sufficient to record a goddess Shubula, who from other sources[194] we know was the local patron of the city Shumdula, a goddess Bashtum,[195] a goddess Mamu (a form of Gula), Am-na-na, Lugal-ki-mu-na, E-la-li (perhaps an epithet for the fire-god Gibil), Ul-mash-shi-tum, and a serpent god Sir. Most of these may be safely put down as of purely local origin and jurisdiction, and it is hardly likely that any of them embody an idea not already covered by those which we have discussed. From the lists of gods prepared by the Babylonian scholars, it is clear that the number of local deities whose names at least survived to a late period was exceedingly large, ranging in the thousands; and since, as seems likely, these lists were prepared (as so much of the lexicographical literature) on the basis of the temple lists and of the commercial and legal documents, we may conclude that all, or at any rate most, of these deities were in use as elements in proper names, without, however, having much importance beyond this incorporation. FOOTNOTES: [183] The museums of Europe and America have secured a large proportion of these through purchase. [184] The longer names consist of three elements: subject, verb, and object. The deity is generally the subject; _e.g._, Sinacherib=Sin-akhe-irba, _i.e._, may the god Sin increase the brothers. But there are many variations. So the imperative of the verb is often used, and in that case, the deity is in the vocative case. Instead of three elements, there are frequently only two, a deity and a participle or an adjective; _e.g._, Sin-magir, _i.e._, Sin is favorable, or a person is called 'the son' or 'the servant' of a god. The name of the deity alone may also constitute a proper name; and many names of course do not contain the mention of a deity at all, though such names are often abbreviations from longer ones in which some god was introduced. [185] Jensen, _Kosmologie_, p. 458. [186] Arnold, _Ancient Babylonian Temple Records_, p. 5, is of the opinion that Id-nik-mar-tu is also a designation of Ramman. His view is plausible, but it still remains to be proved. [187] Scheil, "Le Culte de Gudea sous le II^e Dynastie d'Ur" (_Recueil des Travaux, etc._ xviii. 64-74). W. R. Arnold, _Ancient Babylonian Temple Records_ (New York, 1896). The Telloh tablets appear to be largely lists of offerings made to the temples at Lagash, and temple accounts. (See now Reisner, Tempelurkunden aus Telloh (Berlin, 1901).) [188] See besides Scheil's article (above), Lehmann's note, _Zeits. fuer Assyr._ x. 381. [189] Our knowledge of the documents of this period is due chiefly to Strassmaier and Meissner. [190] At times under rather curious forms, _e.g._, Shush-sha; Strassmaier, Warka, no. 30, l. 21. The form Sha-ash-sha also occurs in nos. 43 and 105 (_cf._ Meissner's note, _Beitraege zum Altbabylonischen Privatrecht_, p. 156). [191] Meissner, no. 42. Also in a proper name, Khusha-ilu, _i.e._, 'Khusha is god.'