The creation tablets are written in Semitic and allude to the great
circle of the gods as already fully developed and having its full
complement. Even the later deities are mentioned in them. This means
that it must be assigned to a comparatively late date, but it possesses
elements which go to show that it is a late edition of a much earlier
composition--indeed the fundamental elements in it appear, as has been
said, to be purely Akkadian in origin, and that would throw back the
date of its original form to a very primitive period indeed. It has, as
will readily be seen, a very involved cosmogony. Its characteristics
show it to have been originally local, and of course Babylonian,
in its secondary origin, but from time to time it was added to, so
that such gods as were at a later date adopted into the Babylonian
pantheon might be explained and accounted for by it; but the legend
of the creation arising in the city of Babylon, the local folk-tale
known and understood by the people, was never entirely shelved by the
more consequential and polished epic, which was perhaps only known
and appreciated in literary and æsthetic circles, and bore the same
relation to the humbler folk-story that Milton's _Paradise Lost_ bears
to the medieval legends of the casting out of Satan from heaven.
Although it is quite easy to distinguish influences of extreme
antiquity in the Babylonian creation myth, it is clear that in the
shape in which it has come down to us it has been altered in such a
manner as to make Merodach reap the entire credit of Tiawath's defeat
instead of En-lil, or the deity who was his predecessor as monarch of
the gods. Jastrow holds that the entire cosmological tale has been
constructed from an account of a conflict with a primeval monster and
a story of a rebellion against Ea; that these two tales have become
fused, and that the first is again divisible into three versions,
originating one at Uruk and the other two at Nippur at different
epochs. The first celebrates the conquest of Anu over Tiawath, the
second exalts Ninib as the conqueror, and the third replaces him by
En-lil. We thus see how it was possible for the god of a conquering or
popular dynasty to have a complete myth made over to him, and how at
last it was competent for the mighty Merodach of Babylon to replace an
entire line of deities as the central figure of a myth which must have
been popular with untold generations of Akkadian and Babylonian people.
Type of Babylonian Cosmology
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account