* 7,e. called into being.
t Rishtu, literally ‘first,’ which is added to distinguish this Apsu from the ordinary use of the word as ‘the watery deep,’ which actually occurs in Tablet iv. line 142.
t It has been customary to regard Mummuw here as an epithet of Tiamat in the sense of ‘chaos,’ ‘raging,’ and the like ; but, since Mummu occurs in Tablet i. lines 30 and 31 as the ‘mes- senger’ of Apsu, it is clear that a separate personage is also intended in the opening lines. The omission of the conjunction is no objection, for the conjunction is omitted also between Apsu and Tiamat.
RELIGION OF BABYLONIA
generator’ and ‘the mother of all of them.’ The eighth line, with equal vagueness, dwells upon the fact that no name was called and no fate decided, to picture the time when nothing had as yet been created, since there were no gods. The first part of the line seems to be a reference to the animal world in general, the second part a more particular reference to man, whose fate is decreed by the gods. In a general way it is stated that the gods were created, though it is not said by whom, or how many there were. Along with the gods two beings, Lakhmu and Lakhamu, are specified as having been called into being ;* and since, in the course of the narrative, they appear on the side of Tiamat, they are evidently introduced as types or symbols of the host of monsters in the wake of Apsuand Tiamat. It is difficult to know how the statement, that after the lapse of time the gods Anshar and Kishar were ‘created,’ is to be reconciled with the assertion in line 9, unless indeed we may fall back upon the hypothesis of a composite production, after the manner of the ‘doublets’ so frequently found in the com- position of two versions of a story in the OT narratives. At all events, the Divine pair, An- shar and Kishar, represent, in the opinion of the Babylonian theologians, the oldest gods, from whom, indeed, by a doctrine closely akin to ema- nation, ten pairs of gods are descended.}+ These pairs are, with one exception, gods who do not play any part whatsoever in the active pantheon as we find it in the historical periods of Babylonia and Assyria; and since, furthermore, neither An- shar nor Kishar, the ‘parents,’ belong to the active pantheon, it is evident that, by the side of the gods actually worshipped and brought together into a system by the Babylonian theologians, we have a purely ‘theoretical’ pantheon devised in accordance with the theological speculations of the Babylonian schools of thought. Anshar, signifying the ‘heavenly’ (or upper) Universe (or ‘totality’), and Kishar the earthly (or lower) Universe (or ‘ totality’), sum up the Divine power in control of all things; and one can follow the logical process which made them the progenitors of the various special powers into which this con- trol was divided. In the Babylonian Creation story, as it lies before us, only two such special powers are introduced—Anu and Ea, the latter under the form Nudimmud ; but since Anu and Ea represent two of the three personages constituting the triad which, according to a school of thought that became at one time the prevailing one, com- prised the control of the Universe,+ it is reasonable to suppose that in an older version the third figure, Bel, was also included. The omission of Bel, who in the narrative is identified with Marduk, is again an evidence of the transformation which the old traditions and speculations underwent in order to make them conform to the main purpose for which the entire tradition is preserved—the glorification of the favourite Marduk.
Anu, the god of heaven, and Nudimmud or Ea, ’ who is described as without a rival in wisdom and strength, are the commanding figures in the conflict that now arises between the gods, as the representatives of order, and Apsu, Mummu, and Tiamat, as the representatives of chaos and chaotic anarchy, though the fragmentary state of the first tablet does not permit us to grasp clearly the part that Anu plays by the side of Ea, who is the principal contestant. The gods, it appears,
* The verbal form used (so also in line 7) of the creation of the gods is shupa@, which conveys the idea of coming forth and streaming forth. mn
+ See the lists in Rawlinson, ii. 54, Nos. 3 and 4; and iii. 69, No. 1, obv.; and Radau’s valuable commentary, ‘Bel, the Christ of Ancient Times’ (Monist, vol. xiv. 81-87).
t See above, p. 538.
gods, are produced.
his complaint against the gods to Tiamat. rage he exclaims—
RELIGION OF BABYLONIA — 569
were unable for a long time to secure control of the three beings symbolical of primeval chaos. The latter, not content with a passive resistance, plot an attack upon the representatives of order. Apsu calls upon his ‘messenger ? Mummu for aid, and together they go to Tiamat to consult with her in regard to a plan for the destruction, or at all events for the crushing, of the independ- ent spirit of the gods. recently found* it is now certain that at this point of the narrative the gods are regarded as
From new fragments quite