The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia — John Shaqi
The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and BabyloniaPinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Religion
The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia
Pinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Bible. Old Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
First we must note that the above introduction to the legend has been
excellently explained and commented upon by the Syrian writer Damascius.
The following is his explanation of the Babylonian teaching concerning the
creation of the world—
“But the Babylonians, like the rest of the Barbarians, pass over in
silence the one principle of the Universe, and they constitute two, Tauthé
and Apason, making Apason the husband of Tauthé, and denominating her the
mother of the gods. And from these proceeds an only-begotten son, Moumis,
which, I conceive, is no other than the intelligible world proceeding from
the two principles. From them, also, another progeny is derived, Daché and
Dachos; and again a third, Kissaré and Assoros, from which last three
others proceed, Anos, and Illinos, and Aos. And of Aos and Dauké is born a
son called Belos, who, they say, is the fabricator of the world, the
Creator.”
The likeness of the names given in this extract from Damascius will be
noticed, and will probably also be recognized as a valuable verification
of the certainty now attained by Assyriologists in the reading of the
proper names. In Tiamtu, or, rather, Tiawthu, will be easily recognized
the Tauthé of Damascius, whose son, as appears from a later fragment, was
called Mummu (= Moumis). Apason he gives as the husband of Tauthé, but of
this we know nothing from the Babylonian tablet, which, however, speaks of
this Apason (_apsû_, “the abyss”), which corresponds with the “primæval
ocean” of the Babylonian tablet.
In Daché and Dachos it is easy to see that there has been a confusion
between Greek Λ and Δ, which so closely resemble each other. Daché and
Dachos should, therefore, be corrected into Laché and Lachos, the Laḫmu
and Laḫamu (better Laḫwu and Laḫawu) of the Babylonian text. They were the
male and female personifications of the heavens. Anšar and Kišar are the
Greek author’s Assoros and Kisaré, the “Host of Heaven” and the “Host of
Earth” respectively. The three proceeding from them, Anos, Illinos, and
Aos, are the well-known Anu, the god of the heavens; Illil, for En-lila,
the Sumerian god of the earth and the Underworld; and Aa or Ea, the god of
the waters, who seems to have been identified by some with Yau or Jah. Aa
or Ea was the husband of Damkina, or Dawkina, the Dauké of Damascius, from
whom, as he says, Belos, _i.e._ Bel-Merodach, was born, and if he did not
“fabricate the world,” at least he ordered it anew, after his great fight
with the Dragon of Chaos, as we shall see when we come to the third tablet
of the series.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account