Burkhart kienast

NOTE: Page 153 Scanned Incorrectly. Left edge of text cut off. Content estimated from context, where applicable.
Nabu: nur (d)I-gi-gi u (d)A-nun-na-ki, “Light of the I. and the A.” (82-7-4, 42:13; see Tallquist,…theta, Page 133.)
Ninurta: qarrad [d]nun.gal^mesh

u (d)A-nun-na-ki, “Hero of the I. and the A.” (WO II 144, Line…KAR, Nr. 349:2).
Nusku: paqid (d)I-gi-gi u (d)A-nun-na-ki, “…of the I. and the A.” (Bauer, Asb II 38,…)
Shamash: dajjan (d)-gi(4)-gi(4) u (d)A-[nun-na-ki]… “…of the I. and the A.” (Bezold, Cat.…)
Shamash: munammir (d)gis.u u (d)A-nun-na-ki, “...of the I. and the A.” (IV R [2. Aufl.]…32 = RA XLIX 38, Line 32).

In the following place are the…of the I. and the A. listed asyndetic to each other. In a hymn to Assurbanipal to Marduk is written: itmuhma Marduk rittushshu…[I-gi-gi] (d) gis.u markas sha[me u erseti], “It…Marduk with his hand the lead rope of the I. and the A., the tie of heaven and earth” (…2, Page 114, Line 8).⁵⁰⁵¹ See also from the same…[9] and:

…i (d)I-gi-gi (d) gis.u kitmusu maharshu u…reshu shaqummesh ramu ana [panishu], “He…I., the A. kneel before him, the gods,…commander, are silent before him…KB VI 2, Page 110, Line 26).
…as Erra epic exhibits the fear…of the pest god: ilanu gimirshunu inat-…nushshu (d)I-gi-gi (d)A-nun-na-ki kullassunu…alhish, “The gods altogether look at…countenance; the I., the A. all stand before him there” (Erra V 2f.).
… ‘Handerhebungsgebet’ praises Seru’a:…el an]a (d)I-gi-gi (d) gis.u nindabeshunu tukan-...you prepare the I., the A. their offering” (Ebeling, Handerhebung, Page 138, Line…A, Nr. 60).
…the IX. Tablet of the series inbu bel arhim…for the 29. Elul: um (d)I-gi-gi (d)A-nun-na-ki (Var.:(d)gis.u), “Day of the I. and the A.” (IV R 33 b 39).

36. In the following examples, the I. seem to appear more like celestial/angelic beings, the A. as underworld gods. [114] In the inscriptions of Adadnarari I., similar to Salmasassar’s I., there can be found repeatedly the curse formula: Ashshur Anu Enlil Ea Ninmah ilanu rabutu (d)I-gi-gu sha shame (d)A-nun-na-ki sha erseti ina napharishunu ezzish likkelmushu-ma, “the great gods, the I. of the sky, the A. of the earth altogether will look on him with anger” (AOB I 64-65, Line 49-51).⁵²

[115] To the dead ghost the oath formulation is directed: nish ilani rauti sha shame u erseti tumma[ta] nish (d)I-gi-gi ilani eluti tumma[ta] nish (d)A-nun-na-ki ilani shapluti tum[mata], “You are sworn by the great gods of heaven and earth; by the I., the gods above, you are sworn; by the A., the under gods, you are sworn” (TuL, Page 133, Line 70-72).⁵³
[116] In the Erra-epic, the gods are prodded: rigimka dunninma lishtaribu elish u shaplis (d)I-gi-gi lishmuma lisharbu shumka (d)A-nun-na-ki lishmuma lishhutu zikirka ilanu lishmuma liknushu ana nirika, “Let your bellow ring out loud, so that those above and below will be left shaking. The I. will hear (it) and they will make your name great; the A. will hear (it) and the will fear your name; the gods will hear (it) and they will bow to your yoke” (Erra I 61-64).
[117] Erra pacified the worries of Marduk: ana shame eliima ana (d)I-gi-gi anamdin urta urrad ana apsi (d)A-nun-na-ki upaqqad, “To the sky I will ascend, the I. I will give resolution; I will descend to Apsu, the A. I will watch over” (Erra I 183 f.).⁵⁴
[118] In a prayer Sin and Shamash are praised as providers to the gods: balukkunu ina (d)I-gi-gi ul uktanni satukku ana (d)A-nun-na-ki kalishunu tunammara kispa, “Without you there would be no offering piece prepared for the I.; for the A. altogether arrange the death offering luminously for you” (ArOr XVII 1, Page 179, Line 10.).⁵⁵

37. The following list includes the genitive hymnic epithets which are placed together with the I. and the A. respectively. Because some of these have already been cited in the previous paragraphs, we have here made due with a short reference. The numbering should show for the most part, in which complexity ilu, ilu rabutum, etc. can step in for the I. and the A. in these epithets. Such cases marked with a star behind the consecutive number, which signifies that the supporting documents with ilu etc. can be found under the key word in Tallquist, Götterepitheta.

1*. apkallu, “sage.” [119] Marduk: apkal (d)I-gi-gi (AfO XIX 61, Line 1).⁵⁶ See I. [45]; apkallat I. [83].

2*.asharedu, “distinguished one.” [120] ashared (d)I-gi-gi (Unger, Reliefstele, Line 2). [121] Nergal: ashared (d)A-nun-na-[ki] (Ebeling, Handerhebung, Page 112 below, Line 2). See I. [88]; A. [89] and [90].

3*. ashiru, “commander.” See I. [86] and [87]; A. [88]; I. u A. [103].

4. atrahasisu, “wise one.” [122] Ea: atrahasisa sha (d)A-nun-na-ki (YOR V 3, Page 41, Line 8, jB Adapa).

5*. belu, “Lord.” [123] Nergal: bel (d)gis.u (CT XXV, Tf. 50, Line 15). [124] Shamash: bel elati u shaplati bel (d)A-nun-na-ki bel etimmi (AnSt V 98, Line 26).

6*. dajjanu, “judge.” [125] Shamash: dajjan (d)I-gi-gi (Bezold, Cat. 79-7-8, 95; see KAR, Nr. 80:12). [126] Shamash: dajjan (d)A-nun-na-ki (KAR, Nr. 224 Rs 11); Gilgamesh: dajjan (d)A-nun-na-ki (TuL, Page 127, Line 7= LKA, Nr. 90). See I. u A. [107].

7*. etellu, “ruler.” [127] ?: etel (d)I-gi-gi (Ebeling, Handerhebung, Page 92, Line 20). [128] Ishtar: etellet (d)I-gi-gi (KB VI 2, Page 60, Line 29). See I. [91]; I. u A. [100].

8*. gashru, “stronger.” [129] Marduk: gashri (d)I-gi-gi (RAcc, Page 134, 223). [130] Irnina: gasherti I-gi-gi (ZA XLIV 32, Line 26, aB).

9. ha’itu, “night-watchman.” [131] Madanu: ha’it (d)I-gi-gi (Ebeling, Handerhebung, Page 32, Line 14).

10. iltu, “goddess.” [132] Ishtar (?): ilti (d)I-gi-gi (Ebeling, Handerhebung, Page 122, Line 30).

11. kurkurratu, “great mountain.”

See A. [81].

12. 
    labbatu, “lion.” See I. [44].
    
13. 
    le’u, “brave one.” [133]
    

Marduk: le’u (d)I-gi-gi (BA V 363, Line 5). See A. [82].

14*. maliku, “counselor.” [134] Nanna: malikat (d)I-gi-gi (VAS I, Nr. 36 i 11); also Baba (KAR, Nr. 109: 17).

15. malku, “leader.” See A. [84].

16. mamlu, “powerful one.” [135] Nergal: mamlu (d)A-nun-na-ki (K.2864:6; see Tallquist, Götterepitheta, Page 129).

17*. martu, “daughter.” [136] Ishtar(?): marti (d)I-gi(4)-gi(4) (KAR, Nr. 158 ii 31).

18*. mashmashshu, “invocation priest.” See I. u A. [101].

19. mudatu, “wise one.” See I. [83].

20. muma’’iru, “ruler.” See I. [89].

21. munammiru, “enlightened one.” See I. [108].

22. muttallu, “elder.” See I. [90]; A. [91].

23. nammaddu, “beloved.” See I. [53].

24*. nuru, “light.” [137] ?: nur (d)I-gi-gi (IV R 56 ii 26). See I. [46]; I. u A. [106].

25. paqidu, “overseer.” See I. u A. [106].

26*. qarradu, “hero.” [138] Adad: qarrad (d)A-nun-na-ki (Unger, Reliefstele, Line 3). See I. [47]; I. u A. [105].

27. rabitu, “great.” [139] Ishtar: rabit I-gi-gi (RA XXII 172, Line 4, aB), rabit (d)I-gi-gi (Ebeling Handerhebung, Page 130, Line 3), rabit (d)I-gi(4)-gi(4) (ibid. Page 26, Line 44).

28*. rashubu, “fertile.” [140] Adad: rashubbu (d)A-nun-na-ki (Ebeling, Handerhebung, Page 98, Line 23); also Enlil (BER IV 142, Line 11).

29*. rubatu, “princess.” See A. [85].

30. sagkallatu, “elegant.” See I. [81].

31. saparu, “net.” See A. [64].

32. saniqu, “overseer.” See A. [86].

33*. Shadu, “mountain.” [141] Assur: shadu I-gi-gi (KAR, Nr. 128 Rs. 22); also Ishtar (Ebeling, Handerhebung, Page 142, Line 27) and Nushku (Maqlu II 6). [142] Enmesharra: shaudu sha (d)A-nun-na-ki (Craig, ABRT II, Tf. 13, Rs. 2). See I. [84].

34. shapiku, “generator.” See I. u A. [97].

35. shaqutu, “high one.” See I. [85]. Further see footnote 41.

36*. sharru, “king.” [143] Assur: shar (d)I-gi-gi (I R 35, Nr. 1:1 and 3:3); also Ninurta (Shurpu II 151). [144] Anu: shar (d)A-nun-na-ki (KH i 1 f.).⁵⁷ See I. u A. [96]; shar gimir A. [59]; shar kishshat I. u A. [99]; sharrat I. u A. [98].

37*. sharuhtu, “glorious one.” [145] Ishtar: sharuhti (d)I-gi-gi (KAR, Nr. 57 ii 13), sharuhti (d)I-gi(4)-gi(4) (KAR, Nr. 357:20).

38. 
    shurbatu, “abundant one.” [146] Ishtar: shurbat E-nu-uk-ki (PBS I 1, Nr. 2:76, aB).⁵⁸
    

39*. shutuqu, “famous one.” [147] Girru: shutuq (d)A-nun-na-k[i] (BA V 670, Line 12).

40. urshanu, “hero.” See I. [82].

41. ushumgallu, “lone ruler.” See I. u A. [102]; A. [87]. See further: ushumgal kalish parakke with documents by Tallquist.

38. Discussion of the supporting documents in parallelism. In the previous pages, we didn’t really define the concept of parallelism membrorum in terms of its actual technical meaning in literature, in order to exhibit the many times where I., A., and ilu are placed parallel to each other in its full complexity. The documents speak for themselves: only a few texts, which with regards to context, closely belong together and specifically speak of the relationship of the underworld, assign the A. as gods of the underworld (§ 30) and place the I. as the sky gods (§ 36). There from is to be seen, how the combinations show, I., A. and ilu as identical ideas, and as much in the aB as in the younger texts, in the epic poetry as also in the hymns and invocations.

39. I. and ilu [23] with regards to ilu matim [37] have the same meaning in the aB collection of the Anzu myth, in the aB redaction of the Etana-myth A. and ilu exchange I. (!) without recognizable difference [70], the epithet of the Aruru names the I. and the A. next to each other [81] (see §§ 40 f.). W. from Soden’s writings on the evidence of a ten count for the I. draw on a curse formulation from the KH [61] which names, after a listing of twelve gods, the “great gods of heaven and earth, the A.”⁵⁹ The asyndetic connection lets us conclude that ilu rabutum…is an exhibited epithet to (d)a.nuna: in Sumerian text, dingir-gal-gal-e-ne is already frequently attributed to the A.; the same goes for the unilingual younger texts, while the I., on the whole, is at most only attributed ilu.⁶⁰ Already this finding hinders us, in that the I. is seen as a smaller number of “great gods”, which are over the A. Also in the curse formulation the ilu rabutum cannot be understood as a synonym for the I. which are not named in those places. Like the Sumerian parallel, the passage should be incorporated singly as “the (rest) of the great gods…, the A.” in the listing.⁶¹ The same goes for the aB Lamashtu-invocation [36], in which the I. are listed parallel to the before named “holy gods of the mountains”. The rest of the aB sources for the two god-groups give no evidence that could lead to a conceptual differentiation between I. and A.

40. Also the younger texts, especially the numerous sources from the 1. millennium, make frequent use of the change between I., A. and ilu, without differentiating factuality between the two ideas. So it is reproved, for example, in the ‘handerhebungsgebet’ to Ishtar [51], that the ilanu (d)I-gi-gi refers, while the variants from Sultantepe (d)n[un.gal^mes] in accordance with ilanu rabutu shows directly. Even so, the switch in the hymn-like epithet is to be noticed: Shamash is soon dajjan I., soon dajjan A., then dajjan I. u A. and finally also dajjan ilani (see § 37). For a whole row of attributes are similar rows advancing. Most meaningful is the identity of the collective description in a passage from the world creation epic [71], in which Marduk places one after another, the ilu rabutu, the ilu, the Anunnakku and the Igigu rabutu opposite each other.

41. Comparatively, in the first millennium the concepts of I. and A. are listed next to each other through the copula (§§ 33 f.) or asyndetic connection (§ 35). In these cases there exists a έν δια δυοιν. Consistently there would be named first the I., then the A.: the list order forms the basis of the “law of the increasing composition”. This literary principle goes only for the direct ‘next-to-each other’ of both identifications. If the tie is cleaved in the hymnic epithet through a second Regens (rain?)—almost always in the same content— the listing of the I. and the A. are, like in the contextual sources, interchangeable: see shared I. ahir A. [88] next to ashared A. ashir I. [89].⁶² Such double epithets already occur in the aB [81].

42. The Anunnakku as underworld gods. The repeatedly asserted identity of the I. and the A. comes to know a certain confinement through the fact that at certain places, the A. are characterized as gods of the underworld. Even so, different sources, which have to do with a combination of the I. in the sky and on the earth (underworld) respectively (§ 27), reason that the idea of the I. encompasses all gods. However, in the texts which concern the underworld, the I. never appear; many more times the A. appear repeatedly (see §§ 14 f., 22f., 30, 36). This goes for the underworld vision, Nergal and Ereshkigal, Ishtar’s journey to hell, and further for the passages from the Erra epic and the Gilgamesh epic, and also for the prayers to the underworld gods.⁶³ Based on this, one shouldn’t come to the conclusion, however, that the A. generally stand as underworldy next to the sky gods, the I. Aside from a number of sources and traditions, which speak against such conclusions, there is the numerous attributions of ilu rabutu for the A.; a epithet of character which could just as easily describe the sky gods. The idea of the A. is also much more ambivalent in the Sumerian tradition and also in the Acadian: As a description for a more or less great group of gods, the idea can also be changed to also signify the gods of the underworld.⁶⁴

43. In the inscriptions of Salmanassar I. and Adadnarari I there appear different formulations of ilanu rabutu I. sha shame A. sha erseti [114]. According to W. von Soden the one has basis in an Assyrian theological concept, which takes on a significant separation between the two concepts: The I. are the sky gods, the A. the underworld gods. An interpretation of that sort seems difficult, because in the same credentials in Assyrian there is no recognizable differentiation of this sort.⁶⁵ The texts render the two god group descriptions in the general or more common way. In the poets of the Assyrian kings of the 1^st millennium there is—like in the Babylonian texts—no talk of a differentiation of the ideas; when we disregard the ambivalence of the terminus A. The named phrase, appearing only in the curse formulation of the two kings, we understand as poetic expansion of a hymn-like epithet. Significance for the listing may have been the “law of the increasing composition” and the ambivalence of the concept of the A. If one wanted to surmise that a theological creation is behind the formulation, then it could have been only an attempt at a general reinterpretation, which did not end in success.

44. The heritage of the concept of Igigu: An attempt at interpretation. The idea of the I. and the A. is used on almost all places, according to our perception, without differing meaning. The only difference between both has its origins in that only the A.—like in the Sumerian tradition—also stands for the gods of the underworld. If there never came a clear separation between both groups, so is the question, why from the aB time onward does the I. appear next to the A.? Because if one uses the aB and also the Sumerian loaned concept of the A. in full comprehension, the I.—like the Sumerian (d)nun-gal-e-ne shows—cannot be seen as a translation, therefore there lies the suspicion of a new creation. The introduction of a new conceptualization only has meaning when at the same time a differentiation is made between which form of the terminus will remain. For this, however, there is no tradition.

45. I want discuss the following theories for the tradition of the idea of I.: I. is an old Acadian description for the god group of unknown origins, which in the aB time coincided with the origin of the Sumerian terminus A. Only by pure chance, brought about through the circumstances of our sources, did the I. of the aB first enter into our field of vision. In unilingual texts they appear, but then in the same comprehension as the loanword A. Sumerian (d)nun-gal-e-ne is then a newly created parallel image after the old (d)a-nun-na, created in the effort to place the Acadian idea to the side of a Sumerian equivalent. It doesn’t seem conclusive that from this is why the (d)nun-gal-e-ne in unilingual Sumerian and bilingual texts of the aB is accounted for so extraordinarily seldom. Our theories explain especially, why the I. never appear specifically as gods of the underworld. In opposition to the chthonic character of the Sumerian, the Acadian religion exhibits predominantly cosmic traits.⁶⁶ The I. are therefore to be understood innately as group of cosmic deities, a concept which survived unknown until in the ‘late time’. On the other hand, the A. were deities of strong chthonic character and could therefore by described as heavenly or also underworldly god groups. The original content of the Sumerian idea could preserve itself away over thousands of years.

46. conclusion. From the aB time onward until the end of the Acadian tradition are the I. and the A. synonymous concepts, which instead of individually honored deities of the pantheon, are described as god groups. The identity of both expressions is due to the following reasons: (1) The alone standing occurrence of I. and the A. outside of every parallelism leaves no difference between the two groups. In the same associations the I., and the A. appear (2) I. and A. appear frequently in parallelism with each other, although also singly or together with ilu; thereby the contextual sources allow no differentiation between sky and underworld gods. Also there is no evidence for a numerical differentiations, in which the I. receives a higher rank. (3) Against the last assumption there speaks so often by the A. of the attribute ilu rabutu, whereas the I. most only receives the ilu apostrophized. (4) Insistently the hymnic epithet shows, that both concepts are of the same worth, interchangeable “great ones”. (5) The identity of I. and A. is underscored through the beginning of the first millennium’s numeric cryptograms ja. min (=I.) and gis.u (=A.). Both numerical values go back to the world creation epic, from where it follows that the concept of the I. and the A. encompass the same pantheon. Immediately next to each other stand the termini I. and A. also as έν δια δυοιν.

47. An exception occurs in certain poems which have to do with the underworld, and take the A. to be underworld gods. The ambivalence of this conceptualization of the A. has the following reasons: (1)A. is innately a description for a number of unspecified groups of gods and describes originally only part of the whole pantheon. That is why the terminus lends itself to the naming of the gods which only dwell in the underworld. (2) The exceptions of the A. in the underworld are rooted in the Sumerian tradition and continues therewith. In opposition, the I. are nowhere characterized as underworld gods. According to this theology the I. are originally a group description of the cosmic Acadian religion, the A. a designation of the chthonic Sumerian religion.

48. The unilingual Acadian text gives no feasible evidence about the genealogical relationships between the I. and the A. We are therefore depended on the Sumerian tradition to answer this question. For an assessment of the number of the I. and the A. respectively, the lexical lists add nothing useful. Important alone are the results of the world creation epic, which names their number as 600. The numerical cryptogram goes back on this passage. An apocryphal tradition developed in the En. el. from a misunderstanding of this number, which resulted in counting 300 I. and 600 A.

49. Shared cult cites of the god groups are not to be found; from the perspective of cultic worship, the individuality of the single gods always remains. The doings of the I. and the A. are nowhere concretely outlined. Only seldom are they named as ascertainers of the fate, mostly they are listed under the commands of another god. The function of both god groups is on the whole, according to a unilingual Acadian source, meeker and blurrier than the picture which we have of the A. from Sumer; their roll opposite stronger single gods still less meaningful. An exception is only the A. of the underworld with their duties as judges.

50. We examined finally the question of the god groups from a historical perspective, so we came to the recognition: after (d)a-nun-na, in the course of the formation of the royal pantheon, had the conception to describe all (or all the great) gods—inclusive of the exceptions of the A. of the underworld—and so its development was retained into the ‘late time’.⁶⁷ As synonyms, they appeared next to the I., only that these could also be described as special gods of the underworld. A disjunction of both ideas in one or the other way never occurred.

1 Cf. W. von Soden, “Babylonische Götterpruppen: Igigu und Anunnaku. Zum Bedeutungswandel theologischer Begriffe,“ Compte rendu de l’onzieme Recontre Assyriologique International, Pgs. 102-11.

2 The following exceptions from the rules named in the text are as follows: (1) an aB letter contains the following passage: […m]i-im sa I-gi(4)-gi(4) […]…a-la-ak […]-bu-ti-im UET V, Nr. 22 Rd. 1-3). (2) Both god-groups are called inbu bel arhi in the IX. Tablet [113]. (3) The A. appear as underworld gods in the series enuma Anu Enlil; see footnote 34. Further resources for the I. Ach, Adad Nr. XXXVI A 31, and for the A. Ach, Shamash Nr. XI 73 and XIII 13.

3 To the attempt at finding a meaning for the name Igigu read footnote 66

4 (d) nun.gal (mes): AfO XVIII 44, Line 16 (Tn. I. Epos); AKA, Pg. 207, Line 4 (Anp. II.); WO II 144, Line 9; III R 7:1 (Salm. III.);