This Project Gutenberg's Etext Was Produced by Paul Murray and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net. (This file was produced from images generously made available by the Bibliothèque nationale de France
The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria
By Morris Jastrow. 1893
Professor of Semitic Languages in the University of Pennsylvania
Preface
I. Introduction
II. The Land and the People
III. General Traits of the Old Babylonian
Pantheon
IV. Babylonian Gods Prior to the Days of
Hammurabi
V. The Consorts of the Gods
VI. Gudea's Pantheon
VII. Summary
VIII. The Pantheon in the Days of
Hammurabi
IX. The Gods in the Temple Lists and in
the Legal and Commercial Documents
X. The Minor Gods in the Period of
Hammurabi
XI. Survivals of Animism in the
Babylonian Religion
XII. The Assyrian Pantheon
XIII. The Triad and the Combined
Invocation of Deities
XIV. The Neo-babylonian Period
XV. The Religious Literature of
Babylonia
XVI. The Magical Texts
XVII. The Prayers and Hymns
XVIII. Penitential Psalms
XIX. Oracles and Omens
XX. Various Classes of Omens
XXI. The Cosmology of the
Babylonians
XXII. The Zodiacal System of the
Babylonians
XXIII. The Gilgamesh Epic
XXIV. Myths and Legends
XXV. The Views of Life After
Death
XXVI. The Temples and the Cult
XXVII. Conclusion. Bibliography.
Excavations and Decipherment [Pg xiv]
ENLARGE
From a drawing by Mr. J. HORACE FRANK.)[Pg 1]
PREFACE.
It requires no profound knowledge to reach the conclusion that the time has not yet come for an exhaustive treatise on the religion of Babylonia and Assyria. But even if our knowledge of this religion were more advanced than it is, the utility of an exhaustive treatment might still be questioned. Exhaustive treatises are apt to be exhausting to both reader and author; and however exhaustive (or exhausting) such a treatise may be, it cannot be final except in the fond imagination of the writer. For as long as activity prevails in any branch of science, all results are provisional. Increasing knowledge leads necessarily to a change of perspective and to a readjustment of views. The chief reason for writing a book is to prepare the way for the next one on the same subject.
In accordance with the general plan of this Series[1] of Handbooks, it has been my chief aim to gather together in convenient arrangement and readable form what is at present known about the religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians. The investigations of scholars are scattered through a large variety of periodicals and monographs. The time has come for focusing the results reached, for sifting the certain from the uncertain, and the uncertain from the false. This work of gathering the disjecta membra of Assyriological science is essential to future progress. If I have succeeded in my chief aim, I shall feel amply repaid for the labor involved.
In order that the book may serve as a guide to students, the names of those to whose researches our present knowledge of the subject is due have frequently been introduced, and it will be found, I trust, that I have been fair to all.[2] At the same time, I have naturally not hesitated to indicate my dissent from views advanced by this or that scholar, and it will also be found, I trust, that in the course of my studies I have advanced the interpretation of the general theme or of specific facts at various points. While, therefore, the book is only in a secondary degree sent forth as an original contribution, the discussion of mooted points will enhance its value, I hope, for the specialist, as well as for the general reader and student for whom, in the first place, the volumes of this series are intended.
The disposition of the subject requires a word of explanation.
After the two introductory chapters (common to all the volumes of
the series) I have taken up the pantheon as the natural means to
a survey of the field. The pantheon is treated, on the basis of
the historical texts, in four sections:
(1) the old Babylonian period,
(2) the middle period, or the pantheon in the days of
Hammurabi,
(3) the Assyrian pantheon, and
(4) the latest or neo-Babylonian period.
The most difficult phase has naturally been the old Babylonian pantheon. Much is uncertain here. Not to speak of the chronology which is still to a large extent guesswork, the identification of many of the gods occurring in the oldest inscriptions, with their later equivalents, must be postponed till future discoveries shall have cleared away the many obstacles which beset the path of the scholar. The discoveries at Telloh and Nippur have occasioned a recasting of our views, but new problems have arisen as rapidly as old ones have been solved. I have been especially careful in this section not to pass beyond the range of[Pg ix] what is definitely known, or, at the most, what may be regarded as tolerably certain. Throughout the chapters on the pantheon, I have endeavored to preserve the attitude of being 'open to conviction'—an attitude on which at present too much stress can hardly be laid.
The second division of the subject is represented by the religious literature. With this literature as a guide, the views held by the Babylonians and Assyrians regarding magic and oracles, regarding the relationship to the gods, the creation of the world, and the views of life after death have been illustrated by copious translations, together with discussions of the specimens chosen. The translations, I may add, have been made direct from the original texts, and aim to be as literal as is consonant with presentation in idiomatic English.
The religious architecture, the history of the temples, and the cult form the subject of the third division. Here again there is much which is still uncertain, and this uncertainty accounts for the unequal subdivisions of the theme which will not escape the reader.
Following the general plan of the series, the last chapter of the book is devoted to a general estimate and to a consideration of the influence exerted by the religion of Babylonia and Assyria.
In the transliteration of proper names, I have followed conventional methods for well-known names (like Nebuchadnezzar), and the general usage of scholars in the case of others. In some cases I have furnished a transliteration of my own; and for the famous Assyrian king, to whom we owe so much of the material for the study of the Babylonian and Assyrian religion, Ashurbanabal, I have retained the older usage of writing it with a b, following in this respect Lehman, whose arguments[3] in favor of this pronunciation for the last element in the name I regard as on the whole acceptable.
I have reasons to regret the proportions to which the work has grown. These proportions were entirely unforeseen when I began the book, and have been occasioned mainly by the large amount of material that has been made available by numerous important publications that appeared after the actual writing of the book had begun. This constant increase of material necessitated constant revision of chapters; and such revision was inseparable from enlargement. I may conscientiously say that I have studied these recent publications thoroughly as they appeared, and have embodied at the proper place the results reached by others and which appeared to me acceptable. The work, therefore, as now given to the public may fairly be said to represent the state of present knowledge.
In a science that grows so rapidly as Assyriology, to which more than to many others the adage of dies diem docet is applicable, there is great danger of producing a piece of work that is antiquated before it leaves the press. At times a publication appeared too late to be utilized. So Delitzsch's important contribution to the origin of cuneiform writing[4] was published long after the introductory chapters had been printed. In this book he practically abandons his position on the Sumerian question and once more joins the opposite camp. As far as my own position is concerned, I do not feel called upon to make any changes from the statements found in Chapter 1, even after reading Weissbach's Die Sumerische Frage (Leipzig, 1898),—the latest contribution to the subject, which is valuable as a history of the controversy, but offers little that is new. Delitzsch's name must now be removed from the list of those who accept Halévy's thesis; but, on the other hand, Halévy has gained a strong ally in F. Thureau-Dangin, whose special studies in the old Babylonian inscriptions lend great weight to his utterances on the origin of the cuneiform script. Dr. Alfred Jeremias, of[Pg xi] Leipzig, is likewise to be added to the adherents of Halévy. The Sumero-Akkadian controversy is not yet settled, and meanwhile it is well to bear in mind that not every Assyriologist is qualified to pronounce an opinion on the subject. A special study is required, and but few Assyriologists have made such a study. Accepting a view or a tradition from one's teacher does not constitute a person an authority, and one may be a very good Assyriologist without having views on the controversy that are of any particular value.
Lastly, I desire to call attention to the Bibliography, on which much time has been spent, and which will, I trust, be found satisfactory. In a list of addenda at the end of the book, I have noted some errors that slipped into the book, and I have also embodied a few additions. The copious index is the work of my student, Dr. S. Koppe, and it gives me pleasure to express my deep obligations to him for the able and painstaking manner in which he has carried out the work so kindly undertaken by him. The drawing for the map was made by Mr. J. Horace Frank of Philadelphia.
To my wife more thanks are due than I can convey in words for her share in the work. She copied almost all of the manuscript, and in doing so made many valuable suggestions. Without her constant aid and encouragement I would have shrunk from a task which at times seemed too formidable to be carried to a successful issue. As I lay down my pen after several years of devotion to this book, my last thought is one of gratitude to the beloved partner of my joys and sorrows.
MORRIS JASTROW, Jr.
University of Pennsylvania,
June, 1898.
[Pg
xii]
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Set forth in the announcement of the series at the back of the book and in the Editor's Prefatory Note to Volume I.
[2] In the Index, however, names of scholars have only been introduced where absolutely necessary to the subject.
[3] In his work, Shamassum-ukin König von Babylonien, pp. 16-21. Hence, I also write Ashurnasirbal.
[4] Die Entstehung des ältesten Schriftsystems (Leipzig, 1897).