Deliver Me from Evil: Mesopotamian Incantations 2500–1500 BC

106 Pages·1997·2.355 MB·English

by  Graham Cunningham

STUDIA POHL: SERIES MAIOR
DISSERTATIONES SCIENTIFICAE DE REBUS ORIENTIS ANTIQUI

17

GRAHAM CUNNINGHAM

`DELIVER ME FROM EVIL ,

Mesopotamian incantations 2500-1500 BC

Air
:DO
VE
BBV MINI VERBVM D,QMI,[JJ
y..(cid:127) s A (WO .3 ..: ffc
6 \11^ na (cid:127)! 2 W (cid:9) 2
r ^
E PONTIFICIO INSTITUTO BIBLICO EDIT CE PONTIFICIO ISTITUTO BIBLICO

ROMAE ROMA 1997
The Pontifical Biblical Institute dedicates this series to the memory of
P. Alfred Pohl, founder of its Faculty of Ancient Near Eastern Studies.
Studia Pohl reproduces in offset studies on Ancient Near Eastern history Contents
and philology, and is intended particularly to benefit younger scholars
who wish to present the results of their doctoral studies to a wider public.
Acknowledgements (cid:9) vii(cid:9) References related to priests (cid:9) 65
Opening formula, closing formula
Chapter 1 (cid:9) and subscripts (cid:9) 466
Introduction (cid:9) 1 (cid:9) Functions (cid:9) 67
/
Deities invoked (cid:9) 76
Chapter 2 (cid:9) Helpful divine intervention (cid:9) 79
Incantations in (cid:9) Formulae of analogy (cid:9) 85
the pre-Sargonic period (cid:9) 5 (cid:9) Accompanying ritual (cid:9) 86
Provenance (cid:9) 5 (cid:9) Harmful divine intervention (cid:9) 88
References related to temples (cid:9) 9 (cid:9) Catalogue of Sumerian incantations (cid:9) 96
References related to priests (cid:9) 13 (cid:9) Catalogue of Akkadian incantations (cid:9) 97
Deities invoked (cid:9) 16
Functions (cid:9) 18 (cid:9) Chapter 6
Helpful divine intervention (cid:9) 23 (cid:9) Incantations in
Formulae of analogy (cid:9) 32 (cid:9) the Old Babylonian period (cid:9) 98
Accompanying ritual (cid:9) 32 (cid:9) Provenance (cid:9) 98
Harmful divine intervention (cid:9) 35 (cid:9) Functions (cid:9) 100
Catalogue of Sumerian incantations (cid:9) 40 (cid:9) Deities invoked (cid:9) 114
Catalogue of Semitic incantations (cid:9) 42 (cid:9) Helpful divine intervention (cid:9) 116
Formulae of analogy (cid:9) 122
Chapter 3 (cid:9) Accompanying ritual (cid:9) 124
The nature of divine intervention (cid:9) . Harmful divine intervention (cid:9) 127
in pre Sargonic royal inscriptions (cid:9) 44 (cid:9) Catalogue of Sumerian incantations (cid:9) 131
-
Motivated helpful divine intervention (cid:9) 44 (cid:9) Catalogue of partly or wholly
Motivated harmful divine intervention (cid:9) 45 (cid:9) bilingual incantations (cid:9) 148
Catalogue of Akkadian incantations (cid:9) 149
Chapter 4 (cid:9) Catalogue of incantations partly or
Incantations in the Sargonic period (cid:9) 49 (cid:9) wholly in other languages (cid:9) 156
Provenance (cid:9) 49
Functions (cid:9) 49 (cid:9) Chapter 7
Opening formula, closing formula (cid:9) Conclusion (cid:9) 160
and subscripts (cid:9) 49 (cid:9) Period, language and provenance
Deities invoked (cid:9) 50 (cid:9) of theincantations (cid:9) 160
Helpful divine intervention (cid:9) 55 (cid:9) Functions (cid:9) 162
Formulae of analogy (cid:9) 57 (cid:9) Helpful divine intervention (cid:9) 167
Accompanying ritual (cid:9) 58 (cid:9) Accompanying ritual (cid:9) 171
Harmful divine intervention (cid:9) 61 (cid:9) Harmful divine intervention (cid:9) 176
Catalogue of Sumerian incantations (cid:9) 64 (cid:9) In favour of a classification of the
ISBN 88-7653-608-6 Catalogue of Akkadian incantations (cid:9) 64 (cid:9) incantations as religious (cid:9) 180
© 1997 EDITRICE PONTIFICIO ISTITUTO BIBLICO Chapter 5 (cid:9) Appendix (cid:9) 184
Piazza della Pilotta 35 — 00187 Roma, Italia Incantations in (cid:9) Abbreviations (cid:9) 185
the neo-Sumerian period (cid:9) 65 (cid:9) Concordance (cid:9) 186
Provenance (cid:9) 65 (cid:9) Bibliography (cid:9) 192
Acknowledgements
This study is a slightly revised version of a doctoral disse rtation submitted to
the University of Cambridge in December 1995.
I would like to take the opportunity of its publication to express my
particular gratitude to Professor J. N. Postgate for teaching me Akkadian and
Sumerian, supervising the dissertation and assisting in its revision for
publication. Further thanks are due to: Professor Karlheinz Deller and Dr
Alasdair Livingstone (now of the University of Birmingham) for Akkadian
tuition during a year at the University of Heidelberg; Dr Augusta McMahon of
the University of Cambridge for suggesting improvements to the original
dissertation and the version revised for publication; Dr Wilfred van Soldt of the
University of Leiden for the Sippar font used for the dissertation and this
revised version; Professor Robert P. Gordon of the University of Cambridge
and Dr Alasdair Livingstone for their comments as examiners of the
dissertation; and Dr Werner Mayer of the Pontificio Istituto Biblico for
accepting — and improving — the dissertation for publication. More generally I
would also like to express gratitude to the compilers of the reference-books and
editors of the texts consulted in conducting this research.
For financial assistance in researching the dissertation I am indebted to the
British Academy, the C. H. W. Johns and H. M. Chadwick Funds, and the
Erasmus Programme. I am further indebted to the C. H. W. Johns Fund for
financial assistance toward the cost of publishing the dissertation.
Chapter 1
Introduction
This study analyses five aspects of the approximately 450 published
Mesopotamian incantations dating to the period from 2500 to 1500BC 1: 1) the
incantations' development during this period; 2) their functions, the most
important of which is deliverance from evil, or more prosaically releasing an
individual from a particular type of suffering, illness; 3) the verbal techniques
they use to request or represent helpful divine intervention towards those ends;
4) their accompanying ritual; and 5) the information they provide about the
ultimate cause of such suffering, that is harmful divine intervention. The work
ends by summarising this analysis and arguing that it fails to support the
conventional classification of the incantations as magical rather than religious.
Development of the incantations
The incantations' development is examined by dividing the texts into four
broad periods: pre-Sargonic, Sargonic, neo-Sumerian and Old Babylonian.
Except where stated otherwise, only published incantations are discussed and
the allocation to. periods follows the conclusions of the texts' editors and is
based on when the texts were written down rather than speculation about when
they were compôsed2. Each chapter covering incantations in a particular period
concludes with descriptive catalogues analysing those incantations, grouped
according to language.
1The research for this study includes references cited in the bibliographies published by Archiv für
Orientforschung and Orientalia, up to the issues of AfO 40-41 (1993-94) and Or 64 (1995).
However, after the research had been completed several references came to my attention which it
has not been possible to incorporate within the body of this study: Cavigneaux 1987 no 12 (Old
Babylonian incantation); Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi 1993b and 1995 texts MA, MB, MC, S and U
(five Old Babylonian incantation tablets); Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi 1994 texts A, B, C and V (four
Old Babylonian incantation tablets); and Michalowski 1992 figure 1 nos 9.1, 11.1.1 and 11.3.2.5
(three third millennium incantations) and figure 2 nos 16, 20 and 22 (three Old Babylonian
incantation fragments). With the exception of the Cavigneaux and Al-Rawi 1994 Akkadian
references, these are all Sumerian incantations.
2Where it is uncertain whether an incantation dates to the neo-Sumerian or Old Babylonian periods
the latter has been chosen. Because of the difficulty in dating sign forms on small stone objects
(see Lambert 1976 p61), incantation amulets (such as BIN 2 14, BIN 2 16, Iraq 38 p60, Iraq 38
p62 and MDP 6 p49; compare also Iraq 33 p96) have not been discussed.
2 (cid:9) Mesopotamian incantations 2500-1500BC Introduction (cid:127) (cid:9) 3
Functions consubstantial with what they represents. While a distinction is made between
In each period the incantations' functions are discussed, with the principal transfer and symbolic identification, the latter can also be said to involve
difference between the periods being the wider range of functions attested with transfer in that an action performed on a representation was expected to
time. In the pre-Sargonic period only a narrow range of functions is attested: transfer to whatever was represented. It should be noted that as most of the
primarily curing illness, but also avoiding it, easing birth and opening the ritual discussed is mimetic — that is it corresponds to something described1 in
mouths of divine statues; by the Old Babylonian period this range has extended the texts — what is actually under discussion is a combination of word and
to include other functions such as arousing love, winning war, soothing babies deed. A further type of mimetic ritual is also discussed, the enactment in ritual
and solving agricultural problems. The functions are identified on the basis of of formulae of analogy which express a desired event: `May something happen
the contents of the incantations and, if available, their subscripts. Both in the same way that something else happens'. Such formulae as appear
functions and subscripts are specified in the relevant catalogues. unlikely to have been enacted in ritual are discussed separately.
Harmful divine intervention
Helpful divine intervention
Within each period the incantations' principal verbal techniques for The incantations request or represent helpful divine intervention primarily in
requesting or representing helpful divine intervention are also examined. Three order to release suffering. The ultimate cause of such suffering stated in the
of these techniques correspond to three of the four principal categories of texts is harmful divine intervention, with the suffering principally taking the
Sumerian incantation identified by Falkenstein: Marduk-Ea-Typ, discussed form of illness and a range of agents being regarded as responsible for its
here as divine dialogues; Weihungstyp (or Kultmittelbeschwörung), discussed infliction. In third millennium incantations it is not clear whether this harmful
as consecration and praise of divine purifiers; and Legitimationstyp, in which a divine intervention was perceived as random or as divine punishment of human
priest legitimates himself as a representative of a deity, discussed as priestly transgression. To clarify this ambiguity other contemporary texts are discussed
legitimation. Also considered are divine legitimation of the incantations, divine — royal inscriptions, principally those from the pre-Sargonic period — which
oaths, divine praise and the Akkadian equivalent to divine dialogues, the use of suggest that such intervention may have been perceived as divine punishment,
a manna luspur formula in which the speaker ponders whom to send for divine as is specified to be the case in some incantations in the Old Babylonian
assistance. These principal verbal techniques — and the deities whose helpful period.
-
intervention is sought — are again specified in the relevant catalogues.
Textual numbering system
Accompanying ritual The incantations analysed in this study have been assigned individual
Three principal types of ritual are discussed 3: the transfer of a positive numbers, with publication details and references to latest editions being given
attribute, usually purity, to a recipient, usually an invalid; the transfer of a in the relevant catalogues2; a concordance presents this information in reverse,
' negative attribute, usually illness, to a neutral carrier 4; and symbolic correlating publication details to the incantations' numbers. Incantations
identification, the use of representations in ritual which are in some way
1The principle of symbolic identification in Mesopotamian ritual practices is discussed by
1For a recent discussion of the therapeutic aspects of incantations see Michalowski 1992 p307ff. Jacobsen 1987 in relation to divine statues and by Daxelmüller and Thomsen 1982, particularly
2Falkenstein 1931. The fourth category, Prophylaktischer Typ, discussed at the beginning of p53ff, in relation to representations used in the ritual accompanying incantations.
chapter 6, is less relevant to this analysis of the incantations. 2Unless otherwise stated textual references follow the editions cited in the catalogues. However,
3Ritual is used here to mean manipulation of objects, that is to indicate non-verbal action; the transliterations of third millennium Semitic incantations have been tentatively normalised; in
however, adjectival and adverbial use indicates a combination of verbal and non-verbal action; the addition, restorations are only indicated as such in the transliterations and not in the translations.
nouns used to indicate such a combination are rite and ceremony. The classification of ritual has The catalogues are particularly indebted to Falkenstein 1931 p8, Farber, W. 1981 and 1984,
been influenced by one proposed by Skorupski 1976 p134ff which is discussed further in chapter Krebernik 1984 pp198-99 and van Dijk 1985 p1 note 5. The identification of individual
incantations aims to be as accurate as possible. However, on broken compendium tablets it is not
7.
4For a recent discussion of such transfer in relation to first millennium namburbû incantations see always clear how many incantations remain, so their identification should be regarded as
approximate.
Maul 1994 p72ff.
4(cid:9) Mesopotamian incantations 2500-1500BC
known in more than one version are referred to by number followed by a Chapter 2 (cid:9) (cid:127)
lower-case letter indicating the particular version. By incantation is meant any Incantations in the pre-Sargonic period
text with an opening formula, closing formula or subscript containing terms
which we translate as incantation and any text of similar content; other
references to literary genres reflect modern rather than Mesopotamian Forty-six incantations, plus partial duplicates, have been dated to the pfe-
conventions. The numbering system used for the incantations is based first on Sargonic period. This chapter begins by examining their provenance, placing
period, second on language and third on provenance. The lowest numbers the incantations — Texts 1 to 46 in the context of other texts which come from
belong to the earliest period; thus the incantations referred to as Texts 1 to 46 the same locations.
date to the pre-Sargonic period, Texts 47 to 50 to the Sargonic period, Texts 51
to 72 to the neo-Sumerian period and Texts 73 to 448 to the Old Babylonian Provenance
period. Within each period the lower numbers refer to Sumerian incantations In the following discussion a distinction is made between administrative,
and the higher numbers to Akkadian incantations; thus, in the pre-Sargonic lexical and literary texts, with incantations being included in the last category.
period for example, Texts 1 to 31 are in Sumerian and Texts 32 to 46 in However, the incantations may have been regarded as in some way distinct
Akkadian" (in the Old Babylonian period the order is Sumerian, bilingual, because they are the only group of texts which have no colophons", and thus
Akkadian and incantations in other languages). Within each period's language- no reference to scribal names, possibly reflecting their status as belonging to
sequence the lower numbers refer to provenanced incantations and the higher the divine rather than human domain.
numbers to unprovenanced incantations, with texts from the same site being
grouped together and those coming from the sites which yielded the most texts Sumerian context
having the lowest numbers. The earliest evidence for writing comes from a religious institution dating to
before the pre-Sargonic period, the Eanna complex at Uruk, and consists at
Conclusion first of administrative texts, supplemented later by lexical lists. From about the
Incantations in the period under discussion are generally classified as beginning of the pre-Sargonic period, or Early Dynastic I in archaeological
magical. This study concludes by summarising the preceding analysis of the terms, comes a similar range of texts from another temple, that of Nanna at
incantations and discussing whether it supports this classification in the light of Ur2.
the various distinctions made in anthropology between magic and religion. In From Ur and Uruk at this time — comes isolated evidence of Sumerian
the analysis of the incantations it is proposed that their principal concern is literary texts3. However, it is only from the Early Dynastic III period that we
mediation between the human and divine domains — in terms of narrative in have substantial evidence of literary texts, primarily from Abu Salâbikh
divine dialogues, in terms of objects in divine purifiers and in terms of people (ancient name unknown) and Suruppak; a few literary texts have also been
in priests - and that these mediations complement temples as the primary place found at Lagag-from later in the period. The finds from Suruppak include one
of mediation between the human and divine. It is therefore suggested that incantation tablet and three incantation compendium tablets — Texts 1 to 164,
rather than isolating incantations from temples by classifying them as magical, excluding Texts 8b and 8c which are Ebla duplicates of a uruppak
the Mesopotamian conceptual scheme should be respected and they should be incantation. Fewer incantations have been found at Abu Salabikh, with only
classified as religious. one such tablet — so far unpublished — having been excavated at that sites. The
"Biggs 1974 p33.
2Postgate 1994 pp66-67.
3Biggs 1974 p29 note 8.
4lncluding duplicate versions of Texts 9 to 13.
"Or more properly Semitic, given that the language of these incantations remains a subject of 5AbS 2714 (photograph of reverse Iraq 52 plate 15d); further unpublished Sumerian incantations
debate. come from Adab and possibly Nippur (Michalowski 1992 pp315 and 322-23).
6 (cid:9) Mesopotamian incantations 2500-15006C Incantations in the pre-Sargonic period (cid:9) 7
so far unfound. Looking more specifically at the incantations, the
tablets from Abü Salàbikh and uruppak are thought to be roughly
standardisation of their opening and closing formulae and their collection onto
contemporary and to date to one or two generations before the reign of the
Lagas ruler Urnansel. This would place them at around 2500BC2. compendium tablets also indicate that we are not seeing their first written
appearance.
The literary texts therefore precede the earliest known royal inscriptions
with a narrative, which feature Urnanse himself. In this period the inscriptions Identifying the institution responsible for the Early. Dynastic III texts is mope
difficult than for the earlier tablets. The Abn Salabikh literary and lexical texts,
are primarily temple-related, referring either to rulers founding temples or
found with a few administrative documents, appear to stem from a public
dedicating objects for use in worship within them. They thus suggest a close
authority although the textual evidence is insufficient to show whether this was
relationship between the two institutions of palace and temple. One of the texts
a temple or a palace' ; the architectural evidence, however, favours attribution
categorised as an Urnange royal inscription appears to contain different types
to a templet. The Lagas incantation tablet, again found alongside
of material, suggesting that some form of connection existed between them: it
administrative documents, comes from a building of uncertain function about
concludes with a conventional narrative identifying Urnanse and the temple he
has founded but begins with incantation-like material in praise of the reed — 400 metres from temple buildings dedicated to Ningirsu3; from the same room
comes another literary text, consisting of city-related riddles. The situation is
Text 17. Also from the Lagag area comes a fragmentary incantation
more complicated at Suruppak where the tablets come from more widely
compendium tablet on which one incantation remains — Text 18a. A further
distributed find-spots, often in an unclear architectural context.
Sumerian incantation, of unknown provenance and dating to later in the pre-
The find-spots of nearly one-quarter of the tablets excavated at uruppak
Sargonic period, has also been identified — Text 19.
have been identified, including that for one of the four incantation tablets
The relationship of the Sumerian literary texts to any preceding oral tradition
inevitably remains uncertain. The lexical lists with which they are found are found at the site4. These find-spots show a broad division between
regarded as products of literacy without oral forerunners 3. It is tempting to administrative texts and lexical/literary texts: 16 of the 24 find-spots involved
have only administrative texts while four have only lexical/literary texts.
suggest that the literary texts represent, if not something similarly new, at least
Opinions différ as to what these find-spots represent. One suggestion is that
a substantial transformation of any preceding oral material. However, this
suggestion probably represents too severe a form of technological determinism, they are the archives of different institutions or economic units 5, another that
given that the role of literacy varies according to particular circumstances 4. they are different offices of the same organisation, although it cannot be
While the debt of the literary texts to a preceding oral tradition remains determined whether this organisation was a palace or temple 6. It is from one of
unclear, it can be suggested with greater confidence that they had written the four Suruppak find-spots with no administrative texts that the incantation
tablet comes; the other texts from the same find-spot consist of lexical lists but
predecessors. For the lexical tradition, continuity is attested from the Uruk
tablets onwards. For example, versions of a list of officials and professions also include another literary text, one containing proverbs which are duplicated
on a tablet from Abii Salabikh7.
found at the Uruk and Ur temples were also excavated from the Early Dynastic
This skeletal evidence suggests that the incantations fall within what has
III levels of Abb. Salâbikh and uruppak (a few lines from the same list have
/
also been found at Lagag)5. These sites are likely to represent only part of a been described as `the first great flowering of Sumerian literature and the , `
wider network of communication, across space and time, which has so far not
been recovered. Similarities between some of the literary texts found at the
different Early Dynastic III sites suggest that they too had written predecessors, 1Biggs 1974 pp43-44.
2Hansen 1974 p18.
3The incantation fragment comes from area C while the Ningirsu buildings are in area B (Biggs
1976 p7 and Hansen 1980-83 p425ff).
'Biggs 1974 p26.
2Cooper 1986 p14. 4Martin 1988 p88 table 16. Note 28 refers to the find-spot for the inc antation compendium tablet
SF 46.
3Goody 1977 p80ff.
4For recent discussion of the role of literacy see Vanstiphout and Vogelzang 1992 in Assyriology 5Martin 1988 p89.
6Pomponio 1983 p130.
and Finnegan 1988 in anthropology.
5Early Dynastic hi list A (Nissen 1981 p106). 7SF 65 = IAS 255 (Biggs 1974 p37 under SF 26).
8 (cid:9) Mesopotamian incantations 2500-15008C Incantations in the pre-Sargonic period (cid:9) 9
culmination of the archaic Sumerian tradition of scholarship' 1. The observe the reading sequence of the signs more so than do those which come
incantations thus take their place alongside the hymn to Ninbursag's temple in from Sumerl.
Keg and a cycle of short hymns in praise of various deities and their cult- In addition to the incantations, other types of text provide examples of
centres, both of which were found at Abi Salâbikh. Also from Abi Salabikh connections between Ebla and Sumer. For example, the previously mentioned
comes the Instructions of uruppak, a collection of proverbs and precepts some list of officials and professions has also been found at Ebla2. These Sumer a'n
of which such as the warnings neither to steal nor murder2 conform to our connections suggest some degree of cultural influence on Ebla from the south.
behavioural conventions of what constitutes transgression. More difficult to assess is the extent of influence on Ebla from the Semitic-
speaking region north of Sumer. In this context it has been argued that Ebla
belonged to what has been termed the Kis civilisation, a cultural area centred
Semitic context
The earliest and principal source of evidence for the development of Semitic on Kis and extending via Mari to Ebla, with towns such as Abi Salabikh lying
literature is Ebla in the north-west of modern Syria. The relationship between in an intermediate zone between the Semitic north and the Sumerian south 3.
Akkadian and the Semitic language used for some of the Ebla texts continues
to be a subject of debate, although recently it has been argued that the latter is References related to temples
an archaic form of Old Akkadian3. In addition to coming from an institutional context, the incantations contain
The earliest known Semitic incantations Texts 32 to 464 come from references to one particular institution, the temple, with their opening formula
Ebla. A further 12 Sumerian incantations were also found at Ebla — Texts 20 to possibly originally referring to a temple-feature, and their contents referring to
315, plus Texts 8b and 8c, which duplicate a Suruppak incantation, and Text divine domains known to have been represented as or within temples. The
18b, which duplicates the Lagag incantation. In contrast to the situation in most important of these references are to the three related concepts of abzu,
Sumer, the institution responsible for the tablets has been confidently identified É.NUN and engur.
as a palace: the incantations come from Ebla' s largest known royal archive,
which contains lexical lists and administrative documents alongside other Opening formula
literary texts such as a Semitic narrative featuring Samas also found at Abb. The opening formula of the pre-Sargonic incantations is in appearance one
Salâbikh6. that is used throughout the period covered by this study. Syllabic versions from
Dating the Ebla archives has proved difficult. Early opinion placed them in the Old Babylonian period onwards support the transliteration of the formula
the Sargonic period, but more recently a date corresponding approximately to as én-é-nu-ru4; however, the earliest known syllabic version offers only partial
the Abi Salabikh and Suruppak texts has been favoured 7. Looking more support for this reading. Because of the uncertainties involved — it is not clear
specifically at the incantations, however, it seems likely that the Ebla texts are how representative the early syllabic versions are, nor whether the other
later than those from the south, given that the Sumerian incantations from Ebla variants are simply graphic, nor when any change occurred — the conventional
transliteration is the one used throughout this study.
The origin of the formula has been examined by Krebernik who argues that
1Biggs 1974 p28. in the earliest texts én-é is one sign, LAK 358 (in appearance SU+AN+É), with
2lnstructions of Suruppak (ED) iii 4 and 7 respectively. For recent discussion of Mesopotamian the other signs in the formula serving as phonetic complements5. He also
concepts of transgression and of the terminology involved see van der Toorn 1985 plOff and
Bottéro 1991 pp164-65 with references; for a broader discussion of concepts of transgression in suggests that LAK 358 itself may represent LAK 397 (in appearance Sû-Ft),
with the sign `an' acting as a phonetic complement. In simplified form the
ancient Greece, Israel and Mesopotamia see Ricoeur 1969 p25ff.
3Lambert 1989 p32 (see further Lambert 1992).
4lncluding duplicate versions of Texts 37 and 42. The formal status of Texts 33 to 36 as
incantations is uncertain: Texts 33 and 35 have no opening or closing formula, similarly 34 but it 1Following Krebernik 1984 p1.
may be unfinished, and 36 is broken at the beginning and end. 2Early Dynastic 16 list A (Nissen 1981 p106).
51ncluding duplicate versions of Texts 22, 23, 28 and 31. 3Gelb 1981 p52ff.
6The texts come from room L 2769 (Pettinato 1981 pp33-34). 4Krebernik 1984 pp198-99 and van Dijk 1985 pp4-5.
7Pettinato 1981 p72ff. 5Krebernik 1984 p197ff.
10 (cid:9) Mesopotamian incantations 2500-15008C Incantations in the pre-Sargonic period (cid:9) 11
different third millennium versions of the opening formula can be presented however, the reference here to brickwork suggests that some form of structure
is involved, presumably a representation of the place.
asl:
Most frequent writing (cid:9) SU an É-nu ru Kur itself is often used in the sense of mountain to describe temples', with
Text 18a (Lagas, pre-Sargonic) (cid:9) SU-É-ru one implication of the image being that the height of temples enables them to
Text 42a (Ebla, pre-Sargonic) (cid:9) an-SU-É-ru mediate between the temporal world and the divine domain of heaven. Tits
Texts 30, 31b and 37b (Ebla, pre-Sargonic) (cid:9) SU-an-nu-E-ru concept is stated explicitly in other texts which add that temples also mediate
Text 58 (Nippur, neo-Sumerian)2 (cid:9) an-SU-E-nu-ru (cid:9) - between the temporal world and the divine domains beneath it, the underworld
Text 29 (Ebla, pre-Sargonic) (cid:9) en-nu-ur and the abzu. Thus, for example, the pre-Sargonic Keg temple hymn describes
Text 19 (unknown, late pre-Sargonic) (cid:9) en-ni-nu-ru that temple as `reaching heaven (and)...filling the abzu' Can û[s]...abzu [si-
The three possible phonetic complements can thus be understood as broadly ga]')3; similarly in the neo-Sumerian period Gudea describes Ningirsu's
equivalent to the earliest syllabic version of the formula. temple as `having grown between heaven and the underworld' (`an-ki-da mG-
While the correct transliteration of the formula remains uncertain in this a')4. A temple described in such terms can be regarded as a place which offers
period, its meaning in Ebla can be tentatively suggested as incantation on the the possibility of human contact with the divine.
basis of two parallel passages. Text 39 begins `ÉN.É.NU.RU KI ÉN.É.NU.RU Mediation between the temporal and the divine can be expressed in other
this can be compared to a passage in Text 36 reading Vi-pd KI.KI ways, for example through temporal representations of divine domains. This
dba-li-ha-a' ;
and possibly to be translated as `incantation of the lands, appears to be the case in the passages cited by Krebernik referring to the abzu
Si-pci 2dba-li-ha'3
and the É.NUN.
incantation of Balih'4.
Representations of the abzu as a temple are known for the pre-Sargonic
periods, associated with Enki who is described in a contemporary inscription as
LAK 358 in relation to temples
While incantation may be the meaning of the opening formula in Ebla, an `king of the abzu' (`lugal-abzu')6. There is also evidence for representations of
analysis of early literary texts from Sumer leads Krebernik to the conclusion the abzu within temples. For example, it is known to have been represented as
that LAK 358 originally referred to a specific feature found in various temples 5. a shrine and as a water-basin7; more specifically, one of the functionaries of
Two of the passages he cites relating LAK 358 to temples also refer to the abzu, the neo-Sumerian temple of Inanna at Nippur is described as `the courtyard-
the É.NUN and the brickwork of the KUR.MÙS6.
The exact nature of the KUR.MÙS remains uncertain. Literary references to
the term have been collected, showing its repeated association with deities but
hesitating over a translation. It has been described as a mythological place 8; 'For example, Sargonic Hymn Cycle 6, describing the d-u6-nir: `Mountain, pure place' (`kur ki-
sikil-la'). The importance of the image is shown by the name of Enlil's p rincipal temple, é-kur
'Note also the writing É-an-lnu-ru' in an unclear context in a literary text from pre-Sargonic Mari (Temple (which is a) mountain).
(TH 80.111 iii' 4'; published and edited Bonechi and Durand 1992). 2For example, Gudea Cylinders B i 6: `The temple, being a great mountain, reached to heaven' (`é
2This reference occurs in line 16 of the incantation as part of a closing rather than opening kur-gal-àm an-né
formula. 3Kes Temple Hymn (ED) B ii. The restorations follow the Old Babylonian version.
3Text 36 vii 4-7. 4Gudea Cylinders B i 2. Similarly (for example, Pre-Sargonic Hymn Cycle 4) Enlil's sacred town
4Following Edzard's interpretation of si-pd as a construct noun whose final t is unwritten rather of Nippur is described as `the bond of heaven and the underworld' (`dur-an-ki'). For further
than Krebernik's interpretation as a plural imperative (Edzard 1984 p27 and Krebernik 1984 p133). descriptions of temples in such terms see Edzard 1987 who describes the image as one of deep-
5Krebernik 1984 p200ff. Falkenstein proposed that the opening formula refers to a temple of Enki rooted skyscrapers. The image can be viewed as recalling the privileged mythological time when
(Falkenstein 1931 p6). Van Dijk, pointing to an Old Babylonian syllabic writing of én-ùri (Old there was no rupture between heaven and the underworld. For myths referring to this cosmogonic
Babylonian period Text 190a 16), tentatively suggests a reading én-urux and an association with tradition see Cassin 1991 p155ff and Bottéro and Kramer 1993 p478ff.
5George 1993 nos 30, 31, 34 and 35.
the Uri-gal ritual structure (van Dijk 1985 p5).
6NTSS 168+ vii 28-31 and SF 56 v 19-vi 6 (edited Krebernik 1984 pp201-02). 6Pre-Sargonic Inscriptions E'annatum no 1 xix 4.
7Wilcke 1969 p200ff. 7PSD under abzu and AHw and CAD under apsû. For a discussion of the abzu as an element in
temples see Charpin 1986 p335.
8Krebernik 1984 pp59-60.
12(cid:9) Mesopotamian incantations 2500-15006C Incantations in the pre-Sargonic period (cid:9) 13
sweeper of the abzu' (`kisal-luh abzu') 1 while a hymn from the Old Incantation references to divine domains
Babylonian period to Nanna's temple in Ur describes how `near the abzu of These divine domains - and one additional one, the engur - are also referred
Ekisnugal, the pure pond, the reed-thicket makes the [...] reeds grow in the to in the incantations themselves.
pure water for you' (`abzu-é-k[is-nu-0l-la-ke4 su]g-kug gis-gi a-kug-ga g[i...] The agrun is mentioned in two uruppak incantations. Text 13 describes
how the mid-wife of Kul' aba, possibly Ningirim, `went into the dwelling of the
ma-ra-mû-mû-e' )2.
Reeds are also associated with the LAK 358, suggesting a similarity between agrun to cast the incantation' (`mu7/tu6 sub-da dag-agrun an-da-DU') 1; Text 10
it and temporal representations of the abzu. For example, one pre-Sargonic begins by setting the location `in the pure temple of Ningirim on the threshold
passage refers to `the small pond...with the reed of the LAK 358' (`sug- of the agrun' (`é-kug dnin-A:HA:MUDU dib-agrun')2. The abzu is
bànda...gi-LAK 358')3. An incantation from the Old Babylonian period mentioned in two Ebla incantations: Text 45 refers to `Ea, king of the apsû'
comments similarly but with reference to the abzu's deity Enki: `The reed of (`dEN.KI LUGAL SU.AB')3; Text 27, also featuring the same deity, refers to
the small pond of Enki' (`gi-sug-bàn-da-'en-ki') 4. `the centre of the abzu' (`SU.AB-g1') 4.
The É.NUN is a term with a range of meanings similar to abzu: it features in Texts 15 and 17 introduce another term, engur, which is also related to the
the names of specific temples, it is a chamber in temples in general and it abzu5 and is known to have been represented as a temple of Nanse in this
designates a divine domain, in which use it appears to be related to the abzu 5. period6. Both these incantations also refer to the KUR.MÙS. Text 15 refers to
In the last two of these meanings the reading agrun is likely6. Suggesting some `the bank of the engur' (`ku-engur')7 and describes how Enki `entered the
degree of conceptual similarity between temples and other types of ritual KUR.MÙS' (`KU[R.M]ÙS-g6 DU')8; Text 17 refers to `the pure reed, the reed
structure, an Ebla lexical entry equates É.NUN with . u-tù-ku87, which can be from the reed-thicket of the engur' (`gi-kug gi gis-gi-engur') 9 and also to `the
compared to Akkadian sutukku, a reed hut associated with the performance of reed which comes from the KUR.MÙS' (`gi KUR.MÙS DU')lo.
incantations. An essential characteristic of both the agrun and the abzu is their
purity. For example, a bilingual passage in a first millennium incantation refers References related to priests
to `the pure agrun/kummu, the place of health' (`agrun kug-ga ki-nam-ti-la ku- The incantations do not specify who was responsible for performing them.
um-mu el-lu a-sar ba-la-tu')8 while a pre-Sargonic reference relates the abzu to However, priestly functions are mentioned in relation to Ningirim, the deity
`pure water, water of protection' (`a-kug a UD dù1') 9. referred to in all except one of the incantations' closing formulae. If an analogy
can be drawn between the divine and temporal worlds, the priestly functions
14N-T213 ii 6 (see Zettler 1992 pp161 and 262). The reference occurs in a list of rations associated with Ningirim may indicate the human performer in the latter. In the
distributed to temple-personnel. Sumerian incantations the references are to the gudu-priest, in the Semitic to
2Ur Temple Hymn 26-27. The restoration follows line 2: `The abzu is the pure, majestic sea of the terms related to Akkadian masmassu and possibly to âsipu. If the human
Ékilnugal' (`abzu-ab-kug-mah 6-kig-nu-g6.l-la-ke4').
3SF 36 vi 4-6 (edited Krebernik 1984 p206).
4Text 243 3. 1Text 13a vi 7-8. Whether KAxLI is to be read mu7 or tu6 in this context is uncertain: compare
5Following Caplice 1973. See also AHw and CAD under agarunnu and kummu. For É.NUN in [mu-6mu7] = sip-[tum]' (MSL 14 p531 7') and `tu-utu6 = 1fi-ip-tum'' (MSL 14 p528 231). Judging
temple-names see George 1993 under é-nun and é-gar6. For a discussion of the É.NUN as an by syllabic variants, both mu7 and tu6 are used in the incantations.
element in temples see Charpin 1986 p211ff. 2Text 10a iii 3-4.
6 tag- [rul-unNUN = ku-um-mu' (MSL 16 p90 333). Also attested as agruna: tag- [rul-naNUN = ku- 3Text 45 xii 8.
urn-mu' (MSL 17 p86 186). 4Text 27 xv 10.
7MEE 4 p235 323 (see further Pettinato 1979a pp114-15). 5'en-gurengur = ABZU-um' (MSL 14 p91 40:1). Note also IAS 278 ii 2-6: `Coming out of the
engur...coming out of the abzu' (`engur-ta è-a...abzu-ta è-a').
8BIN 2 22 146-47.
9SF 56 v 24 (edited Krebernik 1984 p202). Translating the Sumerian terminology concerning 6At Sulum in the Lagal region (George 1993 no 250). É-engur-ra is also used as a literary by-name
purity into English is difficult, a problem also apparently encountered when translating into of the é-abzu (George 1993 no 248).
Akkadian, with kug, sikil and others all being regarded as equivalent to ellu (MSL 16 p310 5'-11'). 7Text 15 x 5 (following the incantation's editor in taking ku as a syllabic writing for gd).
This study follows the Akkadian example and translates kug and sikil with one word, pure (also 8Text 15 xi 2.
used for ellu); dadag and ebbu are translated with clean. The complexity of this terminology 9Text 17 i 1-2.
10Text 17 ii 7 (following Cooper 1986 p32).
suggests its cultural importance.