The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria Part 17

[289] So also Shalmaneser II., Obelisk, l. 179, unless Marduk here is an error for Ramman, _cf._ l. 175.

[290] See above, p. 146.

[291] The so-called _Prunkinschrift_, ll. 174 _seq._

[292] Note the frequent use of Ashur and Bel for a.s.syria and Babylonia.

[293] Ashurbanabal, Ra.s.sam Cylinder, col ix. ll. 76, 77.

[294] See above, p. 205.

[295] IR. II. col. iv. ll. 34, 35.

[296] See below, pp. 231, 237.

[297] Rawlinson, ii. 66.

[298] Ra.s.sam Cylinder, col. x. ll. 25-27.

[299] See Tiele, _Babyl. a.s.syr. Geschichte_, p. 127.

[300] Obelisk, l. 52.

[301] Annals, col. ii. l. 135.

[302] Ra.s.sam Cylinder, col. x. l. 75.

[303] _Prunkinschrift_, l. 143.

[304] Esarhaddon, IR. 46, col. ii. l. 48; Rawlinson, iii. 16, col. iii.

l. 24.

[305] IR. 35, no. 2, l. 12.

[306] IR. 8, no. 3, ll. 5 _seq._

[307] See above, p. 126.

[308] _E.g._, Tiglathpileser III., Nimrud inscription (Layard, pl. 17, l. 12).

[309] Obelisk, l. 5.

[310] Ra.s.sam Cylinder, col. i. l. 45.

[311] Delitzsch (_Das Babylonische Weltschopfungsepos_, p. 99) questions whether Nu-gim-mud (or Nu-dim-mud) was originally a designation of Ea.

Nu-dim-mud being an epithet might, of course, be applied to other G.o.ds, but there can be no doubt that it was used to designate more particularly Ea as the artificer. See my remarks, pp. 138, 177 _seq._

[312] Meissner-Rost, _Bauinscriften Sanherib's_, p. 105.

[313] Cylinder, l. 48, ideographically as Nin-men-an-na, 'lady of the heavenly crown.' In the parallel pa.s.sage, however, as Lyon (_Sargontexte_, p. 71) points out, _Belit ilani_ is used.

[314] Cylinder, l. 70.

[315] Cylinder, l. 68.

[316] Jensen, _Kosmologie_, p. 445, reads the name _Gira_. See pp.

527-28.

[317] See the author's work on _A Fragment of the Dibbarra Epic_. (Ginn & Co., Boston, 1891).

[318] Ra.s.sam Cylinder, col. lv. ll. 79 _seq._

[319] Cylinder, ll. 44-53.

[320] Delitzsch's supposition (see Lyon, _Sargontexte_, p. 71) that Sharru-ilu is Izdubar is untenable.

[321] _Babyl. Chronicle_, col. iii. l. 44.

[322] May also be read Sha-ush-ka.

[323] See above, pp. 13, 170.

[324] _E.g._, IIR. 58, no. 5, t.i.tles of Ea; IIR. 60, no. 2, t.i.tles of Nabu.

[325] _E.g._, IIR. 60, no. 1.

[326] _E.g._, IIIR. 66, lists of G.o.ds wors.h.i.+pped in various temples of a.s.syria and also of Babylonia.

[327] See pp. 189, 238.

CHAPTER XIII.

THE TRIAD AND THE COMBINED INVOCATION OF DEITIES.

The a.s.syrian kings, in imitation of the example set by their Babylonian predecessors, are fond of introducing into their inscriptions, a series of G.o.ds under whose protection they place themselves. They do not do this as the earlier Babylonian rulers did, to emphasize the extent of their jurisdiction by adding to their pantheon the deities of towns or districts vanquished by them. The day of independent states being over, the importance of merely local deities had ceased. The theological system evolved in Babylonia in combination with the popular instinct had led to a selection out of the ma.s.s of deities of a limited number, each with tolerably definite attributes, and who together embraced all the forces under whose power mankind stood. Of these deities again, as we have seen, some acquired greater favor in a.s.syria than others, but for all that, the kings especially of the later period of a.s.syrian history were fond of including in an enumeration of the pantheon, even those who had no special significance. Policy and the meaningless imitation of earlier examples played an equal part in thus giving to the lists an aspect of formality that deprives them of the impression that they might otherwise make.

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

As for the other G.o.ds, it is to some extent a matter of caprice which ones happen to be invoked, though just as frequently we see the motive for selecting certain ones of the pantheon. Thus, when proceeding to Babylonia for war or sacrifices, the G.o.ds of Babylonia are invoked, either Marduk and Nabu alone, as the chief G.o.ds, or Bel (_i.e._, Marduk), Sarpanitum, Nabu, Tashmitum, Nana, Nergal, with Ashur, or Ashur and Marduk, or Marduk and Nabu in combination with Ashur. At other times it depends upon the G.o.ds to whom certain kings may be especially attached, or with whom they may have special dealings in their inscriptions. Thus Tiglathpileser I., when speaking of the temple of Anu and Ramman, contents himself with invoking these two G.o.ds alone at the close of his great inscription. Elsewhere, when referring to the special G.o.ds of his city, he combines Anu and Ramman with Ishtar; but again, for no special reason, his prayer is addressed to Ashur, Shamash, and Ramman. The pantheon of Ramman-nirari I. consists either of the longer one above enumerated, or of Anu, Ashur, Shamash, Ramman, and Ishtar. As we proceed down the centuries, the formal lists at the beginning of inscriptions have a tendency to grow larger. Ashurnasirbal's pantheon consists of Bel and Nin-ib, Anu and Dagan, Sin, Anu, Ramman, and, of course, Ashur, though on special occasions, as when speaking of his achievements in the chase, he contents himself with a mention of Nin-ib and Nergal. He loves, too, to vary the style of his inscriptions by naming various groups of deities in pairs: now Ashur and Shamash, again Ashur and Nin-ib, or Ashur and Bel; then Shamash and Ramman, or a group of three deities, Ashur, Shamash, and Ramman, or Sin, Anu, and Ramman.

His successors imitate this example, though each one chooses his own combinations. Shalmaneser II.'s pantheon embraces Ashur, Anu, Bel, Ea, Sin, Shamash, Nin-ib, Nergal, Nusku, Belit, and Ishtar--eleven in all.

Sargon's practice varies. The best list is furnished by his account of the eight gates of his palace and of two walls, which he names after the G.o.ds in the following order:[328]

Shamash, who grants victory. } As the names for the Ramman, who brings superabundance. } eastern gates.

Bel, who lays foundations. } For the northern gates.

Belit, who brings fertility. } Anu, who blesses handiwork. } For the western Ishtar, who causes the inhabitants to flourish. } gates.