THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
1. Influence of the
Priests.
a connection with Ea of Eridu, but exactly what is not yet made out. As the god of wisdom Nebo was readily dissociated from local con- 11. Nebo. nections, ai.d was even adopted in Assyria. Indeed he took on universal functions as the god of prophecy. As such he was kindly, and none of the dread which attached to thoughts of other deities appears in mention of him.
3. The Priests and the Epics: The type of worship has already been indicated in the article on Assyria. Among the kingly functions sacrifice continued. The priests were numerous, and though they appear little in the texts, their influence can always be read between the lines. The ill-starred attempt of Nabonidus to make Marduk more than he had been, to set him in a place like that of Asshur's in Assyria, was doubtless frustrated by priestly opposition. As the scribes, the teachers, the molders of theology and myth, in a country so devoted to a religion of set forms, the priests had an influence which can hardly be exaggerated. The cosmogony which is most in evidence is manifestly of their make and postdates the rise of Babylon to preeminence, since in it Marduk is conqueror of the rebellious Tiamat, " chaos," and out of her rent body creates the universe and then human kind.
The three epics contain earlier material and doubtless took form before Semitism laid its hands upon them. The Gilgamesh epic is the earliest which contains the world-wide thought of a means of escajne from death. In this case it is a tree, and after obtaining a scion and curing his own mortal illness Gilgamesh lost the scion while on his way home, it being stolen from him by a serpent as he was drinking from a spring. Here occur elements of comparison with the Genesis tree of life in the midst of the garden (not the tree of knowledge of which the first pair ate), and the serpent is also in evidence. A further point for comparison is that Gilgamesh was in opposition to deity in the person of Ishtar, not indeed by eating of the fruit of the tree but by slaying of a sacred bull. The eleventh tablet of the series contained the Babylonian deluge narrative (see Noah). A second epic connected with Eridu tells the story of the first 3. The man, Adapa (which name it has been Adapa Epic, proposed to read Adamu, cf . Expository Times, June, 1906, p. 416-417), and how he too just missed immortality through the guile of Ea. He was summoned to heaven to answer for breaking the wings of the south wind. Ea warned him not to partake of food while there, and by his obedience he failed of the immortality that the "food of life," which was offered him, would have bestowed (see Adam, II, § 5). The third epic, dealing with Marduk's contest witt the 4. Marduk demon, Chaos, has two points of interand Chaos, est: first, it bears upon its face its date, not earlier than Hammurabi, under whom it probably took form; second, it is manifestly a plagiarism from a much earlier story in which Ea was the hero who vanquished Apsu, " the deep,"
2. The Gil-
gramesh
Epic.
and then became creator and protector of men. A fourth narrative, which hovers between epic
and ritual, concerns the bereaval of
5. Ishtar's Ishtar in the loss of her bridegroom
Descent In- Tammuz, to recover whom she de-
to Hades, scends into Hades. This narrative is
late, its description of the environment of the underworld exhibiting the refinements of Semitic elaboration. Geo. W- Gilmore.
Bibliography: The works cited under Assyria (q.v.) generally deal also with Babylonia and should be consulted. General works are F. Lenormant, Etudes cuneiformes, 5 parts, Paris, 1878-80; J. Menant, Nineveh et Babylon, ib. 1887; H. Hilprecht, Assyriaca. Eine Nachlese auf dem Gebiete der Assyriologie, Halle, 1894; C. Fossey, Manuel d'Assyriologie, vol. i, Paris, 1904 (on explorations, decipherment, and origin and history of the cuneiform); B. Meissner, Assyriologische Studien, 1-3, Berlin, 1903- 05. Additional sources are: P. Haupt, Die sumerischen Familiengesetze, Leipsic, 1879; J. HaleVy, Documents religieux de I'Assyrie et de la Babylonie, Paris, 1882; vol. iii of E. Schrader's Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, Berlin, 1890-92, contains historical inscriptions from Urukagina to Cyrus; H. Hilprecht, Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania, Series A, Cuneiform Texts, vol. i, parts 1-2, vol. ix, Philadelphia, 1893-98; L. W. King, Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi and other Kings of the First Dynasty of Babylon, 3 vols., London, 1898-1900 (vol. iii contains translations); J. A. Craig, Assyrian and Babylonian Religious Texts, vols, i, ii, Prayers, Oracles, Hymns, Leipsic, 1895-97; idem, Astrological-Astronomical Tablets, ib. 1899; I. M. Price, The Great Cylinder Inscriptions A and B of Gudea transliterated and translated, Leipsic, 1899; F. Martin, Textes religieux Assyriens et Babyloniens, Paris, 1900 (contains transcription, transl., and commentary); V. Scheil, Textes elamites, 3 vols., ib. 1901-04; C. H. W. Johns, An Assyrian Doomsday Book or Liber censualis, Leipsic, 1901; idem, Babylonian and Assyrian Laws, Contracts and Letters, Edinburgh, 1904; K. F. Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian Letters, Chicago, 1902-04; G. A. Barton, Haverford Library Collection of Cuneiform Tablets . from Telloh, Philadelphia, 1905; S. Langdon, Building Inscriptions of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, part 1, Nabopolassar and Nebuchadrezzar, Paris, 1905 (transliteration, transl., and introduction).
On exploration consult the works of Rogers (vol. i) and Hilprecht {Explorations) mentioned under Assyria, that of Fossey, ut sup., and J. P. Peters, Nippur; or, Explorations and Adventures on the Euphrates, 2 vols., New York, 1897; A. Billerbeck, Geographische Untersuchungen, Berlin, 1898.
On the people: G. Husing, Elamische Studien, Berlin, 1898; H. Ranke, Die Personnamen in den Urkunden der Hammurabidynastie, Munich, 1902; H. Winckler, Die Vblker Vorderasiens, Leipsic, 1899. On the cuneiform writing: J. Menant, Le Syllabaire Assyrien, expose des elements, 2 vols., Paris, 1869-73; T. Noldeke, Some Characteristics of the Semitic Race, in Sketches from Eastern History, New York, 1892; F. Delitzsch, Die Entstehung des altesten Schriftsystems, 2 parts, Leipsic, 1897- 98; F. Thureau-Dangin, Recherches sur Vorigine de I'ecriture cuneiforme, part 1, Formes archaiques, Paris, 1898; F. E. Peiser, Studien zur orientalischen Altertumskunde. Das semitische Alphabet, Berlin, 1900; A. Amiaud et L. Mechineau, Tableau compare des ecritures Babylonienne et Assyrienne, 2d ed., Paris, 1902. For lexicography consult: Fr. Delitzsch, Assyrisches Worterbuch, Leipsic, 1S88- 90; R. E. Brunnow, Classified List of Ideographs,
Leiden, 1889; E. Scheil, Syllabaire, Recueil de signes archaiques , Paris, 1898; J. D. Prince, Materials for
a Sumerian Lexicon, Leipsic, 1905. On grammar consult J. Menant, Manuel de la langue Assyrienne, Paris, 1880. On the Sumerian question: E. de Chossat, Repertoire Sumerien, Lyons, 1882; F. Hommel, in Journal Royal Asiatic Society, 1886; idem, Sumerische Lesestiicke, Munich, 1894; J. HaleVy, Notes Sumeriennes, in Revue simitique, i-x (1893-1902); F. H. Weissbach, Die sumerische Frage, Leipsic, 1898; T. G. Pinches and C. P. Tiele, Akkadian and Sumerian, in Journal Royal Asiatic