PJ- 37-7/ Publications of the university of Pennsylvania. SERIES IN . ii.lology Literature and Archaeoiogy Vol I. No. 2. A Fragment The Babylonian -Dibbarra" Epic. MORRIS JASTROW, JR., Ph.D., r740FESSOR OF AKAIilC IN THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA. N. D. C. HODGES, Agent for United States, Canadti and England 47 Lafayette Place, New Vorl;. N. Y. MAX NIEMEYER, Agent for the Continent of Europe Ilalle, a. S., Germany. PHILALHCU'HIA: . IT>7ivi;rsiTy of Pj. v-jsvlvania Prkss, CO'lI. 1 «- .^c- A..y DATE DUE The PaL with the Uni- the subjects C 250 pages wUl- The pri( others than su Each M- rately. It is the time to time asTney sntm' De"preparea7" GAVLORD PRINTED INU.S A. .ected hs on !oo or to sepa- from Each author assumes the responsibility of his own contribution. Cornell University Library PJ 3771.I6J39 Fragment of the Babylonian "Dlbbara" epi 3 1924 026 806 954 FELIX E. SCHELLING, University of Pennsylvania. /7 "^ C-^S,/^-^- d^'Z' ' — 7 DATE DUE -^ /kJ^-Z^^^^-c^.^,.^^ ^-^ L^ ^P^-^^^ m to Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924026806954 Publications of the University of Pennsylvania, series in Philology Literature and Archaeology Vol. I. No. 2. A Fragment The Babylonian "Dibbarra" Epic. MORRIS _JASTROW, JR., PH.D., PROFESSOR OF ARABIC IN THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA. N. D. C. HODGES, MAX NIEMEYER, Agent for United States, Canada and England Agent for the Continent of Europe 47 Lafayette Place, New York, N. Y. Halle, a. S., Germany. PHILADELPHIA : University of Pennsylvania Press, UNfVERSlTY LIBRARY .^^ -«7--. , ■-.- -,r'.-v-;-. "rebus" or play upon mar, which would thus be the older form. While, of course, this resemblance with marmaru as a reduplication of mar or maur may be purely accidental, still, taken in connection with other indications, I regard it as worthy of notice. 8 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. important indications for the period when the story assumed its present shape. Finally, the opinion may be hazarded that Inmarmaru will turn out to be another and possibly older name for a well-known Babylonian city, much as Ma-uru (see note above, and Jensen, Kosmologie d. Babylonier, pp. 495 and 515, and Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 223) is another name for Surippak ; and more the like. But until we meet with the name again, it is idle to enter upon further speculations. 3. From Sargon, Silver. Inscrip. (Lyon, p. 52) 1. 25, where we read umAm sade u tiamat, it follows that umdm is applied to the animal world in general, with the exception of birds. Schrader's remark, therefore (KAT,'' p. 17), that umdm is equivalent to the Hebrew b^Mmdth does not appear to be exact, inasmuch as b^hinid is never applied to water-inhabiting animals. Nor is umdm in Assyrian restricted in its usage as the Hebrew b^hhnd to animals of large proportions. The passage in the cre- ation fragment, Nos. 345, 248, 147 (Del., AL^ p. 94), which enu- merates in succession bUl siri, umdm. siri, and nam.mdssi s^ri points to um,dm. as holding a place intermediate between the great beasts and the small insects, and finally, I R28, 31^ is to be noted, where umdm is contrasted with the winged creation. 5. Usahrabu may be either a plural form of the Shaf el imper- fect or a singular with overlapping vowel u in place of the a that appears in iriba and userida (Delitzsch Gram., § 147), and it is difficult to make a choice between these possibilities ; if it be the former, it might either have some reference to the umdm sadi, or the destructive agent, whose deeds are here recounted, may be represented as associating other powers with him. In 1. 8, we have the singular ulamm.an, which militates against the latter supposition. The restoration which suggests itself as a parallel to line 3, namely, la userida, would be acceptable were it not that userida is invariably used, even in its metaphorical extension, with sadH, or bringing down from some higher place. Still, it may well be that a verb with similar force may have stood here. At The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 9 all events, it is tempting to suppose that some contrast between mountain and field animals is intended to be brought out. 7. The occurrence of the expression ribit dli in this connec- tion is rather interesting. As is well known, Esarhaddon and Sargon make mention of a ribit Nind (see the passages, Del. Par., p. 260 and Lyon, Sargon in glossary), and the latter in one place, also of the r^bit Durilu (Cylinder, 1. 17). If the city here referred to is, as would seem but natural, the Inmarmaru of 1. 2, a third instance of a rebitu attached to a city would be fur- nished. It seems likely that the rebitu was originally the open space up to a certain distance around the city after the fashion of the "Haram" around Mecca and the mark or common in the Aryan village community, and only as the city grew became its suburb proper. 8. Ittu, in the sense of boundary, with the plural itdti, is applied to river shore as well as to the limits of towns, as the expression i- it nari (II R 56, 26) shows. The attack upon the city Inmarmaru is evidently described in these lines. The ribitu is first assailed, then the ittu is injured, by which we are perhaps to understand that a breach in the wall has been made, and finally the city itself is reached. The ribitu would accord- ingly be situated beyond the walls or boundary proper of the city. If the restoration maMzu be accepted — and there seems scarcely room for doubt — a further support would be given to Pater Scheil's {Samsiramman IV, p. 36) objections to Schrader's view {Keils. Bibl., I, p. vii), that Alu is restricted in its usage to poetry, whereas the common word for city is makdzu — a rela- tion, by the way, precisely the reverse of the Hebrew "^fr and mdkds. The fact seems to be that while at one time such a difference as Schrader claims may have actually existed in the use of the two terms, later on either word was used indifferently irw poetry or prose, just as the formal difference between a mahdzu and an Mu, which it is but natural to assume also pre- vailed, gave way to a complete identification, precisely as we in English use town and city interchangeably; and so also in post-Biblical Hebrew m&Mz is as frequent as '^ir. To ema kibsi. 10 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. it may be noted that IV R 15, Rev. 6, the seven evil spirits are described id&t absi ana kab&si idMni " drawing nigh for destroy- ing (lit., treading down) the shores of the deep." 10. My reading of the signs at the beginning of this line is suggested by IVR 5, col. I, 10, and col. II, 27. In both pas- sages murim rfs limutti is an epithet applied to the seven evil spirits, and since the expression does not occur elsewhere in a connected text,^ so far as I am aware, it is legitimate to conclude that here, too, there is the same, or a similar, reference. One is tempted, then, to complete the ninth line as follows : ana subat ildni limnHte. The traces to be seen after the sign for god might very well be the plural sign, but what follows is entirely too vague to warrant an opinion one way or the other. IV R. S, col. I, 51, there is a reference to this "subtu" of the evil spirits' and it also appears from this passage that the seat in question over which Anu, the king of the seven spirits, presides is none other than the samii rapastu — the broad expanse of heaven. So in the Hymn (K. 8235 and 8234) published by Briinnow (ZA. IV, p. 228), Anu is described as Asibu samdmi — " inhabit- ing the heavens." As for the expression, murim. r&s limutti, it is clear that a literal rendering will help us but little. Lenormant {Et Aec. Ill, p. 122 and 126) proposes "complotant (dans) les t^tes mechantes," which has the double defect of being obscure and unsatisfactory. Sayce (Hibbert Lectures, p. 463), " enlarging their evil heads," marks no improvement, while Hommel {Sem. Voelk I, p. 307) evades the difficulty by leaving the words untranslated. I take ris here in the figurative sense which the word has in all Semitic languages of " source" or "essence," and render the phrase, the stirrers up,'^ — murim being either singular or plural (construct) — of the very source of evil, or more simply, the "primeval causes of evil " — an epithet which accords well not only with the character of these spirits, btit ' II R. 32, 24^, the expression occurs in a vocabulary. ' Tlie ideogram corresponding to murim, viz: HA ZA (evidently Semitic 'Ijz), has the general force of holding, as Del. Woeri, p. 301, shows. The verb rAmu may, therefore, also have this meaning, and there is no reason for reading mukW in such passages as I, R. 29, 3, Asurn, I, 2, etc., as Scheil, (Samsiramman IV, p. 2). would have us do. See Jensen, Kos- mologie der Babylonier, p. 245. The, Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. i i also with the phrase immediately preceding in IV R 5, col. I, 8, " ipis marusti sunu," which' would then stand in a sort of paral- lelism to our phrase, though there is also implied a certain progress in the thought. A free rendering would be "Evil- doers are they ; nay, the very source of evil." In accordance with what has above been pointed out, the subtu referred to, if my restoration be accepted, would be the same broad expanse of heaven as mentioned in the quoted pas- sages of IV R 5. The few remaining words of this side of the fragment are entirely too vague to furnish a clue for tracing the further progress of the events, but so much is certain that after the capture of Inmarmaru the scene is transferred to another place. Reverse. LI. 1-3. The reverse of the fragment opens with an invoca- tion to the gods. It is evident that, in addition to Ea, Samas and Sin, some other deities were invoked in the pi-ayer. The syllable li, in line 2, is certainly the precative par- ticle attached to some verb expressive of a request of some kind, and on the supposition that lipti, of 1. 3, belongs to a different subject, there would be five deities, at least, who are appealed to. In view of this, it will not be considered too bold to regard age, of line i, as part of some such phrase as b&l age or mr age, and the title of some god. Now, while in the historical and religious texts Sin^ (or Nannar) is the only one of the gods to whom such titles are applied, bil age (IVR 9, 14. Tigl. Pil., I, 5, VR I, 3) and sar age (Salm. Obel. 6), the crown, as such, is an emblem of divinity in general. So Tstar (IV R 68, 36, c), Samas^ (M. 192, according to Sayce, Hibbert Lec- • Asur has alko the title nadin hatti or age (Tiprl. Pil., I, 2) , but the story being Baby- lonian (as will be shown) , Asur is, oi course, out of the question. ' The agu (f) Samas of the Aboo-Habba tablet or kudur Samas (see my paper on kudtiru, PAOS, October, i88g) can no longer be admitted as evidence that the Sun-god has a crown, as Sayce {Hibbert Lectures, p. 285) takes it, for the word refers to the' ring which the deity holds in his hand, as W. H. Ward has conclusively shown (PAOS, May, 1887) . Both Scheil and Jeremias, in their recent translations of the inscription, ought to have taken notice of Dr. Ward's important paper. Delitzsch Woert., p. 85, will also have to be corrected ac- cordingly. 12 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. tures, p. 286), and Marduk (VR 33, col. II, 52) have crowns, and so also Bel is spoken of as dpir agdsu, " decked with his crown," while in K. 646, 7 (published by Delitzsch, Woerterbuch, p. 141 ^) there is a reference to the "crown of Anu." The title might therefore apply to any of these, and, for that matter, even these would not exhaust the possibilities. It cannot refer to Sin, for he is mentioned just below, and again Marduk may be ex- cluded from consideration, for he. appears in a different r61e further on in the tablet. Now Anu or Bel (or even both) would fittingly enter as deities to be addressed in the appeal for help (ana tukultihmu, 1. 7) that is being made, but this sup- position, as will appear further on, would carry with it such important conclusions as to the position of the fragment in Babylonian mythology that it ought not to be admitted without satisfactory evidence. As for I star, a word must be said. In the tale of the seven spirits in the incantation texts. Sin, Samas and I star are introduced side by side (see IV R I, col. II, 30-34, and IV R 5, col. I, 60), and so also on the devices accompanying the Aboo-Habba tablet (V R 60) Sin, Samas and I star (with absn as representing Ea) are brought together. Fui-ther on, the connection between the story of our fragment and these episodes — extracted evidently from some collection — will be dwelt upon, and from what will there be said it will appear more than plausible that I star was among the gods here invoked. In her capacity as daughter of the Moon-god — so, e.g., in the tale of the " Descent to Hades " — the title of belit agi, or satrat agi, would be appropriate. 4-5- The translation of the words to be seen in these lines is simple enough, but their relation to what precedes and follows is not altogether clear. Milammu namrir might be the epithet of some deity and synonymous in force with saM nam- riri, applied to Sin (Tigl. PiL, I, 5, and Salm. Obel. 6). SakM- ndku, the well-known priestly title, ^ does not appear applicable to a deity, but it is to be noted that in a tablet dealing with the > See also Strassmaier, Verzekhniss, etc., p, 23. ' Cf. Lyon Sargon, p. 79. The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 13 ravages of the plague-god (M. 55, Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, pp. 311-312), it seems that the epithet is applied to that god, and, furthermore, IV R. i, col. II, 45, the fire-god Gibil is designated as "sa-ka-nak} The latter deity may, indeed, be meant here, and the further designation as milammu namrir would accord well with the character of this god, who, for instance, is elsewhere described as litpusu mSlammt, " clothed in glory" (IV R 26, No. 3, 38). It is to be noted, also, that in the magical text ASKT., p. 96, Gibil is invoked against the evil spirits imme- diately after Marduk, while in IV R I, he is brought into close connection with the seven spirits as one of their opponents, and finally, K. 2585, (Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, p. 570) he is shown to be the direct enemy of the plague-god — all of which points to the appropriateness of his being introduced into our frag- ment. Assuming the above considerations to have a sufficient foundation, we would have, in the first lines of the reverse, a prayer for help addressed to the fire and water, sun and moon, with Tstar as a fifth, representing, perhaps, the planets or stars. 7. The reading ^«w«-j?^ for the sun-god, with the phonetic complement, is noteworthy, and our passage furnishes a welcome confirmation for the reading ukallimu sam-su in the^ Bellino Cyl. of Sennacherib, 1. 47, already proposed by George Smith, but rejected by Evetts (ZA, iii, p. 325 and Note, p. 330). Evetts' translation misses the point entirely. The words must be rendered "exposed to the sun," and the passage is to be interpreted in accordance with the suggestions of Jeremias' Vorstell vom Leben n. d. Tode, p. 52. Asurn I, 10 and Salm. Ob. 16, the phonetic writing, Sam-su, for the deity occurs, though in both cases the other sign for su (Delitzsch, Schrifttafel, No. 199) is the one used, but in the hymn ZA. V., p. yj, 34, the word appears written just as in our fragment. 8. The verbs amdru and faldsu are here synonymously used as frequently (see Zimmern Busspsalmen, pp. 17-18. Jere- mias' Vorstell V. Leben nach dem Tode, p. 55). At the end of the 1 Note, too, that the ideographic equivalent for sakkhnciku enters into the composition of Nergal (Jensen, Kosmologie, p. 477). 14 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. sixth line we must also supply some verb with a similar mean- ing, possibly likit from Mtu, which VR 64, 37^ and VR 34. col. Ill, 11. 12 and 15, is found as a synonym of pald.su. 9-10. Of the gods appealed to, EJa alone appears to respond. IV R 5, col, II, 53-55, where Ea is informed by Nusku, the mes- senger of Bel, of the ravages and audacity of the evil spirits, the following phrase is used, which offers an interesting parallel to our passage : Ea ina absi am&t su\atu ismi ma"] sipatsu issuk. "Ea of the deep heard of that affair and bit his lip."^ Again, in the same tale. Col. I, 54 ffg, Bel's feelings are thus described : Iniisu Bel tema suatu ismima amdta ana libbisu isdud. "At the time that Bel heard the report, he took it to heart." Thirdly, in the story of the Deluge, when Bel sees the ship with Sitnapistim, as Jensen {Kosmologie, p. 384), would have us read the narne of the hero who has survived the flood, there occurs the same phrase as 1. 10 of our brick, libbdti imtali, written precisely with the same signs, barring the omission of a after ba of libbdti. The recurrence of the phrase here disposes finally of Haupt's supposition of a possible clerical error in the Deluge passage (see KAT^, p. 78).^ The phrase is a very forcible idiomatic expression (literally " filled with hearts ") for anger. A similar expression is found K ii2,9, 21, mimma libbdtia la imallil. In contrast to these passages, where the wrath of Ea is described, we have finally one where his joy is spoken of. In the creation, fragment 18, celebrating the praises of Marduk for his conquest of Kitbis-Tidmai, the "dragon," Ea, upon hearing of the glori- ous epithets bestowed upon his son, we are tol'd, " ihnema Ea kabitta'su itingu " — " Ea heard, and his spirit (lit., liver) rejoiced," and he crowns the honors heaped upon Marduk by declaring that the latter's name should be Ea, just as his own. The bear- ings of these passages upon the story of our fragment will be taken up further on. From a comparison of the above passages, it follows (a) that assu and inusu may be used quite synonymously ; and {b) 'In the " Descent of Istar," Rev. 21, /star bites her finger as a siE;n of her wrath. 2 From Haupt, Delitzsch Beitraege zur Assyriologie, I, p. 131, it appears that Haupt has himself abandoned this supposition. He refers also to the phrase ina malt libbUi, v R. 7, 26. The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 15 that Umu and "sipru are synonyms.^ There appear to be at least three different dssu in Assyrian, as follows : (i) expres- sive of a reason, with the force of because, as regards to ; (2) expressive of a purpose, in order to ; and (3) expressive of time, when, at the time when. In line 10, there is an instance of the latter, whereas in line 11, the second is probably intended. These three aTsu must be sharply distinguished from one another, and although identical in form, they arise from a contraction of dif- ferent elements. The first corresponds to Arabic inna, with the addition of the demonstrative particle su ; the second is the Arabic anna, with the same emphatic addition ; while the third, I take to be a combination of the common Assyrian temporal particle in {ti), with "su, and for which the uncontracted forms inusu and inusuma are also found. One is inclined to believe that the attempt was made at one time by the Assyrian scribes to distinguish, at least in writing, between these several assu by availing themselves of the exist- ence of the two signs for su (Nos. 199 and 294 of Delitzsch's Schrifttafel), and certainly I have come across no instance of asm in the temporal sense written otherwise than with the sign No. 199, but between the other two assu there now reigns a hopeless confusion in the texts, for although the second one appears always to be written with the su No. 294, the first appears quite indifferently with the one or the other, and it is only from the context that we can conclude which of the two is meant. , Lines II, 12 are exceedingly difficult. They apparently furnish a further explanation for the anger of Ea. None of the readings that suggest themselves for the first two signs appear satisfactory, and I suspect them to constitute some ideograph. While not absolutely certain of the reading hu-bu-zis — the charac- ters are very much crowded and faint — still I feel quite sure of its being right. The stem habdsu has not been met with fre- quently' as yet in the texts. We have it in hi-bi-is-ti, a word that occurs several times in the inscriptions of Sargon (see Lyon •^AmAiu also appears as a synonym of these words Hommel, Semifen, p. 30S) . i6 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. and Winckler for the passages), and also in those of Sennacherib (Pognon Bavian, pp. 64-5), though it is to be remembered that the reading hisimtu adopted by Briinnow {List of Cuneiform Ideographs, No. 5794) is also possible, even if quite improbable. For the Sargon passages, a meaning like "product" seems to be demanded by the context in all but one. In the Bull Inscription, line 41, and, also, in the Sennacherib passages, some species of trees or plants are clearly described bythe word. Again, in the syllabary III R, 70, 158, we find ha-ab-su in a group explanatory of No. 71 of the Schrifttafel. It is accompanied by a synonym, sa . . . . which, since the sign is explained elsewhere by sararu or sata/m (see Briinnow's List, Nos. 2986-7) is to be filled out accordingly, though 3a\maru\, suggested by Briinnow (No. 2995) is also possible. But, after all, zamaru, sing, and sarahu, cry, are closely related in sense, and on the other hand sararu, ogpose (!"), and sarahu contain the same root, sr, expressive of some violent action. So much then may be concluded from the connection in which ha-ab-su occurs, that it may have some such force as destruction or humiliation. Thirdly, Iii-ib-su is the specification or description of some garment in the clothing list, VR 14, 40^^, but, unfortunately, the left-hand column of the list is here want- ing, and the words within which it is grouped are not of a kind to warrant any safe conclusions (misru, cut (.■•), hilsu, strong, sintu, torn), though they show at least an accord with the gene- ral meaning, that we have hit upon for the stem.^ 1 2. The meaning " present " or " offering " for taklimu is suffi- ciently established by VR 11, 21", where it is placed berftreen ninddbu and kistu {Cf. Haupt Hebraica, III, p. 109). Latrille's explanation (ZA, I, p. 37) from the stem kaldmu, to show, is satisfactory, and' this further suggests a comparison with the Hebrew pdniin, in the phrase lehem hap-p&nhn, "shew-bread." The word occurs again, and is written just as here, in the mytho- logical fragment K, 2087, 8 (published by Sayce, Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch., IV, pp. 305-6) where it appears to be used in paral- 1 Assuming: a Semitic origin, which seems more than lilcely. we have the stem also in the mountain, Hubsan, mentioned IIR 60, 7b. Does the same element perhaps lurk in The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 17 lelism with diimkn., which furnishes a further confirmation of its meaning. And so also in tlie hymn to Marduk, published by Briinnow (ZA, IV, pp. 36-9), we have the singular form tandmdin taklhna ana darts, "thou grantest a present eternally." A dif- ferent word, though closely related, is taklimtu, shown by VR 22'', to be a synonym of tertti, law, and which, therefore, upon the supposition of a derivation from "show" is the exact parallel of our word "revelation." There is no doubt that we have the plural of tl\is word in tak-la-ma-at on one of the Tel-el-Amarna tablets (PSBA, xi, p. 332) though Sayce reads tag-la-ma-at, and moreover confesses the word with taklime, and renders "votive offerings." Regarding the meaning of the verb preceding taklime, and upon which so much depends, I confess to being in puzzling doubt. The most natural reading is su-uh-mut — the Shafel of hamdiu, glow or burn,^ but su-uh-mud is also possible, and from II R 22, $3, it is seen that the Assyrian really had a vexhkamddti. (Strass AV, 3154). Unfortunately, the vocabulary in which it occurs is badly mutilated, and it is quite impossible to con- jecture from the group of words there mentioned what the force of hamddu is. If 1. 64, ta-a \biL\ were absolutely certain, some- thing more definitely might be said than that some of the fol- lowing words signify "strong," "pressed," and the like. As it is, we have only hamtUtu as our guide, which Sayce (PSBA, XI, p. 336) derives from hamddu, and renders quite satis- factorily — judging from the context — as "gift." It is with con- siderable reserve, and only after long deliberation, that I venture to suggest the meaning " presentation " for the verb in our passage, which in connection with "offerings" and "give" of the following line seems to me to accord with the context. 13. For the expression ina la adannisu, of so frequent occur- rence in astronomical texts, see Delitzsch., Woert., p. 135, though it is questionable whether he is right in deriving adannu^ from ' In the hymn ZA. IV, p. ii, 14 and the fourth creation tablet, 1. 40, are examples of the Shafel of this verb. = See my remarks, Proc. Am. Phil. Ass , 1S87, p. xiii. Haupt (Beitraege z. Assyr. I, p. 1 20) derives the word from a stem mediae waw and compares Hebrew noun-forms like lasbn 1 8 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. the stem, edA. The phrase appears to have been used origi- nally for unseasonable events 'hdcp'^temng previous to the expected time, and it is probably owing to this nuance that it interchanges with ina la mindtisu "against calculations," while in the course of further development along this line it acquired the force " in former times," (so e.g., VR 65, col, I, 22), and then quite indis- criminately " out of season," with ina la simdnisu as a synonym. See now also Jensen, Kosmologie, etc., p. 415. The trace of a sign which might be nu is to be seen at the end of this line. 14. Cf. "Black Stone," of Esarhaddon, IR 49, col. I, 21, where Marduk, enraged at the events in Babylonia, is spoken of ana sapan mati hulluku nisi iktapud, " planning the destruction of the land and the annihilation of men." 15-16. The unmistakable signs for " j«;^^" here^ determine definitely the reading IR 66, obv. 24 f., 29 e.. Rev. 27 b., and IR 34, 13s, as Ea sarru, and not man as Thiele, Gesch., p. 519, and others believe. With our passage as a variant, Thiele's con- jectures and theories as to the identity of Ea-mannu and Sul- manu, based upon I R 23, 135, also fall to the ground. Peiser (K. B. I., p. 96), while also reading mannu, yet suggests in a note that nu may be a clerical error for aku, in which case, he says, we would be obliged to read sarru. Why may we not read simply sarrunu "oar King".' If a clerical error exists, I should cer- tainly seek for it in the repetition of nu after Gu-la. At all events, there can no longer be any question as to the reading of sarru in all these passages. Ea evidently calls upon his son and servant, Marduk, to oppose the evil for the removal of which he has been appealed to. In view of the double sense of amatu, as "order" and " report," there may be some hesitation between rendering " Ea . spread the report," or " Ea gave the command," but the latter is the more probable. The only other point here calling for remark is the ideograph EN-NA=«Ssm or nazdsu, see Asurn. II, 133 salam Ninib . . . abni, and Tigl. Pil. Ill, II R 67, 81 salam abnt, The form abnA with overlapping vowel is due to the relative clause (Delitzch Gram., p. 147). The ordinary plural form of salmu is salm.dnu, but of course a second plural, salmi, is legiti- mate. '^ Still, it is not altogether certain whether the plural is here intended, for sa-al-me may be used as the singular nominative, as the gloss., II R. 49, No. 3, 42, shows, and so it is likely also that II R 45, 54^ salme is a nominative as the preceding words are. To add to the confusion, salmu seems to be indifferently used for singular or plural. Certainly II R 67, 81, the plural is intended, as the suffix in bdnsin proves, and so, too, there can be no doubt that salam ildni rabUti (Layard, Inscriptions, etc., pi. 19, 4), refers to several images. The context leads me to believe that several images are spoken of in our text also. 18. For la i-ir-ru, and the meaning here assigned to it, com- pare the similar phrase, IV R i, 34-36 b. Fstar sa ana kibitisa Annundki istanu la i-ir-ru — "Istar, against whose command not a single one of the Annunaki stirs." For the stem see Delitzch Woert., p. 358. At the end of the line some verb with the meaning "endowed" is no doubt to be supplied; also verbs of a similar meaning are demanded at the ends of the two following lines. The parallelism of itself suggests that isdu is a noun, and more especially apart of the body. While in his Lesestuecke, Schrifttafel No. 128, Delitzsch appears to restrict isdu to the sense of "foundation," and adopts the reading s&nu when the ideograph stands for "limbs" or "loins," in his Grammar, p. 26, No. 83, he includes the latter under the reading isdu. Our pas- sage furnishes a further support for the double usage of i'sdu, and incidentally shows that, we would be justified in reading the. iStrassmaier (quoted by Delitzsch Woert., yjij, reads EN-NA=a^j in the sense of "a'ad," but this is more than doubtful. 2 Jensen, in Keilschr. Bibl. II, p- 206, 0. 48), adopts a plural ja/w*. 20 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. same way in the Descent of Istar, Obv. 35, and Rev. 21. Whether Delitzsch adopts this reading already in his Assyr. Studien, p. 121-22, note^ is not altogether clea.r, but certainly as much may be said in favor of this reading as for Mnu, which is adopted by Jeremias, Vorstellnngen, etc., pp. 12 and 18, chiefly in view of II R 35, No. 4, 11. 63 and 6"]. To determine the meaning of this word, the passage VR, 2$, 2 '^-^ must be taken into con- sideration, and from this passage I think it is clear that our word has become a legal term to express the coitus. In II R 35, it has a similar force, while ASKT., 118, Rev. 5, it stands in parallellism with birku, " knee." May it not be that stimi are the genitalia proper, while isdu are the loins .■' 21. The expression uznt isncksunute is evidently but a vari- ant for the phrase usnd . . . isrukum occurring in the colophon attached to the tablets of AsurbanabaF s library. Compare also Haupt, Ni'im^odepos, p. 5, 41, Ea urappihc nzamu, and also a lengthier phrase, II R 67,67, ina uznt nikilti hasisi palki sa isruka abkallu ilu rubu Ea, etc. 22. Sukuttu has attained an extended use in Assyrian, as is but natural that a word with so general a meaning as "fabric" should. II R 67, 28, and elsewhere, it is applied to a product made of gold; I R 13, 66, of iron, and V R 6, 12, it is intro- duced to describe precious stones, and assuming the same read- ing ib. 16, which appears almost certain, the word is used in con- nection with the garment that betokens royalty. Jensen {Keilsckr. Bibl. II, p. 204, note) questions the correctness of Amiaud's de- ductions {Zeits. f. Keilschr., I, 251-2), that would establish for the word also the meaning of a dwelling, more particularly, " tab- ernacle," but there is certainly no reason, h priori, why sukuttu should not be applied to an edifice. I am strongly inclined to be- lieve that VR 6, 45, Amiaud is right in his interpretation. At all events, the sukutti there mentioned, together with the nam- k&ru and the holy vessels, form part of the worship of the gods, and it is such a sukuttu which is certainly referred to in our • He there reads Hit, and proposes an etymology which no doubt he has long since abvindoned. The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 21 passage. A confirmation of this view is furnished by the verb usanbitu, which is invariably used in connection with construc- tions, (Nebuch., E.I.H., II, 45; T.P.III, II R 67, 82, and Nabonid, V R 64, II 13.) 23, Sayce, in his Hibbert Lectures, p. 310, reads the name of the plague-god Nerra, without, however, stating the grounds upon which he does so. Jensen (Z.A., I, p. 56) declares the " non-Semitic " pronunciation to have been Girra or Mirra, while in his recent work (^Kosmologie d. Babylonier, p. 145 and 445), he wavers between Ura and Gira. From the fact that the sign No. 250 of the Schrifttafel has the phonetic value ne (S^ 14), which is evidently curtailed from n^ru (yoke) shown by S^ II, to be one of the meanings of the ideograph, it would seem but proper to conclude from 1 1 R 59, 46, that the name of the god was Ne-ra or Nerra, and not Gira, as Jensen believes ; but the fatal objection against supposing this to be the Assyrian name of the god is that the column in which it occurs is clearly "non- Semitic." Jensen seems to appreciate the weakness of his posi- tion in ZA, I, p. 57, but in his Kosmologie makes no reference to the difficulty. After all, we are not much nearer a solution at present than we were at the time when George Smith published his Chaldizan Genesis, where, starting from the passage II R 25, I3^g-h he read the name of the deity Licbara, and for which Delitzsch. (Germ. Edition, p. 309), suggested as a preferable reading Dibbarra, connecting it with the Hebrew deber, pesti- lence. The objections against regarding the passage adduced by Smith as final are too obvious to be stated, but still it is the best evidence for the actual pronunciation that is as yet forthcom- ing. I do not see how Jensen can afford to ignore this passage altogether, and pending the final solution, which is not possible with the insufficient material at our disposal, I retain, provision- ally, Delitzsch's reading of the name. In view of IV R 5, col. I, 6^, my conjecture at the end of this line stands assured. See, also, the Creation fragment, K, 3561, 14. 24. Uzuz might, of course, be the imperative Kal of 22 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. nazdB2t, but since the context argues against this supposition, we must take it as the singular corresponding to the plural uzuzzu, which occurs IV R 5, col. I, 6"]. From S. 954, Obv. 4 (Del. AL.^ p. 134), where Fstar is addressed ina irsiti ina uzuziki, there can be no further ques- tion as to the existence of an infinitive form,, iizilzu^ to which iizAz and uzuzzu would be the third person singular and plural permansive, respectively. Furthermore, the ideographic equi- valent in the two passages, IV R and S. 954, apart from other - considerations, point unmistakably to a stem, nazAzu, but Delitzsch {Gram., p. 276) can hardly be right in claiming the in- finitive uzdzu to be a form derived from the Shafel usSziz. It seems much more natural and simpler to regard uzAzu as a somewhat irregular form for the Infinitive Piel of the stem, which ought to be written uzzuzu. Uzuz and uzztizu would then be per- mansives, following the analogy of this infinitive form. 25. If my reading at the end of the line be correct, malikut would either be a second plural for maliku by the side of inalike (TR I, 35), or the abstract noun, as malikutu, in the fourth tablet of the creation series, PSBA. X, 86, pi. I, 2. IV. Coming to the interpretation of the fragment, we find that it begins with an account of the destruction of a city by some agent. What is intended by the contrast between the animals of the mountain and of the field is not altogether clear. The former are represented as being caught by the destroyer — to speak thus indefinitely for the present — on his approach to the city, while it may be that those of the field are spared, though upon what grounds such a possible distinction is made is not appa- rent. It . may be that there is some mythological allusion here which we will come across again in some other text, as yet unpublished. I find only one reference in a religious text which may possibly have some connection with the notion underlying 1 Sayce, Hibbert Lectures^ p. 464, very carelessly fails to distinguish^between izuz., from a stem, zjsm, and our uzuzzu^ rendering both words by ^^ divide" The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 23 our passage. In an incantation dealing with the disease ii'zi^ IV R 5, col. Ill, 15) there occurs the following phrase : mamman la ibAsiL istu sadi usirida. Sayce's rendering {Hibbert Lectures, p. 461) is certainly wrong. The subject of userida is, without much question, the disease, and mamman la ibdsH I take as an idiomatic expression for "everything whatsoever" — the negative particle adding force just as it does in the idiomatic expression mala basu,^ "whatsoever." Graphically the various steps in the destruction of the city are described,' and, upon the conclusion of his task, the destroyer proceeds to the "seat of the evil gods," which, as has been shown, is the expanse of heaven. The evil gods are the seven evil spirits to whom we have so many allusions in the religious texts, and since they are always represented as the enemies of mankind, we may conclude that it is not with hostile intent, but as belonging to their circle, that the destroyer now enters their midst. In other words, the mis- sion upon which he ha,s been sent out is completed, and he returns to present a report of his doings to the king of the evil spirits, Anu, — as one feels tempted to supply. The ekallu mentioned here would then refer to the palace of Anu in the heavens. How many lines are missing at the end of the obverse must unfortunately remain an open question. A measurement of the clay librajy tablets, particularly those containing epic and religious texts, shows that the length of the tablets is pretty constant, and that the number of lines does not vary very much. Custom seems to have been as active a force in these matters in ancient Mesopotamia as it is to-day, in dictating the form of an 8vo or i2mo volume, and, indeed, with the manufacture of " writ- ing " bricks carried on, on a large scale, which led no doubt to the use of molds, there is every reason to suppose that the sizes of the tablets were definitely fixed, and that the number of sizes in actual use was equally definite.' Moreover, the systematic arrangerhent of a large library would of itself lead to the conve- nience of a" uniform binding" so far as this was possible, and it ' According to Jensen, ZK., I, p. 303, "elephantiasis." 2 Compare the Enghsh idiom " never so great" by the side of " ever so great." 24 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. may be that under the additional influences of the natural con- servatism of the East, certain shapes were always retained for cer- tain subjects. Be this as it may, the average number of lines on a mythological or religious tablet may conveniently be put down as fifty to fifty-five. Now, since at the point where the obverse begins, the story appears pretty well advanced, ten to fifteen lines at least are to supplied at the beginning, which would leave about twenty lines to be added from the point where the obverse breaks off. But the difficulty in determining what connection exists between the obverse and reverse is enhanced by the impossibility of determining the original width of the tablet. That it consisted of several columns may be put down as almost certain, from the consideration that such is the case with almost all such tablets of AsurbanabaV s library as, like our own, con- tain a religious or mythological tale of some kind. The creation series of tablets, consisting, so far as at present ascer- tained, only of obverse and reverse, appear to form an exception, and so does the famous tablet recounting the story of the descent of Istar into the world of spirits,^ but the others, such as the Gistubar series, the " Dibbarra," the " Zu " series and so forth {Cf. Bezold Babyl. Assy. Liter., pp. 175-176), consist of either four or six columns (that is, either two or three columns on each side), and so, also, the great magical texts have six columns. From the ease with which line 9 of reverse joins line 10, the breadth of each column can be approximately conjectured, but there are no means of ascertaining whether the tablet contained two or three columns on each^side, though the chances are in favor of the former. What is left of the reverse in any case rep- resents the last column of the brick. Now, with at least two columns entirely missing, it would of course be idle to speculate on the precise connection between the two sides, but assuming, as seems justifiable, some general connection, the reverse represent- ting either the end of a story begun on the obverse, or the end of some episode belonging to a more extended epic, I find {a) I It is to be noted that this tablet (IV R 31) is also distinguished by its quite excep- tional length. The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 25 ■ in the introduction of Ea and Marduk on the reverse, and {b) in the mention of the plague-god, the clue to the general inter- pretation of the fragment. In order to establish my position, it will be necessary to dwell at some length upon the character of Ea and Marduk in Babylonian mythology, as well as to make an attempt to trace the development of the r61es of both as re- vealed by the cuneiform literature. The reverse begins, as already pointed out, with a petition addressed to various gods. Of these Ea responds and calls upon Marduk to undertake some work. Now, Ea is, throughout the Babylonian religious and mytho- logical literature, pre-eminently the " god of humanity." He is the creator of mankind. The favorite titles bestowed on him are "ruler of Humanity," "directing the destinies of men ;"^ the "giver of Laws." Accordingly, he is the saviour of mankind, who answers the appeal for help when it reaches him in his home in the watery abyss. When pestilence stalks about in the land, when disease enters the body, when disturbances in the natural phenomena strike terror into men's souls, it is to Ea that the petition for relief is sent. With him there is always associated from a certain period on, his son and servant, Mar- duk, who conveys the message of mankind to Ea, " dwelling in the watery abyss," and from Ea, Marduk receives orders and instructions how the evil complained of is to be removed. Pre- cisely as in our text, so Ea is frequently portrayed as being roused to anger upon hearing of the ravages of the evil spirits, who are made responsible for everything. In a set speech he 1 So I think, without much question, naiiu, in the phrase, mnstlsir naiiisu (Sargron, Cyl. 70, etc.) , and bil nakU (Sennacherib Bavian, 1. 28) . is to lie rendered, and not " canal" or "source," as Lyon, Peiser, Winckler, Thiele(G«J-ir/8,, p. 519), and others do. Pognon, Bavian, p. 65, questions the correctness of the usual rendering, without suggesting any other. In a note to Dr. Ward's article on " The Rising Sun on Babylonian Cylinders," (Jour, of Ameri- can Arch(Eology, Vol. Ill, p. 56) , I have suggested the same translation for sad nakbi, " moun- tain of Fate," in VR 50, col.i, 1. 4, where the phrase stands in parallelism viith sad simA/ii, and I connect the stem with Hebrew nid, "curse," a meaning that may be naturally devel- oped from dwelling on the unfavorable side involved in the general conception of " fate." Thirdly, l.aoot Fragment 18, I would render »a^-a^ limnuti, etc., "through whose {.i.e., Mar. duk's), pure incantation, evil destinies, are removed." I reserve a fuller proof for another occasion. (See now Jensen, Kosmologie, p. 362) . 26 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. usually prescribes certain remedies which Marduk thereupon brings to mankind, or himself applies. The introduction of Ea and Marduk of itself makes it very likely that our fragment deals with a contest of some destructive power or powers against men. Were it a contest among the gods, it is almost certain that Bel, or Bel and Nusku would be introduced at this point, who bear about the same relation to the gods that Ea and Marduk do to men. Bel is pre-eminently the counsellor of the gods, and Nusku is his ser- vant, ready to do his word. Hence the opposition between Bel and Ea, which is well brought out in the Babylonian version of the flood. Curiously enough, in the Deluge story, neither Bel nor Ea are accompanied by their servants. In contradistinction to what we find elsewhere, Ea communicates the decision of the gods directly to his favorite Sitnapistim, and not through the mediation of Marduk, and so there is no mention of Nusku in the story. Bel is the first to see the ship which has survived the general destruc- tion ; but the message of the survival is not conveyed to him by Nusku. I believe that we have here a means of fixing the com- parative age of some of the mythological tales in the cuneiform literature, and, at the same time, an indication of their growth. Adopting the principle now generally admitted in the study of comparative mythology, that the simpler version is the older, the Deluge story in its original shape, at least, would belong to an earlier mythological stratum than such a fragment as ours, where the rescue of humanity is complicated by the mediation of Mar- duk. How the latter came to be added, and similarly why Nusku was attached to Bel, is a question into which it is impossible and needless to enter here. Suffice it to express in a word my con- viction that the combination is due in both cases to an amalga- mation of two deities, whose worship originated at different places, but whose character was very much alike. In the case of Ea and Marduk, the further suggestion may be permitted that the former, whose home is the ocean, was the " god of hu- manity " to a people living at the sea coast ; the latter to a people whose seat was inland. A third period in the develop- ment of Ea-Marduk and Bel-Nusku myths is represented by por- The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 27 tions of the text IV R 5, where, by the same process which led to attaching Marduk to Ea and Nusku to Bel, a combination of all four has taken place. Bel and Ea are no longer in opposition, but the former (IV R 5, col. I, 54 ffg), consults with Ea upon hearing of the ravages of the evil spirits. The words in which the anger of Bel is described are almost identical (see the com- mentary above) with those applied to Ea on other occasions. More remarkable still in the same text, col. ii, 32, ffg where the tale of the seven spirits is repeated, the news of their mis- chief first reaches Bel, who orders his servant Nusku to inform Ea "in the deep," whereupon the latter summons his son and servant, Marduk, and communicates in turn the news to him, at the same time taking the necessary steps for quelling the rebel- lion which the evil spirits have stirred up. While, as a matter of course, I do not regard the different layers of these myths which I have pointed out as exhaustive or final — and, indeed, any " final " conclusion is impossible in the present state of our knowledge of Babylonian mythology, with hundreds of texts still obscure and so many more unpublished — I believe that the distinctions laid down merit attention, and, at all events, represent the method by means of which we may hope to obtain a picture of the unfolding and growth of this myth- ology. Returning now to our text, and adopting provisionally the three distinguishable stages of the Ea myth, viz. : (i) Ea, by himself, as saviour of humanity, opposed to Bel, as protector of the gods. (2) Combination of Ea and Marduk, corresponding to the combination of Bel with Nusku. (3) Amalgamation of Ea-Marduk with Bel-Nusku, it is evident that the fragment before us belongs to the second stage. Ea calls in the aid of Marduk, but it is to be noted that Ea hears the appeal directly, in contradistinction to the incantation texts, where Marduk brings him the news ; and, secondly, a new feature in our fragment is the introduction of the armies of 28 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. Marduk. I am not aware of any other reference to these armies in the mythological literature. Elsewhere, in the fourth creation tablet, recounting the contest between Marduk and the dragon Tiamat, the weapons of Marduk are introduced, but neither here nor in the poetic fragment II R 19, No. 2, which is devoted to a detailed description of the equipment of the god, is there any mention made of his armies.-' For this reason alone, any at- tempt to bring our Marduk into some connection with the van- quisher of Tiamat, which would naturally be suggested by the similarity of their r61es, must be abandoned ; but there are also other considerations which show very clearly that -the Marduk- Tiamat epic belongs to an entirely different series of myths. Here it is at the command of Anu that Marduk undertakes the contest, and it is from Anu that he receives his weapons. In the body of the story Ea is not introduced at all, and indeed it would seem that not only has the Marduk of the " Dragon " epic nothing in common with the Marduk of our fragment and the other tales above referred to, but the introduction of Marduk into the " Dragon " story seems to be due to a later phase which the tale assumed, whereas the original and real hero is the god Bel, whose name, it is to be noted, constantly interchanges in the tale with Marduk. That the story in the form in which it is found in the so-called fourth tablet of the creation series (pub- lished by Budge, PSBA, x, p. 86) has been considerably modi- fied from its original form by some redactor, or by the nat- ural development of popular traditions, is clear from the attempt made in the closing lines to drag Ea into the story. The epi- sode terminates properly with 1 7, Rev. of Budge's text (Sayce's translation, Hibbert Lectures, p. 383, 1. i). What follows is merely a brief recapitulation and summary of the story, with the evident purpose, as shown by the concluding words, to bring it into relationship with the creation of the firma- ment, but with which I feel convinced it had originally nothing to do. This summary is introduced by the statement that since 1 Tiamat appears to have forces at her command, in addition to Kingu, her husband if the words niisru and fuliru (Del., AL", p. 99, 1. 23) are correctly interpreted by Sayce (Hibbert Lectures, p. 382) . The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 29 the time that Marduk overcame Tiamat, the lamentations of Ea ceased, and again, further on, it is said that Marduk, after the contest, presented himself before the deep, the seat of Ea.^ But it is Anu who orders the combat, and accordingly we should expect the hero to present his account to this god. Evidently this addition and change has been made at a time when Marduk was inseparably joined to Ea as his special messenger, while in the story itself Marduk has taken the place which originally belonged to Bel, who, as already said, is pre-eminently the war- rior of and for the gods. Again, we may further distinguish between redactions of the story in which Bel still occurs by the side of and interchangeably with Marduk, and those in which the latter has completely usurped the r61e of the former, and where, moreover, Anu also disappears to make room for Ea. This is the case in the fragment No. 18, published by Delitzsch, AL.,^ p. 95-96, which certainly treats of this conflict, the posi- tion of which fragment, therefore, in the creation series is not at all as clear as Jensen would have it. We may, accordingly, suppose the development of the story to have been somewhat As follows : Originally, the Tiamat story represented a contest among heavenly spirits. Bel, as the warrior of the gods, is commanded by Anu, the king of the gods, to wage war against the dragon. He succeeds, and upon the completion of the struggle presents himself before Anu. Through the amalgamation, probably, of the worship of Bel with Marduk, for which we have satisfactory evidence,^ Marduk is introduced into the Story as identical with Bel, whose name, under the form of de-lu (signifying "lord") becomes a mere title of Marduk. The association of Marduk with Ea leads to the introduction of the latter, and in conse- quence the character of Tiamat is transformed. From being the enemy of gods, she becomes the enemy of men, and this leads naturally to the substitution of Ea for Anu as the instiga- tor of the combat, and the complete usurpation on the part of Marduk of the r61e beloiiging to Bel. While, therefore, as stated 1 Written in both cases ideographically NU GIM-MUD. "Fully set forth by Sayce, Hibhert Lectures, pp. 92-10?, though his view of the original character of Marduk is untenable. 30 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. at the outset of this discussion, the vanquisher of Tiamat must be kept distinct from the Marduk of our fragment, still the reference to his armies and the allusion to a combat suggests that the r61e in which Marduk is represented arose under the same influence that produced the form he has assumed in the Tiamat epic, in what I regard as its transformed phase. Again, in the "incantation" texts, it is by procuring waters of purifica- tion, or by prescribing magic formulas, that Marduk succeeds in redeeming man from the ravages of the evil spirits, and even in the case of the revolt of the heavenly bodies it seems that the mere word of Ea, is sufficient to re-establish peace and order. There is no allusion to a combat; nor any reference to armies. Ea is a god lite the one pictured by the prophet Zechariah, 4, 6, who acts "not by force nor by might," but by his " word "^ sent out through Marduk, and I should like to suggest that the charac- ter of the latter, more specifically as a warrior with armies at his back, is due to his absorption of the r61e of Bel, and does not appear, therefore, until the amalgamation and identification of BeP with Marduk has taken place. Returning now to our fragment, we will be in a position, despite the obscurity enveloping the lines that follow upon the announcement of Ea's wrath, to determine the general trend of the narrative. In the commentary, we have called attention to parallel passages where the anger of Ea is described. Taking these up again, and bearing in mind the conclusions we have reached regarding the development of what we may for conve- nience call the " Ea myth," it is clear that the reverse of the frag- ment introduces some variation of the well-known Ea-Marduk episode that we meet with so frequently. As in the several passages above discussed, and elsewhere, so here Ea has been appealed to, and in response, calls upon his son, Marduk, to under- take some task. To briefly recapitulate, we find this episode ^One cannot help thinking: of the d?bar Jahw^^ "word of Jahw^," which plays an dqually important part in a certain stage of the religion of the Hebrews. 2 It is worthy of note, as pointing to their antiquity, that in the Babylono-Assyrian Hemerologies, Anu and Bel are associated together, never Anu and Marduk. Cf. Sayce Hibbert Lectures, pp. 70-76. The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 31 between Marduk andEa twice referred to at some detail in the magical text IV R S, Cols. I and II. In both instances it is against the ravages of the seven evil spirits that the help of Ea is solicited, and, in fact, the second account. Col. II, is but a repetition, with some variations, of the account in Col. I. A general disturbance of the heavenly bodies has taken place. The Moon-god has been eclipsed. Samas and Ramman have deviated from their paths, and Istar, with Anu, is in rebellion. Ea, upon hearing the news, is enraged, and calls upon Marduk to fight the evil spirits, upon the terriiination of which Sin, Samas, Ramman, /star and Anu are fixed in their places as before " night and day without inter- ruption." Again, in the magical text IV R 15, Ea, upon the request of the fire-god, abetted by Marduk, stops the ravages of these spirits. In both texts the story is introduced in the midst of incantations, or followed by incantations. Thirdly, in a large number of instances (IV R 3, cols. I, 31 II, 2 ; 4, col. Ill, 23 ; 50 col. II, 41, etc., etc.), an abbreviated form of a similar episode is found where, upon the request of Marduk, who informs his father of some evil that has afflicted a person, the god of humanity gives his son the necessary instructions for the cure of the trouble. It is needless for our purposes to dwell on the fact that Ea is represented here as interfering both on behalf of gods and men. If the deductions above made are correct, the explanation for this double r61e is to be sought in the absorption on the part of Ea of the r61e which belonged originally to Bel ; but what is essential, is the circumstance that in all the passages in which the episode in any form has hitherto been found, it has been introduced incidentally — a quotation, as it were — for the purpose evidently of justifying the appeal to Ea by means of incantations ; just as the episode of the descent of Istar to the lower world is recited with a view of justifying the belief in the possibility of a return of the spirits from their dark and dreary dungeon.^ In the text before us, however, the episode evidently forms part of the narrative which the tablet contained, and it is this direct allusion that lends to it a special interest and importance, as will appear presently. 1 See Jeremias' Bahyl-AssyHsch Vorstellungen, etc, pp. 6-8. 32 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. The questions now arise, against whom is Ea's wrath di- rected, and for what purpose are the armies of Marduk called into requisition ? The answer to these questions I find in the- ref- erence to the plague-god, toward the end of the reverse. Atten- tion has already been called to the expression used, IV R 5, col. I, 67, in connection with the revolt of the heavenly bodies of Sin, Santas and Istar. We there read : miisa ti urra uzuzzu la naparkasumite, that " day and night they were fixed without interruption." So it was before the revolt took place, and so, again, after the rebellion has been quelled. In our text it is Dibbarra who is described as being " fixed day and night with- out interruption." It is certainly but legitimate to conclude, from this, that it is against Dibbarra that the efforts of Ea and Mar- duk are directed, as a result of which he is firmly chained to his place, and restrained from doing the mischief upon which, accord- ing to Babylonian mythology, he is always bent. Precisely, then, as in the Marduk-Ea episodes with the seven evil spirits, with the heavenly bodies and with the various evils (superinduced by the spirits) afflicting mankind, it is throiigh the agency of the god of humanity, in consort with his son, that the violence of the plague-god is checked. I conclude, therefore, that we have on the reverse of our fragment a scene in a narrative which described some of the ravages of the plague-god, ending with the final subjugation of the latter through Ea and Marduk. Assuming, furthermore, as we found justifiable, some connection between the obverse and reverse, it is Dibbarra who is the sub- ject of the verbs with which the obverse begins. He it is who enters the city of Inmarmaru and brings about its destruction. But, again, just as in the story of the heavenly revolt, the seven evil spirits are the instigators of the movement, so behind Dib- barra there is another and greater power, at whose command, it would appear, the destruction is undertaken — Anu, the king of the gods, the same as whose "messengers" the seven spirits commit their deeds of violence and destruction. It is to Anu, therefore, as I take it, that Dibbarra, after finishing the mission (or a part of it) on which he has been sent, proceeds with a The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 33 report of his doings. After this it is likely that further ravages of Dibbarra were recounted ; but leaving this and all other con- jectures aside for the present, it is against the plague-god that ' the appeal to the deities mentioned on the reverse is made- Who the person or persons are presenting the petition, whether the inhabitants of Inmarmaru or some other place, it is, of course, idle to conjecture. That neither Sin, Samas nor Istar responds is quite in accord with the position occupied by these deities in IV R 5, ranged, as they there are, against Ea and Marduk, and acting in union with Anu and the evil spirits. Before proceeding here to a discussion of other tales — or, rather, fragments of tales — in which Dibbarra appears in a r61e similar to that of our fragment, and which will, I trust, more firmly establish the interpretation proposed, it is necessary to dwell on the refer- ences to the " offerings," and the " images " that follow upon the announcement of Ea's wrath. Beginning with the former, it is worthy of notice, as throwing, perhaps, some light on the difficulty, that in the two hymns quoted in the commentary to the word taklime Marduk is addressed as the one who "gives gifts or offerings," and so in. a third hymn, published by Briinnow ZA. V, pp. 77-78), K, 7592, Rev. 11, Marduk is said to be n&din kitruba unindcLbii}^ ana il — "giving sacrifice and free-will offering to the god . . . . ;" and where the parallelism mukin tirit apsi, "establishing the law of the watery deep" (the home of Ea), suggests the restoration "Ea." Is there, perhaps, some allusion to these "gifts" in our tablet, or have we a more general refer- ence to offerings that were made at an improper season .-■ From the Babylo-Assyrian hemerologies we see that as there were certain days on which sacrifices were brought, there were others on which they were expressly forbidden. Thus, in a hemerology for the month of Elul (translated by Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, pp. 70-76) there is an injunction against offerings on the 7th, 14th, 19th, 2 1 St and 28th day of the month. At all events, so much is clear that there is a reference here to offerings that ^ Synonyms, it will be remembered, of takltmu^ V R 11, 1-2. See Sayce, Hibbert Lec- tures, p. 73, note. 34 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. were given at an improper time, and it furthermore appears legitimate to conclude that, in consequence of this transgression, a destruction of lands and men had been ordered. It is hardly to be supposed, however, that it is Ea or Marduk who iristigates this terrible destruction, but either Anu, or Dibbarra at the com- mand of Anu. These lines, then, furnish the explanation for the wrath of Ea, and it is not until the fifteenth line, where the latter utters the great " word " (as in IV R 3, col. II, 22), that Ea begins to act.^ I venture to suggest further that it is the inhabi- tants of some city who have offended Anu by offering sacriiices at an improper season, and in consequence of which they, just as Inmarmaru, have been visited by the plague-god. They appealed to various deities, and Ea responds. Passing on now to the reference to the "images," the fol- lowing passages in mythological texts are to be taken into con- sideration : There is an allusion to the images of Ea and Marduk in the "prescription" against evil spirits, IVR 21, No. i, 38. As a means of protection, they are to be placed to the right and left of the gate, and further on (1. 41), Marduk is spoken of as Anbu W«w«^ " inhabiting the image." Again, in K 1284 (published by Lenormant Et Accad., II, p. 239), immediately after the usual Ea-Marduk dialogue, the order is given by Ea to Marduk, salam andundnisu^ bini, i. e., "the image of his full height build." Furthermore, from Sargon Bull., 1. 71 (Gold inscrip. 19 ffg. Annals 424 and 429), it appears that a belief was current which made Ea the author of the colossi, stationed at the ap- proaches to the palace chambers, as well as of sculptured images in general.* See II R where Ea, under the form of ^ See below, p. 36, where the same phrase as in our text, ana sa^an maiaii^ with the probabiUty of a restoration, hulhtk nisH, is used of Dibbarra. Elsewhere, Nerval, concerning whose identity with the plague-god, see below, p. 134-5, is spoken of as s&ijin tnai nukurti (XV R 26, No. I, 29) and sd^in mat la magiri (IV R 24, 57) . "Compare the description of ]3hvi& yosSb hak-kerUb'im (IKgs 8, 7, etc., etc.), K 7592, Rev. 7, Marduk is spoken of ysib parakki. 3 1 think we may finally settle upon andun&nu as being a synonym of bun^nu. See Zimmern, Bussps. Note i. ^SeeThiele Gesch., p- 520. The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 35 Nin-a-gal, is defined as ilu sa napp&hi, "god of the smithy" — a sort of Babylonian Vulcan. Now it seems to me that there must be some allusion in our text to these images, which even in later times, when the belief in their divine origin was no longer current, were supposed to grant protection against evil spirits.^ Further than this general proposition, however, that Ea who, T take it, is here speaking, re- fers to some image or images that he has made, it is hardly possi- ble to go. The sufifix "sunu, would lead us to suppose that they have been already referred to. May it be that there was an account , of their having been destroyed by Dibbarra, in the course of his ruthless passage from city to city, and that Ea now gives the order to Marduk and his armies to restore them .-' Such a train of reasoning would further lead us to see in the sukuttu something connected with these images — a " tabernacle," as Amiaud has it, the destruction of which must also have been recounted in the last portion of the tablet, and which is now likewise being rebuilt. Thirdly, the "house" (1. 25), which is added to the mkuttu, would be the temple proper encompassing the salme and sukuttu, and we would thus have in the images, tabernacle and temple a de- scription passing from the smaller to the greater. Who the speakers in 1. 26 are, whether Ea and Marduk, or Marduk and his hosts, or what not, it is impossible to say, but there will hardly be any question that the warning, " do not thou approach," is directed against Dibbarra. There would thus be a direct allusion to an attack made at some time upon the temple, and by the plague-god. Through the express indication that the images were built "amongst men," equivalent in force here to "for the benefit of men," the supposition that the scenes of destruction recounted on the tablet take place on earth, and not among the heavenly bodies, receives a further support. Finally, in connection with the binding of Dibbarra to his proper place " night and day with- out interruption," attention might be called to another passage in the hymn to Marduk, K 7592, Rev. 4, sumelaka Dibbarra rabil ^E. S; Tigl Pil III, 11 R 67, 81, builds images masar sut iBni rabUte, as " a protec- tion on the part of tlie great gods." Why Schrader {,Keils BUI., II, p. 24), reads zar-ni-ui, which he is unable to translate, I do not know. See now Thiele ZA. V, p. 302. 36 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. dandan il&ni panAkka : " At thy left (O Marduk) (stands) Dib- barra, the great, the strongest of the gods, before thee." The passage besides containing a reference to a subjugation of the plague-god by Marduk, suggests the restoration proposed at the end of 1. 25. V. To pass on now to the relationship existing between our fragment and other portions of the mythological literature of the Babylonians, we have in Smith's Chald. Genesis^ pp. iio- 1 19, the remains of an epic devoted to the deeds of Dibbarra. Unfortunately, the texts themselves there translated by Smith- Delitzsch, have never been published, and that renderings made almost fifteen years ago are no longer reliable, need hardly be said. Sayce appears to have consulted some of these texts for his Hibbert Lectures (pp. 310-13) and offers revised translations of some lines. He has not, however, attempted any classifica- tion of the fragments beyond the one made by George Smith, which was as satisfactory as was possible under the circum- stances. There is every reason to hope that among the thousands of fragments from Asurbanabal's library still unpublished and unexamined in the British Museum, further portions of the epic will be forthcoming, and we may confidently look forward for some valuable light on the subject from Dr. Bezold's Catalogue of the Kouju7iijik Collection, now in course of preparation ;^ but pending a gathering of all the fragments and a new study of those translated by Smith from the original tablets, which I hope to undertake at no distant day, it would only be idle and profitless conjecture to attempt any reconstruction of the divi- sions of the epic. We are, however, in a position at the close of our study of the interesting fragment, however unsatisfactory it is in many respects, to assert the close connection of our fragment > I quote the German Edition of Friedr Delitzscli, Leipzig, 1876. 2 In Vol. I of the Catalogue (1889), p. 258, there is a description of K 1282 belonging to the series. Another fragment is M. 55, Sayce, Hilibert Lectures, p. 311 ; Delitzsch. Woert., p. 558- The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 37 with those found in Smith-Delitzsch and Sayce. A brief refer- ence to the contents will show this very clearly. Smith gives four fragments. In the fragment which Smith takes as the beginning of the epic, the order is given to Dibbarra by Anu to destroy the entire human race.^ In a second fragment, the translation of which is the most unsatisfactory of all, Ea is introduced. The third, which consists of four columns (M 55), describes in great detail Dibbarra's ravages in Babylon, Erech, Duran (.'), Kutha, and a large number of the towns on all sides of Babylonia, which in succession seem to be the object of the divine wrath. Here, as well as in the fourth fragment (K 1282)^ which has attached to it a colophon, stating that it is the fifth tablet of a series, Dibbarra is accompanied by his servant Isum. There is a reference in the third fragment to the wrath of Mar- duk, though no mention of Ea occurs in what is published. In the fifth tablet, reverse, Dibbarra is spoken of as having the intention " ana sapan matati" Marduk [son of Ea], is sent out " at the beginning of the night," and the tablet ends with the hope that Dibbarra may be eternally appeased. The points of comparison which justify the designation of our fragment as a portion of the Dibbarra epic are then briefly as follows : 1. Anu as the probable instigator of the destruction. 2. Dibbarra as the agent. 3. The wrath directed against the city. 4. The reference to the destruction of lands and annihila- tion of men. 5. The introduction of Ea and Marduk. 6. The mission of Marduk. 7. The appeasing of Dibbarra's violence. It is needless for our purposes to dwell on the original character and development of Dibbarra and of his relation to Nergal, particularly as a portion of the subject has recently been fully and -very satisfactorily treated by Jensen, Kosmol- iThe term used is salmat kakkadi, "black-headed," an expression synonymous with "humanity." Compare the corresponding phrase in our text, "destruction of lands and annihilation of men." 38 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. ogie d. Babylonier, pp. 476-90. I accept his theory of the iden- tification of Dibbarra and Nergal at a very early period in Baby- Ionian mythology, though of course the two deities must origin- ally have been distinct. In this connection there is only one point to which, on account of its general bearings on the Dibbarra epic, I desire to call attention here. Above I have given my reasons for preferring the reading Ner or Nerra as the " non-Semitic" designation of the plague-god. The god Nergal is evidently nothing but the "great Ner." Now, on the sup- position that Dibbarra represents the "small Ner," we would have an explanation for the fact that he is represented by an ideograph which has the meaning " servant" In other words, Nergal and Nerra bear the same relation to one another that afterwards applies to Net ra and I sum, '^ Viz., master and servant ; and I take it that Ihim was introduced by the side of Dibbarra after the latter' s — or, as we might also put it, in consequence of the latter's — amalgamation with Nergal. Now, in some of the frag- ments of the Dibbarra epic published by Smith, Jsum actually does appear as performing the will of Dibbarra, and it becomes at once evident that the epic assumed its definite state after Nergal and the plague-god proper had become completely identified. In the first and second of Smith's fragments, however, there is no refer- ence to Isunt ; of course they are exceedingly fragmentary, but if it should turn out that Dibbarra acts by himself there as in our text, we would have two recensions of the " epic" with the introduction of Isum as an indication for the growth of the story, precisely as we have seen the association of Marduk with Ea marking a stage in the development of the " Ea myth." This association of two deities in Babylonian mythology bearing the relation of father and son, and corresponding to master and ser- vant, such as Bel and Nusku, Ea and Marduk, Ner and Nergal, Dibbarra and Isum, is exceedingly curious and important, and deserves a more careful investigation than has as yet been accorded to it. If a final suggestion of a general character be permitted, I 1 Isum is invariably designated as tiie ' messenger ' and ' lieutenant ' of Dibbarra. The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 39 should say that the whole epic must have been divided into several distinct parts like the " Gistubar" story, each part containing some episode in the career of the plague-god, and all together constituting the series which fqrmed acollection under the desig- nation — to judge from the colophon to K 1282 — "The Great Deeds of Dibbarra." The question as to the position of our fragment in the series must, of course, with the inadequate material at our disposal, be left for future consideration. Sum- ming up, then, the conclusions reached, I claim that our frag- ment represents a portion of the " Dibbarra" epic, in which there is set forth the destruction of a city, Inmarmaru, by the god of pestilence, followed by further accounts of the ravages of the god — very likely the destruction of other cities, with their temples and images — ^Imtil, upon a final appeal to the gods, Ea, in consort with Marduk, brings Dibbarra under subju- gation and orders Marduk, with his hosts, to repair the damage that has been done ; and, furthermore, our fragment stands in close connection with a series of other fragments that deal with the deeds of Dibbarra. In conclusion, I wish to direct attention to an expression in our fragment, from which I venture to draw an important infer- ence- as to the original form of the narrative. In line 23, we find the order musa u urra " night and day." The observation has been made that in so-called Sumero-Akkadian texts, " night " precedes "day," whereas in the Assyrian "translation" it is just the reverse (see e. g., KAT, p. 57 note, and quite recently Jensen, ZA V, p. 124). An examination of purely As- syrian texts bears out the view that the Assyrian order is " day and night," with a few exceptions. So in the historical texts, I find only two passages where we meet with the " Sumero-Akka- dian " order, the one in the Naboiiid cylinder (PSBA, January, 1889) col. I, 12, and the other in Sargon's Annals, 1. 303, (ed. Winckler, p, (>^\ where, by a careless slip, Winckler, in his trans lation, turns the phrase around.^ Otherwise we invariably find immu u musu, or iirru u musu {Cf. Sarg. Cyl. 43 and 49 ; ' For explanation of these exceptions, see note to p. 46. 40 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic.^ Prunkinschrift 190, Bull. 48, K 2867 (Asurbanabal) Rev. 9, publ. by George Evans, Essay on Assyriology, appendix).^ Again, in the Nimrod Epic, although of Babylonian origin, and, as I believe, very old, but whose late Assyrian redaction, under the influence of Assyrian ideas, is generally acknowledged, " day and night " is the invariable order (ed. Haupt, pp. 4, 45 ; 6, 38 ; 7, 7 ; 1 1, 21; 13, 19; 69, 20and23. Deluge, col. Ill, 19). On the other hand, in the interhnear renderings of "non-Semitic" texts, night invariably takes precedence, and this applies as well to texts whose "non-Semitic " side or column still exists, such as IV R. 5, cols. I, 6"] and II, 23 ; 15, col. II, 19 ; 18 No. i, 21 ; 19 No. 3, 59 ; 22, 8a- ; 27 No. 3, 31, as well as such in which the Assyrian "trans- lation " alone is preserved, as in the Penitential Psalm, IV R, 26, No. 8, 59.^ Would it not seem, therefore, that our text is to be placed in the same category as the psalm just referred to, namely, a text which presupposes the existence of a " Sumero- Akkadian " original, and that by a fortunate accident the original " Sumero-Akkadian " order of the phrase has been retained? I have already referred (see comment to line 16 of reverse) to the ideograph EN-NA, occurring in our text, and have little hesitation now in seeing herein also an " untranslated " survival of the Sumero-Akkadian original. Thirdly, the form for ra in the spelling of the name Dibbara, as well as in usahrixbu (line 5 ' See in general Delitzsch Woeri., p. 236. ^ In the Assyrian astronomical reports, day is mentioned before night, as we would nat- urally expect, («. g.. Ill R 51, Nos. i and 2) and this, in connection with the facts pointed out, suggests the conclusion that, whereas in Babylonia— the home of the religious literature— the official day began with sunset, in Assyria the point of departure for all calculations was sunrise, which carries with it the assumption that the popular custom was the same. Whether in later times, through the influence of Assyria, a change was introduced into Baby- Ionia, is a question which I am not prepared to answer. In the two exceptions to the Assyrian order above noted, it is significant that the one occurs in the cylinder of a Babylonian king, and the other in the account of a Babylonian campaign, so that, unless it be supposed that these two exceptions are accidental, the legitimate conclusion seems to be that the old custom was preserved in Babylonia till the end of the empire. It may very well be also that both methods of reckoning the day existed side by side, the one as a survival, the other as an innova- tion, just as among the Jews in the post-exilic period there were two methods of calculating the year, one beginning in the Spring, which was a survival of the "agricultural " stage, the other beginning in the Fall, which was due to adoption from the Babylonians. See Jensen's remarks, ZAV, p. 123-4 [Epping's new work, AHronomisches aus Babylon^ which probably throws more light upon this point, is not accessible to me ] The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. 41 of the obverse) is . distinctly Babylonian, and, according to Delitzsch, AL' p. 22, note i, peculiar — to quote his exact words — "to North Babylonian texts, and copies of the latter, e. g., in the legend of the god of Pestilence,^ and almost constant in the bilingual Akkadic-Babylonian texts. "^ This again not only points to an original in the Babylonian variation of cune- iform script from which the scribes of Asurbanabal made our copy, and therefore takes us to Babylonia as the home of the story, but furnishes an additional reason for conjecturing an earlier " Sumero-Akkadian" prototype. Finally, the introduction of the Ea-Marduk episode, which has, up to the present at least, been found only in "bilingual" texts, may serve as a further substantiation of this conjecture, though I am not willing, for obvious reasons, to lay any great stress upon this support. If this conclusion be accepted, it carries with it the general theory that the entire " Dibbarra" epic is a Babylonian tale origi- nally composed in the non-Semitic " style," but of which we have at present only fragments of the Assyrian "translation;" and there is the further probability that some of these fragments represent a later and independent Assyrian redaction, based upon the " non-Semitic " original. APPENDIX. Note by Lee K. Frankel, B.S., University of Pa. The brick was found to be covered with a white layer which could be scratched very easily with a knife-blade, and even with the finger nail. On further examination with the microscope, minute vitreous crystals could be observed, having apparently a monoclinic ■habitus, and were judged from their previously determined hard- ness to be crystals of selenite (gypsum). The greater portion of the incrustation, however, was of the massive variety. 'Incidentally another proof for the companionship of our text with the "Dibbarra" series- 2 Also in the" Gi'sdubar" and "Deluge" texts. "RsM^it, Beitr.fur Assyr., I, p. 70. 42 The Babylonian Dibbarra Epic. The brick was first suspended in dilute hydrochloric acid, its action upon the incrustation being, however, very slow. Upon immersing the brick in concentrated hydrochloric acid better results were obtained. The gypsum was gradually but completely dissolved out, requiring, however, considerable time, since it had settled into every portion of the sunken characters, and hence exposed but a small portion of its surface at a time to the action of the acid. Hot concentrated hydrochloric acid was also tried, but its action was found to be too energetic, since it dissolved out very readily the ferric oxide present in the brick, with a correspond- ing removal of the reddish color from it. The above action also took place on using the cold.acid, but in a lesser degree. It was found that after the acid had exercised its solvent and loosening power, the application of a tooth-brush over the surface of the brick removed the soft gypsum, still undissolved, very materially, leaving the harder clay inviolate. This was especially serviceable for the more minute characters. A theory that could be suggested for the presence of the incrustation of gypsum on the brick, is that it existed as such in the ferruginous clays as found in the Southern countries of Mesopotamia ; that on baking these clays it became converted into the anhydrous variety (anhydrite), which from continued exposure to air and moisture, dissolved and recrystallized as gypsum. This is especially probable, since the gypsum appeared not only as an incrustation on the surface of the brick, but was found deposited throughout the whole body of it, and to such an extent that on immersing the greater portion of the brick in the acid, the dissolving gypsum had a tendency to effect the complete disintegration of the brick. It is advisable, there- fore, so to suspend the brick in the strong acid that merely its surface comes in contact with the acid. If this precaution is followed, it is not likely that this treatment can effect any per- manent or serious injury, but rather the reverse. Publications of tiie University of Pennsylvania. SERIES IN Philology Literature and Archeeology. VOL. 1. 1. Poetic and Verse Criticism ' of the Reign of Elizabeth. By Felix E. SCHELLING, A.M., Assistant Professor of English Literature ;gi.oo 2. A Fragment of the Babylonian " Dibbarra" Epic. By Morris Jastrow, Jr., Ph.D., Professor of Arabic 6o 3. a- Hpos with the Accusative, b. Note on a Passage in the Antigone; By William A. Lamberton, A. M., Professor of the Greek Lai^uage and Literature 50 4. The Gambling Games of the Chinese in America. Fdn tdn and Pdk k6p pifi. By Stewart Culin, Secretary of the Museum of American Archaeology 40 [In preparation,] The Terrace at Persepolis. By Morton W. Easton, Ph.D., Professor of Comparative Philology. An Aztec Manuscript. By Daniel G. Brinton, M.D., Professor of American Archaeology and Linguistics. A Monograph on the Tempest. By Horace Howard Furness, Ph.D., LL.D. Recent Archaeological Explorations in New Jersey. By Charles C. Ab-' BOTT, M.D., Curator of the American Collections. Archaeological Notes in Northern Morocco. By Talcott Williams, A.M., Secretary of the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities. a. On the Aristotelian Dative, b. On a Passage in Aristotle's Rhetoric. By William A. Lamberton, A.M., Professor of the Greek Language and Literature. A Hebrew Bowl Inscription. By Morris Jastrow, Jr., Ph.D., Professor of Arabic. The Life and Writings of George Gascoigne. By Felix E. Schelling A.M., Assistant Professor of English Literature.