the woman of the house from her husband by sorcery. The woman of the house comes before Buznay, who is regarded as the “king of all” (line 14: ml’k’ d-kwlhwn) and has the ability to command all the Sahirs, Dews, Humartas and Liliths. This Buznay seems to send his executioner, Gubaq-Dew (gwb’q dyw’ rwzbnh d-bwzn’y ml’kywn d-kwlhyn),6 and the “head of all” (line 18: ryš’yhwn d-kwlhwn), to chase Bguzan-Lilith out of the house. At the end of the story, Gubaq-Dew speaks in first Bagdana seems to be a designation of a type of demon, namely, a demon ruling over others, as can be seen by the plural form of this word, and the various personal names which can occur with it (cf. Shaked 1997: 515). Note also the feminine form ’bwg’d’nyt’ (parallel to masculine ’bwgd’n’) in a late Mandaic manuscript (Müller-Kessler 2005b: 139, no. 41f: 44-45). 2

3

The list does not claim to be exhaustive.

This story is apparently also paralleled in bowls from the Schøyen collection, see Shaked 1997: 111 (cf. MüllerKessler 2002: 202). 4

Note that according to the continuation of the story, Zanay-Lilith is the daughter of Baglim, daughter of the “mighty lord” (line 18). 5

According to Shaked 1997: 112 (understanding rwzbn’ as executioner with Iranian etymology). Müller-Kessler 1986: 187-190, 193, prefers to understand this as two demons: Gubaq-Dew and ‘Uz, sons of Buznay the king (reading: gwb’q dyw’ ‘wz bnh d-bwzn’y ml’k’); though this is possible (especially since a demon ‘z’, ‘Uzza, is known elsewhere, cf. Greenfield 1973: 152), in my opinion the context seems to favor an understanding of only one demon, and therefore I follow Shaked’s interpretation.

6

58

THE KING OF THE DEMONS: PAZUZU, BAGDANA AND AŠMEDAI

person, calling himself “chief angel,” and saying that he drove out the Dews and Liliths from the house of the client of the bowl (lines 24-25, with Shaked 1997: 112): kd ’tyt ‘l’ ’n’ gwb’q ryš ml’k’ rwzbnh d-bwzn’y ml’kywn d-kwlhyn “When I, Gubaq-Dew, the chief angel, executioner of Buznay, king of all, came against her...”

(2) Elisur Bagdana and the story of Hablat-Lilit/ Taklat-Lilit: A second story told by Bagdana, preserved on many bowls written in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic, Mandaic and Syriac,7 is that of Hablat-Lilit/ Taklat-Lilith, granddaughter of Zarnay-Lilith (mentioned in the previous story), who sits at the thresholds of the houses and kills the children. Following standard formulas, Bagdana (called here Elisur Bagdana/Abugdana)8 introduces himself, addressing the Lilith and adjuring her in first person:9 ’lyswr bgdn’ mlkyhwn ddywy wšlyṭ’ rb’ dlylyt’ mwmyn’ lyky ḥbls lylyt’ bt brth dzrny lylyt’… “Elisur Badana king of the Dews and the great ruler of the Liliths: I adjure you Hablas-Lilit, granddaughter of Zarnai-Lilit…”

But a different name appears in the second part of the text, where the Lilith is adjured by the spear of a hero (gybr’) angel called Qiṭrus, Iqarus or Tiqos,10 who is the ruler of the demons:11 mšb‘n’ ‘lyky dtymḥyn bṭwprs lylbkyn wbmwrnyth dtyqs gybr’ dhw’ šlyṭ ‘l šydy w‘l{y} lylyt’ “I adjure you that you be smitten in the pericardium of your heart and by the lance of Tiqos the hero who rules over the Šedas and over the Liliths.”

(3) Elisur Bagdana and the mountains: Elisur Bagdana is mentioned in an unpublished Jewish Babylonian Aramaic bowl, where he is addressed in the second person in the context of a battle against the demons in the mountains (Müller-Kessler 2001: 350, n. 56):

Müller-Kessler 2001: 346-352, Shaked 1999: 193, Müller-Kessler 2005b: 61-67, nos. 12, 12a, 13, and unpublished bowl cited in p. 62, n. 24. 7

I follow Shaked 1999: 185, n. 45 in understanding ’l’yswr (and variants) as a personal name, since Bagdana usually appears with an extra personal name or epithet. However, it is possible that this is actually an introductory formula (“for the binding of Bagdana”), see Müller-Kessler 2001: 350, n. 56).

8

According to Shaked 1999: 193, D/2 (Schøyen Collection, MS 1928/47). Note the variant in BM 91769 (cf. Müller-Kessler 2001: 346), that adds the words q’ymn’ ’n’ (“I am standing”) after the name/title Abugdana, emphasizing that also the introduction with the titles of Bagdana/Abugdana is part of his speech in the first person. 9

There are many variants to this name, probably indicating that it was not understood at the time of the writing of the bowls (Müller-Kessler 2001: 347, n. 43). Cf. the following variants: ḥwnrws (Shaked 1999: 193); ‘q’rws, q’ṭry’wys, tr’q, tyqs, qyṭrws (Müller-Kessler 2001: 347-349); mqtws, sqrws (Müller-Kessler 2005b: 62, n. 24, 66). For Tiqos, cf. the last line of the bowl BM 135563: bšwm tyqws yhwh ṣb’wt ’mn ’mn slh (cf. most recently Morgenstern 2004: 210).

10

11

According to BM 91710 (Müller-Kessler 2001: 348-349).

59

URI GABBAY ’lyswr bgdn’ mlkyhwn dšydy wšlyṭ’ rbh dkl lylyt’ wdywy kwlhwn ’pyqt mn kwlyh bḥṭryn {bṭwr} bṭwryn bṭwr ‘bwṭ bṭwr rbh dyḥšwkh … “Elisur Bagdana, king of the Šedas and great ruler of all the Liliths and Dews. You drive out all of them from the entire (house)(?) with rods in the mountains, in the mountain Abuṭa, in the great mountain of darkness.”

(4) Mighty Bagdana: The following monstrous description of Bagdana appears in a Jewish Babylonian Aramaic bowl (Naveh and Shaked 1987: 198, no. 13: 3-7):12 bḥylyh drbh wbmymr’ dml’ky wbyšmyh dmry’ bgdn’ ’zyz’ rbh d’ylhy wmlkh r’yšh dšyty mlkwt’ ḥylyh ḥyl’ dzyq’ ḥwmtyh ḥwmt’ dnwr’ swgyyh swgy’ dqṭl’ mrdwtyh mrdwt’ dyqrbh dḥy ’kyl dl’ mzyg šty r’yšyh r’yš’ d’ry’ kkyh kky {d} dybrz’ šynyh šyny dnmr’ syrpy pwmyh ’dwgy dnwr’ ‘ynyh brkyn dyqdyn qwlyh gylgly b‘nn’ ṣydyh sdn’ dprzl’ ’ybryh trty ’rzpt’ ḥdyyh ḥdy’ dgbr’ lṭb’ krsyh ym’ dl’ byry gbyh gb’ dygyl’ šqyh šqy nḥšh wprzl’ sndlyh sndly pryḥy mrkbtyh mrkb’ lṭby tyty bydyh ḥrb’ dqṭl’ ’t mry’ ’t’ gws qryb ‘lyhwn ‘l š ydy w‘l dywy w‘l lylyt’ byšt’ … “By the power of the Great One, and by the command of the angels, and by the name of the mighty lord Bagdana, the great one of the gods, and chief king of sixty kingdoms, whose power is the power of a blast, whose heat is the heat of fire, whose practice is the practice of slaying, whose chastisement is the chastisement of battle, that which is raw he eats, that which is unmixed he drinks. His head is the head of a lion, his tusks are the tusks of a wild boar,13 his teeth are the teeth of a tiger, the draughts of his mouth are furnaces of fire, his eyes are glowing lightnings, his neck(?) is the spheres in a cloud, his temples are an anvil of iron, his arms are two hammers, his chest is the chest of an evil man, his belly is a sea without wells, his back is of stone(?), his legs are legs of brass and iron, his sandals are sandals of sparks, his chariot is the chariot of Laṭabs, a sword of slaying comes in his hand. There came the lord, there came the troop. You, O lord, come and encounter and make an attack against the Šedas, against the Dews, against the evil Lilith …”

(5) Šemhiza, Lord Bagdana: Bagdana appears in a Syriac bowl with the personal name Šemhiza, which should be identified with Š emihazah, the ruler of the angels in the book of Enoch (Montgomery 1912: 435):14 wḥtymyn b‘yzqtyh dšmḥyz’ mry’ bgdn’ “and they are sealed with the signet-ring of Šemḥiza, the lord Bagdana.”

(6) Bagdanas and the Blast-winds: Bagdanas (in plural form) appear in a Syriac adjuration formula in parallel to the blast-wind (zyq’):15

This text, with new parallels, will be treated in a forthcoming study by J. N. Ford. The transliteration and translation given here makes use of suggestions by J. N. Ford (personal communication).

12

For the reading and translation of kkyh kky {d} dybrz’, “his tusks are the tusks of a wild boar,” with a Pahlavi etymology, see Ford, forthcoming.

13

1 Enoch 6: 3; cf. Greenfield 1973: 152-154. Note that the word “ruler” is rendered in the Syriac translation as ryš’, cf. Bhayro 2005: 57.

14

60

THE KING OF THE DEMONS: PAZUZU, BAGDANA AND AŠMEDAI ’syr b’swrh d’ry’ wḥtym bḥtmh dtnyn’ ’syr b’swr’ d’ybwl wḥtym bḥtm’ d’bwryt ’syr b’swr z‘q’: wḥtym bḥtm’ dbgdn’: ’syr wḥtym bmwbl’ rb’ dz‘q’: “Bound by the bond of the Lion and sealed by the seal of the Dragon. Bound by the bond of Ibol and sealed by the seal of Iborit. Bound by the bond of Blast-Winds and sealed by the seal of Bagdanas. Bound and sealed by the great load of the Blast-Winds.”16

IV. Ašmedai and other kings of the demons Besides the figure of Bagdana, there are other figures which are designated or described as kings of the demons, the most famous of which is Ašmedai.17 The Persian etymology of the name Ašmedai is most probably “raging god” (aēšma daēva), and the description “raging” is found in relation to other Aramaic demonic figures (Shaked 1997: 108-109). The following story found in two magic bowls alludes to the figure of Ašmedai. (7) Rasiel and the lance of Ašmedai: In two Jewish Babylonian Aramaic bowls,18 we find a story, although poorly understood, relating to the king of the demons: The bowls begin with a first person address of the speaker who is standing on a stone mountain and a great peak of the mountain, listening to the son of the great king of the Dews and the great ruler of the Liliths/Laṭabs (Moussaieff no. 145: 2-3: bryh mlkh rb’ ddywy wšlyṭ’ rbh dlylyt’). Then the speaker seems to recall a mythological battle of monsters which occurred in mythological times,19 when the entire world was shaken. This chaos may have been stopped only by a warrior (qrqpn’),20 who used the weapons of the king of the demons. According to the Schøyen bowl (line 10), this was the angel Rasiel (rsy’l ml’kh). He stood with one wing on earth and the other in the sky (Moussaieff no. 145, line 12: ḥd gpyh b’r‘’ wḥd gpyh byrqy‘’). He is then described as follows (Moussaieff no. 145: 14):

15 Naveh and Shaked 1993: 118, no. 16: 4-5 (= Müller-Kessler 2005b: 98, no. 33a); Müller-Kessler 2005b: 91-97, nos. 32: 5-6, 32a: 5-6, 33: 5’-7’. For the connection between the Bagdanas and the blast-winds/demons, cf. Shaked 1997: 515.

A related formula in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic appears in Geller 1980: 49: 12 and Levene 2003: 62-63, no. 107: 5-6. For the connection of the Bagdanas to Ibol and Ibolit, see Montgomery 1913: 195, no. 19: 5-6, 12-13 (where Ibol is designated as ml’kh rb’ dz‘qy). 16

Besides the references given below, Ašmedai is mentioned as the king of the demons in Geller 1976: 426: 6: … d’šmdy mlk’ dšydy.

17

Moussaieff Collection, no. 145 and Schøyen Collection MS 2053/159, both treated by Levene 2003: 99-108 (cf. notes and corrections in Müller-Kessler 2005a: 230; Morgenstern 2005: 357-360; Ford 2006: 211-212).

18

“At that moment, at that day, at that time, when…” (Moussaieff no. 145: 3: mn hhy’ š‘t’ bhhw’ ywm’ bhhw’ ‘ydn’ kd …; Schøyen MS 2053/159: 3-4: bhhw’ ywm’ bhhy’ š‘t’ wbhhw’ ‘ydn’ kd …).

19

20

See Müller-Kessler 2005a: 230.

61

URI GABBAY ’yt bkwn gbr’ d‘br ym’ bqlyh wslyq ṭwry byrwgzyh “There is a hero among you who crossed the sea with his voice and went up the mountains with his wrath.”21

This hero is also said to have taken the key to the weapons of the demons, including the lance22 of Ašmedai, king of the Šedas and the sword of the chief king of the Dews (Moussaieff no. 145: 14-15: wnysk’ d’šmdy mlk’ dšydy wsyp’ dryyš mlk’ ddywy). Now the speaker says he will do the same and thereby will remove all demons from the house of the client. (8) The Talmudic story of Ašmedai: As noted by Levene 2003: 106, the description of Rasiel in the previous story as standing with one wing in the sky and the other on earth, is reminiscent of the story of Ašmedai which appears in the Babylonian Talmud (Giṭṭin 68a-b). The story will not be repeated here, but it is interesting to note the following points: According to this story, Ašmedai, king of the demons (’šmd’y mlk’ dšydy), dwells in a certain mountain (bṭwr’ pln),23 and owns a seal (gwšpnq’). Later he also takes the ring of King Solomon (‘yzqtyh). At a certain point in the plot he stands with one wing in the sky and one wing on earth (’wtbyh lḥd gpyh brqy‘’ wlḥd gpyh b’r‘’). In addition, when disguised, the way in which Ašmedai could have been revealed would be through his legs (bkr‘yh), implying that they were probably taloned (although he was wearing shoes, mwqy, and therefore this was not possible to verify). (9) The seal of Ašmedai: The seal of Ašmedai is also mentioned in a Jewish Babylonian Aramaic magic bowl, where it is used against Šedas and Liliths (Geller 1997: 329: 17-19): [’sy]ryn šydyn wḥtymn lylyn ḥtymn lylyn w’syryn šydyn bḥtm’ rb’ d’šmd’y mlk’ dšyd’ bḥtm’ ’ḥydn’ bmšry dlylyt’ “[bo]und are the demons and sealed are the spirits, sealed are the spirits and bound are the demons with the great seal of Ašmedai, king of the demons. Through (this) seal I seized the camps of Lilith.”

(10) The king of the demons(?) visits the tree on the mountain: The association of the king of the demons with the mountain may also be found in an unpublished Mandaic lead amulet cited by Müller-Kessler 2001: 343 (BM 135793 I+ 75-80), which describes a story in the first person by the ruler of the demons: msgyn’ wskyn’ ‘l’n’ d-q’yym bṭwr’ d-’wph dywy’ w’lw’th lṭ’by’ slw’th lyly’t’ ‘tbh b‘l’n’ hn’th dyw’ h’d nysbyt pkrth ldyw’ hn’th wtwm mhyth

For the intransitive use of the verb wslyq (in the pe‘al stem, contra Levene 2003,103), see Müller-Kessler 2005a: 235 and Ford 2006: 211.

21

22

For the word nysk’, cf. Levene 2003: 106 and Morgenstern 2005: 362.

Note that the expression ’šyn’ dṭwr’, which occurs in the first line of the magic bowl cited above (Moussaieff no. 145), appears also in the Talmudic Ašmedai story (though not in relation to Ašmedai but in relation to the minister of the sea and the wild cock).

23

62

THE KING OF THE DEMONS: PAZUZU, BAGDANA AND AŠMEDAI “I24 walked about and looked at a tree which stood on the mountain, of which its boughs are Dews, its leaves are Laṭabs and its thorns are Liliths. There was one Dew in this tree. I seized and bound this Dew and then hit him.”

V. The prototypical king of the demons If all of the above references actually allude to one prototypical figure of the king of the demons, one may cautiously draw the following sketch of this figure: He is connected to mountains (references 3, 7-10 above), he is connected to blast winds (references 4, 6 above), he has remarkable features, including wings and talons (references 4, 7-8 above), and he has a seal or a signet-ring (references 6, 8-9 above). Concerning the literary context in which he appears, he often speaks in the first person (references 1-2, 7, 10), and he is not the demon to be adjured, but rather he is used to adjure and chase away other demons, especially Liliths.

VI. Pazuzu I would now like to suggest that the prototypical figure of the king of the demons found in the Aramaic magic literature shares some similarities with another king of the demons, dating back to ancient Mesopotamia, namely Pazuzu.25 Pazuzu is known from over 170 iconographical representations stemming from the entire Ancient Near East and beyond in the first millennium BC,26 from the Neo-Assyrian, NeoBabylonian and Late-Babylonian periods. These representations include figurines of his entire body and of his head, as well as his depiction on Lamaštu amulets and fibulae which contain his image. Some of the Pazuzu heads and figurines are inscribed with incantations. These incantations are known from several tablets from Nineveh, Sultantepe and Uruk, as well as some rituals which refer to the production of the figurines and the performance of the incantations (Heessel 2002: 55-74). In the iconographical representations of Pazuzu he is depicted with a monstrous head, composed of different animals, having bird’s wings and bird’s talons, and a scorpion tail (cf. Heessel 2002: 9-14). Despite his monstrous features, he does not appear in incantations only as the demon to be driven away, but rather as the chief demon, who has control over all other demons and calamities, and is therefore used to drive away other deities. Since Pazuzu is invoked in order to chase away other demons, his presence in this magical act is textually portrayed in the incantations connected to him by the use of the first and second person, emphasizing his presence (Heessel 2002: 66-68, 81-82). The Pazuzu 24

Cf. Müller-Kessler 2001: 343: “Ich (= der Dämongeschichtenerzähler bzw. Herrscher über die Dämonen).”

25 I assume that the title “king of the evil demons” applies to Pazuzu and not to his father Hanbu (thus e.g., Livingstone 1989: 158, s.v. Hanbi), cf. Heessel 2002: 65-66. 26 To the 164 objects listed by Heessel 2002: 115-169, one may add the following objects: Gabbay 2001, nos. 1, 9, 13-15; Pöll 2005; five Pazuzu objects from Nimrud mentioned in Wiggermann 2004: 377; Márquez Rowe 2009 (I thank Ignacio Márquez Rowe for sending me the manuscript of his article before its publication).

63

URI GABBAY

objects, when inscribed, usually contain one of two incantations, the first of which introduces Pazuzu in the first person, either in Sumerian or in a bilingual Sumero-Akkadian text, and the second of which, in Akkadian, addresses Pazuzu in the second person (Ismail 1974: 122-123; Heessel 2002: 95). These two incantations are also known from Assyrian tablets (from Nineveh and Sultantepe), where they appear together with other similar incantations and are accompanied by short ritual instructions (Borger 1987; Heessel 2002: 55-66).27 Pazuzu’s presence in the magical act is also reflected iconographically, where Lamaštu amulets which portray exorcistic scenes (including Pazuzu himself) are accompanied by the image of Pazuzu standing in back of the amulet and looking down at the scene from the top of the amulet, emphasizing his presence in the actual magical activity.28 Common to both incantations is the association of Pazuzu with winds. In the SumeroAkkadian incantation he is described as an overwhelming blast-wind which confronted all other winds and sent them away. This mythological confrontation is said to have taken place in the strong mountain (Heessel 2002: 59: 102-109).

VII. Pazuzu and Bagdana/ Ašmedai There are several features of Pazuzu which may perhaps be compared to features of Bagdana: (1) Pazuzu is not the demon against whom the incantations are directed. He is invoked in order to drive out Lamaštu and other demons and sickness, as can be seen both through the ritual texts concerned with Pazuzu (cf. Heessel 2002: 59: 97-101; 69-74) and through iconography (Wiggermann 2004: 378). As king of the demons he has the power to drive out other malevolent forces. Of course, this does not necessarily make him a benevolent spirit, and although he is invoked to drive out other demons and illnesses, he is also asked not to use his destructive power against mankind (Heessel 2002: 83-84).29 Like Pazuzu, the king of the demons in the Aramaic sources is also not the figure to be chased away, but rather, he is invoked in order to chase away Liliths.30 However, it is clear that he is also not welcome in the client’s house.31 The same ambiguity which is found in the figure of Pazuzu, i.e., that he is invoked in order to chase away Lamaštu, but that he is also asked not to harm the patient who invokes him, may be found in Ašmedai as well, whose character sets him apart from other 27

The Akkadian Pazuzu incantation is also preserved in SBTU 2, 9: r.9’-27’ (Borger 1987: 27; Heessel 2002: 56).

This was described by Wiggermann 2004: 378 (where P. stands for Pazuzu): “By his position – he holds the amulet in his claws – and by the frontality of the head this P. is emphatically dissociated from the exorcistic scene on the amulet itself, where a full-bodied P. in profile menaces the demoness… The P. head on top looks straight into the room of the victim, where he connects with those present, specifically the demoness in person.”

28

My understanding of this incantation is in agreement with Heessel 2002: 67 and differs from the understanding expressed by Wiggermann 2004: 374.

29

Cf. already Wiggermann 2004: 374, who noted that this character of Pazuzu is found in the later Aramaic tradition: “This theme, a higher demon driving out one of his subjects, is common in later Aramaic incantations.” 30

This could be reflected in the (folk)?-etymology of the name Elisur Bagdana (’l ’swr, “for the binding of Bagdana”), cf. n. 8 above. 31

64

THE KING OF THE DEMONS: PAZUZU, BAGDANA AND AŠMEDAI

harmful demons, though he may also be wrathful, act unexpectedly and cause harm. In a discussion in the Babylonian Talmud about bad omens associated with doing things in pairs, the following is said by Rab Joseph: “Joseph Šeda32 told me: Ašmedai king of the demons (’šmd’y mlk’ dšydy) is responsible for all the pairs, and a king is not considered a harmful spirit (maziq) (wmlk’ l’ ’yqry mzyq).” But others say the opposite: “A king is wrathful (rtḥ), he does whatever he likes …” (Pesakhim 110a). (2) Pazuzu appears with the title: lugal líl-lá hul-a-meš // šar lilê lemn ūti, “king of the evil demons.”33 This may be compared to the titles of the kings of the demons in the Aramaic bowls (such as: mlkyhwn ddywy wšlyṭ’ rb’ dlylyt’, “king of the Dews and great ruler of the Liliths,” see III, reference 2 above; cf. III, references 1, 3-4, and IV, references 7, 9 above). (3) In the Sumero-Akkadian Pazuzu incantation, he introduces himself in the first person: ĝá-e Pazuzu dumu Hanbu lugal líl-lá hul-a-meš // anāku Pazuzu mār Hanbi šar lilê lemnūti, “I am Pazuzu, son of Hanbu, king of the evil demons.”34 This may be compared to the introduction in first person of Bagdana and other kings of the demons in the Aramaic incantations (such as: ’n’ hw b’bgwn ’bwgd’n’, “I am Babgun Abugdana,” see III, reference 1 above; cf. also III, reference 2, and IV, references 7, 10 above). (4) Pazuzu is connected to winds. He confronted other winds, and he himself is an overwhelming, furious wind (šāru ezzu), drying up everything he goes through (Heessel 2002: 57-58). His movement is described with the infinitive zâqu, “to blow”: enūma atta ina zâqika isabbu’ā kibrāti “When you blow, the entire world tosses” (Heessel 2002, p. 58: 40b).

Bagdana, too, is connected to blast-winds, zyqy (z‘qy) (see III, references 4, 6 above), etymologically connected to Akkadian zâqu. (5) The monstrous physical features of Pazuzu are evident through his many iconographical representations. He has wings and talons (Heessel 2002: 11) which may be compared to those of Ašmedai (IV, references 7-8 above).35 Bagdana is not portrayed as having wings and talons but rather as a fierce warrior (III, references 1, 4, and IV, reference 7 above), which may be compared with Pazuzu’s combat with the winds on the mountain which is described in the Sumero-Akkadian incantation. However, Bagdana’s head which is described in one Babylonian Jewish Aramaic bowl (see III, reference 4 above) as “His head is the head of a lion, his tusks are the tusks of a wild boar, his teeth are the teeth of a tiger, the draughts of his mouth are the furnaces of fire, his eyes are glowing lightnings,” fits the iconographical

32

For this figure appearing in a magic bowl, see Shaked 2005: 20.

Heessel 2002: 58: 48-49; 59: 102-103, 110-111; 95: 1-2; 96: 102; 97: 1-4; 99: 1-3; 100: 1-2; 105: 1-3 (top), 1-3 (bottom); 109: 1-4; 112: 1-2; cf. also 111: 1-2. 33

34

See references in n. 33.

35

This, however, is a common feature of demons and is not necessarily restricted only to Ašmedai.

65

URI GABBAY

representations of Pazuzu heads which combine human and fierce animal elements (Heessel 2002: 9-10). (6) Iconographical representations of Pazuzu are often connected to seals (Gabbay 2001: 149, n. 2; Márquez Rowe 2009). Except for one object (Gabbay 2001: 151-152, no. 13 and fig. 5), all seal representations of Pazuzu are related to the seal itself and not to its impression. In one instance, the impression of a Pazuzu seal is that of Lamaštu (Heessel 2002: 115 and 180, no. 1). This is most likely connected to Pazuzu’s role in overwhelming Lamaštu and other demons by binding and sealing them. Similarly, the Aramaic kings of the demons are called to adjure Lilith with their seals or rings (III, references 5-6; cf. IV, references 8-9 above) (alongside other high beings adjuring with seals). (7) Pazuzu is often referred to as “strong” (dannu) and “furious,” ezzu (especially in the Akkadian second person incantation).36 As noted above, this is a common designation of the king of the demons, reflected in the name of Ašmedai himself (see IV above). Bagdana is designated as ’zyz’, “strong, mighty” in a Jewish Babylonian Aramaic bowl (III, reference 4 above). This corresponds to the epithet dannu of Pazuzu, but is perhaps also to be connected to Akkadian ezzu, “furious.” (8) Pazuzu’s mythological combat against the winds occurred in the strong mountain (šadû dannu). He became furious against this mountain and then ascended it, where he confronted all the winds. This can be compared with the association of the Aramaic king of demons with the mountains (III, reference 3, and IV, references 7-10 above). Of special interest is the following sentence from the Sumero-Akkadian Pazuzu incantation:37 hur-saĝ-ta kala-ga mu-un-huš baan-e11-dè ĝá-e-me-en // ana šadî danni uštari’ba (var. urta’’iba) ēlâššu anāku (see translation below). Before pointing at the possible Aramaic parallel to this sentence, a short discussion of the Akkadian phrase will be given: The Sumerian verb huš (in the form mu-un-huš quoted above) means “to rage” (usually paired with ezzu).38 This fits the image of Pazuzu, who appears with the adjective ezzu (see above with n. 36). The Akkadian correspondence to Sumerian mu-un-huš is preserved on six texts. In texts written in Assyrian script on tablets, the verb used is urta’’iba,39 while texts written in Babylonian script on a Pazuzu amulet and a Pazuzu head use the form uštar’iba.40 Only one of these texts (VA Bab 569), written on a LB Pazuzu head, contains the element ša,

Heessel 2002: 57-58: 1-3, 31-34, 50-51 (cf. 101: 2; 104: 1, 3-4; 107: 1-2; 108: 1, 4, 6; 110: 1, 3); cf. also Livingstone 1989: 65, no. 29: r.2 (Heessel 2002: 76-77).

36

37

See Heessel 2002: 59: 104-105, 114-115; 97: 5-8; 109: 4-7, and below.

38

Cf. CAD E, 433a.

39

See Borger 1987: 26: 105 and 27: 115 (STT 147, STT 149, K.2457+, K.8115+).

Amulet: BE 33683 (Saggs 1959-1960: 124; Heessel 2002: 97); Pazuzu head: VA Bab 569 (Lambert 1970: 42; Heessel 2002: 109). Both objects stem from Babylon (cf. Heessel 2002: 121: 15 and 157: 18). 40

66

THE KING OF THE DEMONS: PAZUZU, BAGDANA AND AŠMEDAI

introducing a subordinate clause,41 and this understanding of the syntax of the sentence was followed by most translations also when ša does not occur.42 However, since the ša element appears in only one text, which also exhibits many scribal errors (Lambert 1970: 43), it is likely that the original text did not have ša, and hence this is not a subordinate clause. Therefore, if we assume that this is a main clause, and if we consider the Sumerian lexical correspondence huš, “to be angry,”43 it would be more likely to understand the Št form of the Akkadian verb in the meaning “to be seized by wrath” and “to be set in violent motion,”44 alluding both to the rage of Pazuzu (see above with n. 36) and to his violent motion as an overwhelming wind (see above).45 Therefore, in my opinion, the Akkadian version (ana šadî danni uštar’iba ēlâššu anāku) is to be understood as “I was enraged (in violent motion) against the strong mountain and ascended it.” A very similar phrase occurs in the Jewish Babylonian Aramaic bowl cited above (IV, reference 7), where Rasiel, who overcomes the evil spirits taking up the role of the king of the demons, is described as follows (Moussaieff no. 145: 14): wslyq ṭwry byrwgzyh “... and he ascended the mountains with his wrath.”

Lambert 1970: 42: a-na šá-di-i dan-nu šá u š-tar-’-i-ba el-la-áš-šú a-na-ku, “I myself will ascend the mighty mountain which quaked.”

41

42 Heessel 2002: 62: 104f., 114f. “den mächtigen Berg, der erbebte, bestieg ich selbst.” Wiggermann 2004: 374: “I ascended a mighty mountain that shook.” 43 Even if the Sumerian is not original, I assume that the lexical correspondences are to be taken seriously. The Sumerian verb, using the -n- personal prefix would refer to Pazuzu as well (cf. Ismail 1974: 126), but the grammar of this late Sumerian inscription is probably to be considered less seriously than its lexicon (cf. Lambert 1970: 45). 44

CAD R, 1a and 3. Our passage is correctly cited in CAD R, 1a.

45 According to the dictionaries there are two (or three) different verbs with a similar meaning: ra’ābu and râbu. CAD distinguishes between two verbs: ra’ābu A, “to become angry, furious” (CAD R, 1-2) and ra’ābu B, “to tremble” (CAD R, 2-3), both attested in the G, (Š) and Št stems, but from the note in CAD R, 3b, that “[t]he verbs ra’ābu A and B are here separated on the basis of their Sumerian equivalents,” it may be implied that the editors of CAD considered the two verbs to be connected. In addition to these verbs, there is another verb, râbu B, which has a similar meaning: “to tremble, to quake” (CAD R, 55-57), attested in the G, D and Š stems. AHw, 932-933, lists only one verb ra’ābu, with the common meaning “zittern, zürnen” (etymologically West Semitic rhb), attested in the G, Š and Št stems, and lists a different verb râbu, “beben” (with a Syriac etymology), attested in the G and D stems. AHw, 932, s.v. ra’ābu has a cross-reference to râbu, and according to Edzard, so should have CAD (Edzard 2000: 293). The Assyrian texts which use the form urta’’iba pose a problem since the declination with an aleph would refer to ra’ābu and not to râbu, while the D stem is attested only with râbu and not with ra’ābu. Perhaps this reflects an association of the two verbs already in antiquity (cf. the two forms of the D participle, murīb and mura’’ib in SB texts, quoted in CAD R, 56-57). As to the meaning of this form, the Dt stem of this verb is not attested. Could this reflect a misunderstanding of the verb as transitive (i.e., D perf. or Dtn pret.), with ana as an accusative marker?

67

URI GABBAY

The Hebrew root rgz, here used in Aramaic context, is the exact semantic equivalent of Akkadian ra’ābu, since it means both “to be angry” and “to shake,” i.e., alluding to a violent motion.46

VIII. Conclusion This study suggests a connection between the ancient Mesopotamian king of the demons Pazuzu and the king of the demons mentioned in Aramaic sources, especially Bagdana. One may wonder whether this connection is only typological, i.e., that these are simply two representations of a general cultural perception of the king of the demons, with no historical connection or whether, as I believe, it is likely that these two figures are actually historically and culturally connected.47 As noted in the introduction to this article, not many specific references to ancient Mesopotamian traditions have survived in the tradition of the Aramaic bowls. Nevertheless, general ancient Mesopotamian conceptions, forms and patterns did seem to survive, though in a new, different guise. Just as the characteristic features of the ancient Mesopotamian demoness Lamaštu are found in the features of certain Liliths described in the bowls, even though the name Lamaštu is absent from this corpus, I believe that features of the persecutor of Lamaštu, namely Pazuzu, may be found in descriptions of Bagdana (and other kings of the demons) in the Aramaic magical tradition of late antiquity. It is not surprising, in my view, to find motifs associated with Pazuzu in the descriptions of the kings of the demons in the Aramaic tradition. Pazuzu is somewhat exceptional in the textual tradition of ancient Mesopotamian magic. The large amount of Pazuzu objects48 stands in extreme contrast to the scant mention of Pazuzu in professional medical or magical texts written in cuneiform on clay tablets, and belonging to fixed series which were associated with the official practice of magic. In my opinion, this would suggest that Pazuzu did not originally belong to the official magic associated with the āšipūtu professional craft and literature, but to a different, unofficial practice. Such a practice, somewhat separated from the professional craft of Mesopotamian magic,49 is more likely to have survived into times when the professional (and usually textual) magical and medical practices were lost, after the death of cuneiform writing and its culture.50 The practitioners who wrote the magic bowls could not rely on the Cf. HALOT, vol. III, 1183, s.v. rgz, “to tremble, be caught in restless motion; to tremble with emotion; to come out quaking with fear; to get excited,” in hif‘il: “to agitate, arouse; to cause unrest to someone,” and in hitpa’el: “to get worked up, be enraged, with ’l against.” 46

This connection is not necessarily a borrowing. As noted by Müller-Kessler 2002,194, the Akkadian and Aramaic incantations existed in parallel to each other for many hundred of years.

47

48

See n. 26 above.

However, it was not totally disconnected from the professional magic, as demonstrated by the collections of Pazuzu incantations together with rituals (Heessel 2002: 55-66), and by the references to Pazuzu in ritual texts (Heessel 2002: 69-74). It seems that the official magic made use of an existing unofficial magical practice.

49

Michalowski compared two ancient Mesopotamian beings who were able to overcome winds by breaking their wings: Adapa and Pazuzu (Michalowski 1980: 81). These two figures are used also in ritual to overcome demons 50

68

THE KING OF THE DEMONS: PAZUZU, BAGDANA AND AŠMEDAI

Babylonian technical and magical literature, which was now lost. Therefore they relied upon magical practices which were not part of the technical official magic. These non-technical practices included demon stories and other “relatively uncomplicated incantations, lacking both rituals and medicine recipes” (Geller 2008: 44).51

Bibliography Bhayro, S. 2005

The Semihazah and Asael Narrative of 1 Enoch 6-11: Introduction, Text, Translation and Commentary with Reference to Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Antecedents (AOAT 322), Münster 2005.

Borger, R. 1987 “Pazuzu,” in: F. Rochberg-Halton (ed.), Language, Literature, and History: Philological and Historical Studies Presented to Erica Reiner (AOS 67), New Haven: 15-32. Edzard, D. O. 2000 Review of CAD R, ZA 90: 292-295. Ford, J. N. 2006 Review of Levene 2003, JSS 51: 207-214. forthcoming “Notes on the Eastern Aramaic Lexicon.”

and sickness, since they have the ability to cross over from the natural world to the divine realm. Adapa, or the sage of the god Ea in general, is often used in official Mesopotamian magic, where he is identified with the āšipu performing the magic act, introducing himself in first person speech, cf. Geller 2007: 104 and 199: 81-85: a-da-pà abgal eriduki-ga-ke4 // [dMIN ap-kal-lu š]á eri4-du10 / ĝá-e lú-mu7-mu7 den-ki-ga-me-en // [a-ši-pu šá] dé-a ana-ku / ĝá-e lú-kiĝ-gi4-a dasar-lú-hi-me-en // [mar šip-ri šá dAMAR.UTU ana-ku] / níĝ-tu-ra-a-ni lú ti-la-a-ni-šè // [mar-ṣuus-su ana bul-lu-ṭu] / en gal den-ki-ke4 mu-un-ši-in-ĝen-na] // [be-lu GAL-ú dé-a iš-pur-an-ni], “As Adapa, sage of Eridu, I am Ea’s incantation priest, and I am Marduk’s messenger. In order to cure the patient of his illness, the great lord Ea has sent me” (cf. also Geller 2007: 97: 8-18; 100: 7-9; 102-103: 54-58; 105: 100-101, 116-117; 108: 165-177; 108-109: 179-197; 128: 28-30; 141: 130-131; 144: 24-27; 176: 233’-239’; this is found already in the Old Babylonian period, cf. Geller 1995: 22: 59-61). Pazuzu serves in a similar role, presenting himself in the first person, and identifying himself with the magician or client, but this role is not identical but parallel, existing in another, unofficial and less technical sphere of Mesopotamian magic. This demonic first person introduction is also a characteristic of the incantation bowls (Müller-Kessler 2002: 194), which belonged to unofficial magic as well. As suggested to me by M. Geller (personal communication), the transmission from the ancient Mesopotamian traditions of the king of the demons to the similar traditions found in the magic bowls may have not been dependent on non-official popular magic. Rather, these ancient Mesopotamian traditions may have been transmitted to the magic bowls not directly, but through the Babylonian Talmud (cf. the Ašmedai traditions mentioned above, IV, reference 8, and VII, reference 1), which unlike the magic bowls does contain traditions which were directly influenced by ancient Mesopotamian culture, while it was still alive (cf. Geller 2005: 54).

51

69

URI GABBAY

Gabbay, U. 2001 “A Collection of Pazuzu Objects in Jerusalem,” RA 95: 149-154. Geller, M. J. 1976

“Two Incantation Bowls inscribed in Syriac and Aramaic,” BSOAS 39: 422-427, pls. IIII.

1980

“Four Aramaic Incantation Bowls,” in: G. Rendsburg, R. Adler, M. Arfa and N. H. Winter (eds.), The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon, New York: 4760. Forerunners to Udug-hul: Sumerian Exorcistic Incantations (FAOS 12), Stuttgart. “More Magic Spells and Formulae,” BSOAS 60: 327-335, pls. I-IV.

1995 1997 2005

“Tablets and Magic Bowls,” in: Sh. Shaked (ed.), Officina Magica: Essays on the Practice of Magic in Antiquity (IJS Studies in Judaica 4), Leiden-Boston: 53-72.

2007

Evil Demons: Canonical Utukkū Lemnūtu Incantations (SAA Cuneiform Texts 5), Helsinki. “Graeco-Babylonian Utukkū Lemnūtu,” NABU 2008, no. 33: 43-44.

2008

Greenfield, J. C. 1973 “Notes on some Aramaic and Mandaic Magic Bowls,” JANES 5, 149-156. Heessel, N. P. 2002 Pazuzu: Archäologische und philologische Studien zu einem altorientalischen Dämon, Leiden-Boston-Köln. Ismail, B. Kh. 1974 “Ein Pazuzu-Kopf aus Ninive,” Sumer 30: 121-128. Lambert, W. G. 1970 “Inscribed Pazuzu Heads from Babylon,” FuB 12: 41-47. Levene, D. 2003

A Corpus of Magic Bowls: Incantation Texts in Jewish Aramaic from Late Antiquity, London-New York-Bahrain.

Livingstone, A. 1989 Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea (SAA 3), Helsinki. Márquez Rowe, I. 2009 “Ceramic Stamp-Seal Amulets in the Shape of the Head of Pazuzu,” Iraq 71: 151-159. Michalowski, P. 1980

“Adapa and the Ritual Process,” Rocznik Orientalistyczny 41 (Anniversary Volume dedicated to Rudolf Ranoszek on his 85th birthday): 77-82. 70

THE KING OF THE DEMONS: PAZUZU, BAGDANA AND AŠMEDAI

Montgomery, J. A. 1912 1913

“A Magical Bowl-Text and the Original Script of the Manichaeans,” JAOS 32: 434438. Aramaic Incantation Texts from Nippur (PBS 3), Philadelphia.

Morgenstern, M. 2004 “Notes on a Recently Published Magic Bowl,” Aramaic Studies 2/2, 207-222. 2005 “Linguistic Notes on Bowls in the Moussaieff Collection,” BSOAS 68: 349-368. Müller-Kessler, Ch. 1996 “The Story of Bguzan-Lilit, Daughter of Zanay-Lilit,” JAOS 116: 185-195. 2000 “Phraseology in Mandaic Incantations and Its Rendering in Various Eastern Aramaic Dialects. A Collection of Magic Terminology,” Aram 11/12: 293-310. 2001 “Lilit(s) in der aramäisch-magischen Literatur der Spätantike. Teil I: Wüstenbeherrscherin, Baum-Lilit und Kindesräuberin,” AoF 28: 338-352. 2002

“Die aramäische Beschwörung und ihre Rezeption in den madäisch-magischen Texten am Beispiel ausgewählter aramäischer Beschwörungsformulare,” in: R. Gyselen (ed.), Charmes er sortilèges, magie et magiciens (Res Orientales 14), Louvain: 193-208.

2005a “Of Jesus, Darius, Marduk…: Aramaic Magic Bowls in the Moussaieff Collection,” JAOS 125: 219-240. 2005b Die Zauberschalentexte in der Hilprecht-Sammlung, Jena, und weitere Nippur-Texte anderer Sammlungen (TMH 7), Wiesbaden. Müller-Kessler, Ch. and Kessler, K. 1999 “Spätbabylonische Gottheiten in spätantiken mandäischen Texten,” ZA 89: 65-87. Naveh, J. and Shaked, Sh. 1987 Amulets and Magic Bowls: Aramaic Incantations of Late Antiquity2, Jerusalem. 1993 Magic Spells and Formulae: Aramaic Incantations of Late Antiquity, Jerusalem. Pöll, B. 2005

“Ein Pazuzu-Kopf aus Tell Ababra,” in: R. Rollinger (ed.), Von Sumer bis Homer: Festschrift für Manfred Schretter zum 60. Geburtstag am 25. Februar 2004 (AOAT 325), Münster: 535-541.

Saggs, H. W. F. 1959-1960 “Pazuzu,” AfO 19: 123-127. Shaked, Sh. 1985

“Bagdāna, King of the Demons, and other Iranian Terms in Babylonian Aramaic Magic,” in: Acta Iranica 25, Hommages et Opera Minora XI (Papers in Honour of Proffessor Mary Boyce), Leiden: 511-525.

71

URI GABBAY

1997

“Popular Religion in Sasanian Babylonia,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 21: 103-117.

1999

“The Poetics of Spells. Language and Structure in Aramaic Incantations of Late Antiquity 1: The Divorce Formula and its Ramifications,” in: Tz. Abusch and K. van der Toorn (eds.), Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical and Interpretative Perspectives (Ancient Magic and Divination 1), Groningen: 173-195.

2005

“Form and Purpose in Aramaic Spells: Some Jewish Themes,” in: Sh. Shaked (ed.), Officina Magica: Essays on the Practice of Magic in Antiquity (IJS Studies in Judaica 4), Leiden-Boston: 1-30.

Wiggermann, F. A. M. 2004 “Pazuzu,” in: RlA 10/5-6: 372-381.

72

V STARS, COWS, SEMICIRCLES AND DOMES ASTRONOMICAL CREATION MYTHS AND THE MATHEMATICAL UNIVERSE* WAYNE HOROWITZ

Let me begin tonight with a few words in honour of our celebrant, my dear friend and colleague Joan Goodnik Westenholz, who I have known now for over two decades, ever since I first arrived in Jerusalem in 1986. Joan is my idea of what an assyriologist should be. She has very broad interests and asks important questions, which she attempts to answer on the basis of all available evidence from the Ancient Near East, both the textual/philological which dominate her academic work and publications, and the art historical materials – the material culture of Ancient Mesopotamia – which characterizes her work here at the museum. It is in the blending of these two sets of evidence, text and artifact, which are too often treated as separate in the assyriological world, that Joan has made a great contribution to the study and interpretation of the magnificent collection housed in this building as the founding curator of The Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem. Bearing this in mind, I present now in her honour a paper, which although philological in nature, is dependent on a study of shape in cuneiform culture, namely the circle, the semi-circle, and the dome, all in search of a Mesopotamian notion of a round heaven, whatever that might mean. In my paper, this evening, I will reach this discussion of heavenly roundness indirectly, beginning with a study of written sources for the shape of the heavens, with particular interest given to Mesopotamian accounts of the creation of the sky. To do this, I will be asking you to suspend your belief in more current models for the shape, structure, and origins of the heavens, and to abandon our infinite above with its distant galaxies, quasars, supernova and so on, which in most recent times have become familiar images to us through the wonders of the modern telescope. Instead, I will ask you to go back in time with me to the ancient heavens over what is now Iraq, the then Sumer and Akkad, Assyria and Babylonia, where Ancient Mesopotamians saw the stars, and attempted to explain their mysteries and behavior, through what often seems to us to be a mixture of myth, science, and I dare say even art and artifact. All this set against the backdrop of perhaps the realm of human life where our modern view of

Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the conference “What was Old is New Again,” sponsored by the Caeno Foundation and Zentrum für Kunst und Medientechnologie (ZKM) in Karlsruhe Germany from November 21-23, 2008, and at the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem at the evening in honour of Joan’s retirement. The written version here retains much of the oral presentation format from that evening. *

73

WAYNE HOROWITZ

things remains closest to the ancient view, astronomy, for the sky above Ancient Mesopotamia is our sky, and the stars we see are theirs. However, before beginning in earnest, let me warn and apologize. I realize that for some of you the texts and images I will be presenting will be very new and unfamiliar. I promise to do my best to place the material in a user friendly context, but please excuse me if I don’t always succeed. Likewise, for those of you already familiar with Ancient Mesopotamia, please excuse my licence in jumping from text to text, and passage to passage, over gaps of hundreds and sometimes even thousands of years with little warning. The available sources for the topic which I will be discussing barely allow for even this problematic methodology, so please excuse my assyriological sins and transgressions, as I try to put together the most coherent picture of my topic possible for the sake of my argument, and our non-assyriological friends.

Sumerian and Akkadian Creation Accounts Sumerian and Akkadian accounts of the creation of the universe (Heaven and Earth, Sumerian an.ki, Akkadian šamû u erṣetum), survive from a period spanning over 2000 years, from the time of the earliest surviving literary materials in Sumerian in the Early Dynastic Period, c. 2500 BCE, down to the Persian and Hellenistic periods.1 Among these accounts, here and there, are a small number of short narratives concerning the organization of the starry skies in earliest times. The most famous of these is found at the start of the fifth tablet of the 12th century Babylonian creation narrative Enuma Elish, where Marduk, the Babylonian king of the gods, arranges a set of 36 stars (Sumerian mul = Akkadian kakkabu) in the sky: Enuma Elish V: 1-8 1. 2.

He fashioned the stations (manzāzu) for the great gods. The stars, their likeness, he set up, the constellations.

3. 4.

He fixed the year, drew the boundary lines. Set up three stars each for the 12 months.

5. 6.

After he drew up the designs of the days of the year. He set fast the station of Nēberu (‘The Crossing’) to fix their bands.

7. 8.

So that none would transgress, be neglectful at all, He set the station of Enlil and Ea with it.

Here in Enuma Elish V, Marduk arranges the stars in the sky in the image of a group of ancient cuneiform astronomical texts commonly known as Astrolabes, which come in two forms:2

Numerous surveys of cuneiform creation accounts are to be found in both assyriological and more general publications. Two representative examples are Lambert 2008, and my own Horowitz 1998.

1

My full edition of the Astrolabe group is in the final stages of preparation. For now see Horowitz 2007 and Casaburi 2003. 2

74

STARS, COWS, SEMICIRCLES AND DOMES...

1) List Form – as in the case of the earliest of the Astrolabes, Astrolabe B = The Berlin Astrolabe (KAV 218), from the 12th century, just a few generations at most before the composition of Enuma Elish.3 2) A later Circular Form, which today survives only in fragments from the 7th century library of Assurbanipal, King of Assyria (CT 33 11-12), a restoration of which can be seen as fig. 1. Let us now make use of this restored Circular Astrolabe to better understand Marduk’s creation of the sky in Enuma Elish V: 1-8. The circular form diagrams the 36 stars of the Astrolabe in their places in the Paths of Anu, Enlil, and Ea, month by month, over the 12 months of the year. Here, concentric circles mark the boundaries between an outer ring representing the Path of Ea in the south of the sky; a central ring representing the Path of Anu in the middle of the sky; and a circle inside representing the northern Path of Enlil. Likewise, the 12 radii represent the borders between the months, with the 12 radii and 3 concentric circles forming 36 stellar-sectors, what Enuma Elish calls manzazu, with one manzazu for each of the 36 stars of the Astrolabes. Thus, in the Circular Astrolabe we have a coming together of science (the astronomical theory of the Astrolabes), literature/religion (Marduk organizes the 36 stars in the sky in Enuma Elish), and the visual (the circular diagram on the Circular Astrolabe), with this circular diagram representing, in some way, the circle of the sky, in Akkadian kippat šamê/ šamām ī, or even better kippat burūmê, ‘The Circle of The Night Sky,’ from the root barāmu, “to be multicolored, speckled”: i.e. the stars as specks of color against the background of the blue/black night sky as in the following set of epithets of the Moon-god: O Sin, Mo[on-god of Heaven and Earth], Lord of the Lunar-disk, who illuminates the multicolored/speckled night sky (burūmû)4

One last aspect of the Enuma Elish account of the organization of the stars is worthy of note before we move on, this being the theme of Marduk “drawing,” here uṣṣuru (a D-stem from the standard Akkadian verb “to write, to draw, to etch,” eṣēru) as a central act in the organizing the stars in the sky: 3. 4.

He fixed the year, drew (uaṣṣir) the boundary lines. Set up three stars each for the 12 months.

5. 6.

After he drew up (uṣṣiru) the designs of the days of the year. He set fast the station of Nēberu (‘The Crossing’) to fix their bands.

This too is important for our theme of literature, science, and visual image, since drawing brings us into the realm of geometry and geometric shapes, for example the concentric circles and radii of the Circular Astrolabes themselves.

3

For a photograph of Astrolabe B see the frontispiece of Casaburi 2003.

4

Thureau-Dangin 1930: 14: 6-7.

75

WAYNE HOROWITZ

The Sumerian Sky Let us now leave Enuma Elish, and move back in time to Sumerian views of the starry sky, sparse as they may be, since no Sumerian writing offers a definitive creation account of the type found in the Babylonian Enuma Elish or biblical Genesis, a difficulty that is compounded by the fact that the Sumerians had no formal academic discipline of astronomy whatsoever.5 Yet, even in Ancient Sumer, the image of the heavens as round, or maybe more carefully “roundish,” can be found if one looks hard enough. To see this we will consider two Sumerian hymns to the Moon-god, Nanna-Suen, that were studied by my teacher Professor Wolfgang Heimpel in the Festschrift for Åke Sjöberg, where the stars are referred to as cows and cattle, living in heavenly cattle pens.6 In the first hymn, that was published by Sjöberg himself as Sjöberg Mondgott 1 (Sjöberg 1960: 13-34), the stars are described as cows with reference to dairy production:7 How many they are, how many, many are the cows In the pen of Suen8 (the Moon-god) how many they are. The dark ones are translucent like lapis lazuli The light ones of the cows are the rising moonlight The many cows in his many pens He, the splendor of the heaven, releases from the tether Their yellow cowmilk he pours in the churn

In the second hymn, there is a direct reference to the Moon-god’s great cattle pens, and then to seven groups of cows, adding up to a total of 600,000 cattle (by Heimpel’s count).9 What is going on here is not completely clear, but Heimpel proposes in his article a series of associations: stars ➛ cows ➛ milk ➛ Milky Way. Heimpel also suggests, more generally, that what we have here are allusions to the stars and planets in the sky as herd animals, and to the sky itself as a set of animal pens, and later (as we shall see) as a cattle pen itself. Such ideas are bourne out by many other cuneiform sources. For example, here and there, we find the Sumerian word for star not written with the standard sign MUL, or MÚL (TE), but with the sign for cow: áb = mul4.10 Another piece of evidence in this direction is to be found in Sumero-Akkadian lexicography, where the term for planets is Sumerian udu.idim = Akkadian bibbu, a type of sheep traditionally translated as ‘wild sheep,’11 in the sense that planets wander about the sky without keeping their place in the

5

For what can be said about Sumerian astronomy see my survey Horowitz 2005.

6

Heimpel 1989.

7

Translation below excerpted and adapted from Heimpel 1989: 250.

8

Sjöberg 1960: 13: 2: tùr-dsuen-.

9

Heimpel 1989: 251, with the fullest edition of the hymn in Hall 1986.

10

See Neugebauer and Sachs 1967: 200; Rochberg-Halton 1988: 227, 289.

11

This reading and interpretation is given in CAD B 217-218, but has been challenged in Reiner 1995: 7.

76

STARS, COWS, SEMICIRCLES AND DOMES...

herd, while the stars themselves, like domesticated sheep and cattle, keep their place in relation to one another.

The Stars as Sheep and Cattle Other allusions to the stars as sheep and cattle are to be found in both Sumerian and Akkadian. First, is a bilingual passage from a literary work today known as the Exaltation of Ištar where the great gods of traditional Mesopotamia, Anu, Enlil, and Ea, create day and night, and then set order in the starry skies, with the stars keeping in line like cattle plowing rows of furrows:12 In the beginning, when Anu, Enlil, and Ea shared out the shares for the twinned gods, the watchmen of heaven and earth, who open the Door of Anu/Heaven, for the Moon-god and Sun-god, night was created evenly with day, from Horizon to Zenith, they assigned their tasks: to keep all the stars in place as in a furrow to make the gods at the fore keep to the path like cattle

Second, are two quotations from a commentary to the 50th tablet of the Enuma Anu Enlil series where the sky, and Paths of Anu, Enlil, and Ea, are said to be a cattle pen (Sumerian tùr = Akkadian tarbaṣu):13 The astral cattle pen (mulé.tùr.ra) is for all of heaven/sky [so it is said] for all of heaven/sky. DÍM means tot[ality] so it says, for the creatures of heaven/sky. The Path of the Sun at the foot of the cattle pen belongs to Ea. The Path of the Sun in the m[iddle of the ca]ttle pen belongs to Anu. The Path of the Sun at the head of the cattle pen belongs to Enlil . . .

In response to these two passages describing the stellar paths as a cattle pen, one might consider the original form of the sign for Sumerian tùr, “cattle pen,” which includes within it what looks to me something like the shape of a dome, with a half rectangle, and a triangle, inscribed within (fig. 2).14 This reflects the shape of cattle pen/barns/dairies known from both early Sumerian artwork and the modern Iraqi countryside (figs. 3-4). If we put all this together, what we seem to have so far then is a primary image of cows in a circular cattle pen = stars as speckles against the circular sky, with a secondary theme of stars moving along their paths like cattle plowing furrows from horizon to horizon.

12

For the passage see now Horowitz 1998: 144-145.

13

Reiner and Pingree 1981: 43 III 21-22a, 24b.

14

See Labat’s manual, no. 87a, Nissen and Green 1987: 297, no. 563.

77

WAYNE HOROWITZ

The Sky as a Circle The idea of the sky as a circle finds expression in Ancient Mesopotamia both in text and picture. For pictures, in addition to the drawings of the circular Astrolabes discussed above, there is the contemporary Neo-Assyrian planisphere that was published together with the circular Astrolabe fragments as CT 33 10;15 the fragment W. 20030/121 (Hunger Uruk 98) from late-period Uruk,16 and a late-Babylonian diagram of zipqu-stars on a circle with a rosette inside.17 Back in texts, we can also cite the ziqpu-star texts, where the distances between a series of ziqpu-stars are measured as they rise from the eastern horizon, reach a ziqpu-point high in the sky where they culminate, i.e. reach their apex, and then descend before setting at the western horizon (see fig. 5).18 For example, the ziqpu-star text AO 6478, which gives the following sum total of measurements along an annual stellar circuit: 60 2/3 minas (of water on the waterclock) = Time 364 UŠ ina qaqqari (364 o in stellar sectors) = Angle 655,200 bēru in šamê (655,200 leagues in the sky = actual perceived linear distance (approximately 6,552,000 kilometers)

These totals assume a very large near circular geometric circuit of 364 o in stellar sectors, with the anomaly of 364 o, rather than a perfect circle of 360 o, to be related to the Mesopotamian version of the 364 day year known later from the Apocrypha and Qumran.19 It is not clear how much of this circuit of the ziqpu-stars was conceived to be above the horizon, and how much below, but we suggest that what was visualized was two semicircles, or arcs, with one semicircle/arc of stars above the horizon by night, and the other invisible below the earth’s surface by day.

More Creation Accounts, Circles, Semicircles and Domes Now, as my time begins to run out, I would like to very quickly note three additional Mesopotamian sources for the creation of the sky that touch upon themes that we have developed thus far. 1) KAR 307, a mystical-religious text which was meant to be seen by only the most learned of scribes. Here it is revealed that it was Marduk, the Babylonian King of the Gods, who drew the stars and constellations on the sky (as in Enuma Elish V). This text explains that the sky is made of jasper, this being the lowest of the three heavens in the text. Above are the highest

15

More recently edited and discussed in Koch 1989.

16

Edition and drawing Horowitz 1998: 193-207.

17

Al-Rawi and Horowitz 2001.

18

Fig. 5 from Horowitz 1998: 187. For the ziqpu-stars see Hunger and Pingree 1999: 68-70, 84-90.

For the 364 day year in Mesopotamia see most recently Britton 2007, and earliest Horowitz 1996 with discussion of AO 6478 in Horowitz 1998: 182-188.

19

78

STARS, COWS, SEMICIRCLES AND DOMES...

heavens, the Heaven of Anu, which is made of luludānītu-stone, and the middle heavens which are made of saggilmud-stone, a variety of blue lapis-lazuli:20 The Upper Heavens are luludānītu-stone. They belong to Anu. He (Marduk) settled the 300 Igigi inside. The Middle Heavens are saggilmud-stone. They belong to the Igigi. Bel sat on the high dais inside, in the lapis-lazuli sanctuary. He made a lamp? of electrum shine inside. The Lower Heavens are jasper. They belong to the stars. He (Marduk) drew the constellations of the gods on them.

Thus, what we seem to have in KAR 307 is a vision of stars, drawn on a jasper sky, shining brightly against the blue lapis-lazuli colored background of the floor of the Middle Heavens. 2) A parallel in the astronomical omen series Enuma Anu Enlil, which agrees with Enuma Elish in principle that the gods drew the stars and constellations onto the surface of the sky, but credits this act to Anu, Enlil, and Ea, rather than Marduk:21 When Anu, Enlil, and Ea, the great gods, built heaven and earth, fixed the astronomical signs, established the stellar positions, [se]t fast the stellar locations the gods of the night they . [ . . ] ., divided the (stellar) paths the gods, the likenesses [of them they dr]ew, the constellations night (and) day, as equa[ls? they measure]d, month and year they created.

3) K. 7067, a literary fragment from the British Museum which adds a new ingredient to the mix, mathematics:22 1’. 2’. 3’. 4’. 5’. 6’. 7’. 8’. 9’. 10’. 11’. 12’. 13’.

Ea in the Apsu [ . . . The Great Gods took council and in the d[ecisions . . . The stars, like a beaut[iful] glo[w . . . The vast heavens [ . . , From sunrise to suns[et . . . They multiplied the width (UŠ) by the height (SAG) [ . . . omens and oracular decisions [ . . . The god divided up the st[ations . . . (manzazu) In the station, the pole [ . . . Night and day [ . . . [ . n]ight to/for the M[oon/month, the day to/for the Sun] [ . . the pole [ . . . [ . . m]inas? . [ . . .

20

Livingstone 1989: 100; Horowitz 1998: 3-4.

21

For this often cited passage see Horowitz 1998: 146-147 with further bibliography.

Horowitz 1998: 147-148. Brown 2000: 254 makes reference to two parallel literary fragments that were identified as such by W. G. Lambert (K.10817+11118 and K. 2313). These fragments do not join or add anything to K.7067.

22

79

WAYNE HOROWITZ

Line 6, They multiplied the width (UŠ) by the height (SAG) [ . . ., at first glance, would seem to offer the equation for determining the area of a rectangle, i.e. multiplying the long side by the short side. Yet, given the actual shape of the sky, and the sources quoted above, it seems strange to visualize the heavens as a rectangle. Thus, I would suggest that multiplying the SAG by the UŠ in our context is not to be related to the rectangle, but to a standard Babylonian equation for determining the area of a semicircle: The Area of Semicircle = 3/4 (0;45) × Diameter (UŠ) × the Radius (SAG)

This formula is used in what remains from a geometry question from the cuneiform scribal school, the Edubba, which E. Robson presents in her 1999 book, Mesopotamian Mathematics 2100-1600 BC in her discussion of the semicircle (Robson 1999: 39):23 The area of a semicircle, 2/3 (of it?), . . . the UŠ and the SAG, what are they?

In her discussion, Robson also offers a diagram with the SAG and UŠ of the semicircle (fig. 6), that was neatly anticipated by the diagram for the ziqpu-stars that we viewed above as fig. 5. Thus, if we mix and match freely with what he have seen so far we may present the following equation for determining the area of the semicircle of the starry sky: The area of the semicircular stellar cattle-pen = the length of its base (a line drawn from the eastern to western horizon) times the length of a line drawn from the earth’s surface to the ziqpu-point overhead, multiplied by 3/4.

Further, if we extend this view of the sky into three dimensions, we may have the image not of a semicircle or an arc from horizon to horizon, but of the sky as a dome, or, given that Ancient Mesopotamian architects did not know the dome, something like a dome, for example the arced roofs of the barns/dairies in figs. 3-4. In any case, such mathematical-geometrical understandings of the sky, and its creation, fits the time and place of K. 7067, the 7th century library of Assurbanipal, King of Assyria, the home of the circular Astrolabe fragments CT 33 11-12, where royal astronomers reporting to king make reference to predictions of eclipses, and other observable phenomena that can only be calculated by means of math.24 In this historical context, I would submit that K. 7067 from Assurbanipal’s library represents a new view of the creation of the sky. Here, Anu, Enlil, and Ea not only command the Gods of the Night, the stars, and the Sun-god and the Moon-god to follow their paths in the sky and so create time (day and night, the months, the years) as in earlier astronomical creation myths, but now set these orders for the first time in the context of mathematical-geometric universe where equations govern the mechanics of the cosmos. Although in K. 7067, we have at best the idea of a mathematical-geometrical universe only in poetry, in a broken passage in a creation myth, the logical extension of this premise is the use of relatively simple mathematical/geometric models to describe astronomical phenomena, such as we find in the ziqpu-star texts. Such simple models then give way in the latter part of the first millennium, to the sophisticated mathematical-astronomical traditions of the Persian and Hellenistic period Babylonia. 23

Earlier see Neugebauer and Sachs 1945: 57.

24

For the correspondence of the astronomers see Hunger 1992 and some letters in Parpola 1993.

80

STARS, COWS, SEMICIRCLES AND DOMES...

Bibliography Al-Rawi, F. and Horowitz, W. 2001 “Tablets from The Sippar Library IX: A Ziqpu-Star Planisphere,” Iraq 63: 171-181. Britton, J. 2007

“Calendars, Intercalations, and Year Lengths in Mesopotamia,” in: J. Steele (ed.), Calendars and Years, Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near East, Oxford: 115-132.

Brown, D. 2000 Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology, Groningen. Casaburi, M. 2003 Tre-stelle-per-ciascun(-mese), L’Astrolabio B: edizione filologica, Naples. Hall, M. 1986 “A Hymn to The Moon-God, Nana,” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 38: 152-166. Heimpel, W. 1989

“The Babylonian Background of the Term ‘Milky Way,’” in: H. Behrens et al. (eds.), DUMU-É-DUB-BA-A, Studies in Honour of Åke W. Sjöberg (Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 11), Philadelphia: 249-253.

Horowitz, W. 1996: “The 360 and 364 Day Year in Ancient Mesopotamia,” Journal of The Ancient Near Eastern Society 24: 35-41. 1998 Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, Winona Lake. 2005

“Some Thoughts on Sumerian Star-Names and Sumerian Astronomy,” in: Y. Sefati et al. (eds.), An Experienced Scribe Who Neglects Nothing, Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Jacob Klein, Bethesda: 163-178.

2007

“The Astrolabes: Astronomy, Theology, and Chronology,” in: J. Steele (ed.), Calendars and Years: Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near East, Oxford: 101113.

Hunger, H. 1992 Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings (State Archives of Asssyria 8), Helsinki. Hunger, H. and Pingree, D. 1989 Mul-Apin, An Astronomical Compendium in Cuneiform (AfO Beiheft 24), Horn. Koch, J. 1989

Neue Untersuchungen Wiesbaden.

zu

Topographie

81

des

babylonischen

Fixsternhimmels,

WAYNE HOROWITZ

Lambert, W. G. 2008

“Mesopotamian Creation Stories,” in: M. J. Geller and M. Schipper (eds.), Imagining Creation, Leiden: 15-59.

Livingstone, A. 1989 Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea (State Archives of Assyria 8), Helsinki. Neugebauer, O. and Sachs, A. 1945 Mathematical Cuneiform Texts, New Haven. 1967

Some Atypical Astronomical Cuneiform Texts, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21: 183218.

Nissen, H. J. and Green, M. W. 1987 Zeichenliste der archaischen Texte aus Uruk (Archaische Texte aus Uruk 2), Berlin. Parpola, S. 1993

Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars (State Archives of Assyria 10), Helsinki.

Reiner, E. 1995 Astral Magic in Babylonia, Philadelphia. Roaf, M. 1990 Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia and the Ancient Near East, New York - Oxford. Robson, E. 1999

Mesopotamian Mathematics 2100-1600 BC: Technical Constants in Bureaucracy and Education (OECT 14), Oxford.

Reiner, E. and Pingree, D. 1981

Babylonian Planetary Omens, Part Two, Enūma Anu Enlil, Tablets 50-51 (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 2/2), Malibu.

Rochberg-Halton, F. 1988

Aspects of Babylonian Celestial Divination : The Lunar Eclipse Tablets (AfO Beiheft 22), Horn.

Sjöberg, Å. 1960 Der Mondgott Nanna-Suen in der sumerischen Überlieferung, Stockholm. Thureau-Dangin, F. 1930 “L’Inscription des Lions de Til-Barsip,” Revue d’Assyriologie 27: 11-21.

82

STARS, COWS, SEMICIRCLES AND DOMES...

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

83

WAYNE HOROWITZ

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

84

STARS, COWS, SEMICIRCLES AND DOMES...

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

85

VI NAME MIDRASHIM AND WORD PLAYS ON NAMES IN AKKADIAN HISTORICAL WRITINGS

VICTOR AVIGDOR HUROWITZ

For Joanie, a font of friendship Šaptēn duššupat balāṭam pīša Simtišša ihannima ṣīhātum Ištāša ibašši milkum Izzakkar inniši innabbi šumša

Proper names are not merely random sounds used to label a person or a geographical entity; nor when given are they chosen simply because they are mellifluous or fashionable. In fact, names are meaningful linguistic units; and although they are not always coined anew and are frequently applied to more than one individual they are often selected purposely, reflecting the circumstances of the person’s birth or expressing some parental wish about their new child’s character and future. Geographical names may indicate some feature of the site they designate such as location, physical topography or local economy, society and religion. The expressive powers inherent in names used in daily life ultimately leads to the literary phenomena of “symbolic names” on the one hand and “name-midrashim”1 on the other. These are distinct but related literary-rhetorical devices, which are in a sense two sides of the same coin. A symbolic name is a name given to a character expressing his or her nature or role in a composition. The character behaves like the name and the name mirrors the character’s behavior. The namemidrash is a verbal reflection upon a name, explaining or illuminating its bearer’s personality or role in the composition. By their very nature symbolic names will appear inevitably in fictitious works in which the characters’ names are made up or chosen by the author, while a name-midrash is a literary flourish that can occur in any type of text. A name-midrash can turn an ordinary name into a symbolic one in its literary context. A word-play on a name can be a midrash, explaining the name in its context, or simply a use of the sounds of the name to integrate it into its context.

Midrash has the basic connotation of “explanation” but can apply both to philologically correct explanations as well as “fanciful” explanations which may ignore strict rules of grammar and etymology. When they appear in a text they can be explicitly described as an explanation or they can be hidden, in which case the midrash is a turn of expression used in juxtaposition to the name but part of a regular sentence rather than a “label.”

1

87

VICTOR AVIGDOR HUROWITZ

A good illustration of the interplay between symbolic names and name-midrashim is that of Gimil-Ninurta, the hero of the comic tale “Poor Man of Nippur”2. Most surprisingly scholars have overlooked it; and even Scott Noegel who wrote a whole article on word play in this text and related to the name in various ways overlooked its symbolism3. Gimil-DN type names are not rare, and their plain meaning is “The Kindness of DN,” based on the regular meanings of gamālu and gimillu as “be kind,” and “act of kindness.” However, a well-known literary idiom gimilla turru means “to avenge.” This expression can mean “repay kindness,” but it often means to repay evil and revenge. If so, Gimil-Ninurta can mean “Ninurta’s payment” or even “Ninurta’s revenge,” both suited to Gimil-Ninurta whose sole desire is to wreak vengeance on Mr. Mayor4 of Nippur who repaid kindness with evil. The author has not invented a new name but has given his hero a name which resonates meaningfully with the given context. This particular meaning is emphasized by a refrain which explains Gimil-Ninurta’s actions and acts as a midrash on the name. Before his first act of vengeance and at the end of each of the three acts Gimil-Ninurta announces aššu ištēt biltu ša tēmedanni ša ištēn šalaš rībētu arâbka, “for the one burden / embarrassment you have inflicted upon me I will pay you back three payments” (STT I 38 ll. 67-68; cf. 112-113; 138-139; 157-158). This sentence does not contain gamālu or any derivative, but râbu frequently occurs together with gamālu forming a pair of synonymous terms. So we find in the Counsels of Wisdom ana ēpiš limuttīka damiqtu rībšu / ana raggīka mīšara gimlaššu, “To your malefactor pay back good / to one who is wicked to you requite justice” (BWL 100-101: 42-43; see CAD G 22a s.v. gamālu); ṭâbi eli dŠamši irâbšu dumqu // šubšû usâtu gimil dūr ūmi “It is pleasing to Šamaš, who will repay him with favour // Do charitable deeds, kindness all your days” (BWL 102-103 64-65). And there are other examples. If so, Gimil-Ninurta bears a symbolic name reflecting his character, and the context clarifies this with a midrash. Identifying a name-midrash can be subjective. Sometimes it is labeled or tagged as such by appearing at the time a name is given. But in many instances one scholar might legitimately ask whether a midrash identified by another scholar is in fact intentional or just a coincidental similarity in sound or meaning between the name being explained and its explanation. The problem becomes more difficult because a name-midrash can ignore the name’s basic meaning 2

STT 38, 39; Gurney 1956: 145-164. Cf. George 1993: 63-75, esp. 75.

3

Noegel 1996: 169-186.

Note that this character is designated sometimes mha-za-an-nu, (l. 26, 34, 118, [120], 124, [144], 152, [160]) but other times lúha-za-an-nu (l. 21, 41, 88, 104, 114, 148) or even ha-za-an-nu (36, 37, 101) with no determinative. The word spelled ideographically NU.BÀN.DA, read by Gurney as hazannu (24, 30, 69, 87, 94, 95, 98, 126) is, however to be read as la/uputtû. Gurney translates all cases of hazannu as Mayor (upper case M), taking it as a title, while Foster always renders with a lower case, “mayor.” It is tempting to suggest that in distinguishing between m hazannu and lúhazannu, the author is distinguishing between the proper name Mr. Mayor and the common noun, mayor in which case the former would be a symbolic name. This thought is squelched, however, by the phrase m hazannu Nippur, the construct state precluding the parsing of the nomen rectum as a proper noun. The other named character in this work, Tukulti-Enlil (dBE) (ll. 25, 30, 110, 136) the gate keeper should also have a symbolic name, but its meaning escapes me. At most I can point to some alliteration between the name and his function which is atû muk¥l bābi (ll. 65, 119), loosely identifying the man with the role he plays. 4

88

NAME MIDRASHIM AND WORD PLAYS ON NAMES IN AKKADIAN HISTORICAL WRITINGS

or etymology, or might even relate to only some of the consonants in a name. In this paper I will try to justify most identifications of the phenomenon by pointing out features which indicate intentionality rather than coincidence. These phenomena have been extensively investigated in the Hebrew Bible5; but beside such famous names as Marduk6, Šamhat or Ziusudra-ūta-napišti7, less attention has been given them in Akkadian texts8. Name-midrashim occur in writings of all subjects and genres. This paper will be somewhat limited, restricting itself to a literary and exegetical discussion of selected occurrences of name-midrashim and plays on names in Akkadian historical writings – some known, most newly detected – showing how the devices function and how they enhance the texts in which they appear. In other words, we will not be dealing primarily with symbolic names but only with literary explanations of real names, something that actually turns the real name into a symbolic one. The names which are objects of midrashim include divine names, royal names, personal names of non-royal individuals, and toponyms.

a. Divine Names Marduk – Before going directly to historical texts per se I start with a name-midrash from a mythological composition which eventually reverberates in historical writings as well. Enūma eliš, which by its very first line is all about naming, ends by proclaiming Marduk’s fifty names, each with a fanciful, very learned explanation, each of which is a prima facie name-midrash.9 This is not the place to deal with this passage. Instead, I would like to look at the namemidrash in the description of Marduk’s birth in tablet 1 which is counterbalanced by the fifty name-midrashim in tablets 6 and 7. As we will see, this midrash eventually reverberates in an historical inscription. When Marduk is born Anu joyously exclaims māriyūtu māriyūtu mārī šamšī šamši ša ilī, probably meaning “Little son, little son; my son my sun, sun of the gods” (En. El. 1: 101-102). The first words play on the sound of the written name dAMAR.UTU, turning it into an Akkadian word māriyūtu which has been interpreted as an affectionate diminutive of mārī, my son. Afterwards the first component, mārī, of māriyūtu is interpreted as an Akkadian word “my son” and the second component, UTU is interpreted as a Sumerogram meaning sun.

See in particular the extensive and excellent studies of Zakovitch 1971; Garsiel 1991. The biblical name derivations described in these studies closely resemble in nearly every aspect the name derivations found in Akkadian texts as discussed below. It is remarkable therefore that although these works take interest in the continuing phenomenon of name derivations in post-Biblical Jewish literature they are totally silent on the nearly identical phenomena in the writings of the ancient near east. 5

6

See below.

7

See Hurowitz 2007: 67-78.

See Hurowitz 2000: 63-87, esp. 73-78, 82 (Marduk, Nusku-ibni, Ninurta, Mummu, Apišalim); Hurowitz 2004: 177-178; Hurowitz 2008: 69-88.

8

See Talon 2005. For the names and the generation of their meanings see Bottéro 1977: 5-28; Foster 2005: 436486. The relationship between the list of Marduk’s names and the Mesopotamian god lists as well as the function of the names in the narrative of Enūma eliš has been discussed most recently by Seri 2006: 507-519. 9

89

VICTOR AVIGDOR HUROWITZ

Finally, the text explains the infant god’s superiority over the other gods, for he is the sun god of the gods – šamši ša ilī. So far, so good! But the question now arises, what does šamši ša ilī, “Sun of the gods” mean? One cannot know for sure, but three texts offer explanations. First of all, in Enūma eliš 6: 127 we find: šū māru Šamši ša ilī nībūšuma; ina nūrīšu namri littallakū šūnu kajjān, “He, ‘the son, the sun of the gods’ is his name; in his illuminating lamp they (the gods) will walk perpetually.” This relates to the previous midrashim mārī šamšī and šamši ša ilī but explains that Marduk is the leader of the gods, understanding māru as mu’’aru, from wâru, a synonym of alāku. A second midrash appears in Ludlul bēl nēmeqi which is a hymn praising Marduk by a suffering man who at long last realizes that Marduk is superior and preferable to the other gods and an individual will do well to make him his personal god10. Tablet 4: 29-36 describes Marduk’s ability to enliven the dead, and contains four verse couplets11: The citizens of Babylon have seen how [Marduk] resuscitates; The ends (of the earth) in their entirety will pronounce his greatness. Who has said “I will see his sun”? (Mannumma iqbi ammar šamšīšu) Who in his heart has wondered whether he will pass in his street? Who besides Marduk enlivens the dead, Besides Zērbanītum, who is the goddess who grants life? Marduk can resurrect from the grave, Zērbanītum knows how to save from the pit.

Three of these couplets mention Marduk in the initial verse, but in the remaining couplet his name does not appear. Yet in their place we find a man who says ammar šamšīšu “I have seen his sun” meaning “Marduk, has taken me out into the light of the sun and given me light.” But it seems that these words are in fact a name-midrash. The name Marduk is written d AMAR.UTU, and in the midrash in Ludlul the sign AMAR is echoed by the verb ammar, while UTU is interpreted šamšu, sun. Furthermore, the words ammar š amšišu are nearly identical in sound with mārī šamši in Enūma eliš, the result being that the line in Ludlul is doubly dependent on the midrash of Marduk in Enūma eliš. If so, Marduk is not the leader of the gods as in Enūma eliš but the giver of life and freedom to his devotees. A third explanation appears in an historical text, in this case a dedicatory inscription to Marduk from the time of Assurbanipal which describes the god as apir agî bēlūti ša rašubbatu šamši ilī zīme ruššûti, “crowned by a diadem of lordship and radiance // sun of the gods, ruddy of countenance”12; namely, Marduk’s light is brighter and more radiant than all the gods. If so, Marduk’s name testifies by way of the midrash to his being the most radiant of all the gods.

10

For this interpretation of Ludlul see Moran 2002: 182-200.

11

BWL 58-59: 4(?): 29-36.

12

Streck, Asb 278 line β from K.3412 = Borger, BIA p. 201 ll. 9-10.

90

NAME MIDRASHIM AND WORD PLAYS ON NAMES IN AKKADIAN HISTORICAL WRITINGS

ŠÀ.ZU – One of Marduk’s fifty names was dŠazu (Enūma eliš 7: 35)13. A midrash on this name appears in an inscription of Nabopolassar. In a text describing the building of ImgurEnlil, a wall of Babylon, Marduk is described14: d

ŠÀ.ZU bēlu mūdû libbi (ŠÀ) ilāni ša šamê u erṣetim ša ta-ka-la-at nišim ibarrû kajāni iāšim ṣahram ša ina nišī la uttû ša libbīja ibrēma

d

Šazu, the lord who knows the heart of the gods of heaven and earth Who constantly investigates the stomachs15 of human beings, Me, the insignificant one who is not noticed among human beings, he investigated my heart

Marduk is here called by his poetic names, dŠazu, which is actually a Sumerian symbolic name meaning “knows the heart.” This name is interpreted literally as mūdû libbi, and this is then explained as ša ta-ka-la-at nišim ibarrû. This entire passage seems to be an expansion of Enūma eliš 7: 35 which gives as the first interpretation of dŠÀ.ZU mūdê libbi ilāni ša ibarrû karšu. In other words, this is not an independent name-midrash but a citation from what may be characterized as a midrashic composition. Sîn – Esarhaddon’s monument at Zincirli starts with a list of twelve divinities and their titles, indicating what they had done for the king (Borger, Asarhaddon p. 96 Mnm. A Vs. 1-12). The fifth god listed is the Moon God, Sîn but rather than being given a single name as are the other gods, he is given the double appellative Sîn Nannaru. This exceptional, double name is followed immediately by the word namru which explains the second appellative Nannaru. Nergal – Sargon II, in his Letter to Assur describing his campaign to Urartu, reports (l. 14)16: Ana Zikirte u Anidīja ša dURÌ.GAL dIM ú-rì-gal-li ālikūt mahrīja ušaṭriṣa nīršun To the lands of Zikirte and Andija I turned the yoke of Nergal and Adad, the standards going before me.

In this passage the name Nergal is written dURÌ.GAL in order to be played upon and interpreted by urigallu,17 meaning “standard” thereby creating the message that it is not just a

13

This name is followed by five more compound names, the first component in each being dŠÀ.ZU (ll. 21-24).

14

Al-Rawi 1985: 1-13, esp. 1 l. 15. See also VAB 4 p. 66 Nabopolassar 4 ll. 8-9.

Al-Rawi translates ta-ka-la-at “the subtleties of human beings” based on an otherwise unattested word takkaltu, pl. takkalātu” meaning “clever, ingenious behaviour” which he must have derive from nakālu although he doesn’t say this explicitly. CAD T does not list this word so it may be assumed that it stands by its emendation to tallakat from tallaktu meaning “the course, goings, activities of the people” found in CAD B s.v. barû A v. 1a). My translation assumes that takaltu with the literal meaning of “stomach” is used here metaphorically as innermost thoughts, and is synonymous with libbu. It is also synonymous with karšu found in the Enūma eliš passage on which it may be based.

15

16

See most recently Mayer 1983: 65-132.

17

See Borger 2003: 358 on 535 n. 2.

91

VICTOR AVIGDOR HUROWITZ

standard going before the camp but that the standard is the embodiment of the god of war, Nergal. This again is a combination of a symbolic name and a name-midrash explaining it.

b. Personal Names Iphur-Kiši – A name-midrash from a text well known to Joan the Jubilarienne appears in a literary account of the revolt against Narām-Sîn of Akkade, an event also attested in historical writings. In the “Great Revolt against Narām-Sîn” we read about the gathering of the rebellious forces. Even though Kish had been in brotherhood with Narām-Sîn18: Bīrit Tiwa Urumum….Kiši iphurma Iphur-Kiši awīl Kiš mār ṣummirat-Ištar ṣarrihtim Ana šarrūtim Iššûma Between Tiwa and Urumum…the (citizens) of Kiši assembled (and) Iphur-Kiši, the man of Kiši, son of Ṣummirat-Ištar, the lamentation priestess, they elected to kingship.

The name Iphur-Kiši means “he gathered Kish,” but here he is mentioned immediately after the statement that “Kiši assembled” (Kiši iphurma), interpreting his name accordingly, “Kish gathered.” Juxtaposition of the person with the event identical to his name integrates him more fully into the account of the events, making his role essentially inevitable and making him inextricably bound up with the event in which he participated. Kaštiliašu – The inscriptions of Tukulti-Ninurta I report his war with Kaštiliašu, King of Babylon/Karduniaš. In one place he describes the capture of the king (RIMA I 273 A.0.78.23 ll.. 64-65 = 276 A.0.78.24 ll. 36-37): mkaš-til-a-šu MAN kaš-ši-i qa-ti lu ik-šu-ud, “Kaštiliašu the king of the Kassites my hand surely captured.” This statement looks quite innocent, but it is surprising that here the king of Karduniaš (so referred to in l. 60 [34]) should be referred to a second time and this time as King of the Kassites, the title by which he is referred to constantly in the Tukulti-Ninurta Epic but nowhere else in the royal inscriptions. There is an alliterative connection between the royal name and the following words kašši…ikšud. In addition to these there may be here a quite sophisticated multi-lingual name-midrash. The first element in the king’s name, kaš is interpreted as kaššû, the Kassite. The last element, šu is interpreted as if it were the logogram šú meaning in Akkadian kašādu, to capture. The middle element til is taken as a logogram which has the Akkadian equivalent qatû, “to complete,” but here it is used for the phonetic value of qatû’s Akkadian homonym qātu, hand. So kaš= kaššû; til = qatû = qāti; šu = šú = ikšud. If this is indeed a name-midrash its purpose would be to state that Kaštiliašu’s fate, to be captured by the hand of Tukulti-Ninurta is already predicted in his own name. In other words, he was doomed from birth. This is the same type of playful/scholarly name interpretation known from the list of Marduk’s names in Enūma eliš and appears later as the basis of cryptographic writing known as Assyrian hieroglyphs19. 18

See Goodnick-Westenholz 1997: 242-243 ll. 24-28. See also the Mari version, p. 234-235 ll. 14-16.

19

See Finkel 1996: 244-268; Roaf, Zgoll 2001: 264-295; Morenz 2003: 18-27.

92

NAME MIDRASHIM AND WORD PLAYS ON NAMES IN AKKADIAN HISTORICAL WRITINGS

Sargon – Three Mesopotamian kings bore the name Šarru-kīn which also appears in variant forms as Šarru-kīnu or Šarru-ukīn20. The first is Sargon the Great of Akkade, the second was a minor Assyrian king of the early second millennium BCE, and the third was Sargon II, King of Assyria of the first millennium BCE. The basic meaning of the sentence name Šarru-kīn is “the king is firm, legitimate, true.” Šarru-kīnu is “the firm, legitimate, true king,” while Šarru-ukīn means “the king made firm/established.” When originally coined and applied, the name may have had political connotations relating to its first bearer, but these connotations lose their importance or precision when applied to other, subsequent kings, permitting the name to assume new nuances. Name-midrashim, offering different interpretations of the name, exist in relation to Sargon (the Great) of Akkade and Sargon II of Assyria. The first example is in an Old-Assyrian text from the merchant community of Kaniš discovered in 1958 but published only forty years later21. This text has merited the titles “The Sargon Parody”22 and “Sargon, Lord of Lies”23. It begins with a group of royal titles: LUGAL/LUGAL.KI.IN/LUGAL A-ki-dí-e/ re-be-tim/ LUGAL da-num ša iš-te i-li-e e-ta-wa-ni “The King, Sargon, King of Agade of the broad squares, the mighty king who negotiates with the gods.”

This translation is quite straightforward and would not seem to deserve much particular attention. However, a preponderance of word plays in the text as well as the continuation of the narrative in which the king attributes to himself all sorts of incredible acts and three times adds that he swears by the gods Adad and Ištar (ll. 11-13, 18-19, 40-41) has led to a different interpretation, understanding the introductory passage as what might be called a “long distance name-midrash.” Benjamin Foster has proposed that the titles be read in light of the legal formula DN1 u DN2 ú-má la sú-ra-tim lu kí-ni-iš-ma, “By the gods, it is not a lie but true,” and that the name Šarru-kīn, written here LUGAL.KI.IN is supposed to be understood as a parody on the word pair surratim and kīniš. A further play on the name, this one in the text itself and not imported from outside would be in line 16: sà-ar-a-am/ áš-ta-kà-an, “I set up a lie.”24

20

For these readings see Fuchs 1993: 414-415.

See Günbatti 1997: 131-155; Van De Mieroop 2000: 133-159; Alster, Oshima 2007: 1-20 The late publication of the text prevented its inclusion in Goodnick-Westenholz 1997, which appeared in the same year. But see now Goodnick-Westenholz 2007: 21-27. 21

22

Foster 2002.

23

Foster 2005: 71-75.

Van De Mieroop emends this text and reads sà-ar-a-am áš-ta-kà-an-ma, “I set up my inscription” on the basis of the previous line mu-sà-ri/i-pì-tí-qi-ma, “my inscription of loosened” or “my inscription was formed.” Even with this emendation, there might still be a multi-lingual word play because musarû is an Akkadianized form of the Sumerian “MU.SAR,” “written name,” Sumerian SAR, written, being understood by the poet as if it were Akkadian sar, liar.

24

93

VICTOR AVIGDOR HUROWITZ

A well known inscription of Sargon II of Assyria which is certainly unrelated to this one, exploits the same potential for midrashic explanation inherent in the king’s name. In his letter to the gods describing his Urartian campaign of 714 BCE we read25: 112 anāku Šarru-ukīn, šar kibrat erbi / rē’i māt Aššur, nāṣer šamni Ellil Marduk / mupīq dēn Šamaš 113 zēr Aššur āl nēmeqi pīt hasīsi ša amat ilāni rabûti palhiš utaqqû / la isanniqu uṣurātēšun 114 šarru kīnu dābib damqāte ša ikkibšu amāt tašgerti epēš lemnūtim habālu la uṣṣû ina pîšu 115 igigal malkī ša kiššati ša ina milki u ṭēmi ibbanû palāh ili u Ištari ukallû rittuššu I, Sargon, king of the four quarters, shepherd of the Land of Assyria, guardian of the oil (covenant) of Ellil and Marduk, obedient to the judgment of Šamaš, descendant of Aššur, city of wisdom and understanding, who fearfully awaits the word of the great gods, who does not question/pressure their ordinances/boundaries; Truthful king, speaker of good things, whose taboo is lies, and doing wickedness and oppression does not issue from his lips; wisest of kings of the world who was created in counsel and sense, and holds in his hand fear of the god and goddess.

Line 114 contains a name-midrash on the name Šarru-ukīn. Although the title šarru kīnu has been translated “rightful king” (Luckenbill), “rechtmäßige Könige” (Mayer), and “legitimate king” (Foster) reflecting the original meaning of the king’s name, i.e. the name given to Sargon King of Akkade, in this case and context it surely means “the truthful king”26. This description of Sargon bears several linguistic correspondences to the depiction of Ursû in the previous lines as a consummate liar. The two characters are thus mirror images27. A similar midrash appears in Sargon II’s somewhat later Cylinder Inscription and found its way into some contemporary legal documents as well28. As a “truthful king,” Sargon speaks good things, does not lie, and evil and destructive things do not issue from his mouth. Between

See Thureau-Dangin 1912. For a new edition see Mayer 1983: 65-132. For an English translation see Foster 2005: 790-813. The relevant portions of the text have been discussed in Hurowitz 2008a: 104-120. For the name-midrash see already Seux 1967: 297, n. 181.

25

Line 156 anāku Šarru-ukīn nāṣer kitti, “I, Sargon, guardian of truth,” is also to be considered a variation of this name Midrash.

26

In the account of the sixth year contained in Sargon’s annals we find that Ursâ the Urartian sends to Bagdatti of Wišdiš (Fuchs 1993: 96 §79-80: rakbušu š a dababti sarrati išpur itti Šarru-ukīn…ušamkiršunūtima, “He sent his rider of lying prattle who incites enemies against (Sargon),” again juxtaposing speaking of lies to Sargon and implying that Šarru-ukīn means “truthful king.” 27

This has been noticed independently by several scholars. For the most recent and most detailed discussion see Frahm 2005: 46-50, esp. 48 and 49 note 24. 28

94

NAME MIDRASHIM AND WORD PLAYS ON NAMES IN AKKADIAN HISTORICAL WRITINGS

Sargon’s decision to build a city and his request that the gods approve the plan, is a passage the likes of which are found in no other building account (ll. 50-52)29: kīma zikir šumīja ša ana naṣār kitti u mīšari / šūtešur la le’î / la habāl enši imbûnni ilāni rabûti kasap eqlēt āli šâšu kī pî ṭuppāte šājjāmānūte kaspu u siparru ana bēlīšunu utīrma aššu riggāte la šubšî ša kasap eqli la ṣebû eqlu mihir eqli ašar pānûšunu šaknū addinšunūti. According to the pronunciation of my name (kīma zikir šumīja) Which the great gods have called for the purpose of guarding justice and righteousness, being just to the disabled, and not oppressing the weak, I paid to their owners the silver and copper price of the fields around that city according to the bills of sale; And so as not to cause any complaint I gave a person who didn’t want the price of a field a substitute field wherever he desired.

We recall here Ahab’s proposal to Neboth, but unlike Elijah, Sargon sees such a deed as quintessential justice. But what does legal purchase of fields have to do with the king’s divinely given name? It seems that this passage contains an elaborate, explicit midrash on the name Šarru-kīn. The etymological meaning of Šarru-kīn is “the king is legitimate” or “the king is stable.” But, this is beside the point here, for what we have is a Midrash of the name explaining the name as “the king is just.” Not only this, but the text actually describes the justice Sargon has done by purchasing the property, and in the language is an echo of the famous lines in the Prologue to Codex Hammurabi commissioning him: mīšaram ina mātim ana šūpîm raggam u ṣēnam ana hulliqim dannum enšam ana la habālim to cause justice to shine forth in the land to destroy wickedness and evil so that the strong will not oppress the weak.

Also Hammurabi, in fulfilling his commission, claims: ana šūtēšur nišī mātim… kittam u mīšaram ina pī mātim aškun To do justice to the people of the land, justice and righteousness I placed in the mouths of the people.

If so, the midrash shows that Sargon fulfilled his commission embodied in his divinely given name, and has acted justly, in the best tradition of Hammurabi of blessed memory. Finally, in his twelfth year, Sargon is sent by Marduk to fight Merodachbaladan and his selection for this mission is described30:

29

Fuchs 1993: 39-40.

95

VICTOR AVIGDOR HUROWITZ

iâti Šarru-ukīn šarru šahtu ina naphar mālikī kīniš uttânima ullâ rēšīja I, Sargon, the humble king, from all kings he truly selected me and raised my head

The words šarru and kīniš echo Sargon’s name and read into it his humility and the certainty of his selection. Ullusunu the Mannaean – In Sargon’s account of his campaign to Urartu, the king of the Mannāja named Ullusunu comes out to greet Sargon ina ulluṣ libbi u hidût pāni. Here too is a name-midrash explaining Ullusunu as ullussunu (=ulluṣ+šunu) meaning “their happiness” or “make them happy,” emphasizing that the king is like his name and behaves accordingly31. This name-midrash is also the basis of l. 155 libbi Ullusunu bēlīšunu uṭībma ana nišēšu dalpāte ušēṣi nūru, “the heart of Ullusunu their master I made good and let light go out to his restless people.” The terms libbu ṭâbu and nūru wāṣû both have connotations of happiness, and are expressions synonymous with the verb elēṣu. So there is in fact a triple name-midrash. Assurbanipal – The Rassam Cylinder of Assurbanipal starts with an introduction of the king (Borger, BIA p. 14 A I 1): Anāku Aššur-bāni-apli binûtu Aššur u Mullissu I, Assurbanipal, creation of Assur and Mullissu…

This statement is a prima facie name-midrash containing an obvious explanation of the king’s name, relating specifically to its first two elements32. Moreover, this initial statement sets a theme which occurs as a Leitmotif in various expressions further on in the composition. This sentence itself is expanded in lines 3-5: ša Aššur u Sîn…ina libbi ummīšu ibnû… Whom Assur and Sin had created in his mother’s womb.

In II 97, introducing the dream to Gyges, the king says: nibīt šumīja ina šutti ušabrīšuma Aššur ilu bānûa umma šēpē Aššur-bāni-apli šarri Aššur ṣabatma ina zukur šumīšu kušud nakrūtīka

30

Fuchs 1993: 137 §§ 261-262.

31

Mayer 1983: 10 ll. 31, 34; cf. Foster 2005: 793 n. 3.

Seux 1967: 61-64, lists several royal titles containing the word binûtu in phrases of the type binût DN or binût qātē DN. The first to receive such an epithet is Esarhaddon, however there are only two such occurrences. The neoBabylonian monarchs Nebuchadrezzar, Nabopolassar and Nabonidus also receive such titles. However, the vast majority of the occurrences relate to Assurbanipal. This distribution leads us to suggest that although the title was not created for Assurbanipal, but for his father, it was adopted and adapted by Assurbanipal because it could serve as a name – midrash, and afterwards it was used by neo-Babylonian kings in imitation of Assyrian prototypes.

32

96

NAME MIDRASHIM AND WORD PLAYS ON NAMES IN AKKADIAN HISTORICAL WRITINGS Assur, the god who is my creator showed him in a dream the calling of my name Saying: take hold of the feet of Assurbanipal, king of Assyria By the calling of his name conquer your enemies

In VII 94 the king refers to himself as: Aššur-bāni-apli šangû ellu rēšu mutninnu binût qātē Aššur Assurbanipal, the pure priest, the supplicant humble man, creation of the hands of Assur

What seems to be a variant can be found in III 87-89: Anāku Aššur-bāni-apli šar Aššur ša ilāni rabûti šimat damiqtim išīmūšu ibnûšu ina kitti u mīšari I, Assurbanipal, king of Assyria, For whom the great gods have determined a propitious destiny And created him in truth and righteousness.

In this passage, the god Assur is not mentioned by name, being replaced by ilāni rabûti, the great gods. That they are in fact one and the same, and interchangeable, is consistent with what Simo Parpola has characterized as “Assyrian monotheism” and expressed in the neoAssyrian personal name Gabbi-ilāni-Aššur, “Assur is the totality of the gods”33. In this same vein we should regard I 1 which attributed Assurbanipal’s creation not only to Aššur but to Mullissu, I 3-5 which attribute it to Aššur and Sîn, and V 100-101 where Ištar of Arbela says in a mass dream to the king’s troops: Anāku allak ina mahar Aššur-bāni-apli šarru ša ibnû qātāja I shall go before Assurbanipal, the king whom my hands created

In this passage Ištar replaces Aššur as the king’s creator but there is really no difference because the two are one and the same. Assurbanipal’s references to his own creation by Assur and the other gods may also have given rise to frequent references to his father Esarhaddon as abu bānû’a/bānīja (I 8, 27, 44, 54, 58, 61, 111; II 16, 19). Šamaš-šum-ukīn – The midrashic potential in the verb kânu observed in the name Sargon manifests itself in other names as well. In Assurbanipal’s Rassam Cylinder the king’s rebellious brother and rival is described twice as ahu lā kīnu, “a dishonest brother” (III 70-96): Ina ūmēšu Šamaš-šum-ukīn ahu la kīnu ša ṭābtu ēpšuš aškunuš ana šarrūt Bābilī At that time, Šamaš-šum-ukīn, the dishonest brother for whom I had done good, I appointed him for kingship in Babylon.

33

See Parpola 1993: 161-208; Parpola 1997, passim.

97

VICTOR AVIGDOR HUROWITZ u šū Šamaš-šum-ukīn ahu la kēnu ša la iṣṣuru adêja nišē Akkadî…ušbalkit ina qātēja and he, Šamaš-šum-ukīn, the dishonest brother, who doesn’t obey my treaty incited the people of Akkade…to rebel against me

The immediate juxtaposition of the title ahu lā kīnu and the name Šama š-šum-ukīn creates a name-midrash in the same way as did using DN banû in close proximity to Aššurbāni-apli discussed above. In the intervening lines, Assurbanipal details the favors he did his brother and what he received in turn (III 8-84): elîš ina šaptēšu itammâ ṭubbāti šaplānu libbašu qaṣir nêrtu… mārē Bābilī…dabāb lā kitte idbuba ittīšun Above, by his lips he espouses friendship, Beneath, in his heart, he plans murder The sons of Babylon…he spoke with them dishonest words.

In all three passages the text plays on the verbal component in Šamaš-šum-ukīn’s name, reminding us of the several statements we saw earlier in relationship to Šarru-kīn, and is likewise to be considered a name-midrash. This midrash is expanded by the description of Assurbanipal’s reaction to his brother’s behavior (III 87-89): anāku Aššur-bāni-apli šar Aššur ša ilāni rabûti šīmat damiqtim išīmūšu ibnûšu ina kitti u mīšari I, Assurbanipal, king of Assyria, For whom the great gods have determined a propitious destiny And created him in truth and righteousness

Although this statement depicts Assurbanipal and contains a midrash on his name, in effect it contrasts him midrashically with Šamaš-šum-ukīn. It contains two midrashim, one on each of the two rivals. Assurbanipal is ša ilāni ibnûšu, but he is built ina kitti u mīšari, which is the opposite of his brother. To these examples of name-midrashim on personal names in royal inscriptions, I add two examples of the phenomenon from royal letters. Zimri-Lim – In a letter from Mari to Zimrī-Līm (ARM 2 112: 12), Ms Inib-šarrim writes bēlī lišpuramma litrûninni u zīm bēlīja š a uzammû lūmur, “May my lord send for me, and may they lead me so that I might see the radiant countenance (zīm) of my lord which I miss.” In this brief but touching epistle, the word zīmu alludes to Zimrī-līm who is not mentioned explicitly, and it may be his nickname. The verb uzammû, “whom I miss” also echoes the name and the longing for the king by way of word play. Zimrī-līm who is called simply zīm, is also terribly missed. The woman’s longing to see the king expressed by the word lūmur may also be a play on the rest of the king’s name, echoing ri-lim. In other words, the entire name Zimri-lim is echoed in zim…lūmur.

98

NAME MIDRASHIM AND WORD PLAYS ON NAMES IN AKKADIAN HISTORICAL WRITINGS

Šarru-lū-dāri – A name-midrash may have magical power. In a letter to Esarhaddon reporting a conspiracy Bēl-ušēzib says to the king (SAA X 112 r. 11-12): šarru bēlīja lū dāru, “may the king my lord live forever”; and immediately afterwards he reveals that the conspiracy has been joined by several men, the ring leader being an Egyptian named Šarru-lū-dāru. I suggest that the blessing, appearing unexpectedly in the middle of the letter, is meant to subvert the blessing expressed in the conspirator’s name, direct it to the king, and thwart the plot. Such a name-midrash magically unlocks the power in the name, and belongs to the category of associative magic accomplished by word play.

c. Ethnic and Geographical names Alongside the explicit name-midrashim relating to persons, some texts contain words which phonologically resemble the names of places or peoples and explain them. So, for instance, the legend about Sargon of Akkade King of Battle (Šar-tamhāri) contains a double midrash on the place name Kiši, explaining it as kiššatu (universe) and kiššūtu, violence of strength34: Mīna ina qereb Akkadî kišši lilqut Šarrru-kēn šar kiššati šumšu nizkur urridānu numahhara kiššūti ul qarradānu What can Kiši take from the midst of Akkade? We swore (loyalty) by the name of Sargon, king of the universe, So we went down (and now) we are facing violence and we are not (particularly) heroic.

The first name-midrash makes Sargon king of the universe (šar kiššati) implying that he is the superior of his rival Kiši. The second characterizes the Kiši as being violent (kiššūtu). In Sargon II’s letter to Assur reporting his campaign to Urartu he says that he traversed seven mountains (only six of which he names), the second of which is kurBiru’atti, and immediately afterwards describes the first two mountains traversed as šadê bêrūte, “remote ranges.” The toponym need not be and probably is not Akkadian so it would not have an Akkadian etymology. Foster has already suggested that the description of the mountains is a word play on the later range, and this is essentially a name-midrash35, a rhetorical device for which true etymology is irrelevant. In any case, it makes the strange place identical with its terrain, which is how place names might be given in Akkadian itself. Elsewhere in the same text (l. 188) Sargon says ana kurBari tu-kul-ti būlīšu ša kurSangibutu iqabbûšunu aqtereb, “I approached Mt. Bari, the tu-kul-tu of his cattle, which they call Mt. Sangibutu.” Foster has translated tu-kul-tu būlīšu as “the source of his livestock” and Mayer gives “der Hilfsquelle seiner Herden,” both following CAD T 463 s.v. tukultu 1d (resources on

Kišši is taken in l. 17 as the toponym Kīši as suggested by Albright and Rainey who also suggested that there is a word play here, on which see Goodnick-Westenholz 1997: 114-115 on 17-18. Cf. also Foster 2005: 340 n. 2 who translates slightly differently: “What would (even) a Kishite pluck out of Agade? We swore (allegiance) to Sargon, king of the universe, We have come down to him that we may meet strength, for we are no warriors.” 34

Mayer 1993: 70, l. 28; see Foster 2005: 793 n. 2. Mayer translates “Berge mit klaren Konturen” but this does not affect the existence of a word play and name Midrash.

35

99

VICTOR AVIGDOR HUROWITZ

which one relies), deriving the noun from takālu. However, what we have here is a unique noun or a byform of tākultu, derived from akālu, to eat, and it means food, meal or in this case animal fodder36. It seems that here, the toponym Bari is being interpreted as “Mt. Grain/Fodder,” and this would be based on lexical lists equations with šu’u/šuhu, “barley” (see CAD B p. 115a s.v. baru s. meaning “cereal”). This is the same word as Hebrew ‫בר‬. If so, this gloss on the toponym is in fact a very learned name-midrash, deriving it from a rare word known only from lexical lists. Again the name-midrash makes the place name reflect some characteristic of the place it designates, as would be expected with an Akkadian name. Sennacherib, in describing his fifth campaign says he reached (Borger BAL p. 78 III 77): uru

Qa-na ša kīma qinni arî ašāred iṣṣurāti ṣēr zuqti Nippur šadî marṣi šubassun šitkunatma

The city of Qāna whose place lodges like the nest of an eagle, the foremost of birds upon the peak of Nippur, the difficult mountain,…

The name Qāna too is probably not Akkadian37 in which case it would not have an Akkadian etymology, but this text exploits the techniques of word play and name midrash, for which true etymology is un-important, to lead the reader into thinking that the name of the city of Qāna reflects its geographical situation. Esarhaddon, in his Letter to the God concerning his campaign to Šubria describes the enemy’s capital city (Borger, Asarhaddon p. 104; Gbr II 36): Uppume āl šarrūtīšu ša ṣēr šadî danni kīma urpati šitkunat Uppume, his royal city, which lodges atop a strong mountain like a cloud.

This text, using the technique of name-midrash which permits ignoring part of the name (in this case the ending -me), seems to derive the name of the city Uppume/Upūmu38 from the Akkadian word upû I