Note

The so-called “Sumerian Question” as to the genuine linguistic character of the ancient Non-Semitic Babylonian texts has agitated the Assyriological world for more than twenty years. The new Sumerian matter from the monuments which is constantly coming to hand demands, in the interest of all those who can look upon this discussion with impartial eyes, a most rigid and unprejudiced examination. Dr. Vanderburgh in the following monograph has adhered to the views expounded in my “Materials for a Sumerian Lexicon” (J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1905-1907), that the so-called Sumerian was originally a Non-Semitic agglutinative language which, in the course of many centuries of Semitic influences, became so incrusted with Semiticisms, most of them the result of a very gradual development of the earlier foreign sacred speech of the priests, that it is really not surprising to find the theory that Sumerian was merely a Semitic cryptography set forth and vigorously upheld by so eminent a scholar as Professor Halévy (MSL., pp. VIII, IX).

The study of the more ancient Non-Semitic texts, more particularly of the Sumerian unilingual hymns, cannot fail to shed additional light on the nature of this peculiar idiom, besides furnishing a valuable addition to the study of the Babylonian religious system.

The texts of the hymns in Vol. XV. of the Brit. Mus. Cun. Texts are not always in good condition and present many difficulties, a solution of some of which, it is hoped, has been suggested in this work with at least approximate correctness.

John Dyneley Prince

To the
Rev. Edward Judson, D. D.,
in recognition of his friendship to the author
and of his interest in Oriental studies

Preface

Vol. XV. of the “Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, printed by order of the Trustees”, was published in 1902. Plates 7-30 of this valuable volume contain hymns addressed to Bêl, Nergal, Adad, Sin, Tammuz, Bau and Ningirgilu. Of these, besides the translations given in the present work, the following have been translated and commented on; viz., J. Dyneley Prince, Jour. Amer. Or. Soc., xxviii, pp. 168-182, a hymn to Nergal (Pl. 14); and a hymn to Sin (also rendered and explained in this thesis) by E. Guthrie Perry, in Hymnen und Gebete an Sin (Pl. 17). In press at present are also translations by J. D. Prince, a hymn to Bau, Vol. XV. Pl. 22 in the Harper Memorial Volume (Chicago); and, by the same author, a hymn to Ningirgilu, Vol. XV. Pl. 23, in the Paul Haupt Collection to appear in 1908.

All these hymns in Plates 7-30 stand by themselves as distinct from anything hitherto published. They are unilingual, a fact indicating that they are very ancient and furthermore adding materially to the difficulty of their translation. This Thesis ventures a transliteration, translation and commentary of four of the hymns which are peculiarly difficult owing to their unilingual Non-Semitic character. Of the history of the tablets in question, which are all in the Old Babylonian character, we have no information. They must tell their own story.

The writer of this Thesis wishes to acknowledge with much appreciation the aid given him by Dr. John Dyneley Prince, Professor of Semitic Languages in Columbia University, in the preparation of this work.

New York, Oct. 1st, 1907

F. A. Vanderburgh

List of Abbreviations

AL:Assyrische Lesestücke, von Friedrich Delitzsch. Vierte durchaus neu bearbeitete Auflage.

ASK:Akkadische and Sumerische Keilschrifttexte, von Paul Haupt.

BN:Das Babylonische Nimrodepos, von Paul Haupt.

Br:A Classified List of Cuneiform Ideograms, Compiled by Rudolph E. Brünnow.

CDAL.:A Concise Dictionary of the Assyrian Language, by William Muss-Arnolt.

CḤ:The Code of Ḥammurabi, King of Babylon, by Robert Francis Harper.

Cler:Collection de Clercq. Catalogue. Antiquités Assyriennes.

CT:Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum.

Déc:Découvertes en Chaldée, par Ernest de Sarzec.

EBH:Early Babylonian History, by Hugo Radau.

EBL:Explorations in Bible Lands during the 19th Century, by H. V. Hilprecht.

HBA:A History of Babylonia and Assyria, by R. W. Rogers.

HW:Assyrisches Handwörterbuch, von Friedrich Delitzsch.

IG:The Great Cylinder Inscriptions A and B of Gudea, by Ira Maurice Price.

JA:Journal Asiatique.

JRAS:The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.

MSL:Materials for a Sumerian Lexicon, by John Dyneley Prince.

N:Nippur, or Explorations and Adventures on the Euphrates, by John Punnett Peters.

OBI:Old Babylonian Inscriptions, chiefly from Nippur. By H. V. Hilprecht.

OBTR:Old Babylonian Temple Records, by Robert Julius Lau.

R:Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, prepared by Sir Henry Rawlinson.

RAAO:Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale.

RBA:Die Religion Babyloniens und Assyriens, von Morris Jastrow, Jr.

RSA:Recueil de Signes Archaiques de l’Écriture Cunéiforme, par V. Scheil.

SSD:Les Signes Sumériens derivés, par Paul Toscanne.

SSO:A Sketch of Semitic Origins, by George Aaron Barton.

SVA:Die Sumerischen Verbal-Afformative nach den ältesten Keilinschriften, von Vincent Brummer.

TC:Tableau Comparé des Écritures Babylonienne et Assyrienne Archaiques et Modernes, par A. Amiaud et L. Mechineau.

TEA:Der Tontafelfund von El Amarna, herausgegeben von Hugo Winckler.

TR:Travels and Researches in Chaldaea and Susiana, by Wm. K. Loftus.

Table of Contents

Page

Introduction 1

Chapter I 21

Transliteration, Translation and Commentary, Hymn to Bel

Chapter II 42

Transliteration, Translation and Commentary, Hymn to Sin

Chapter III 55

Transliteration, Translation and Commentary, Hymn to Adad

Chapter IV 70

Transliteration, Translation and Commentary, Hymn to Tammuz

Glossary 81

Introduction

The gods honored in the hymns treated in the following Thesis are Bêl, Sin (Nannar), Adad (Ramman) and Tammuz, all deities of the old Babylonian pantheon, representing different phases of personality and force, conceived of as incorporated in nature and as affecting the destinies of men. These gods are severally designated in the hymns as follows:

in Tablet 13963, Rev. 1, “O Bêl of the mountains;”

in Tablet 13930, Obv. 2, “O father Nannar;”

in Tablet 29631, Obv. 10, “O Ramman, king of heaven”; and

in Tablet 29628, Obv. 3, “The lord Tammuz” (CT. XV, 10, 15, 16, 17 and 19).

The attributes and deeds belonging to these divinities are adduced from a wide range of literature, beginning with the royal inscriptions of the pre-dynastic periods and ending with the inscriptions of the monarchs of the later Babylonian empire. In fact, the building inscriptions of the Babylonians, the war inscriptions of the Assyrians, the legendary literature, the incantations, as well as the religious collections, particularly the hymns, afford us many descriptions, of greater or less length, of all the Babylonian gods.

To aid the student in understanding better the character of the four gods whose hymns have been translated in the following Thesis, I here give a brief descriptive sketch of each of the deities whose praises were sung in the documents which I have chosen to render.

1. Bêl

Bêl was the most ancient of all Babylonian gods and was a popular deity through the historic rise and fall of several Babylonian states, when no other god received prominent recognition. When En-šag-kušanna, lord of Kêngi, subdued the city of Kîš in the north of Babylonia, he brought the spoil of his victory to Bêl. “To Bêl (En-lil), king of the lands, En-šag-kušanna, lord of Kêngi, the spoil 2 of Kîš, wicked of heart, he presented.”[1] Urukagina, king of Lagaš, built a temple to Ningirsu, the god of Girsu, but he, in honoring Ningirsu as the hero of Bêl, was really honoring Bêl. “For Ningirsu, the hero of Bêl, Urukagina, king of Širpurla, his house he built.”[2] Eannatum, who was patesi of Lagaš and made himself king of Kîš, calls himself the chosen of Bêl, as follows: “Eannatum, patesi of Širpurla, chosen of Bêl.”[3] Entemena, who is called in the Vase of Silver, “son of Enanatum”,[4] and who probably was the nephew of Eannatum, introduces his fine Cone Inscription with these words: “Bêl, king of the lands, father of the gods.”[5] He also claims in the same inscription to derive the right to reign from Bêl: “Entemena, patesi of Širpurla, to whom a sceptre is given by Bêl.”[6] Entemena’s Cone also gives us information about Mesilim. It speaks of Mesilim as “king of Kîš.”[7] In describing the victory of Mesilim over the Gišbanites, a people located apparently not very far from Kîš, Entemena tells us that the victory was effected by the command of Bêl. “Upon the command of Bêl a scourge he (Mesilim) brought over them (the Gišbanites); the dead in a field of the land he buried.”[8] For map showing supposed location of Gišban, see SSO. p. 158. Lugalzaggisi, a usurper from the north, making himself master of the world in all directions and setting up a throne at Erech, in his inscription of 132 lines, freely recognizes the favor of Bêl. “Bêl, king of the lands, to Lugalzaggisi, king of Erech, the kingship of the world did give.”[9] In this period preceding Sargon I., Šamaš seems to have a distinct place in the religious world, but he does not receive the attention that Bêl receives. He is particularly mentioned in one inscription; viz., in the Stèle des Vautours, where he is spoken of as “Šamaš, the king who dispenses splendour.”[10]

The date of these early Babylonian rulers, of course, is, as yet, not accurately determined. The relative age of each is made out chiefly from palaeographic evidences (see EBH. p. 8, for example), supplemented with the attempt at fitting into one harmonious whole the events which the inscriptions of these rulers divulge. Then the whole schedule is crowded backward or forward or internally changed from time to time as new evidence is gathered for or against the testimony of Nabonidus (555-538 B. C.) who, when he discovered the tablet of Narâm-Sin, declared that he was gazing on that which no eyes had beheld for thirty-two hundred years. Nabonidus says: “I dug to a depth of eighteen cubits, and the foundation of Narâm-Sin, the son of Sargon, which for thirty-two hundred years no king that had preceded me had discovered, Šamaš, the great Lord of E-barra, permitted me, even me, to behold.”[11] On the supposed relation of these kings to Narâm-Sin, the rulers En-šag-kušanna, a king of the south, Urukagina, of Lagaš, and Mesilim, a king ruling at Kîš, are placed along about the date of 4500 B. C., while Eannatum, Enannatum and Entemena, successive rulers at Lagaš, are placed near the date of 4200 B. C. Lugalzaggisi of Erech is placed at 4000 B. C. It may be stated here that the date of Sargon I. as 3800 B. C. is obtained by adding to 3200 the date of the reign of Nabonidus as 550 years B. C. and also the length of the reign of Sargon I. as 50 years.

The seat of Bêl’s cult was Nippur, a city lying between the Euphrates and Tigris, a little below Babylon, and located, as it were, in the midway favorable to receiving homage from kings of either the north or the south of Babylonia. We find it mentioned as early as the time of Entemena, who in one of his inscriptions, in speaking of something presented to Bêl, says: “To Bêl of Nippur by Entemena it was presented”.[12] In the bilingual legend of the Creation, Nippur seems to be regarded as a very old city. It is placed at the head of the list of three that are mentioned as ancient cities of Babylonia. “Nippur was not made; E-kur was not built. Erech was not made; E-anna was not built. The abyss was not made; Eridu was not built.”[13] Nippur evidently is older than the worship of Bêl and the conception of Bêl is older than the first king of whom we have mention; viz., En-šag-kušanna, who is placed at 4500 B. C.

At Nippur was located Bêl’s great temple which was commonly called E-kur, house of the mountain, a name particularly descriptive of the shrine of Bêl resting on the top of the mountain-like ziggurrat. Sargon I. calls himself the builder of Bêl’s temple at Nippur, and Narâm-Sin, the son of Sargon, also calls himself the builder of Bêl’s temple. Sargon’s language, which we take from a door-socket found at Nippur, is: “Šargani-šar-âli, son of Itti-Bêl, the mighty king of Agade, builder of E-kur, temple of Bêl in Nippur”.[14] The language of Narâm-Sin from a brick stamp found at Nippur is: “Narâm-Sin, builder of the temple of Bêl”.[15] Neither Sargon nor his son meant that he was the original builder of E-kur. They were simply repairers of the temple, like many other kings. Many kings down to the last king of the last empire took much pride in rebuilding temples. There must have been a temple at Nippur when En-šag-kušanna presented the spoil of Kîš to Bêl. Excavations at Nippur show that, as there are great deposits of debris above the temple pavements made by Sargon and his son, so beneath these pavements there is a further great layer of debris, proving that the founding of E-kur must reach far back into the darkness of pre-historic antiquity. Sargon’s bricks were the first to bear a stamp which we may consider to imply a date, but they were not the first bricks laid.

The ziggurrat which Ur-Gur, an early king of Ur, built is the first of which we have definite knowledge. We know something of the pavement that Sargon I. and Narâm-Sin built, but of the character of the buildings that might have rested on this pavement we have no information. Ur-Gur leveled the ground and built a new platform, 8 feet high and 100 by 170 feet in area with a ziggurrat consisting of three stages. Some of the facings of his structure were made of burnt brick, bearing the inscription of Ur-Gur (see N. II, 124). The greatest temple Nippur ever had was built by an Assyrian king; viz., Ašurbânipal. The structure covered a larger surface than any before it. The walls, instead of being plain, were ornamented with square half columns. The lower terrace was faced with baked brick, stamped with an inscription in which the ziggurrat is dedicated to Bêl, the lord of the lands, by Ašurbânipal, the mighty king, the king of the four quarters of the earth, the builder of E-kur (see N. II, 126).

E-kur, the temple of Bêl at Nippur, as restored on the basis of the discoveries of the University of Pennsylvania Exploration Fund, consists of two courts, an outer and an inner court. Within 5 the inner court stands the ziggurrat, rising to a tower of three or four stages which the most devout pilgrims might perhaps ascend. At the top is an enclosed shrine in which is a statue of Bêl. Here Bêl and his consort, Bêlit, for Babylonian gods maintain family relations like human beings, are supposed to dwell. In figurines Bêl appears as an old man, dressed in royal robes, generally carrying a thunder-bolt in his hand (see N. II, 128). By the side of the ziggurrat stands a temple for the use of the priests. We may assume on the whole, no doubt, that the assembly of pilgrims was confined chiefly to the outer court (see EBL. 470).

Bêl was at first a local deity, but as the circumference of the political territory of which Nippur was the religious centre was enlarged, so Bêl’s cult was extended. Other cities included in the same political domain with Nippur, recognized Bêl as lord. Bêl was a sort of war god. Kings rivaled one another in courting his favor. The victorious king attributed his success to Bêl and brought the spoil to Bêl. The king of the south, whether of Lagaš, Erech or Ur, and the king of the north, whether of Kîš or Agade, always went to Nippur to celebrate his victory. In this way Bêl’s lordship came to be recognized as extending over all Babylonia and finally over Assyria. Ḥammurabi, king at Babylon, 2300 B. C., recognized “Bêl as lord of heaven and earth, who determines the destiny of the land”,[16] and Tiglath-pileser I. (about 1100 B. C.), the first great Assyrian conqueror, called Bêl “the father of the gods and Bêl of the lands”,[17] and speaks of himself as “appointed to dominion over the country of Bêl”.[18]

The Semitic appropriation of En-lil involved some transformation in the conception of Bêl. Not to refer to Palestine, there were three Bêls; the Sumerian Bêl, the Semitic Bêl and the new Bêl or Marduk, who, however, was really a different god. The Babylonian Bêl, either in the mind of the Sumerian, of the Babylonian or of the Assyrian, always had his seat at Nippur.

Under Semitic influence Bêl became lord of the world. He was one in the hierarchy of three who ruled the universe; viz., Anu, the lord of the heavens, Bêl, the lord of the earth, and Ea, the lord of the deep. The Sumerian name, En-lil, made Bêl the “lord of fulness”. The Semitic name Bêl emphasized the fact of his lordship, and the name of his temple, E-kur, “house of the mountain”, marked out the scope of his lordship. The earth was conceived 6 of as a mountain resting on the abyss, and the temple with its ziggurrat was built to rise up like a mountain out of the deep. The people could stand in the court of the temple at Nippur and say of the mountain-like structure:

When Babylon became the chief city of all Babylonia, it was natural that its god should be regarded as supreme. It was at this point that political lordship seemed to pass from the old Bêl to the new, namely to Marduk. Ḥammurabi, one of the early kings at Babylon, speaks of Bêl as voluntarily transferring his power to Marduk. In the Assyrian legend of the Creation this transfer is dramatically enacted. The task of overcoming the monster Tiâmat naturally belonged to Bêl. But Marduk, the youthful god of Eridu, the son of Ea, was urged to attempt the feat. When he had slain the monster, there was joy among the gods. They vied with each other in bestowing honor on the victor. Finally Bêl steps forward and confers an honor also. He bestowed on Marduk his own title with these words: “Father Bêl calls Marduk the lord of the world.”[20] Marduk, therefore, is sometimes called the new Bêl in distinction from En-lil, the old Bêl.

The idea of origins is apparently not very fully elaborated in Babylonian literature. For instance, the Babylonians did not come so near to the idea of creation ex nihilo as the Hebrews. Their cosmogony starts with chaos. The expanse of the heavens appears specked with stars, some of which move with regularity. The moon travels across the expanse according to a prescribed order. Then the Babylonian bilingual account of the Creation gives a short statement of the creation of the land and sea, of man and beast. Generally, however, the divinity that planned and perfected order seems to be far in the background. The bilingual account says:

Now Marduk, we know, took the place of Bêl and Bêl handed over his prerogatives to Marduk. In transferring his rights he must have given over also his power to create. If Marduk possessed the power to create in the time of his popularity, Bêl must have had the same power in the days of his glory, before he was succeeded by Marduk. Therefore we are led to the belief that the early Babylonians looked upon Bêl as the creator of animal and human life on earth.

The following hymn may be regarded as embodying a legendary view of Bêl as creator, while the idea of destruction is also incorporated in the hymn:

2. Sin

Next after Bêl, the moon-god is worthy of consideration, because of the age of his cult, and because of the greatness of its influence in Babylonia. The moon-god had two Sumerian names, 8 two Assyrian names and two great temples. The Sumerian name most often applied to the moon-god is Šis-ki, the particular meaning of which in this case does not seem to be very patent. If the two syllables Šis and ki are taken as nouns, the one is the construct state and the other in the genitive relation, the name means “brother of the land”, that is, “protector of the land”, or “helper of the land”. The other Sumerian name is En-zu, lord of wisdom, the intellectual attribute of wisdom being closely related to the physical property of giving light. While therefore Šis-ki expresses the material relation of the moon to the earth, En-zu seems to state the intellectual relation of the moon-god to the affairs of the earth. The first Assyrian name of the moon-god to be considered is Nannar. The derivation of this name is still in doubt. It generally occurs in bilingual literature as the Assyrian equivalent of the Sumerian Šis-ki (see IV R. 9, 3-18). Jastrow thinks that the word Nannar is made by the reduplication of nar, “light”, and the assimilation of the first r, Nar + nar = Nannar (see RBA. p. 72). The other Assyrian name, connected with the moon-god more often at Harran than at Ur, is Sin, the sign being EŠ, used also for “thirty”, and is applied to the moon-god as the deity of the month of thirty days. As the cult of the moon-god traveled from Ur to Harran, so the name of Sin traveled even into the peninsula of Arabia and probably became a local name there in the wilderness. The Assyrian kings of the second empire seemed to prefer to call the moon-god by the name Sin, but the Semitic Babylonians called him Nannar.

Nannar had a temple at Ur, called E-gišširgal, and one at Harran, known as E-ḥulḥul. Ur was the oldest of the two temple cities. Its history may possibly reach back to 4000 B. C. Ur held a position in southern Babylonia similar to that held by Nippur in northern Babylonia, but was not so old as Nippur. Ur was the religious centre in the south with Nannar as the state god, as Nippur was the religious centre in the north with Bêl as the state god. When the states of the south and the north were united under Ḥammurabi, Babylon, becoming the religious capital of the south and the north combined, the state lustre of the god of Babylon naturally came to dim the glory of the god of Ur as well as that of Nippur. Harran, situated on the Euphrates in the northern part of Assyria, never figured in state power, and was prominent only because of the importance of the events that centered there, on the road between the east and the west.

Nabonidus, the last Semitic Babylonian king (555-538 B. C.) was an enthusiastic devotee of the moon-god. He tells us what Ašurbânipal did to the temple of the moon-god at Mugheir. In speaking of that temple, he calls it the house of Sin which Ašurbânipal, 9 king of Assyria, son of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria had built. Nabonidus himself rebuilt both the temples of the moon-god, the temple of E-gišširgal at Ur and the temple of E-ḥulḥul at Harran, and he gives us a description of the rebuilding of both. We also have two prayers of Nabonidus addressed to the moon-god, one addressed to him at E-gišširgal, the other addressed to him at E-ḥulḥul (see I R. 68, Col. I, 6 ff. and V R. 64, Col. I, 8 ff.).

The temple ruins of E-gišširgal have been well uncovered. The temple is of rectangular form, the four corners turned towards the four cardinal points of the compass. The platform of the base is at the level of the roofs of the houses, made of solid masonry of bricks and reached by steps at the end. On the platform are two stagings, also of solid masonry reached by steps at one end. On the second staging is a shrine of the moon-god. In sculpture he appears as an old man with long beard and dressed in royal robes. He wears a hat and in the scene there is always a thin crescent (see Clercq, Vol. I, Plates X-XV). Loftus and Taylor both give drawings of the temple of E-gišširgal (see TR. p. 127 and JRAS. XV, p. 260.) The ruins of the temple of the moon-god at Harran have not yet been uncovered to the extent that the plan of the temple can be laid before us.

Theologically, Nannar stood at the head of the second triad of gods. The hierarchy of the universe consisted of the god Anu, the god Bêl and the god Ea. The hierarchy of heaven consisted of the god Nannar, the god Šamaš and the god Ištar; that is, the moon-god, the sun-god and the star-god. The reason for placing Nannar above Šamaš was that Nannar was the god of the ruling city, while Šamaš was the city god of the dependent state, though the sun which Šamaš represents is stronger than the moon which Nannar represents, and we should expect Šamaš, therefore, to receive the first place. The god of the city of Larsa was Šamaš. The god of the city of Ur was Nannar. When Larsa became subject to Ur, the god of Larsa; viz., Šamaš, became the child of the god of Ur; that is, of Nannar. The relation of the night to the calendar also shows that the rank of Nannar was superior to that of Šamaš. The day began at evening; not with the morning. The sun too was the son of the night; that is, it issued forth from the night, in the morning. Kings, thinking of this fact, that the sun was born of the night, often addressed Šamaš as the offspring of the god Sin. The rising of the moon in the night to send forth its light into the darkness also impressed the Babylonian with the power of the moon. The waxing and waning of the moon left the same impression on the Babylonian mind. The regularity of the phases of the moon and its effect upon the tides as well showed 10 the moon to be an agent in marking time. Finally, the place of the moon among the stars also gave him the appearance of having royal sway.

Nannar’s national influence was much like that of Bêl. Geographically, he represented southern Babylonia, while Bêl was the chief deity of northern Babylonia. When Marduk became the patron god of Babylon, Bêl and Nannar still held their positions as patron gods, but in subordination to Marduk. Besides, they did not lose their influence as supreme deities, each in his peculiar sphere, Bêl as the god of the earth and Nannar as the god of the moon. Bêl was ruler of the earth while Nannar was, by his light, a producer in the earth. Bêl was the providential director of life on earth, Nannar was the originator of life on earth, as he formed the child in the womb. Both were superhuman in power and wisdom. Thus Ḥammurabi: “My words are mighty. If a man pay no attention to my words, may Bêl, the lord who determines destinies, whose command cannot be altered, who has enlarged my dominion, drive him out from his dwelling. May Sin, the lord of heaven, my divine creator, whose scimetar shines among the gods, take away from him the crown and throne of sovereignty.”[23]

No god in the mind of the Babylonian had reached the position of combining in himself all the qualities of divinity. So it did not seem inconsistent to the Babylonian to worship two gods like Bêl and Nannar, or more gods. There was a tolerance of all gods; each was considered as acting in his own circle, and these circles did not necessarily exclude the one the other. One god might be more important than another, according to the importance of the circle in which his virtue was effective, or according to the importance of the political power the circle of whose sway was under the special tutelage of some particular god. Babylonian worship cannot be said to be polytheistic in the grosser form, nor had it reached the higher ideal that lies in monotheism. It may properly be considered a henotheistic worship in which there is a pantheon of gods whose local and universal claims did not cause the gods or their devotees to war the one on the other.

There is a truly great bilingual hymn addressed to Nannar. According to the colophon it was transcribed by the chief penman of Ašurbânipal from an old copy. My impression is that it is an 11 enlargement of the hymn to Nannar of which this Thesis gives a transliteration, translation and commentary. For this reason I herewith append the following translation:

This Ašurbânipal hymn may be considered as remarkable for its advanced ideas. In the first part of the hymn there is introduced the mythological idea of the bullock’s head in the moon with horns and the face with flowing hazel-colored beard, so that strength and brilliancy are pointed out. But the hymn advances into literal speech by which the most varied and greatest of divine attributes are attached to the god Nannar. He is named as sovereign god, a self-created god, a merciful god, the begetter of all life, the maintainer of the life of the world, the bestower of gifts to men, the establisher of dwellings; he fixes destinies, pronounces judgment, 13 gives water to man and supplies him with vegetable food. He holds a unique and exalted position in heaven and on earth above all other beings. To him the angels of heaven and spirits of earth bow, and at his command the forces of nature perform their marvellous functions.

3. Adad

The storm-god is known by the Sumerian ideogram Im. The sign IMMU in the El-Amarna tablets (1500 B. C.) has the reading Adad, a name connected with the Syrian Hadad. Oppert thinks Adad is the god’s oldest name. It seems evidently a foreign equivalent for Im. The Assyrian name Ramman is a provisional name meaning “thunderer”, and probably only an epithet. The sign IMMU has also the value Mer. This is, no doubt, the original and real name of the god, which appears as well in the form Immer. The primary idea in the name is that of wind, then, that of rain and finally of thunder and lightning. The god is not an object like Nannar, but a force; then the force is personified and he is spoken of as a person. Ḥammurabi puts him in the second triad of gods. He is the third person of that triad, Sin being the first person and Šamaš the second. Generally Ištar has the third place in the second triad. In that case Ramman falls outside of that triad and takes position among all the gods as seventh in importance. The order is as follows: Anu, Bêl, Ea, Sin, Šamaš, Ištar, Adad (Ramman). As a Babylonian god we find Ramman’s name appears in Ḥammurabi’s time as a common name in literature. He is invoked in Ḥammurabi’s Code, like other gods, of course in his sphere as a storm-god. Thus: “If a man will pay no attention to my words, may Adad, the lord of abundance, the regent of heaven and earth, my helper, deprive him of the rain from heaven and the water-floods from the springs! May he bring his land to destruction through want and hunger! May he break loose furiously over his city and turn his land into a heap left by a whirlwind!”[24] With the kings of the Cassite dynasty Ramman seems to be popular. His name appears by the side of that of Šamaš and he is called the divine lord of justice. In the Babylonian dynasty of kings, Nebuchadnezzar I. addresses Ramman as the great lord of heaven, the lord of the subterranean waters and rain, whose curse is invoked against the one who sets aside the decrees of Nebuchadnezzar or defaces his monument.

Ramman is thought to be more truly an Assyrian than a Babylonian god. He is almost as dear to the Assyrian as the god Ašur. Historical data, however, do not furnish very early mention of his name in Assyria. We find that he had a seat of worship in Damascus, and his cult had vogue in the plain of Jezreel, his name appearing in Hebrew, written by mistake, after the text was Masoretically vocalized, “Rimmon” which is exactly the same in form as the Hebrew word for pomegranate. In Assyria we can trace his history back to some extent by means of inscriptions in which his name appears as an element in the compound names of kings. For example, we find his name in the name of the ancient Assyrian king Šamaš-Ramman, and from an inscription of Tiglath-pileser I. we learn also that Šamaš-Ramman built a temple to the god Ramman. So we have historical evidence that the cult of Ramman is older in Assyria than this king, who was reigning in 1820 B. C. How much older it may be we do not know. Jastrow thinks that the cult is indigenous to Assyrian soil.

Between the time of Šamaš-Ramman and the time of Tiglath-pileser I. the service of Ramman must have declined somewhat, for the temple of Ramman in the city of Aššur seems not to have been repaired from the days of Šamaš-Ramman till Tiglath-pileser himself rebuilt it. Tiglath-pileser says that from the time of the founding it was in decay six hundred and forty years. Then king Ašurdan tore it down entirely. Sixty years after the entire destruction, Tiglath-pileser builds the temple anew. He says that in the beginning of his government the great gods Anu and Adad demanded for him the restoration of their sacred dwelling. “I made bricks and cleared its ground until I reached the artificial flat terrace upon which the old temple had been built. I laid its foundation upon the solid rock and the whole place incased with bricks like a fire-place, overlaid on it a layer of fifty bricks in depth and built upon this the foundations of the temple of Anu and Adad of large square stones. I built it up from foundation to roof, larger and grander than before, and erected also two great temple towers ... fitting ornaments of their great divinities.”[25] From Tiglath-pileser on, temples of Ramman do not seem to be often mentioned, but the god himself is frequently spoken of in inscriptions of the kings. Sargon II. has one of the eastern gates 15 of his temple named “Ramman the producer of abundance”. Ašurbânipal enumerates thirteen gods whom he honors as the great gods, and places Ramman fifth in the list.

Ramman’s most esteemed service was that of bestowing blessing. The rains in the right proportion were a boon to the land, filling the canals and watering the soil. Ḥammurabi calls Ramman the lord of abundance and his helper. Tiglath-pileser I. prays for the blessings of prosperity, as he prays to Adad: “May Anu and Adad turn to me truly and accept graciously the lifting up of my hand, hearken unto my devout prayers, grant me and my reign abundance of rain, years of prosperity and fruitfulness in plenty.”[26] Ašurbânipal describes the blessings he receives by the favor of this god: “Ramman let loose his showers and Ea has opened his springs, the grain has grown to a height of five yards and the ears have been five sixths of a yard long, the produce of the land has been abundant and the fruit trees have borne fruit richly.”[27] The mention of Anu and Ea with Ramman is because of their power to produce water, Ea representing the depths of water and Anu the heaven with its clouds of rain.

The most conspicuous work of Ramman was that of destruction. It is in this function of judgment that he is associated with Šamaš. The connection lies in the fact that the lightning of Ramman is like the day-light of Šamaš; so, as the god of lightning, Ramman has the title birḳu. Lightning and flooding rain were, because of their destructive character, fearful forces, and the kings in calling for a curse on hostile man or land turn to Ramman in imprecation, as, for example, Raman-Nirari I. does concerning the man who may be tempted to blot out the record of Ramman-Nirari’s name: “May Ramman with terrible rainstorm overwhelm him, may flood, destruction, wind, rebellion, revolution, tempest, want and famine, drought and hunger be continually in his land. May he come down on his land like a flood. May he turn it into mounds and ruins. May Ramman strike his land with a destructive bolt.”[28]

Some Babylonian composer has set forth the terrifying side of Ramman’s character in a bilingual hymn as follows:

4. Tammuz

There is a fascination about the life of Tammuz not experienced in the contemplation of the other gods of Babylonia. He seems to be presented to us just as though he were a man.

Our first paragraph may describe him as a resident of one of the ancient cities of southern Babylonia. The city of his residence was Eridu on the banks of the Euphrates. His official title is that of sun-god and his occupation is to care for the growth of plants. The name of his father was Ea, the lord of the city of Eridu, whose duties consisted in governing the waters of the river on whose shore the city rested. Tammuz had a mother, whose name was Davkina, the mistress of the vine. Tammuz also had a sister Belili whose calling was, like that of Tammuz her brother, the care of plant growth. Tammuz also had a bride, the famous and treacherous Ištar, the goddess of love, represented by the evening star; she was mistress of the neighbouring city of Erech, a little to the north-west, and on the other side of the Euphrates. The life of Tammuz at Eridu was romantic and his days ended in tragedy. There is a little poem, giving a picture of his home. There was a garden, a holy place, abundantly shaded with profuse leafage of trees whose roots went down deep into the waters over which Ea presided. His couch was hung under the rich foliage of the vine which his mother tended. There Tammuz dwelt and 17 there was his shrine. His dwelling of foliage in his youthful days was symbolic of the domain in which the virtue of his power was to be exercised. His real home was in heaven, for from heaven the virtue of plant-growth proceeds with the heat of the sun. But his connection with heaven had been forgotten, except in reminiscence found in legend. In the legend of Adapa, for instance, we find a hint of it. Tammuz and his companion Gišzida are seen mounting up to heaven where they receive stations as door-keepers in the gate of Anu’s house; in heaven they properly belong.

The descent of Tammuz to the lower world implies that he died, but the accounts have not made a direct statement of how he died, or what was the cause of his death. Perhaps we may conceive of the event of his death as having taken place at Eridu before the service of lamentation had developed into a cult honored at the court of Sargon of Akkad, where a temple was built for Tammuz after northern Babylonia had gained the ascendency over southern Babylonia. The literal cause of his death was that he was not capable of making plant-growth a continuous process. The power of the heat of the sun as the summer advanced was superior to the virtue which Tammuz possessed over plant-life. The fierce heat of the summer caused vegetation to take a paler hue; then the germs of decay entered; slowly and surely the face of the land was assuming the same state that existed before the power of Tammuz appeared to quicken the blade of grass and the fruit-bud of the early spring. So Tammuz was banished to the lower world. Romantically his entrance to the abode of the dead was due to the hand which Ištar had in the events of his life. She had many lovers, and she betrayed them all. Her betrayal in the case of Tammuz consisted in not aiding him in her sphere as great mother in the production of life on earth. Had she supplemented his effort and made the earth continue to bear and bring forth, counteracting the effect of the deadly heat of the summer solstice and the destructive wind of the south, the gardens and the fruit orchards over whose productiveness Tammuz presided would have enjoyed perennial fruitage, and Gilgameš would never have had to take up the sad accusation against Ištar:

Also there had never gone up the song of lamentation:

According to another story of the fate of Tammuz, Ištar was the victim of sudden and violent passion, and in a fit of anger for disregard of her command she had smitten him down, just as she crushed the allallu-bird she loved:

Also as she cast out of her sight the lion:

The origin of the service of weeping for Tammuz is an interesting legend. When Ištar had slain her lover, she hastened, like the going down of the evening star, to the lower world in search of waters to restore him to life. She searches long, passing through all the compartments of Hades. The story does not give details of her finding Tammuz, but instead, a scene of his burial is introduced:

A scene of the mourning for Tammuz is also introduced, which may be taken as the original lamentation, all other summer solstice weepings being anniversaries of this original one. His sister is there lamenting:

And a great company of mourners sing dirges by the accompaniment of the flute and follow the instruction which Tammuz, though dead, seems to be giving then and there:

Of course the story is not finished and the circle of events not completed without the resurrection of Tammuz. In a Chaldaean intaglio there is a picture of Tammuz rejuvenated on the knees of Ištar (see Clercq Vol. I, Plate IX, No. 83). Some forms of the story must include his return to the earth, and the complete service of lamentation must have been sometimes supplemented by a service of joy in which the idea of resurrection was significant.

Though the original lamentation was an expression of grief for Tammuz dead, the fully developed ceremony was an expression of several pathetic ideas. It was accompanied with sacrifice and offerings of wine. In Babylonia the commemoration was observed every year on the second day of the fourth month, called the month of Tammuz. It was not only a weeping for dead Tammuz, but a weeping for dead vegetation. The dying leaf had a mourner. The withered stock had a sympathizing friend. For the blasted blade of grass there was shed a tear. For the barren tree bereft of golden foliage and luscious fruit there went up a cry of sympathy. The ceremony was an expression of sadness that came over the people as the oppression of the heat of summer bore down upon them, the water supply being reduced, vegetable life put out and human life consequently made almost unendurable by the deprivation and heat of summer. The time of weeping was one for the expression of personal sorrow that lurks in almost every heart. The wail of anguish was a relief to souls burdened with their own peculiar griefs. The soul found relief in lifting up the voice attuned to some form of elegy. There came a relief like the rolling of the burden of guilt from the breast. The ceremony was one that embraced in its performance the expression of confession. It was, however, performed with the consciousness that the drought of summer was but for a season, and that there was to follow a period of happier existence, as the succeeding winter should merge into a new spring.

Tammuz was supposed to leave the land with the season when the spring growth was completed, to come back again in the following year. He is considered as dead, but his death is not an absolute one. He tells the mourners what to do as they gather about his bier. According to some allusions he seems also to be a lord, as it were, in the bowels of the earth, preparing the inner earth for putting forth a new stock of vegetation, as spring shall come. Hence, the hymn to Tammuz in this Thesis calls him 20 “the generator of the lower world”. His association with his friend Gišzida substantiates more fully the idea of his resurrection. To give vitality to his work he still maintains his old personality of sun-god, and to him again is given a seat in heaven, as the Adapa legend shows:

The story of Tammuz seems to have taken deep and almost universal hold of the imagination and sympathy of mankind. The weeping for Tammuz is said to have been maintained by the Babylonians till a very late period. Similar stories to that of the Tammuz legend existed in about the same period of history among the Phoenicians, the Hebrews, the Greeks and the Egyptians, the most of these accounts having a common origin; if they have more than one origin, they seem nevertheless to blend in the main into one story. It is said that in the Phoenician town of Gebal by the Mediterranean on the road leading from the people of the east to those of the west, there is a yearly lamentation over the death of their sun-god, the beloved Aštoreth, who had been slain by a cruel hand, just as the spring verdure was cut down by the hot blasts of summer. The women, tearing their hair, disfiguring their faces and cutting their breasts, sent up a cry to heaven: “O my brother!” Across the sea by the way of Cyprus, the cry is said to have been carried to Greece where it found embodiment in the story of Adonis and Aphrodite. Possibly, however, the Greek story may be indigenous. Adonis lost his life while hunting, thrust through the thigh with the tusk of a wild boar. After death he was in great favour with Persephone who finally yielded to the entreaties of the inconsolable Aphrodite, and Adonis spent one half of the year with his celestial mistress and the other half with his infernal one. How much place the annual weeping for a departed one had among the Hebrews may be inferred to some extent by the mention made in the Scriptures of the service. Zechariah speaks of the well-known mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon, and Amos refers to the custom of mourning for an only son. Ezekiel says that the Lord brought him to Jehovah’s house “and behold, there sat the women weeping for Tammuz”. Jeremiah goes a step further and gives us the refrain which was used in the weeping: “Ah me! Ah my brother!” The parallel story in Egypt had for its hero the god Osiris who, representing goodness, upon being slain by a foe, became judge of the dead, though his soul continued in existence among men.

Transliteration, Translation and Commentary

Chapter I
Tablet 13963, Plate 10, Hymn to Bel

Obverse

Reverse

This composition is a hymn of praise to Bêl, who is directly addressed. His name, Mu-ul-lil, appears in 14 of the 25 lines of the hymn, in which he is called distinctively “father”, the title occurring 8 times.

The god is addressed in the second person, as is seen in line 16, where za-e, the personal pronoun of the second person, is applied to him, and also in the pronominal phase of the second person, za-da, found in lines 18 and 19, not to mention other less striking symbols of the second person singular.

The hymn consists of many laudatory epithets descriptive of Bêl’s divine nature and work. His fatherhood and lordship are dwelt upon. He is a righteous and all-wise father. His lordship extends not only over the land, but up into the air as well. He provides subsistence for the creatures of earth, being also the organizer of city and state. He superintends also the operations of nature in the atmosphere being the dread of heaven, the lord of gods, the occasion of fear among the birds and fishes, the shepherd of the storms (or stars).

The time of the origin of this hymn is a matter of conjecture. The form of the signs offers some evidence. What the early kings say of Bêl also throws some light on the subject. The signs are, of course, later than the picture-writing of the hieroglyph, and also later than the linear script suited to stone. These signs are made in clay, hence the wedge appears. The design of the signs used here has met with some transformation since the hieroglyph was used, but it has not yet reached the chaste and symmetrical form given by the hand of the Assyrian. In short the signs of this hymn are old Babylonian, almost identical with those used in the inscriptions of Eannatum, Entemena, Gudea and Ḥammurabi. There are, however, some later and even New-Babylonian signs among them, pointing perhaps to transcription subsequent to the original composition.

There is no mention of any city in the hymn, as there is in the hymn to Sin, but this hymn probably had its origin in Nippur which was the great religious centre of Babylonia in the pre-dynastic period, when kings ascribed their successes to Bêl and brought their booty to Nippur, calling Bêl “the lord of the lands.”

Obverse

ù-mu-un means “being lord”, ù equalling “lord” and mu-un equalling “being”. ù-mu-un is a phonetic representation of umun = bêlu, (Br. 9475). umun is sometimes ideographically represented by the sign GIGURÛ, the corner wedge (Br. 8659), which signifies “depress”, “overpower”, “be powerful”, “rule”. umun may be shortened either to u, mun or un, giving to GIGURÛ three values for “lord”, u, un and umun. umun, which is ES, has an EK value, ugun. In line 17, we shall meet with another word for “lord”; viz., ga-šá-an.

ù: the sign IGI-DIBBU alone means “lord”. It has a well-known Assyrian equivalent, labâru, “be old”, (Br. 9464). Brummer explains the sign correctly as follows: IGI-DIBBU is a compound sign and equals ŠI, “eye”, plus LU, “take away”, hence the meaning “take away the eye”, “become old”, “elderly”, “lord”, (SVA. 2-7).

mu-un contracted to mun is cognate with me-en which equals bašû, “to be”, as in za-e-me-en (Br. 10404). We shall meet the form mu-un as a verbal prefix.

mu here is simply a dialectic form of me (MSL., p. 240). mu as a Sumerian value is attested by the sign-name MU. We shall meet with MU in the name Mu-ul-lil, also as a suffix and in other ways. The MU of our text is old Babylonian. It is the MU of Ur-Gur and Gudea (see brick of Ur-Gur, No. 90009, CT. XXI, and Gudea’s Cylinder A, Col. XVIII, line 27, in Déc. 36).

un is plainly cognate with en which is so commonly represented by the sign ÊNU. The sign UN we shall meet again with the value kalama. The UN of our text is a very ancient sign (see Cone of Eannatum, Col. I, CT. XXI, Tablet 30062).

na-àm-zu-ka consists of noun, na-àm-zu and postposition ka.

na-àm-zu is an abstract noun composed of the abstract prefix na-àm and the stem zu.

na-àm equals šîmtu, “fortune”, (Br. 1609 and HW. 654) and is a dialectic form of nam (Br. 2103) which is a common abstract prefix.

na is a Sumerian value of the sign NANÛ. The value is simply syllabic here. The sign originally signified “stone”. Our 25 NA is found both in old Babylonian tablets and in New-Babylonian inscriptions.

àm (ES) also is only syllabic here. The sign has the EK value ag and is used ideographically.

zu: the sign representing zu has only one value, presenting a rather uncommon circumstance in Sumerian. zu means “know”, also “be wise”, and may equal nîmeḳu, “wisdom”, (Br. 136), but the author preferred to say na-àm-zu, “the fortune of wisdom”.

ka, sign-name KÂGU, is a postpositive sign of the genitive. The sign KÂGU (discussed below) is often used in this way, but it has several values and is used to express a large number of ideas, ka as a postposition is a dialectic form of ge(KIT).

še-ir-ma-al is ES for the EK nir-gal, š changing to n and m to g (MSL. p. XI). It is translated into Assyrian by the word etellu. še-ir-ma-al consists then of two parts; stem še-ir and suffix ma-al. Strictly, še-ir is “lord” and še-ir-ma-al is “lordship”.

še-ir: e and i appear generally to be distinct sounds, but they combine, just as the two u’s combine in mu-un, making mun, and as the two a’s combine in na-àm, making nam. Evidently the weaker sound is absorbed by the stronger, hence še-ir becomes šêr, “ruler”, which could be represented by NISIGÙ (JA., 1905, p. 113, also Br. 4306).

še is perhaps a Semitic value coming from šê’u, “grain”. The original sign is a picture of a head of grain like wheat or oats. The name of the sign is Û-UM. The sign occurs in line 20 as an ideogram.

ir is also Semitic value of the sign GAḲ-GUNÙ. We shall meet the sign used as a verb equal to kamû, “bind”.

ma-al, phonetically written for mal, is an ending which adds to šêr the idea of “having”; hence še-ir-ma-al means “having rule”.

ma: we shall find MAMÛ used mostly as a noun, but it may occur as a verbal prefix or as a phonetic complement.

al: the sign has only one value, al, whose use is principally syllabic. The sign-name is ALLU.

nì-te-na: nì-te is the main word with na as a suffix.

nì-te: nì and te stand related to each other as object and cognate verb, meaning “fear a fear”. The affinity of nì and te is shown by the fact that the sign for nì, called IMMU, may have the value tu (see Br. 8355), then the object and verb would be tu-te, “fear a fear” (see Fossey in JA., 1905, p. 128). nì-te may mean “self” just as nì may stand not only for “fear” but for that which causes fear as Rammânu, “the storm-god”, and then by way of erroneous association for ramânu, “self”.

nì: the sign IMMU is one of the principal signs that originally 26 denoted “the quarter of the heavens”. It is used to signify “storm” and many ideas connected with storm.

te: TÊMMÊNU originally meant “orientation”, then “to approach hostilely”; hence nì-te meant “approach of storm”.

na is an indeterminate suffix, but the context shows that it means “thy”, so that nì-te-na means “thyself” (see na above).

^dimmer: the sign AN here has the value dimmer. In the great bilingual penitential Psalm, K. 2811 (IV R. plate 10), instead of the single sign AN, we have the spelling dim-me-er (see lines 3, 7 and others). If this were an EK composition, the sign AN might be dingir, di-in-gir, but in the words ù-mu-un and še-ir-ma-al which we have already had, we have evidence that this is an ES composition, hence AN here is to be read dimmer.

Mu-ul-lil: Bêl has only one name in this hymn; namely, Mul-lil. In the two tablets, 29644 and 29623, following this tablet, Bêl is called En-lil (see the colophons). The word Mu-ul-lil divides into two parts, Mu-ul, which contracts into Mul, and lil.

Mu-ul: Mul is ES; En is EK. Both Mul and En mean “lord”, so that either Mul-lil or En-lil means “lord of fulness”. It is probable that mul (wul) is cognate with en (el).

mu (as a value is discussed in line 1).

ul: the sign is composed of GÊŠPU and GUṬṬU. The value ul is Semitic. We shall meet below this sign with the value rù meaning “perfect”.

lil: the name of the sign is KÎTU. lil in magic writings means “demon”, i. e., a spirit which may be either good or bad. Originally the sign indicated “structure”, from which idea comes the postpositional use of the sign with the value ge. šâru, “wind”, with the value lil is a secondary meaning of the sign.

ù-mu-un na-àm-zu-ka (occurring in line 1, was discussed there). The fragments following -ka do not give a sure clue as to what the signs were before the erasure. After ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil perhaps the whole of the second line was precisely like the first.

še-ir-ma-al nì-te-na (explained in line 1).

a-a is probably for ad-da, ad meaning “protector”. Exactly how a-a comes to be used in the place of ad-da may not be determined with certainty. The explanation may lie in the relation between “water”, “seed” and “father”. a-a also seems to be a 27 softened form of ad-da. a means “seed” or more primarily “water”. The sign is an ideographic picture of dripping water.

^dimmer Mu-ul-lil (explained in line 2).

ù-mu-un-e divides into the word ù-mu-un and the prolongation vowel e, possibly demonstrative in sense (see e farther on).

ù-mu-un is not elsewhere in this hymn lengthened to ù-mu-un-e, but ù-mu-un occurs nine times.

kur-kur-ra is the plural form of noun, kur, plus postposition ra.

kur-kur: in Sumerian the general way of denoting the plural in nouns is by doubling the root (see ASK. p. 140), whereas the doubled root in a verb means an intensified or causative stem. There are five other cases of doubling the root in the hymn: di-di, line 7, ma-ma, line 8, ir-ir, line 13, má-má, line 20; and da-da, line 23.

kur: the sign KÛRU in the old linear form represented pictorially “mountain tops”. The value kur has three very common Assyrian equivalents, šadû, “mountain”, irṣitu, “earth” and mâtu, “land”, all closely related to each other.

ra is a common postposition signifying “unto”. Perhaps ra sometimes serves merely as a vowel of prolongation, the r at the same time making a double of the final consonant of the preceding word. In such a case ra is called a phonetic complement, while it also helps to determine the value of the sign immediately preceding. To illustrate, the sign KÙRU being followed by RARÛ cannot be read gin nor mad. ra can also be the sign of the genitive (Br. 6367).

a-a ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil ù-mu-un (explained in lines 1, 2 and 3).

dug-ga: dug is the value of KÂGU to be used here, as is at once suggested by the phonetic complement ga.

dug: a very common meaning of dug is ḳibîtu, “command” (Br. 532).

ga is merely the vowel of prolongation a with the final g of the preceding stem.

zi-da: zi being followed by da gives the impression that it should be read zid with da as a phonetic complement. A final consonant in the first syllable, however, is not always a necessity. The name of the temple of Nabu at Borsippa is not read È-zid-da, but È-zi-da or È-zida.

zi here equals imnu, “right”. It may sometimes equal napištu (see below, line 25).

siba equals rê’û (Br. 5688). The sign is compounded from PA and LU and means “staff-bearer”, since PA signifies “staff” and LU means “hold”, “seize”. The use of the sign is confined almost entirely to the idea of shepherd of animals and then figuratively to that of governor of men.

sag: the sign with the value sag, called SANGU or SAGGU, is the common sign to represent “head” which is expressed in Assyrian either by rêšu or ḳaḳḳadu (see Br. 3522 and 3513). The sign occurs in many compounds.

gig-ga: gig is the value of MI suggested by the phonetic complement ga.

gig: the sign is composed of the corner wedge U and the sign TATTAB and means “darkness”. The sign really signifies “entering into depression”. gi perhaps is a dialectism for mi.

ga = phonetic complement, sag gig-ga means a race of men, evidently here the Babylonians, the people in particular over whom Bêl exercised rule. The term is certainly not one of depreciation. It merely shows that the Babylonians were swarthy. On the other hand, “blackheaded” may be intended to mean the human race inhabiting the earth in contradistinction to the bright celestial beings (see CDAL. 878). Cyrus, in his Broken Cylinder, seems to use the phrase as meaning the Babylonians. His words are: nišê ṣal-mat ḳaḳḳadi šá ú-šá-ak-ši-du ḳa-ta-a-šu. “The blackheaded people whom he caused his hands to conquer” (V R. 35, 13).

i-de, phonetic representation of ide, which in the EK dialect is represented by the sign IGÛ with the value igi which in Assyrian means înu, “eye” (Br. 4004, 4003 and 9273). ide is ES for the EK igi. We have the sign IGÛ in the colophon where it occurs with ÂU, “water”, a-ide meaning “water of the eye”.

i is represented by GIṬṬÛ (“five”). The value i, however, is, of course, entirely syllabic here. Notice that there is a slight difference between the Babylonian GIṬṬÛ and the Assyrian GIṬṬÛ. In Assyrian, GIṬṬÛ consists of two wedges followed by three. In Babylonian it consists of three followed by two, and in the linear form the sign consists of three horizontal lines followed by two (see AL. p. 125, No. 105).

de represented by IZÛ and having the value bil means “fire”. The sign in its hieroglyphic form is probably a picture of building a fire by the friction of an instrument against a piece of wood. Hence the sign is properly composed of AM and GIŠ, AM representing something having a head and GIŠ meaning “wood”. The sign in our text is old Babylonian and may be found in Gudea 29 (Cylinder B, Col. IV, line 13, in Déc. Plate 34). Possibly i-de could be explained as if i were an abstract prefix and de as referring to the light of the eye, hence i-de means “eye”.

gaba is the common word for irtu, “breast” (Br. 4477). The sign GABBU is a double MU-sign meaning “fulness”. From this idea of “fulness” we easily derive the idea of “open” (Br. 4490). So that ide gaba means “open eyed”. The two MU’s appear entirely separate in the Babylonian form of the sign as they do not in the Assyrian form (see TC. p. 18). Our GABBU is not so old as the GABBU of the Stèleo des Vauturs, but is like Gudea’s GABBU (see Cylinder A, Cob XXI, line 25, in Déc. Plate 34). i-de gaba is about equal to “omniscient”.

nì-te-na may be rendered as in line 1, “thyself,” or perhaps we could say “only”.

ama: the meaning for AMMU with the value ama is rîmu, “bull”. AMMU may mean “lord”, bêlu (Br. 4543). In the sign AMMU we have the hieroglyphs for the bull’s head and the mountain combined. In the oldest Babylonian form, of course, lines are used instead of wedges. In Assyrian the sign has been reduced to two horizontal wedges placed before the sign DÛGU. AMMU represents “the bull of the mountains”. In line 9 we shall have the sign GUṬṬU which represents “the bull not of the mountains”, i. e. “the domestic bull” or “the ox”. The sign is the same in form as AMMU, except that the little inside wedges representing the mountains are wanting.

erim-na: erim is taken to be the right value rather than laḥ, because of the following na which serves as a phonetic complement, m and n being closely related because of their similar indeterminate nasal qualities.

erim affords a meaning that seems to suit the context. erim must be equal to the Assyrian ṣâbu which must like the Hebrew ṣābā have in it the idea of “service”. Such expressions as the following bring out the idea of “service”. erim-bal-ku-a, “slave employed at the water wheel” (OBTR. Plate 91, Obv.). erim-bal-gub-ba, “slave who carries a hatchet” (OBTR. Plate 17, Obv.). A common meaning for erim is “warrior”, but the warrior as a soldier rather a general. Then from the idea “soldier of the enemy”, we come to the idea “enemy”, which seems to be the meaning here.

na, while serving phonetically, is also here a pronominal suffix.

di-di can equal kašâdu (Br. 9529 and 9563). The judgment implied by di-di, accordingly, may be that executed on an enemy. 30 di-di is more than pronouncing sentence. It is inflicting the punishment.

di may be a value borrowed from the Assyrian dânu, “to judge”, but this is uncertain, as such an occurrence implies Semitic influence which could not have amounted to much if this hymn was written at a very early period.

ù-nê-la equals noun ù-nê = emûḳu, “power” and phonetic complement la.

ù: IGI-DIBBU might be confounded with ḤUL. It is rather carelessly written here. ù, we have seen in line 1, may mean “lord” in the sense of being “elderly”. ù might mean “mountain”; if so it would be in the sense of being an “ancient mountain”. ù here, however, must be an abstract prefix (MSL. p. XVII). ù, for example, is used as such a prefix with tu, ù-tu being equal to “offspring” (Br. 9470).

nê: PIRIḲḲU in passing from the old Babylonian form which we have in our text meets with much change. The form in our text comes near to being that of the oldest known. Even in Ḥammurabi it begins to take the form of the Assyrian PIRIḲḲU (see CḤ. XLIV. 24. Plate LXXXI). PIRIḲḲU with the value gir which is EK for the ES ner is the common sign for “foot” (Br. 9192). With the meaning of “power” it generally has the value nê (Br. 9184).

la: LALÛ here is essentially the same as the old linear picture which may readily be found in old Sumerian script, given also by Delitzsch (see AL. p. 122, No. 31). la means “fulness” like the Assyrian lalû, but its use in our text is entirely phonetic. We should rather expect ra here. Note that in line 10, we have ra where we should expect la, and in line 12, we have da-ma-al-la where the la is regular, just as ra is regular in kur-kur-ra of line 3.

ma-ma: MAMÛ in its original form is an old hieroglyph representing the earth, so that “earth” or “the land” is a common meaning for ma and equal to the Assyrian mâtu which probably comes from Sumerian ma, “land”, and da, “strong” = DADDU (see line 1 for further comment).

ama, which in line 7 was rendered by “lord”, must mean here “bull”, as the word nà-a limits us to this meaning. nà-a means 31 “pasture”. nà-a could be taken as an adjective, descriptive of the attitude of the bull, i. e., that of lying down quietly. We have nà-a again in line 14. a is simply phonetic here (see line 3).

nà: the sign for the value nà has no sign-name. In almost this form, the sign is easily found in the text of Gudea (see Cylinder B, Col. XVI, line 19, in Déc. 35). The form in our text is very near to the original linear form and differs much from the Assyrian. The ordinary meaning of nà is given by the Assyrian rabâṣu “lie down”, kindred to the Hebrew rābăṣ.

gù, the value here for GUṬṬU, is commonly rendered in Assyrian by alpu “ox”. The sign represents the bull’s head with horns. Historically the sign has three forms, the old Babylonian linear form, the old Babylonian wedge-form and the Assyrian wedge-form. The old Babylonian linear and wedge-forms are the same, except that wedges occur in the latter where simple straight lines appear in the former. The Assyrian form is composed of two horizontal wedges, one upright wedge and two little corner wedges (AL. p. 128, No. 164). The difference between GUṬṬU and AMMU is significant (see note on line 7).

ne-sig: ne-sig-ga equals kamû, “bind” (Br. 4626). The meaning “bind” fits here.

ne is not an unusual indeterminate verbal prefix (see MSL. p. XXIX).

sig = PA, probably with the value sig, may equal kamû (Br. 5575). Hence ne-sig is a verb, ne being the prefix and sig the stem.

gan-nu: the value gan is indicated by the following nu.

gan with complementary nu is represented here by an ancient form of the sign which is very different from the Assyrian form. The meaning here must be expressed by daḥâdu, “plenty”, kindred to alidu (IV R. 9, 24a).

ki: the KIKÛ of our text is New-Babylonian (see the Cyrus Cylinder, I R. 35, line 4). The early linear form is well represented by the wedge-form of Ḥammurabi (CḤ. Col. I, line 10, plate I). A picture of the earth was probably attempted in the archaic linear form. It should be noted that space is represented conventionally by parallel horizontal lines included in a rectangle, orientated to the four quarters of the heavens.

^dimmer Mu-ul-lil (see line 2 for notes).

nin in the sense of bêlu, “lord”, gives a good context.

ḳar-ra equals noun ḳar and postposition ra; ḳar = “plenty” (see MSL. 123). The text however may be dam-ḳar-ra.

Note that ra may be taken as a postposition of the genitive as well as phonetic complement (see on line 3).

ki (see on line 9).

damal-ra equals adjective plus postposition.

damal, ES for the EK dagal, with the meaning of rapšu, “extensive” (Br. 5452). The sign name is AMÛ. The sign is composed of two signs one within the other, PISANNU, “house”, the outer sign, and ANÛ, “high”, the inner sign, hence the meaning “large space”, “extensive”.

ù-mu-un (see line 1 for note).

mu-ud-na may equal “creator” or “begetter”, just as muḥ-na equals the Assyrian a-lid (IV R. 9, 32a). mu-ud is a phonetic representation of the word mud, whose sign is MUŠÊN-DUGÛ, ḤU plus ḤI (Br. 2273). The word mud is equal to the Assyrian banû (Br. 2274).

dú: here we must let the sense govern us in deciding on a form which may be read either as KAK or NI. KAK with the value du equal to banû (Br. 5248) gives a meaning that fits smoothly with what precedes and follows. In their original forms KAK, NI and IR are similar yet entirely distinct signs. In the archaic linear form, KAK is a triangle with one of the angles pointing to the right. NI is a triangle with one of the angles pointing to the right and one upright line passing through the triangle. IR also is a triangle with one of the angles pointing to the right and two upright lines passing through the triangle.

sag-ma-al equals noun sag, plus suffix ma-al. It could stand for sag-ga just as sag-mal can stand for sag-ga (Br. 3595). sag equals “head” (as in line 5). ma-al: if ma-al is taken a suffix (as in line 1), it stands for the sign PISANNU meaning šakânu, “establish”, or bašû, “exist”, and is ES for the EK gal.

ki (see line 9).

ù-mu-un (see line 1 for note).

zal: NI means “oil”. The Babylonian KAK, NI and IR should be distinguished from the Assyrian. In Assyrian the horizontal wedges are parallel and do not come to an angle at the right.

laḥ-na: zal laḥ-na means “his shining oil”, and the thought appears to be that Bêl causes food to be produced to sustain successive generations. His oil is milk for many generations. 33 zal-laḥ is somewhat like the expression “finest oil” found in Assyrian inscriptions.

laḥ: the signs ḤISSU and ṢÂBU find their nearest approach to each other in the value laḥ. Both signs have this value with the meaning “brightness”.

na here is a suffix of the third person; sometimes it is second person (see line 1).

ga: our sign here is the old Babylonian GÛ which with its common value ga means šizbu, “milk”. The archaic linear form represents the teat of the breast. ga occurs often as a phonetic complement (see line 4).

nunuz-ám means “is multitudinous”. nunuz: NUNUZ in this form is, as Delitzsch observes (HW. p. 525b), New-Babylonian. In Assyrian it is composed of ṢAB and ḤI and in New-Babylonian of ṢAB and ŠE. Here it is equal to the Assyrian lîpu, German “Nachkomme”.

ám: A.AN, equalling ám, is a well recognized verbal suffix used like the verb “to be”; for instance, dingir-ra ám means “is a god” and gal-la ám means “is great” (see SVA. p. 56).

da-ma-al-la is composed of the adjective da-ma-al and the phonetic complement la. da-ma-al is the phonetic representation in ES of the sign AMÛ meaning rapšu (see line 10).

silim-ma-a-ni means “his decree”. Thus, silim-ma-a equals noun, plus phonetic complement, plus vowel prolongation. silim: we have had the sign SARARÛ (in line 7), where it was given the value di; here, however, the phonetic complement suggests the choice of the value silim, from which we derive the meaning “decree”, although “salutation” is a more primary meaning expressed by the Semitic value silim (from šulmu). The sign is apparently New-Babylonian.

ni is one of the common nominal suffixes of the third person. Note that Bêl is addressed in the third person in this line, but we shall find him addressed in the second person again in line 16.

eri is ES for the EK uru. This value is substantiated by the name of the city of Eridu = Eri-ṭu, (see MSL. p. 105). The name of the sign is ALU. Our sign is old Babylonian and is not very different from the hieroglyphic form which is supposed to represent a city (see AL. p. 121, No. 21). It differs considerably from the New-Babylonian ALU which is much like the Assyrian.

ir-ir is an intensive form of the verb and therefore may be causative. Bêl is supposed to have aided kings especially in capturing cities. ir may mean “bind”, expressed by kamû, but kamû 34 is not so often represented by IR as by DIBBU or LALLU. kamû may be represented by PA (see line 9). Although ir is said to be a Semitic value, it is used in this hymn syllabically and is the only value of the sign preserved (see line 1 and also dù in line 11 for further comment).

dù: the sign giving this value has two origins, one of which is represented by the value dul, meaning “cover” (Br. 9582). The other is represented by the value dù and means “dwelling-place”, rendered in Assyrian by šubtu (Br. 9588). dù really means “prescribed space”.

nà-a-ni means “his lying-down place”. nà-a defines with more particularity the nature of the dwelling as “a lying-down place”, “a permanent place of rest”. Here we have dù nà-a; above we have ama nà-a (line 9).

à: IDU and DADDU come from the same ideogram which is the picture of the hand and the forearm, the fingers pointing to the left. The value id is supposed to be of Semitic derivation, from the root appearing in Assyrian as idu, “hand”. The sign IDU also means “side”, “wing”, “horn”, “power”. Hence I render “powerful” here, making it qualify dù nà-a-ni. The sign in our text is old Babylonian; yet it seems to be a form that is approaching the Assyrian form. TA is also related to ID and DA and is used as DA sometimes is, as a postposition.

àm-e, composed of prefix àm and stem e. àm: we have had the sign used phonetically (line 1). Here it is undoubtedly an abstract prefix (MSL. p. XVII), qualifying the following e. The sign is old Babylonian, readily found in old Babylonian inscriptions. It is a composite sign. The enclosure contains the sign IZÛ which is also composite. IZÛ however, as explained above (line 6), means “fire”. So àm is primarily the “fire of love”, hence the usual meaning “love”.

e: it is clear that e can equal ḳabû, “speak” (Br. 5843 and HW. 578a). Hence àm-e must mean “speech”. The sign is old Babylonian, as may be seen, for instance, by examining Ḥammurabi. It is called ÊGÛ. The New-Babylonian form comes nearer to the old Babylonian than the Assyrian does. This fact goes to show that the Assyrian signs are as a rule farther away from the archaic forms than the New-Babylonian signs are. The sign ÂU represented “water”, but the sign ÊGÛ represented the “waterditch”, “canal”. How e comes to mean ḳabû may perhaps be explained by its relation to the value i of KÂGU which equals amâtu, “word”.

gal-la: gal, “great”, is often followed by the phonetic complement la.

kur (see on line 3).

^dimmer Babbar-ê-ta equals ideogram for “the sun”, plus verb ê = “coming out”, plus postposition “from”. ^dimmer Babbar is the ordinary ideogram for ^ilu Šamaš used of “the sun”, as well as of “the god Šamaš”. Babbar is a value of ḤISSU which means “to be white”.

ê: = two signs, UD and DU, equivalent to this value, meaning aṣû, “come out”, or “go out”. The sign UD is a picture of the sun, and represents the rising sun; hence = “come forth”.

ta is a postposition meaning in this case “from”, but often “in, into”. TA in our text is old Babylonian and much like the linear form in early tablets. Nearly the same form can be found in Ḥammurabi also. But on the whole, the old Babylonian, the Assyrian and the New-Babylonian all differ from each other much. TA has a close relation to DA and ID (see on line 14).

^dimmer Babbar-šu-šù equals ideogram for “the sun”, plus šu = “going in”, plus postposition “to”.

šu equals erêbu, “enter in”. Ideographically, ŠU means “bent over”, or “depressed”.

šù is a value of KU, as a postposition, meaning “unto”. The sign is of rectangular form and has many values, consequently many meanings starting with the idea “enclosure”. The governing force of šù here reaches back over kur in the middle of the line, just as the governing force of ta goes back over kur at the beginning of the line.

The beautiful expression of this line occurs more than once in Sumerian and Babylonian literature. As early as Lugalziggisi it appears in royal writings. Lugalziggisi speaks of his kingdom as extending “from the rising sun to the setting sun”. Babbar-ê-ta (UD.UD.DU.TA) Babbar-šu-šù (UD.ŠU.KU) (OBI. No. 87, Col. II, 12 and 13). And Esarhaddon in Cylinder A says that “From the rising sun to the setting sun he marched without a rival”. ul-tu ṣi-it ^ilu Šam-ši a-di e-rib ^ilu Šam-ši it-tal-lak-u-ma ma-ḥi-ra la i-šu-u (I R. 45, Col. I, 7 and 8).

kur-ra (see on line 3).

ù-mu-un (see on line 1).

nu-um-ti occurs also in the next line and no doubt equals balâṭu, “life”.

nu-um seems to be an abstracting prefix of the nature of nam as in nam-ti-la = balâṭu (Br. 1697). nu-um-ti, however, may be a phonetic representation of nim, also written num which means elîtu, “height” (Br. 1982 and 9011). According to this view, nu-um-ti might mean “the acme of life”, just as nam-ti equals “the fortune of life”; hence “life in general”. Or it might be suggested that num is really for nam, as a is known to differentiate sometimes into u; ga for instance becomes gu (MSL. p. X).

ti equals balâṭu, “life”, and has its fuller form in tin, also equal to balâṭu “live”.

za-e equals atta, “thou” (Br. 11762, also ASK. p. 139).

ab-da-me-en equals “thou thyself art”. The form consists of verbal prefix, infix and verb, as follows: ab, being an indeterminate prefix, may therefore be used of the second person (MSL. p. XXV). ÊŠU is an old Babylonian sign pictorially representing “enclosed space”, hence the meaning of “enclosure”. It means, with the value éš, “house”, and, with the value ab, “sea”. da is like à(ID) (line 14), ideographically represented by the picture of the hand and forearm (line 4). It means “side”, also “strength”. It is sometimes a reflexive verbal infix (MSL. p. XXIV). me-en equals bašû (Br. 10404). me also equals bašû (Br. 10361) and the longer me-a equals bašû (Br. 10459). en, therefore, is not an essential part of the word which means “be”. me-en has no connection with ma-e, the personal pronoun of the first person. men, in fact, can be used of the second person and even of the third as well. The defining pronoun za-e here compels us to take me-en in the second person.

Reverse

^dimmer Mu-ul-lil (see line 2 for note).

kur-kur-ra (see line 3 for note).

ga-šá-an, like ù-mu-un (line 1), equals bêlu, “lord”, and is a phonetic form of gašan which is usually represented by GÊŠPU-GUNÛ (Br. 6989 and MSL. p. 129). ga is only a syllable here (see lines 4 and 12 for further comment). ŠÁ is an old sign; here it is old Babylonian and represents closely the linear form. The sign is much used in Assyrian with the syllabic value šá, especially in the place of NITÛ(ša) which is often a relative pronoun.

nu-um-ti (see on line 16).

nin-zu means “lord of wisdom”. nin equals bêlu (Br. 10985; see line 10). On zu (see line 1).

ab-da should evidently be ab-da-me-en (see line 16).

e-lum equals kabtu (Br. 5888), and appears to stand for elim which also equals kabtu (Br. 8885). lum is clearly syllabic here, but the sign, old Babylonian here, is indicative of plant-growth, consisting of waving lines.

nì equals puluḥtu, “fear”, here (see on line 1).

an-na: an equaling šamê, “heavens”, is a value of ANÛ attested by the phonetic complement na. The sign ANÛ in our text is old Babylonian and is the same as the original ideogram of the star, except that wedges have taken the place of straight lines. In our Hymn to Adad (CT. XV, Tablet 29631) the transition from the Babylonian to the Assyrian ANÛ may be clearly seen all on one page, wedges however are used, not straight lines. There is the original form, there is the Assyrian form, and there are intermediate forms enough to show how the Babylonian star passes into the Assyrian ANÛ. The NANÛ of our text may be found exactly in the Brick of Ur-Gur (CT. XXI, Tablet 90000, plate 8). In Nebuchadrezzar I. (CT. IX, Tablet 92987), the internal horizontals have disappeared, but the sign has not fully reached the Assyrian NANÛ.

a-kad: perhaps this word a-kad is a loan-word from the Assyrian ekdu. It is better to take a as a vocalic abstract prefix and to consider kad as the root. There are three signs that give this value kad (Br. 1364, 1365 and 2700). The sign GADU means kitû, “clothing material” (Br. 2704 and WH. 361; see also MSL. p. 114). The context alone suggests here that some idea of power may be expected in the word a-kad. Perhaps royal power is meant, which could be symbolically represented by a garment, especially a royal robe.

za-da no doubt stands for za-e-da and would be equal to “thou thyself”, “thou indeed” (see line 16).

šá in Sumerian may represent the Assyrian lû, “verily”, (Br. 7047). šá, simply as a syllable, occurs above (see line 17).

mu-e-da-mal is a verb. mu is an indeterminate verbal prefix. Whether it is first, second or third person may be determined by the context. Here, however, the za-da of the context shows mu to be second person (see on line 1). e here is a verbal infix, corroborative in character (see MSL. p. XXIV, also lines 3 and 14). da is also a verbal infix (see line 16). mal equals bašû, “to be”, (Br. 2238).

u equals bêlu, “lord”, and is a very common ideogram for “lord” (see ù-mu-un, line 1). en also equals bêlu, “lord”, but evidently the text is imperfect at this point (see line 16, on en).

dimmer-ri-ne means “gods”. ri is a phonetic complement; ne is a purely phonetic plural ending used both for nouns and verbs (see SVA. p. 69).

za-da šá mu-e-da-mal (see line 18).

a-a ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil (see on lines 2 and 3).

mu-lu is a phonetic representation of mulu (Br. 6398). mulu is ES; EK would be gulu (Br. 6395). mu-lu frequently means the Assyrian relative pronoun ša (Br. 6406).

gu: GÛ is a composite sign whose original parts are NI and BE and which means “full of death”. According to the derivation, GÛ then may be read as “destruction” (MSL. p. 156). GÛ has also an Assyrian equivalent gû meaning “plant”, “vegetation” (Br. 11138 and HW. p. 582). The consideration of GÛ as meaning “vegetation” looks only on the perishable side of the object. The sign has few values. Here, it is clearly old Babylonian resembling the linear form.

má-má-me-en here equals aṣû, “go out”, used of plants and trees (Br. 4303). The more generally used word for aṣû is ê (UD.DU) (see on line 15).

má: the name of the sign is NISIGÛ (see note on še-ir, line 1). The sign is old Babylonian here. me-en (see on line 16).

še: the sign is old Babylonian here. Its most common Assyrian equivalent is šê’u, “grain” (see line 1). If we gave Û-UM the broader meaning of “production”, at the same time reading GÛ as “destruction”, we would have the fine antithetical parallelism: “O father Bêl, who bringest forth destruction and who bringest forth production.” Such a reading would give quite correctly the course of thought, for Bêl is god of the atmosphere, lord of the clouds, and commander of the rain-storms which are either sources of growth on earth or of ruin. On the other hand, the translation which I have adopted seems perhaps preferable.

me-lam-zu: from the combination of ME and LAM we get the Assyrian melammu, “glory”. me: MIMÛ with the value išib 39 means ellu, “bright” (see line 16 for further comment). lam: one of the values of IZÛ, seems to equal išâtu, “flame”, but the usual value of IZÛ for išâtu is bil (see line 6, de), me-lam literally means “bright flame”. zu, besides being an ideogram for idû, “know”, is the usual pronominal suffix of the second person singular (see on zu, line 1), as in this passage.

gúr-ra gives a good sense, though the signs resemble KU and RA giving šù-ra, a double postposition. The text however is defective. gúr-ra equals kabtu (Br. 10183), making the phrase read “before thy great glory”. gúr: KIL also has the value gurun equal to ebnu, “fruit” (Br. 10179). ra (see on line 3).

ḥa: KÙA is the usual Sumerian sign used with a verb, to give a precative sense as here. The sign here is old Babylonian and resembles the pictorial form which is clearly that of “a fish” (see on line 22). The original pictorial figure is one of the few to be found in which curved lines predominate.

mu-ni-ib-( )-ne-ne: strangely enough the verb seems to be omitted in the sentence of this line. Perhaps the omission is due to scribal error. mu is a verbal prefix of the third person here (see on line 18). ni-ib is a verbal infix (see MSL. p. XXXIII). The infixes are generally personally indeterminate. They incorporate, between the verbal prefixes that represent the subject and the verb, the object in pronominal form, whether it be direct or indirect. ni-ib really equals “before it”. The translation disregards ni-ib for the sake of smoothness. ni (see on line 13). ib stands to ni as postposition to pronoun. The sign for ib is old Babylonian; it is really composite and signifies “side”. ne-ne is a personal pronoun of the third person (see ASK. p. 139). ne is syllabic here (see de, line 6, about its ideographic value; also lam, line 21).

ḥu-e equals iṣṣuru, “bird”. ḥu: simple ḥu is used elsewhere for iṣṣûru. The sign MUŠÊNNU here is old Babylonian. The archaic form is supposed to be the picture of a bird in flight. mušên, another value of MUŠÊNNU, also means “bird”. e is not a necessary part of the word, being here only a vowel of prolongation probably indicating the definite article (see lines 3 and 14).

an-na (see on line 18).

ḥa-e equals nûnu, “fish”. ḥa alone equals nûnu (see on line 21). e serves the same purpose as in ḥu-e.

ṭú-ra equals apsû, “sea”. ṭú alone equals apsû (Br. 10217). ra may be taken as a sign of the genitive (see on line 3).

šà-nì equals “in the midst of fear”. šà: ŠÂGU, with the 40 value šà, equal to libbu or kirbu, is one of the few Sumerian prepositions. It precedes its object as a noun in the construct state, nì (see on line 18).

ma-ni-ib-si consists of prefix, infix and verb. ma is not a very common verbal prefix. It is indeterminate, but the sense requires the third person (see MSL. p. XXIV). ni-ib is second person here (see on line 21). si: the most common meaning of si is malû, “fill”. The sign is Babylonian and can be found either in the Code of Ḥammurabi or the Cyrus Cylinder.

a-a ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil-li (see on line 2). li is merely phonetic complement. We might give it an ideographic value and connect it with da-da and render “abundant in strength”. The common meaning of LILÛ is rašû, “abound”. With the value gub, however, it means ellu, “bright”. The sign is old Babylonian, yet quite different from the archaic linear form.

da-da means “strength” (see on line 16).

maḥ has three common Assyrian equivalents, ma’adu, “many”, rabû, “great” and ṣîru, “high”. maḥ here equals rabû. There is still another Assyrian equivalent, maḥḥu which must be a loanword in Semitic.

mu-e-gin as prefix, infix and verb means “he indeed goes”. mu-e (see on line 18). gin is a value of the sign ARAGUBBÛ (see ê, line 15).

sag-e-zi equals “head” (line 5) plus vowel of prolongation (line 3) and “of life” (line 4). ZÎTU equals napištu as well as imnu and kînu.

si-ba-e divides into siba and e. si-ba is the same as siba (line 5), only here the word is given syllabically rather than ideographically. e is a vowel prolongation (as in line 3).

e-nab is naturally treated as though e were a vocalic prefix and nab the root. e as an abstract prefix, no doubt, is possible (MSL. p. XVII). nab: instead of NABBU, perhaps the sign is ANA-ÊŠŠÊKU with the last component omitted; then the value should be mul, equal to kakkabâni, “stars”, and the clause reads: “shepherd of the stars”. e may equal mû “water” (see line 14), and nab may equal šamû, “heaven”; then we have the reading: “shepherd of the water of heaven”.

ù-mu-un (line 1).

ka: KÂGU here is a noun with the value ka equal to pû, “mouth”, (Br. 538). The sign originally represented the head, and its first meaning was gu equal to ḳibû. The sign is old Babylonian (see on lines 1 and 4).

na-àm-gá is a noun. na-àm is an abstract prefix (line 1). gá equals šakânu, “cause to be”, (Br. 5421). The sign is PISANNU. We have had the sign phonetically represented by ma-al (line 11) used as a suffix. Here gá is not a suffix, but the root.

iz-ba is a verb. iz is an indeterminate prefix, shown by the context to be of the second person. ba equals pitû, “open”. The sign is old Babylonian. The archaic form of the sign signified “divide”.

eri (see on line 13).

ga (see line 12). ga can be used as an adjective meaning “prolific”, one of the derived ideas of ga as “milk”.

mu-e-gin (see line 23).

gín equals ḳanû, “reed”. The sign is sometimes followed by the phonetic complement na. The sign is old Babylonian.

si equals “fulness” (see on line 22).

ti-šù means “unto life”. ti (see line 16); the sign here, however, really resembles BALA which primarily means “breaking into”. Then we have the derived meaning palû, “weapon”, then “insignia of royal authority”, and consequently “rule”, “government”. If we read bal instead of ti, then Bêl is “a full reed unto royalty”, which makes little sense. šù (see line 15).

me-a is the same as me-en (see on line 16). a is phonetic (see on line 9).

a-a ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil (see lines 2 and 3). sag (see line 5).

zi equals napištu like ti (see line 16, also 23). nê-la (see on line 8).

šú equals ḳâtu, “hand”. The sign also has a value kád which is evidently derived from the Semitic ḳâtu.

ti (see on line 24). If we read the sign as TIL, then Bêl is “the power of life”. If we read BALA, then Bêl is “the power of royalty”, signifying perhaps that royal authority is vested in Bêl.

ba-ni-ib-ag is a verb, ba is an indeterminate verbal prefix, but is much used for the second person (MSL. p. XXVI). ni-ib (see on line 21). ag equals epêšu, “make”. The sign is old Babylonian.

šú-gil equals napḥaru, “what is collected”, “totality”, “entirety”. šú is a prefix to the causative stem (see on line 25). gil equals paḥâru, “collect”.

nišĭa: the signs for the numerals twenty and five are the same as in Assyrian, niš is the Sumerian numeral for “twenty”. ĭa is the Sumerian numeral for “five”.

mu-bi im: mu-bi equals “his name”, each line of the Hymn being considered a name of Bêl. In our translation we may read “its lines”. im, the same sign as nì (line 1). im is sometimes equal to ṭîṭu, “clay”, or duppu, “tablet”.

êr is a value derived from two signs, A and ŠI, taken together. The most common meaning of the value is bikîtu, “lamentation”, or “song” (see i-de, line 6).

lim-ma: the phonetic complement ma indicates that the preceding value should end with m. Dr. Lau regards this as the sign lib(m) = kûru, “woe”, (Br. 7271); hence êr-lim-ma would mean a penitential psalm.

Chapter II
Tablet 13930, Plates 16 and 17, Hymn to Sin

Obverse

Reverse

This beautiful and interesting hymn begins with a picturesque and lordly epithet of the god whose full face so often shone upon the worshipper night by night. His fatherly nature and his full-orbed glory are dwelt upon in adoring and glowing terms. The name of his city and temple are mentioned. His power to lighten the world is acknowledged. His peculiar relation of “son to Bêl” is announced. The phenomenon of his appearance in the heavens as the full moon is described to us from several points of view. This is the famous Nannar, dwelling in the temple of E-gišširgal at the ancient city of Ur. The sacred ship, becoming a peculiar emblem in Babylonian worship, symbolized several important ideas connected with Nannar’s transit through the heavens by night or during the month. Perhaps Nannar was in the beginning a water-god. His power over the waters is graphically described.

Obverse

mà-gur is a boat of crescent form. Sin is a man sitting in the half circle of the moon and sailing across the firmament of the heavens as in a majestic ship. mà: the sign MÙ was originally pictorial and represented the rudder of the ship. The sign of our tablet is New-Babylonian and can be found in the inscriptions of Nebuchadrezzar II. It is half way between the old pictorial and the usual Assyrian MÙ. gur: the sign ḤAR probably refers to the body of the ship as “an enclosure”, or more particularly to “the crescent form” of the ship, since ḤAR means “circular enclosure”. The ḤAR of our text is much like the linear form found in the Stèle des Vautours.

azag equals ellu, “shining”, (Br. 9890). The sign also has the value ku with the meaning ellu. azag, “shining”, refers to the moon and the moon looks like a ship.

an-na (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18).

še-ir-ma-al nì-te-na (see Hymn to Bêl, line 1). The ideas of these two words find their way into the first line of the Ašurbânipal Hymn to Sin, K. 2861, (IV R. 9). še-ir-ma-al appears especially as ner-gal (š-n and m-g) and nì-te-na as aš-ni maḥ-àm; e-diš-ši-šu ṣi-i-ru.

a-a (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

^dimmer Šis-^ki is the most common Sumerian name of the god Sin, and means “brother of the land”. Sin was probably looked upon as “the helper of earth”. ^dimmer (see Hymn to Bêl, line 2). Šis equals aḥu, “brother”, (Br. 6437). ŠIŠ sometimes has the value uru, especially when it means naṣâru, “keep”. The ŠIŠ of our hymn is New-Babylonian but is not essentially different from the ŠIŠ of Gudea. ki (see Hymn to Bêl, line 9).

ù-mu-un-e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

Šis-unu-^ki-ma means “of the brother’s dwelling place”. Šis means “brother”. unu equals šubtu, “dwelling”, (Br. 4792). ma, perhaps, can be taken as a sign of the genitive, being dialectic for ga, which is for ge, one of the values of KIT (see MSL. pp. XI and XVI). Perhaps we ought to read this word Uru-um-^ki-ma, taking the other value of ŠIŠ and also reading um instead of unu. In texts of OBI. it would appear that UNU is closely related to UM as well as to AB.

a-a ^dimmer Šis-^ki ù-mu-un-e (see line 2).

È-ner-nu-gál is not the usual spelling. The more common form is È-giš-šir-gal. Our È(BIT)-ner(NER)-nu(NU)-gál(IG) which also occurs in Ḥammurabi (for example, in CḤ. Col. II, line 21, Plate II) is dialectic for È(BIT)-giš(IZ)-šir(ŠIR)-gal(GAL). È(BIT)-giš(IZ)-šir(ŠIR)-gal(GAL) is the spelling found in the Ašurbânipal Hymn. In the inscription of the Clay Cylinder of Nabonidus found at Ur (Col. I, line 30), the spelling is È(BIT)-giš(IZ)-šir(ŠIR)-gal(GAL), but the margin has the spelling È(BIT)-giš(IZ)-nu(NU)-gál(IG). È equals bîtu, “house”, (Br. 6238). ner evidently stands for kiš. These two values, ner and kiš, were represented by the same sign in old Babylonian; namely, PIRIḲḲU. From the sign PIRIḲḲU, there developed in Assyrian another sign, whose chief 46 value is kiš with the meaning kiššatu. The sign here then should have the value kiš, or in old Babylonian giš, which is also one of the values of GISSU, a determinative before the name of a light. nu is for šir which equals nûru, “light”. IṢ.ŠIR is a common ideogram for “light”. The interchange of NU and SIRU is not so easy to explain. The fact that NU instead of SIRU occurs in the name of the temple in the time of Ḥammurabi would go to show that the spelling of the word with NU is more primitive than the spelling with SIRU. Perhaps NU has a value šir. Brünnow recognizes the fact that NU in the name of the temple sometimes takes the place of SIRU (see Br. 2005 and 1657). There is a difference between IḲU and GALLU. IḲU equals bašû, while GALLU equals rabû. The gal (ES mal) of IḲU must be different from the gal of GALLU.

a-a ^dimmer Šis-^ki ù-mu-un (see line 2).

^dimmer Áš-suḥ-ud: one of the citations Brünnow gives, in which the name of this god occurs, is in Incantation K. 3255 (IV R.² 2, 21), where, in the Sumerian as well as in the marginal reading of the Assyrian, Sin is said to be the lord of the god Namraṣit. ^dimmer En-zu-na en ^dimmer Áš-suḥ-ud ra-ge = ^ilu Sin be-el Nam-ra-ṣi-it. Áš-suḥ-ud means “the only foundation of light”. Áš has a very common Assyrian equivalent edu, “one”. suḥ equals išdu, “foundation”, (Br. 4811). ud equals urru, “light”, (see Br. 7798).

^dimmer Šis-^ki (see line 2).

ṭu-mu: ṬU.MU is a syllabic and dialectic form of DUMU (Br. 4069 and 11917). When DUMU stands for mâru, “son”, it is supposed to have the value du (Br. 4081). ṭu-mu is no doubt for dumu and du is a shortened form of dumu. ṭu: the sign may be recognized as old Babylonian appearing in this form in the Code of Ḥammurabi (see also AL. p. 135, No. 328).

sag (see Hymn to Bêl, line 5). ṭu-mu sag must be equal to some such expression as “first born son”, or “only begotten son”.

^dingir En-lil-lá: in line 7, we shall have ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil-ra and in line 18, ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil-li. ^dingir may be preferred to ^dimmer because the sign is a determinative to an EK form. En-lil-lá consists of the god’s name, En-lil (see Mu-ul-lil in Hymn to Bêl, line 2).

síg-ga-zu-ne is a ḥal-clause equal to ina malîka, “in thy fulness”. síg: the sign to which this value is attached is composite. One element consists of SI whose chief meaning is “fill”. The other element consists of A which means “water”. SI.A then means “full of water”, or “fulness”. The sign, called DIRIGU, has two values ending with g; i. e., dirig related to the sign-name and síg which is quite certainly equal to malû (Br. 3722). ga is a phonetic complement (see Hymn to Bêl, line 4). zu is a determinate suffix of the second person (see Hymn to Bêl, line 21). ne is a postposition equal to ina (see Br. 4602, also de in Hymn to Bêl, line 6).

i-de (see Hymn to Bêl, line 6). i-de is a preposition used as a noun in the construct state, having the meaning of maḥru or pânu and equal to ina maḥar or ina pân.

a-a-zu equals noun a-a, plus suffix zu. a-a (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3). zu (see line 6).

^dimmer Mu-ul-lil-ra equals god’s name ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil, plus phonetic complement ra. ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil (see Hymn to Bêl, line 2). ra (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3). It might be better to regard lil-ra as a shortened form of lil-lá-ra. lil is quite apt to take the phonetic complement lá, a value of the sign LALLU, while ra is naturally a postposition.

še-ir-ma-al-la-zu-ne is a ḥal-clause equal to “in thy sovereignty”. še-ir-ma-al (see Hymn to Bêl, line 1). zu-ne (see line 6).

a-a ^dimmer Šis-^ki (see line 2).

še-ir-ma-al-la-zu-ne (see line 7).

gaba equals irtu, “breast”, (Br. 4470). We have had gaba as an adjective equal to pitû (see Hymn to Bêl, line 6).

zi-ga-zu-ne is a ḥal-clause meaning “in thy lifting up”. zi equals našû, “lift up”, (Br. 2325). We have had zi as equal to kênu, “right”, and napištu, “life”, (see Hymn to Bêl, lines 4 and 25). ga is a phonetic complement. zi might be zig (see Br. 2303 and Hymn to Bêl, line 4). zu-ne (see line 6). In gaba zi-ga-zu-ne, perhaps we have the picture of the full moon suddenly rising in the night from the horizon.

mà-gur (see line 1).

an-šàg-ga: ŠÂGU is usually taken as a preposition and stands before its object. Here it seems to follow its object, an (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). šàg-ga equals LIB plus GA. šàg: ŠÂGU, equal to libbu, may have either one of three values; viz., šà when not followed by a phonetic complement, šàg when followed by the phonetic complement ga and šàb when followed by the phonetic complement ba (see Br. 7980 and Hymn to Bêl, line 22). ga (see Hymn to Bêl, line 4).

síg-ga (see line 6).

še-ir-ma-al-la-zu-ne (see line 7).

a-a ^dimmer Šis-^ki (see line 2).

za-e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 16).

éš (see Hymn to Bêl, line 16). éš is admittedly a Sumerian value as is shown by its relation to the sign-name ÊŠU. éš is the fuller form of è(BIT). From éš there has arisen a Semitic loan-word ešu, “house”.

azag-šù means “to the shining”, azag (see line 1). šù (see Hymn to Bêl, line 15).

pa(d)-a-zu-ne is a ḥal-clause composed of a preposition with an infinitive that governs a suffix, as ina tamîka, “in thy speaking”, i. e., “when thou speakest”. pad is a verb equal to tamû, “speak”. pad also equals zakâru, “to name”. pa, the shortened form of pad, evidently intended here, is sometimes represented by the Assyrian nabû. a is the vowel of prolongation indicating the pa, rather than the pad-value. zu-ne (see line 6).

a-a ^dimmer Šis-^ki (see line 2).

mà-dim consists of noun mà and postposition dim. mà (see on line 1). mà-gur refers to the moon, mà refers to an ordinary ship. dim is equal to kîma, “like”. The sign-name is DIMMU. dim is ES. The EK form of the value is gim.

êgâ is a contraction of a, gè and a from the signs A, MI and A, and means “tide”, or “high water”. a means “water” and MI with the value gè means “black”, and the second A is evidently phonetic only. êgâ, therefore, means “black water”, such water as is seen in a “flood” or “high tide”.

síg-ga-zu-ne (see line 6).

síg-ga-zu-ne (see line 6).

za-e (see line 10). It may be noticed that síg-ga-zu-ne occurs three times in this line and ten times in the section, lines 6-18. This repetition no doubt serves for rhetorical effect, especially in oral delivery and, together with the marked uniformity of measure in the clauses, characterizes the passage as poetic.

síg-ga-zu-ne (see line 6).

bi-šag-a-zu-ne is a ḥal-clause equal to “in thy speaking graciously”. bi equals ḳibû, “speak”, (Br. 5124). Starting with the meaning “speak” the sign KŠU comes to have a demonstrative force and is generally used as a suffix of the third person singular. We shall also see that it sometimes equals šikaru “strong drink”. šag: the sign giving this value is one not much used. It may be identified as GIŠIMMAR (see AL. p. 130, No. 206, also Br. 7286). šag is the chief value, equal to damâḳu or damḳu, “gracious”. a: the value is generally followed by the phonetic complement ga, but here it is followed by a (see Hymn to Bêl, line 9). zu-ne (see line 6).

bi-šag-a (see line 13).

rù-ti-a-zu-ne is a ḥal-clause equal to “in thy engendering life”. rù: we have had UL already as a composite part of Mu-ul-lil (see Hymn to Bêl, line 2). UL here probably with the value rù equals kalâlu, “perfect”. The sign is intended to be the picture of a goring bull; then, as we get away from the primary idea, there arise the meanings of “exultation”, “perfection”, etc. Nannar is “the perfecter of life”. ti (see Hymn to Bêl, line 16). a (see Hymn to Bêl, line 9). zu-ne (see line 6).

za-e (see line 10).

síg-ga-zu-ne (see line 6).

a-a ^dimmer Šis-^ki (see on line 2).

lid may be of Semitic origin from the Assyrian word littu, “progeny”. The two horizontal lines in the sign suggest the 50 idea of “pairing”, from which comes the idea of “progeny” (thus, Prince, MSL., p. 223).

damal (see Hymn to Bêl, line 10).

lid-ne-ra equals “to that progeny”. ne equals annû, a demonstrative pronoun “this”. ne is cognate with de which is also cognate with da and ta used as postpositions (see de and da in Hymn to Bêl, lines 6 and 4). ra is a postposition = “unto” (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

sal-dug-ga-zu-ne is a ḥal-clause: “in thy speaking”. sal is a prefix of an abstract character. It is equivalent to the Assyrian zinništu, “feminine”. It is a counterpart to ku in the expressions Eme-sal and Eme-ku, ku being equal to bêlu, “lord”. As a prefix, sal generalizes the root-idea of the stem to which it is attached and is consequently an abstract prefix (see Br. 10930, 10949 and 10955). dug-ga (see Hymn to Bêl, line 4). zu-ne (see line 6).

a-a-zu (see on line 7).

ide equals pânu, “face”, (Br. 9281). The sign IGÛ can be read either ide, which is ES, or ige, which is EK.

ḥùl-la equals noun ḥùl, plus phonetic complement la. ḥùl equals ḥadû, “joy” (Br. 10884). The sign giving this value is not to be confounded with another sign which also has the value ḥul meaning “evil”, expressed by limuttu (Br. 9503).

mu-e-ši-in-maš is a verb consisting of verbal prefix mu, verbal infixes e and ši-in and root maš. mu (see Hymn to Bêl, lines 1 and 18). e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). ši-in: an objective verbal infix naturally has its person determined by the object to which it refers. That object in this case seems to be ide ḥùl-la, “the joyful face” of the moon. maš: the sign has two names, BÂRU and MŠU, and two chief values related to these names, bar and maš. bar and maš are cognate forms. b changes to m (MSL. p. X); r changes to š (MSL. p. XII). The sign has two chief meanings, “side” and “cut”. The meaning of “side” is represented by bar (see MSL. p. 234), while the meaning of “cut”, from which we get the idea of “distinguish” is generally represented by the value maš (Br. 1735).

sal-zi consists of abstract prefix sal and noun zi. sal (see on line 15). zi (see on line 8).

ma-ra equals “unto the land”. ma (see Hymn to Bêl, line 8). ra (see line 15).

ni-in-gú: ni can be a verbal prefix and in a verbal infix, or ni-in can be a verbal infix with the verbal prefix omitted, gú 51 being the verbal root. ni, if taken as a prefix, naturally refers to a-a-zu. ni may have a demonstrative force, equal to šuatu, like ne. in as an infix refers to ma-ra. gú, a shortened form of gug, equal either ḳìbû, “speak”, or apâlu, “answer”. gú and gug have dialectic forms du and dug, the g changing to d which ES prefers. The sign is apparently a modification of the sign SANGU (see AL. p. 121, No. 14, and p. 124, No. 87). The primary meaning was “opening” and the leading value is ka equal to pû, “mouth”. The values ka and gú come from the sign-name KÂGU (see Hymn to Bêl, lines 1 and 4). With the value ì the sign means “word”.

e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14).

i-i: i is the chief value of GIṬṬÛ. The sign with its five parallel lines or wedges representing the five fingers of the hand is a symbol of power. From the idea of “power”, we get that of “exaltation” (see Hymn to Bêl, line 6).

lugal-ra consists of stem lugal and postposition ra lugal: the sign is composite, the elements being GAL and LU which mean “great” and “man”. lugal equals šarru (Br. 4266). We shall have the element LU with the ES value mulu. ra (see Hymn to Bêl, lines 3 and 8). We might expect la here.

û-de-eš consists of root û, phonetic complement de and adverbial ending eš. û equals ûmu, “day”, (Br. 7797), and is a shortened form of ud. de is phonetic here. The more usual phonetic complement of ud is da (see Br. 7774). eš (see Br. 10001). eš as an adverbial ending is probably derived from the Semitic adverbial ending -iš which is supposed to have grown out of the Assyrian suffix of the third person šu. Agglutinative languages do not often possess special adverbial endings.

mu-un-ê consists of verbal prefix mu-un and verbal root ê. mu-un is phonetic for mun which is simply a nasalized mu (see MSL. p. XXVIII, and Hymn to Bêl, line 1). On ê (see Hymn to Bêl, line 15).

^dimmer Mu-ul-lil-li (see Hymn to Bêl, line 23).

mu-du-ru: there is a sign MUDRU (Br. 10776) which may be related to PA. We may infer a relation between MUDRU and PA, because the two signs have a common value sig. We know also that MU.DU.RU sometimes stands for PA (Br. 1275). Now 52 if MU.DU.RU can stand for PA it must have some meaning in common with PA. The most usual meaning of PA is ḥaṭṭu, “sceptre”, which gives good sense here. mu (see Hymn to Bêl, line 1). du (see Hymn to Bêl, line 15).

û-sud-du consists of noun û, adjective sud, and phonetic complement du. û (see line 17). sud equals rûḳu, “distant” (Br. 7603). du (see gin, line 23), phonetic complement here.

šú-za equals noun šú and suffix za. šú (see Hymn to Bêl, line 25). za is a suffix of the second person singular masculine (Br. 11722). We have had za-e as being equal to “thou” (Hymn to Bêl, line 16). zu we have found to be the more usual suffix of the second person (see on line 6). za is dialectic for zu.

ma-ra (see on line 16).

ni-in-rù consists of prefix ni, infix in and verbal root rù. ni-in (see on line 16). rù (see on line 14).

Šis-unu-^ki-ma (see on line 2).

mà-gur (see on line 1).

azag-ga equals adjective azag, plus phonetic complement ga. azag (see on line 1). ga (see Hymn to Bêl, line 4).

pa(d)-a-zu-ne (see on line 10).

^dimmer Nu-dim-mud-e: we have here a compound ideogram as a name of the god Ea. ^dimmer is determinative before the name of a god (see Hymn to Bêl, line 2). Nu-dim-mud equals the Assyrian E-a (Br. 2016). The usual Sumerian ideogram is EN.KI. e in Nu-dim-mud-e a vowel of prolongation (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

sal-dug-ga-zu-ne (see line 15).

pa(d)-a-zu-ne (see line 10).

Reverse

a equals mû, “water” (Br. 11347). “Water” is a primary meaning of the sign ÂU, which at first consisted of two short perpendicular lines representing “falling water” (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

im-si consists of indeterminate verbal prefix im and verbal root si. im (Br. p. 545). si (Hymn to Bêl, line 22).

a im-si (see line 23).

ìd equals nâru, “river”. Sometimes ìd is shortened to i (Br. 11647). The value ìd comes from the union of two signs A “water” and ṬÚ (Br. 10217). Moreover, ṬÚ with the value ṭú equals apsû, “sea”. The ṬÚ sign, explained more minutely, consists of ḤAL “run” inside of KIL “enclosure”. So ḤAL + KIL = running, “flowing within an enclosure”, hence = “sea”. While ìd means primarily “water of the sea”, it is much used also as a determinative before names of rivers. We have the name of the Euphrates in the next line. Perhaps the name of the Tigris was given in some one of the lines. The common Sumerian ideogram for the name of the Tigris is ḥal-ḥal, an intensified form of ḥal, which means “running” or “rushing”. The Tigris is thus very appropriately called “the rushing river”. The Babylonian Diglat in the hands of the Persians took the form Tigra.

azag-gi equals ellu, “shining” (Br. 9901). azag (see line 19). gi is a phonetic complement, chosen no doubt with a view to vowel harmony as regards the following ìd (?). GI as an ideogram means “reed” (see Hymn to Bêl, line 24, gín).

ìd ud-kib-nun-na-ge means the river of Sippar. For ìd, see on line 25. ud-kib-nun consists of ud “sun” + kib “flourish, generate”, and nun “great”. The sign KIB suggests the idea “double” and hence, of course, “generate, beget” (MSL. p. 203). Nun, of course, = rabû “great” (Br. 2628), while na must be the phonetic complement and ge the nota genitivi as used in the next Hymn. The form ud-kib-nun then seems to mean “the great (nun) generative force (kib) of the sun” (ud); a name applied to Sippar had been from time immemorial the seat of the worship of the sun-god Šamaš (RBA., pp. 69, 117). Ìd-ud-kib-nun-na-ge then simply means “the river (ìd) of (ge) Sippar”, viz., the Euphrates, 54 which was usually termed in Sumerian Bura-nunu “the great stream” (MSL. p. 7, C).

a im-si (see on line 23).

ìd (see on line 25).

nu, regular Sumerian negative adverb, equal to the Assyrian la.

e-bi equals noun e and suffix bi. e equals mû, “water” (Br. 5844). We have also had e equal to ḳabû, “speech” (Hymn to Bêl, line 14). bi is a suffix of the third person singular (see Br. 5135). bi gets its demonstrative nature from the conception “speak” which seems to be the primary one in the old Babylonian linear hieroglyph.

láḥ-e consists of root láḥ and vocalic prolongation e. láḥ equals misû “wash” (Br. 6167). It is used of washing the hands and feet. It gets the idea “wash” from the idea “servant” who does the washing, but it may have meant “servant” before it meant “wash”. It often has the phonetic complement ḥa or ḥi. Literally the clause read: “the river whose water washes not”.

a im-si (see on line 23).

^dimmer Šis-^ki-kam equals god-name ^dimmer Šis-^ki plus kam = KAMMU without doubt (see CT. XV, Colophon of Tablet 29623, plate 12). kam is a well recognized determinative used after ordinal numerals. It no doubt occupies this position as a genitive particle, but, as a genitive sign, it may be used after words other than numerals; and, in fact, is so used in Gudea. It is evidently a lengthened form of the postposition ka; being ka plus am (see SVA. p. 60).

The sign looks like MÀ but perhaps the copyist made a mistake. maḥ (see Hymn to Bêl, line 23).

sug equals ṣuṣû, “marsh”. The sign is the enclosure-sign KIL with the “water” sign ÂU within the “enclosure” sign.

ban-da: the signs are DUMU and DADDU. DUMU has several values, the chief of which are dumu, tur and ban. dumu equals mâru, “son”. We have met the value dumu or its dialectic equivalent ṭumu, represented by ṬU and MU (see on line 5). tur equals ṣiḥru, “small”, and is naturally followed by the phonetic complement ra. lan-da also equals ṣiḥru “little” (Br. 4133).

a im-si (see on line 23).

^dimmer Šis-^ki-kam (see line 27).

êr-lim-ma (see Hymn to Bêl, line 27).

^dimmer En-zu “lord of wisdom” is the other name by which Sin is known in Sumerian. We have had one name above; viz., ^dimmer Šis-^ki. ^dimmer En-zu is no doubt in genitive relation to the preceding part of the line, although the nota genitivi is lacking. In another hymn to Bêl (CT. XV, Tablet 29644, plate 12), the genitive relation is signified by the postposition kam. The words are: êr-lim-ma ^dingir En-lil-lá-kam.

Chapter III
Tablet 29631, Plates 15 and 16, Hymn To Adad

Obverse

Reverse

This hymn we find to be full of action. The lightning flashes in the first line, and we see at least three distinct kinds of storm placed on the scene, one succeeding the other. The thunder storm first passes over our head. We see the lightning, we hear the roar of the thunder, the earth is placed in fear, the day turns 58 dark, the top of the mountain is smitten, the very gods themselves are terrified. Secondly comes the flood. The storm of the hour is lengthened into one of days. It becomes a deluge of judgment on the earth. The words say seven days, but in such poetic discourse seven might perhaps simply mean “many”. Finally, there is a decided change in the scene. The flood has passed away. The death-destroying hail-storm falls upon us, not simply the little hail-stones, but the great hail-stones. The day, of course, has come.

But the effects of Adad’s power so artistically set forth in this hymn are secondary, as placed beside the dignity of the god himself. The word of Adad is absolute and all-powerful. He is a god of great wrath. He is a real bull-god, of heaven and earth. He can put the heavens out of sight. He can make day as black as the darkest night. He can split the earth with his lightning. He can flood the land with water. He can pelt its inhabitants with stones. Yet in all this he consults with father Bêl.

Obverse

ḥad-ê-a is a ḥal-clause, consisting of noun ḥad, participle ê and postposition a, and means “in the going out of the sceptre”, or freely, “in the lightning flash”. The apodosis is mu-zu an-zak-ku. ḥad (PA) equals ḥaṭṭu, “sceptre” (Br. 5573). The value ḥad may be of Semitic origin, but note that its cognate ḥud is equal to namûru, “brightness” (Br. 5582), as is also kun, another value of PA “staff”; then PA = “a lighted torch”. ê we have had as equal to aṣû (Hymn to Bêl, line 15). ê is also equal to šûpû, “flashing” (Br. 5638). a equals ina, “in” (Br. 11365).

mu-zu means “thy name”. mu equals šumu, “name” (Br. 1235).

an-zak-ku is a verb. an is an indeterminate verbal prefix. The context shows it to be of the second person (see MSL. p. XXVI). zak-ku may mean “utter a decree” (Br. 6519). For example, zak equals tamîtu, “a decree” (Br. 6493). Perhaps it could as well be a verb signifying “to decree”, or “to establish”. ku also equals tamû, “utter” (Br. 10555), but it would be simpler to make ku a phonetic complement to zak. It may be that we ought to read the clause: “thy name utters the decree”. But “thy name” has the usual position of the object. It is also rather awkward to regard zak as an object placed between the verbal prefix and the verb.

^dimmer Mer: this is the Sumerian name of the storm-god. Mer being one of the values of the sign IMMU. The fact that the sign in some cases in this hymn (e. g. lines 15 and 17) is followed by the phonetic complement ri or ra shows that Mer is the value intended for the name of the god. Mer is probably from imi changed to immer and then to Mer and hence, like imi, means “wind” and “storm”. The name Mer offers no suggestion as to the origin of the Semitic names Rammânu and Addu.

bi-maḥ equals “mighty utterance”. bi (see Hymn to Sin, line 13). maḥ (see Hymn to Bêl, line 23).

ḥad-ê-a mu-zu an-zak-ku (see on line 1).

dumu (see Hymn to Sin, line 5, ṭu-mu).

An-na, ideogram for the god of heaven, plus phonetic complement. Note that AN for the god Anu does not take the determinative god sign. Probably the omission is due to the desire to avoid the occurrence of AN twice in succession. It must have been after Adad had taken the place of Ištar in the second triad of gods that Adad was called the son of Anu. The earlier arrangement was Anu, Bêl, Ea, Sin, Šamaš and Ištar. The later order was Anu, Bêl and Ea, as rulers of the universe, and Sin, Šamaš and Adad, as rulers of heaven under the command of Anu. This new grouping was the result of a theological development. Ištar was found to be one of the planets, and, therefore, not to be classed longer along with Sin and Šamaš. Adad, the god of the atmosphere, was thought to be a personality of sufficient dignity to take the place formerly occupied by Ištar.

bi-maḥ ḥad-ê-a mu-zu an-zak-ku (see on lines 1 and 2).

ù-mu-un (see Hymn to Bêl, line 1).

nì-ki-ge: nì is a value of IMMU equal to puluḥtu, “fear” (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). ki equals irṣitu, “earth” (see Hymn to Bêl, line 9). ge is a postpositive sign of the genitive (see Br. 5935.)

bi-maḥ ḥad-ê-a mu-zu an-zak-ku (see lines 1 and 2).

ib-mal-la: ib is a value of TUM equal to agâgu, “anger” (Br. 4954). mal is a value of IḲU which is dialectic for PISANNU and also for MA.AL (see Hymn to Bêl, lines 1 and 18, and Hymn to Sin, line 2). ìb-mal = “wrathful” (Br. 2242).

bi-maḥ ḥad-ê-a mu-zu an-zak-ku (see on lines 1 and 2).

bar-tab-ba equals tu’âmu, “twin” (Br. 1896). maš equals tu’âmu (Br. 1811), while the cognate bar equals tappû, “companion” (Br. 1807). maš, which represents the idea “cut”, is more primitive than bar which represents the idea “side”. maš is also equal to mâšu, “twin”, a Sumerian loan-word in Assyrian. tab equals tappû (Br. 3775). tab may have been inserted, that bar “companion” should be taken rather than the narrower word “twin” (Hymn to Sin, line 16). ba is a phonetic complement (Br. 102 and Hymn to Bêl, line 25). Adad is called “twin” or “companion”, because he possessed a composite nature, comprising in himself the elements of several gods. The manifestations of power seen in wind and rain and in lightning and thunder, would logically lead to the conclusion that his nature was divided, or that he brought to his aid several gods endowed with powers suited to different kinds of effort. The gods that aided Adad were sometimes looked upon as birds, one of whom was the god Zû, who presided over the tempest. Zû’s mother was Siris, lady of the rain and clouds. Then there was Martu, the lord of the squall, and Barḳu, the genius of the lightning. The son of Zû was a strong bull who pastured in the meadows, bringing abundance and fertility. There was also Šûtu, the south wind. He, no doubt, was an agent of Adad’s. There is another way in which Adad may be looked upon as twin-like in his nature. He could pass suddenly from the fiercest anger to gentlest kindness. He was represented in sculpture as carrying a battle-axe. Kings invoked his aid against their enemies. In his passionate rage he destroyed everything before him. When his wrath was appeased, however, there might come the gentle breeze and the refreshing shower. The fields which he had devastated he also caused to blossom and produce fruit and grain.

dimmer (see Hymn to Bêl, line 2).

ama-an-ki-ga: ama equals rîmu, “bull” (see Hymn to Bêl, lines 7 and 9). an (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). ki (see on line 4). ga seems to be a postposition (see MSL. p. XVI). ga might perhaps be equal to bašû, “being” (Br. 6109).

bi-maḥ ḥad-e-a mu-zu an-zak-ku (see on lines 1 and 2).

a-a (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

ud-da: ud equals urru, “light” (Br. 7798, also Hymn to Sin, line 17). da is a phonetic complement (see Hymn to Bêl, line 16).

mu-zu an-zak-ku (see on line 1).

û-gal-la: û (see Hymn to Sin, line 17). gal-la (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14).

bar-ru-a: bar equals parâsu, “cut off” (Br. 1785). The idea “cut”, however, is more usually expressed by the value maš (see on line 6). ru, being a phonetic complement, limits us to the choice of the value bar here.

uku-gal-la: uku a value of UG, which is here a Babylonian sign found, for instance, in the Cyrus Cylinder, equals both ûmu, “day”, and šarru, “king” (Br. 3861 and 3862). gal-la (see on line 8).

^dimmer Mer (see on line 2). uku (see MSL. 344 and on line 9).

mu-zu (see on line 1).

kalam-ma: kalam as a value is related to the sign-name KALAMMU and equals mâtu, “land” (Br. 5914). We have already had the value un (see Hymn to Bêl, line 1). ma is a phonetic complement (see Hymn to Bêl, line 1).

mu-un-rù-rù-rù: mu-un (see Hymn to Sin, line 17). rù-rù-rù (see Hymn to Sin, line 14). A double form like rù-rù is common, but the triple form is rare, and expresses a very unusual emphasis.

me-lam-zu (see Hymn to Bêl, line 21).

kalam-ma (see on line 11).

tug-gim: tug equals ṣubâtu, “clothing” (Br. 10551). gim is an EK form. We have had the ES form dim (Hymn to Sin, line 11).

im-mi-in-dul: im is an indeterminate verbal prefix, but commonly used for the third person (see Br. p. 545). mi-in is a verbal infix, used chiefly of the third person (MSL. pp. XXIV and XXXII). Its antecedent here is kalam-ma. dul equals katâmu, “cover”, but du also equals šubtu, “dwelling” (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14), connoting in both instances the idea “cover, shelter”.

za equals abnu, “stone” (Br. 11721 and Hymn to Sin, line 18). There is another sign used more commonly than ZÂU to represent “stone”; namely, DAḲḲU.

ḥad (see on line 1).

aka-zu-šù: aka equals ramâmu, “roar” (Br. 4746). The meaning of RAM as ramâmu seems to come through mnemonic paronomasia by way of the value aka as equal to râmu, “love”. It is important to distinguish ramâmu from Ramman, an Assyrian name for Mer meaning “thunderer”, as well as from ramânu, “self”. ramânu self is often a pun on Ramman. zu (see Hymn to Bêl, line 21). šù (see Hymn to Bêl, line 15).

kur-gal: kur (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3). gal (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14).

a-a ^dimmer Mu-ul-lil (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3). In the Hymn to Bêl (line 16), Bêl seems to be called a mountain. The thought probably is suggested by E-kur of Nippur.

urša equals ramâmu (Br. 8556). ur is a value of ḤAR which itself may mean ramâmu (Br. 8539) and ša is a value of DU which we know means alâku. urša must mean “advancing thunder”.

àma equals ummu, “mother”. The idea of “mother” arises out of “amplitude”, which the sign is intended pictorially to represent. damal is a common value of the same sign (see Hymn to Bêl, line 10).

gal (Hymn to Bêl, line 14).

^dimmer Nin-lil. Nin-lil is the Sumerian name of Bêlit, the consort of Bêl. Nin equals Bêltu, “lady”. lil has the same meaning as in En-lil or Mul-lil (see Hymn to Bêl, line 2). Nin-lil is exactly the reverse with respect to sex of En-lil. Bêlit, like Bêl, had a temple at Nippur which dates back apparently to the time 63 of the early dynasties of Ur. It was, however, simply a dim shadow of the temple of Bêl. The goddess of the divine family never achieved the popularity attained by the god, the father of the family. Besides being called Nin-lil, “lady of mercy” (Br. 5932), she was sometimes called Nin-ḥar-sag, “lady of the high mountain”, which would indicate that she dwelt with Bêl in E-kur, “the mountain house”. Under the name of Nin-ḥar-sag, Bêlit had a temple also at Girsu, one of the divisions of the town of Lagaš. Nin-ḥar-sag was sometimes addressed as “the mother of the gods”.

ba-e-di-ḥu-láḥ-e is a verb. ba is an indeterminate verbal prefix. Here it is third person (see Hymn to Bêl, line 25). e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). di is an unusual infix; it is probably used here in the interest of vowel harmony for da (see Hymn to Bêl, line 16). ḥu-láḥ is the verb itself and is equal to galâtu, “frighten” (Br. 2076). On closer analysis, ḥu must be a prefix of generalization; for example ḥu may equal amêlu, “man” (Br. 2050). láḥ must be the real verb; it is equal to galâtu (Br. 6166). e must be a vowel of prolongation. The usual phonetic complement after láḥ is ḥa.

The fear of the lightning of Adad in this hymn is somewhat like that expressed in the Babylonian Epic of Gilgameš, Eleventh Tablet. The lord of the storm caused the heavens to rain heavily. There arose from the foundation of heaven a black cloud. The thunderbearers marched over mountain and plain, and Ninib continued pouring out rain and Adad’s violence reached to heaven. The southern blast blew hard. Like a battle-charge upon mankind the waters rushed. One could no longer see an other. The gods were dismayed at the flood. They sought refuge by ascending the highest heaven, cowering like dogs. On the battlements of heaven they crouched and Ištar screamed like a woman in travail.

^dingir En-lil-li: Bêl’s name has appeared before in this hymn, but in the ES form (line 13). ^dingir En-lil (see Hymn to Sin, line 5). li (see Hymn to Bêl, line 23).

dumu-ni: (see on line 3). ni (see Hymn to Bêl, line 13).

à (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14) = ID.

mu-un-da-an-aka: mu-un (see Hymn to Sin, line 17). da-an is a verbal infix (MSL. pp. XXIV and XXXII). Its antecedent here is dumu-ni. aka: we have had aka equal to ramâmu (line 13), but here we have aka equal to madâdu, “measure out”. madâdu, “measure out”, is a pun on madâdu, “love” (thus MSL. p. 21).

mulu: The sign is the usual ideogram for “man”, but may stand for the Assyrian ša, as here. Note that the sign takes the value lu in composition (see Hymn to Bêl, line 20).

dumu-mu: dumu (see line 3). mu is a suffix of the first person (Br. 1241). There are three pronominal mu’s. First, the determinate pronominal suffix mu of the first person, cognate with ma-e, the personal pronoun of the first person; this is the mu we have here. Secondly, there is a mu of mu-un, the indeterminate verbal prefix. mun or mu-un is simply this mu nasalized. We have had this mu quite often. Finally, there is another mu, an indeterminate suffix, which is related to mu of mu-un, rather than to mu, the cognate of ma-e. This indeterminate mu is found at the end of relative clauses. We shall meet it in the Hymn to Tammuz (see below).

û (see Hymn to Sin, line 17).

um-me-ši-si-si is a verb. um-me is a indeterminate verbal prefix, but is chosen here for the second person, since mu-un is so often used for the third person. umme is not a very common prefix. It stands for ume which is a shortened form of umeni. ši: ŠI with the value ige or ide we have seen equals înu, “eye” (see Hymn to Sin, line 16). ši here, however, seems to be regarded as a part of the verbal stem and hence slips in between the prefix and the root. si-si (see Hymn to Bêl, line 22). The Sumerian idiom means “fill the eye”.

um-me-ši-lá-lá: um-me-ši (just explained). lá-lá: lá is a value of LALLU which occurs as a phonetic complement in the word En-lil-lá (Hymn to Sin, line 5) also equals našû, “lift up” (Br. 10101).

^dimmer Mer (see on line 2). ri (see Hymn to Bêl, line 19).

û um-me-ši-si-si û um-me-ši-lá-lá (see on line 16).

û (see Hymn to Sin, line 17).

iminna-bi-meš: iminna is the Sumerian word for “seven”. The sign in our text consists of seven uprights, four above and three below. The Assyrian form consists of three above, three in the middle and one at the bottom. bi is the demonstrative pronoun 65 = “those” (Br. 5134 and Hymn to Sin, line 27). meš is the Sumerian sign of the plural number (Br. 10470). The sign is composed of ME and EŠ and means “many”.

ba-gan-tal-lá: ba (see on line 14); ba = prefix. gan is an infix here of adverbial and corroborative character (see Hymn to Bêl, line 9). tal is a value of RI equal to zâḳu, “blow” (Br. 2581). We assume tal to be the correct value because of the following LALLU = lá (see on line 16).

û um-me-ši-lá-lá (see line 16). This interesting statement on the flood agrees entirely with the story of the flood in the Eleventh Tablet of the Babylonian Epic of Gilgameš. The difference between the length of the Hebrew and that of the Babylonian deluge is significant. The narrative of Pirnapištim, the Babylonian Noah, is quite graphic. He represents the gods as seated weeping, their lips covered in fear. Six days and nights the wind blew. When the seventh day appeared, the storm subsided, the sea began to dry and the flood was ended. He looked upon the sea, mankind was turned to clay, corpses floated like reeds. He opened the window. He sent forth a dove which returned. He sent forth a raven, which saw the carrion on the water, ate, and wandered away, but did not return. He built an altar on the peak of the mountain and set forth vessels by sevens. The gods smelled the savour and gathered to the sacrifice, and the great goddess lifted up the rainbow which Anu had created. Those days he thought upon and forgot not.

û (line 16).

ì equals amâtu, “word” (Br. 518, see also Hymn to Sin, line 16).

di-zu-ka: di equals dênu, “judgment” (Br. 9525 and Hymn to Bêl, line 7). zu (Hymn to Bêl, line 21). ka = nota genitivi (Hymn to Bêl, line 1).

ḥàr-ḥa-ra is the same as ḥàr-ḥar-a. ḥàr is a value of GUṬṬU, meaning ḳardu, “heroic one” (MSL. p. 174). We have had the sign with the value gù (Hymn to Bêl, line 9). ḥa-ra, phonetic representation of ḥàr-a, with the same meaning as ḥàr of GUṬṬU, plus phonetic complement.

ab-ba: ab equals tâmtu, “sea” (Br. 3822). The common word for “sea” is AB.ZU, written ZU.AB, meaning “sea of wisdom”, the abode of Ea, the god of wisdom. ab also equals aptu, “abyss” (Br. 3815). ab, “sea”, or “abyss” is a shortened form of a-ab, 66 “water enclosure”, “water space”. AB with the value éš we have had (Hymn to Sin, line 10).

û um-me-ši-lá-lá (line 16).

nim-gir equals birḳu, “lightning” (Br. 9020). nim-gir literally means “high lightning”. nim equals elû, “high”. gir alone equals birḳu (Br. 306). The sign GIRÛ in its primitive form is a picture of a “dagger”. From the conception of the “dagger”, there is, of course, but a short step to that of the forked lightning.

luḥ equals sukkallu, “messenger” (Br. 6170). We have had the sign SUKKALLU with the value laḥ (line 14, laḥ, and Hymn to Sin, line 27).

su-ši-šù equals noun su-ši and postposition šù. su-ši: SU.ŠI means “increase of eye” and eqnals šalummatu which means “splendour”, or perhaps “terror”. SU.ŠI might be read su-lim. SU.ZI, however, has the same meaning (see Br. 235 and 187, also MSL. p. 298), proving the reading SU.ŠI.

mu-ra-du-ud: mu (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). ra is an infix of adverbial character denoting motion (MSL. p. XXIV). du-ud is no doubt for du-du, an intensified form of du (see Hymn to Bêl, line 23, gin).

mulu dumu-mu (see on line 16).

rù equals naḳâpu, “break forth violently”, or “storm furiously”, (Br. 9144). Here we come near to the primary idea of the sign which is that of “the goring bull” (see Hymn to Sin, line 14).

gin-na-gin-na: DU = alâku may have any one of three values, gin, tum or rà (Br. 4871). gin is the correct value here, as is shown by the phonetic complement na. The value du must be closely related to tum and gin. du by change of d to t and by addition of the nasal m becomes tum. tum by change of t to g, of u to i and of m to n becomes gin.

a-ba equals mannu, “who” (Br. 11370). See also below.

zi-gi-en probably is a phonetic and dialectic form for za-e-gim (line 22).

te-ga: te equals ṭeḥû, “attack” (Br. 7688). ga: BA is probably dialectic for ga (Br. 103) which would be the same as PISANNU, i. e., bašû, “being”, or šakânu, “establishing”.

Reverse

ki-bala: ki (see Hymn to Bêl, line 9). bala equals palû, “weapon” (Br. 276). From the idea of “weapon”, it is easy to pass to that of “hostility”, expressed by nukurtu (Br. 272).

ḥul equals limnu, “bad” (see Br. 9502 and Hymn to Sin, line 16, ḥùl).

gíg equals marṣu, “sick” (Br. 9235). The sign is composite, the principal element of which is MI meaning “black”.

a-a (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

muḥ-zu-šù: muḥ equals eli, “upon”, or “against” (Br. 8841). zu (Hymn to Bêl, line 21). šù (Hymn to Bêl, line 15) governs the phrase muḥ-zu.

a-ba (see on line 21).

za-e-gim: za-e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 16). gim (see line 12).

te-ga (see on line 21).

ná: DAḲḲU has three values for abnu, “stone”, za, ṣi and ná. We have also had the sign ZA with the value za equal to abnu (line 13). No doubt DAḲḲU indicates “hailstone” here.

imi is the common value of the sign IMMU for šâru, “storm” (Br. 8369).

tur-tur-e: tur (see Hymn to Sin, line 28, ban-da). The sign is DUMU (lines 3, 15 and 16). e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

šú-um-me-ti: šú is a part of the verbal conjugation (see Hymn to Bêl, line 25), making it causal. um-me (see on line 16). ti equals laḳû, “take” (Br. 1700). This is the same word as ti meaning “life” (Hymn to Bêl, line 16).

a-ba za-e-gim te-ga (see on line 22).

ná (see on line 23).

gal-gal-e: gal (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14). e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

šú-um-me-ti a-ba za-e-gim te-ga (see line 23).

ná (see on line 23).

gal-gal-zu: gal (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14). zu (Hymn to Bêl, line 21).

tur-tur-zu: tur (see on line 23).

muḥ-ba: muḥ (see line 22). ba is a pronominal suffix of the third person singular (Br. 114).

ù-me-ám verb in the imperative mood. ù-me, the same as um-me (line 16). ám (see Hymn to Bêl, line 12).

ki-bala-a (see on line 22). a (see Hymn to Bêl, line 9).

zi-da-zu: zi equals imnu, “right hand” (Br. 2312). da is a phonetic complement (see Hymn to Bêl, line 4). zu (see Hymn to Bêl, line 21).

ù-mu-e-gul: ù is an indeterminate verbal prefix; it is used of the third person (Br. p. 547; see also Hymn to Bêl, line 1). mu-e constitutes a double verbal infix, the mu being pronominal and the e adverbial. mu (see line 16 and Hymn to Bêl, line 18). e (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). gul equals abâtu, “destroy” (Br. 8954).

da equals idu, “strength” (see Hymn to Bêl, line 16). bur equals nasâḥu, “tear away” (Br. 7528). The sign SÎRU occurs only here in all of the four hymns of this Thesis. su is the common word for “body”, represented by zumru (Br. 172). This translation is only provisional.

ù-mu-e-se: ù-mu-e (just explained). se equals nadânu, “give” (Br. 4418). Brünnow gives to the sign the value sí, when it stands for nadânu.

^dimmer Mer-ri (see on line 17).

dug-dug-ga is a ḥal-clause equal to “in commanding”. dug (see Hymn to Sin, line 15).

a-a (see Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

muḥ-na-šù: muḥ (see line 22). na, pronominal suffix of the third person (see Hymn to Bêl, line 1). šù (see Hymn to Bêl, line 15).

geš-ni: geš equals šutêšuru, “government” (Br. 5706). ni (Hymn to Bêl, line 13).

ba-ši-in-ag: ba (see Hymn to Bêl, line 25). Suffix ši-in (see Hymn to Sin, line 16). ag (see Hymn to Bêl, line 25).

è-ta: è (see Hymn to Sin, line 3). ta (see Hymn to Bêl, line 15).

ê-a-ni: ê (see Hymn to Bêl, line 15). a is a vowel of prolongation, which ê is accustomed to take (see Hymn to Bêl, line 9). ni (see Hymn to Bêl, line 13).

û (see Hymn to Sin, line 17).

ì (see on line 19).

di (see on line 19).

na-nam: na is an indeterminate verbal prefix (see MSL. p. XXIV and Hymn to Bêl, lines 1 and 18). nam evidently a verb here, equals šimtu, “fixing” (Br. 2103).

è-ta (see on line 28).

eri-ta: eri (see Hymn to Bêl, line 13).

ê-a-ni (see on line 28).

uku (see on line 9).

ban-da equals ekdu, “strong” (Br. 4127). ban-da, following the idea “strength”, also equals “young” (see Hymn to Sin, line 28).

na-nam (see line 28).

eri-ta (see line 29).

an-na-ta: an-na (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). ta (see Hymn to Bêl, line 15).

gar-ra-ni: gar equals šakânu, “establish” (Br. 11978). ra, phonetic complement, (Hymn to Bêl, line 3). ni (see line 28).

û (see Hymn to Sin, line 17).

ì (see on line 19).

ḥar-ra: ḥar equals uṣurtu, “curse” (Br. 8545). ra, phonetic complement.

na-nam (see on line 28).

Chapter IV
Tablet 29628, Plate 19, Hymn to Tammuz

Obverse

Reverse

The salient phases of the rounded out Tammuz story are touched upon in this hymn; viz., his local dwelling in a city where he had a temple; the memorial weeping; his relation to Anu; his lordly power; his specification as “a brother”; his relation to the goddess Ištar; his characteristic and supreme function of plant-germination. Note also that he was the agricultural god of spring vegetation. Offerings of wine were poured out over his bier, he having been humbled to sorrow by banishment to the lower world, where he became a lord over the occult and internal forces inherent beneath the soil of the earth. So he became a god of a new life. The hymn does not seem altogether to confine the germinating work of Tammuz to the vegetation of spring growth, but appears, especially in the Reverse, to include fruit growing which might come later in the season. Possibly this hymn was sung as a dirge at Babylonian anniversaries for the departed Tammuz. The Babylonians at the time of the summer solstice annually commemorated with lamentation the departure of Tammuz to the lower world. He had instructed them that they should gather at his bier and that hired musicians should sing and play and that the people should sacrifice and drink wine.

Obverse

šes-e: šes same as šis (Hymn to Sin, line 2). e equals ana, “to” (Br. 5847).

tuš-e-na: tuš equals ašâbu, “dwell” (Br. 10523). Probably the sign has the same value for šubtu, “dwelling” (Br. 10553). We have had the sign (KU) with the value šù (Hymn to Bêl, line 15). e, vowel of prolongation. na, pronominal suffix (see Hymn to Adad, line 27).

eri (Hymn to Bêl, line 13).

êr-ra: êr (Hymn to Bêl, Colophon). ra, phonetic complement (Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

na-nam equals kîam, “thus” (see Br. 1597 and Hymn to Adad, line 28). The words “O my brother” are represented in 73 legend as being first uttered by the sister of Tammuz and then taken up by other mourners. Probably the custom of weeping for Tammuz originated in the city of Eridu.

a-kala is an abstract noun like nam-kala which is equal to dannûtu (Br. 6194). a is an abstract prefix, as in A.DU, equal to a-rá, “going” (MSL. p. XVII). kala equal dannu, “mighty” (Br. 6194).

šeš-e. See on šes (line 1). e, probably sign of the genitive, if not merely a vowel of prolongation. It can certainly be a postposition (see on line 1).

tab (see Hymn to Adad, line 6).

An-na (see Hymn to Adad, line 3 and Hymn to Bêl, line 18). Tammuz was a companion of Gišzida in the dominion of Anu. Gišzida was also a god of vegetable growth. At a certain period of the year, Tammuz and Gišzida were stationed in companionship as attendants at the gate of heaven. Here the power of Tammuz to cause vegetation to grow began to be effective. He was, in the first days of his existence, a sun-god, and, stationed in heaven, the rays of his power were felt on earth. So, probably every year, at the time of spring growth, he was conceived of as operating from heaven like a sun.

a-kala (see on line 2).

à-ba: à (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14). ba (Hymn to Adad, line 25).

en (see Hymn to Bêl, line 19).

^dimmer Dumu-zi. Dumu-zi means “son of life”. Dumu (Hymn to Sin, line 5). zi (see Hymn to Bêl, line 23).

dumu (see Hymn to Sin, line 5, ṭu-mu).

è-gal-a-ni: è-gal equals êkallu, “temple”, (Br. 6252). È.GAL, “great house”, is the common compound ideogram for “temple”, both in Sumerian and Assyrian. The Assyrian êkallu is evidently the Sumerian è, plus gal which is changed to kal. The word has passed over into Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic. è (see Hymn to Sin, line 3). gal (see Hymn to Bêl, line 14). è-gal is often followed by la; here, however, it is followed by a, showing that the phonetic use of la and a is quite similar. ni (see Hymn to Bêl, line 13).

nu (Hymn to Sin, line 27).

mu-un-su-ga-mu is a verb and seems to mean “who is far away”. The clause occurs also in lines 6, 8, 10 and 12, only that in lines 6 and 12 SU is used instead of SUD. mu-un (see Hymn to Sin, line 17). su: SUD seems to equal rûḳu, “distant”, here. Yet when it is equal to rûḳu, it generally has the value sud and is followed by the phonetic complement da; here it is followed by ga. So the value should be sug or su. mu is a relative suffix related to mu of mu-un (see Hymn to Adad, line 16).

azag (see Hymn to Sin, line 1).

^dimmer Nanâ-ge. Nanâ, also written Nanna, is the Sumerian name of Ištar. NANNU is sometimes written like RI which, when preceded by the god-sign, also equals “Ištar”. ge (see Hymn to Adad, line 4).

è (see Hymn to Sin, line 3).

An-na-ka (see Hymn to Adad, line 4). ka equals nota genitivi (see Br. 551 and Hymn to Bêl, line 1).

im-me: im (see Hymn to Sin, line 23). me (Hymn to Bêl, line 16). Tammuz seems to be the shining one. The epithet “shining” is sometimes applied to gods, goddesses, kings, princes and others. The primary relation of Tammuz was that of lover. But in the lower world he made love to another. But each year during the season of vegetable growth he was supposed to be living with Ištar and during the season of vegetable decline he was supposed to be living with the other whom he loved in the regions below. The house of Anu might mean the temple of Anu, but the reference in this line is no doubt to heaven, over which Anu was lord and at whose portals Tammuz sometimes acted as porter.

mulu (see Hymn to Adad, line 16).

ú-sun-na-ge: ú-sun seems to be a compound noun meaning “plant-growing”. It occurs eight times in the hymn. ú equals šammu, “plant” (Br. 6027). It is sometime a determinative before the name of a plant (Br. 6029). sun means “irrigate” (MSL. 299). It is improbable that this sign is KIB. ge (see Hymn to Adad, line 4).

nu (see Hymn to Sin, line 27).

mu-un-su-ga-mu (see line 4). su(SU) and su(SUD,SUG) are interchangeable (Br. 7593).

azag ^dimmer Nana-ge (see on line 5).

za: the probable meaning of za here is “stone” (see Hymn to Adad, line 13).

NANNA: there are no citations in Brünnow showing the meaning of NANNA when standing alone. za-NANNA-di equals mammû, “snow”, and za-NANNA may mean “white stone”. If NANNA can equal UŠLANU-GUNÛ, then it can mean nasâḳu (Br. 3019) and za-NANNA means “shining stone”. It may be that NANNA stands for UŠLANU-GUNÛ, then ZA.NANNA.UNU.KI could be equal to Unug-^ki (Br. 11749), and the line would read azag ^dimmer Nanâ-ge Unug-^ki-ka im-me, “the shining one of Ištar of Erech he is”.

Unug: that Unug is the correct value is shown by the phonetic complement ga that often follows UNU. Erech, we know, was the city of Ištar (Br. 3023). unu (see Hymn to Sin, line 2). ka (line 5).

im-me (see on line 5).

mulu (see Hymn to Adad, line 16).

zib-ba-ra-ge: zib-ba (see Hymn to Sin, line 16, gu). ra must answer for vowel prolongation (Hymn to Bêl, line 3). ge (see Hymn to Adad, line 4). “One of speech” must mean the god endowed with authoritative utterance on the subject of germination.

nu mu-un-su-ga-mu (see on line 4).

bara-ka: bara equals parakku, “dwelling room in the temple” (Br. 6878). ka (line 5).

azag ^dimmer Nanâ-ge (line 5).

te equals temennu, “foundation” (Br. 7710).

ki-ka: ki (Hymn to Bêl, line 9). ka (Hymn to Bêl, line 1).

im-me (line 5).

mulu (see Hymn to Adad, line 16).

ka-áš is evidently a phonetic representation of kaš(BI), cognate with geš in geštin and equal to karânu, “wine” (Br. 5121, 5004 and 5006).

ka-sa-ge: ka-sa may be a phonetic form for kas equal to šinâ, “two” (Br. 4459). Perhaps it would be better to consider ka-áš ka-sa as a reduplication of kaš, as kaš-kas(š) = “much wine”. ge (Hymn to Adad, line 4). One form of the legend makes Tammuz the begetter of autumn vegetation. If so, he is the producer of much wine. More likely the meaning is that, on his account, much wine was offered in the service of lamentation at his departure.

nu mu-un-su-ga-mu (see on line 4).

azag ^dimmer Nanâ-ge (line 5).

šà-mu: šà (Hymn to Sin, line 9, šsag). Relative mu (see line 4).

ú-sun (line 6).

mu-un-si-mal. mu-un (see Hymn to Sin, line 17). si (see Hymn to Bêl, line 22). mal (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). Plant growth is a matter of intelligent devising on the part of Tammuz.

mulu (see Hymn to Adad, line 16).

ḥul-mal equals limnu, “evil” (Br. 9508). ḥul equals limênu, “be evil”. mal (Hymn to Bêl, line 18).

nu mu-un-su-ga-mu (line 6).

mutin is “wood of life”, mu being ES for geš, “wood”, and tin being for ti (Hymn to Bêl, line 16).

An-na-ge: An-na (see Hymn to Adad, line 3). ge (Hymn to Adad, line 4).

kaš-ra-bi: kaš equals šikaru, “strong drink” (Br. 5126). ra answers as a vowel of prolongation (Hymn to Bêl, line 3). If ra were a postposition, it would follow the suffix bi (on which see Hymn to Sin, line 27).

mu-un-šub: mu-un (Hymn to Sin, line 17). šub equals nadû “cast down” (Br. 1434). RU signifies “bent down”. The attitude of the mourners may be noted.

mulu ú-sun-na-ge (see line 6).

a-na-ám equals minammi (Br. 11436) which is the same as minû “what?” (Br. 11434). Note that a-ba (Hymn to Adad, line 21) equals mannu, “who?”

šú-ba: šú (Hymn to Bêl, line 25). ba (see Hymn to Adad, line 25).

ab-rù: ab (Hymn to Bêl, line 16). rù (Hymn to Sin, line 14).

See line 8.

See line 10.

mulu ḥul-mal (line 12).

a-na-àm šú-ba (line 14).

ab-gin: ab (Hymn to Bêl, line 16). gin (Hymn to Bêl, line 23).

dimmer mutin An-ua-ge (line 13).

PAḤÂDU, Assyrian for “lamb”. The sign is PISANNU enclosing GÊSṬARÛ (Br. 5489). The Sumerian value of the sign is not known. Among the few citations in which the sign appears, a female lamb is mentioned (Br. 10946).

sigišše-ra: sigišše equals nîḳû, “sacrifice”, and ra answers as a vowel of prolongation which the sign takes (Br. 9092).

mu-un-šub-bi: mu-un-šub (line 13). bi is a phonetic complement.

nim-me: nim (see Hymn to Adad, line 20). me, phonetic complement.

azag (Hymn to Sin, line 1).

^dimmer Nanâ-ra: ^dimmer Nanâ (line 5). ra (Hymn to Bêl, line 3).

ì (Hymn to Adad, line 19).

mu-un-na-ab-e-e: mu-un (Hymn to Sin, line 17). na-ab is a verbal infix = “to him”, third person here (MSL. p. XXXII). e-e (Hymn to Bêl, line 14).

nim-me (line 19).

ki (Hymn to Bêl, line 9).

mu-lu (Hymn to Bêl, line 20).

ni (Hymn to Bêl, line 13).

an-pad-de: an (Hymn to Adad, line 1). pad (Hymn to Sin, line 10). de, phonetic complement.

a-na equals minû, “what” (Br. 11434), the same as a-na-ám (line 14).

mu-un-ba-e-e: mu-un (Hymn to Sin, line 17). ba may be used as an infix as well as a prefix (MSL. p. XXIV, and Hymn to Bêl, lines 24 and 25). e-e (line 19).

kaš-a-ka: kaš (line 13). a (Hymn to Bêl, line 9). ka (line 5).

gurun-na-ka: gurun equals inbu, “fruit” (Br. 10179). na, phonetic complement. ka (just explained).

dumu (Hymn to Sin, line 5).

mu-lu (Hymn to Bêl, line 20).

azag (Hymn to Sin, line 1).

zu-ge: zu (Hymn to Bêl, line 1). ge (Hymn to Adad, line 4).

ne-ne (Hymn to Bêl, line 21).

mu-un-til-li: mu-un (Hymn to Sin, line 17). til is probably the longer form of ti (Hymn to Bêl, line 16).

nim-me azag (line 19).

dimmer mutin An-na-ge (line 13).

ì mu-un-na-ab-e-e (line 19).

nim-me ki (line 20).

šes (line 1).

ma-ra (Hymn to Sin, line 16).

an-pad-de (line 20).

a-na-ám (line 14).

mu-un-ma-al: mu-un (Hymn to Sin, line 17). ma-al is the verb (Hymn to Bêl, line 11).

Reverse

è kaš-a-ka è gurun-na-nka dumu mulu azag zu-ge (line 21).

sigišše (line 18).

sag (Hymn to Bêl, line 5).

tuk-a-na: tuk equals išû, “have” (Br. 11237). a, vowel of prolongation (Hymn to Bêl, line 9). na, suffix of the third person (Hymn to Bêl, line 1).

ur equals amêlu, “man” (Br. 11256).

sag (Hymn to Bêl, line 5). ur-sag means “head-man”, and is also equal to ḳarradu, “mighty one”.

^giš ku-a: ^giš equals iṣu, “wood”, and is a determinative before names of things made of wood. ku equals bêlu, “weapon”, perhaps sacrificial implements. a, vowel of prolongation.

sag-mal-mal-ge: sag (just explained). mal-mal: PISANNU is dialectic for either MA.AL or IḲU and as a suffix makes an adjective of a noun (see Hymn to Bêl, lines 1 and 18). ge (see Hymn to Adad, line 4).

dimmer mutin An-na-ge (line 13).

ú-sun-na (line 6).

sag mal-mal-ge (line 25).

ú-sun (line 6).

gurun-gurun, plural form of gurun (line 21).

šes-mu: šes (line 1). mu (Hymn to Adad, line 16).

ú-sun (line 6).

a-ra-li has passed over into Assyrian as arallû, “lower world”. a-ra-li is phonetic. There is a sign, URUGAL, translated by arallû. URUGAL consists of the “enclosure” sign containing the sign GAL and means “great house”. è-kur-be is also translated by arallû and is equal to bît mûti, “house of the dead” (Br. 6259); more literally the meaning is “house of the land of the dead”.

ú-sun gurun-gurun šes-mu (line 27).

in-nu might equal tibnu, “straw”, “vegetation” (Br. 4231). Perhaps it would be better to take in-nu as a verb meaning “he is the one who”, in being a verbal prefix and nu the verbal stem in the sense of zikaru (Br. 1964), as in nu-banda (MSL. 264).

gíš: UŠ with the value gíš equals riḥû, “beget” (Br. 5042).

^giš gu-ga-ge: ^giš (see line 25). gu (Hymn to Bêl, line 20). ga answers as a vowel of prolongation. ge (Hymn to Adad, line 4).

tàl-ta-al-ta-al: tàl is the value of ÁŠ required by the phonetic gloss ta-al-ta-al.

mu-ib-rá-rá: mu (see Hymn to Bêl, line 18). ib is a modal verbal infix (MSL. p. XXIV). rá is a value of DU (see Hymn to Adad, line 21, gin).

dumu (Hymn to Sin, line 5).

zi-ga-na: zi (Hymn to Bêl, line 23). ga serves for vowel prolongation. na is postpositional.

ga-ni: ga (Hymn to Bêl, line 12). ni may be taken as the possessive suffix of the third person.

šà-zi-zi: šà (Hymn to Bêl, line 22). zi (just explained).

mu-ib-rá (see line 29).

eš: GÊŠPÛ with the value eš means “thirty”. diš is frequently a determinative before proper names, but here seems to mean “line”.

êr lim-ma (see Hymn to Bêl, colophon).

^dimmer Dumu-zi-da-kam: ^dimmer Dumu-zi (line 3). da (Hymn to Bêl, line 4). kam (Hymn to Sin, line 27).

Glossary

A I E U B G D Z Ḥ Ṭ K L M N S P Ḳ R Š T

A

Page

aba 66

abba 65

abgin 77

abdamên 35

abrù 76

azaggi 53

akad 37

akazušù 62

akala 73

ama 29

amânkiga 60

ana 77

ana-ám 76

anzakku 58

Annaka 74

anpadde 78

anšàgga 48

arali 79

Ašsuḥud 46

àba 73

àma 62

àme 34

â 26

âzu 47

I

i 51

ibmalla 60

ide 28

izba 41

im 42

iminnabimeš 64

imdasiggi 62

immîndul 62

imsi 53

ir 33

ì 65

ìd 53

E

e 51

ebi 54

elum 37

en 38

enab 40

Enzu 55

Enlillá 46

erimna 29

erita 69

éš 48

ègalani 73

Ènernugal 45

èta 69

ê-ani 69

êgâ 48

êrra 72

U

u 38

udda 61

Udkibnunnage 53

ukugalla 61

ummešilálá 64

ummešisisi 64

Unugka 75

ursag 79

uršazu 62

úsunnage 74

ùme-ám 68

ùmu-egul 68

ùmu-ese 68

ùmúne 26

ùnêla 30

û 64

ûgalla 61

ûdêš 51

ûsuddu 52

B

ba-ediḥuláḥe 63

Babbarêta 35

Babbaršušù 35

bagantallá 65

banîbag 41

banda 69

baraka 75

barru-a 61

bartabba 60

82

bašînag 68

bišaggazune 49

bur 68

G

ga 33

gaba 29

galgale 67

gannu 31

garrani 69

gašân 36

gigga 28

ginnaginna 66

giš 79

gíg 67

gín 41

gíš 80

gešni 68

gugage 80

gurunnaka 78

gúrra 39

gù 31

D

da 40

damalra 32

damâlla 33

dizuka 65

dimmer 26

dimmerrine 38

dugdugga 68

Dumuzi 73

dú 32

dù 34

Z

za 62

za-egin 67

zada 37

zal 32

zibbarage 75

zigazuni 47

zigi-en 66

zidazu 68

zuge 78

Ḥ

ḥa-e 39

ḥadê-a 58

ḥamunîbnene 39

ḥarra 69

ḥàrḥara 65

ḥu-e 39

ḥulmal 76

ḥùlla 50

Ṭ

ṭumu 46

ṭúra 39

K

ka 41

kalamma 61

kašaka 78

kašrabi 76

kâškasage 75

kibala 67

kika 75

ku-a 79

kurkurra 27

L

laḥna 32

láḥe-a 54

lid 49

limma 42

lugalra 51

luḥ 66

M

ma 30

maḥ 54

manîbsi 40

mara 50

mámên 38

màgur 44

màdim 48

me-a 41

melamzu 38

Merri 64

mu-ibrárá 80

mu-egin 40

mu-edamal 37

mu-ešînmaš 50

mubi 42

muduru 51

muzu 58

muḥba 68

muḥzušù 67

muḥnašù 68

mulu 64

munîbnene 39

muradûd 66

mutin 76

mûdna 32

Mûllilli 40

Mûllilra 47

mûnê 51

mûnba-e-e 78

mûndânaka 63

mûnmâl 78

mûnnâbe-e 77

mûnsimal 76

mûnsugamu 74

mûnrùrùrù 61

mûnšubbi 77

mûntilli 78

N

nanam 72

Nanâra 77

ná 67

nà-a 31

nâmga 41

nâmzuka 24

nâni 34

83

ni 77

nimgir 66

nimme 77

ninzu 37

Ninlil 62

nišia 42

nì 37

nìkige 59

nìtena 25

nîngú 50

nînru 52

nene 78

nesig 31

nêla 41

nu 54

Nudimmude 52

nunuzám 33

nûmti 36

S

sagezi 40

sagmalmalge 79

sagmâl 32

salduggazune 50

salzi 50

siba 28

siba-e 40

sigišše 79

síggazune 47

silimmâni 33

su 68

sug 54

sušišù 66

P

padazune 48

PAḤÂDU 77

Ḳ

ḳarra 31

R

rù 66

rùti-azu 49

Š

šá 37

šàzizi 80

šàmu 76

šànì 39

Šisunukima 45

Šiskima 54

še 38

šesmu 79

šêrmal 25

šêrmâllazune 47

šú 41

šú-ummeti 67

šúba 77

šúgil 42

šúza 52

T

tàltaltal 80

tišù 41

te 75

tega 66

tuggim 62

tukana 79

turture 67

turturzu 68

tušena 72

Footnotes

Transcriber’s Notes

• This eBook was prepared from a facsimile of the edition published by the AM PRESS, INC., New York, 1966.
• A few typographical errors or inconsistent spellings were corrected.
• An original cover image was produced, for unrestricted distribution with this Distributed-Proofreaders eBook.
• In the text version only, delimited italicized text within _underscores_.
• In the text version only, determinatives (words printed in superscript) are preceded by a caret (^) character.