Divination as Science: A Workshop on Divination Conducted during the 60th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Warsaw, 2014 9781575064260

Citation preview

Divination as Science

Divination as Science A Workshop Conducted during the 60th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Warsaw, 2014

Edited by

Jeanette C. Fincke

Winona Lake, Indiana Eisenbrauns 2016

© 2016 by Eisenbrauns Inc. All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America www.eisenbrauns.com

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Rencontre assyriologique internationale (60th : 2014 : Warsaw, Poland) | Fincke, Jeanette, editor. Title: Divination as science : a workshop conducted during the 60th Rencontre assyriologique internationale, Warsaw, 2014 / edited by Jeanette C. Fincke. Description: Winona Lake, IN : Eisenbrauns, 2016. | Includes bibliographical references and indexes. Identifiers: LCCN 2016011710 (print) | LCCN 2016016128 (ebook) | ISBN 9781575064253 (hardback : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781575064260 (pdf) Subjects: LCSH: Divination—Middle East—Congresses. | Religion and science—Middle East—Congresses. | Assyro-Babylonian religion—Congresses. | Assyriology—Congresses. Classification: LCC BL613 .R46 2014 (print) | LCC BL613 (ebook) | DDC 203/.20935—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016011710

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48–1984. ♾ ™

Contents Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   vii Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   xiii Divination between Religion and Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   1 JoAnn Scurlock Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena Made for Divinatory Purposes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   11 Ulla Susanne Koch “Shamash, great lord, whom I am asking, answer me with reliable ‘Yes!’ ”: The Influence of Divination on the Result of War . . . . . . . . . .   47 Krzysztof Ulanowski Sheep Anatomical Terminology in the šumma immeru Omen Series and Additional Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yoram Cohen

  79

Some Remarks about the Old Babylonian Libanomancy Texts . . . . . . .   93 Maria Stella Cingolo The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise: enūma anu enlil . . . . 107 Jeanette C. Fincke Divination and Religion as a Cultural System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Paul Delnero Indexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 General Index  167 Akkadian/Sumerian/Logograms 170 Texts 171   A. Museum Numbers  171   B. Publication Numbers  171

v

Abbreviations A AO BM CBS

Museum number of the Louvre for texts from Mari. Antiquités orientales. Museum number of the Louvre. British Museum, London. Museum number. Catalogue of the Babylonian Section. Museum number of the University Museum of Philadelphia. col. column. CUA Museum number of the Catholic University of America. EA El-Amarna Tablets number. EAE enūma anu enlil, series with celestial and meteorological omens. Hh ḪAR-ra=ḫubullu lexical list. Hg ḪAR-gud lexical list. HSM Museum number of the Harvard Semitic Museum, Cambridge, MA. IM Museum number of the Iraq Museum, Baghdad. Istanbul Tello Number of the tablets from Tello, Istanbul Museum. K. Kouyunjik collection. Museum number of the British Museum, London, for tablets from Nineveh. Ki. King. Museum number of the British Museum, London. LB Late Babylonian. LB Number of the Liagre Böhl collection of the Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, Leiden. M. Mari. Museum number of the Louvre, Paris. MA Middle Assyrian. MAH Museum number of the Musée d’Art et d’Histoire, Genève. Meissner Number of the collection of Meissner. MLC Number of the J. Pierpont Morgan Library Collection, now included into the Yale Babylonian Collection, New Haven. MMA Museum number of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City. NA Neo-Assyrian. NB Neo Babylonian. NCBT Tablet number of the Newell Collection of Babylonian Tablets (now at the Yale University, New Haven). ND Siglum for the tablets from Nimrud / Kalḫu of the British Museum, London, and the Iraq Museum, Baghdad. Ni Nippur. Museum number of the Istanbul Museum. obv. obverse. rev. reverse. Rm. Rassam. Museum number of the British Museum, London. Sb Susiane; Museum number of the Louvre, Paris. SE Seleucid era. Sm. Smith. Museum number of the British Museum, London, for tablets excavated in Nineveh by G. Smith in 1874. Strassbourg Museum number of the Museum in Strassbourg. U. Ur. Museum number of the British Museum, London. UCBC Museum number of the University of California Berkeley Collection.

vii

viii UMM VAT YBC

Abbreviations Museum number of the University Museum Manchester. Vorderasiatische Abteilung T(h)ontafeln. Museum number of the Vorderasiatisches Museum, Berlin. Museum number of the Yale Babylonian Collection, New Haven.

Bibliographic Abbreviations IIIR IVR AAT ABL ACh ACT AEM 1/1 AfO AHw AoF ARM ARM X ARM XIII ARM 26 ARMT II AOAT ASJ BaM BBR BiOr BRM IV

Henry C. Rawlinson and George Smith, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, Vol. III. A Selection from Miscellaneous Inscriptions of Assyria. London: The British Museum, 1870. Henry C. Rawlinson and George Smith, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, Vol. IV. A Selection from Miscellaneous Inscriptions of Assyria. London: The British Museum, 1891. James A. Craig, Astrological-Astronomical Texts Copied form the Original Tablets in the British Museum. Leipzig: Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1899. Robert F. Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian Letters belonging to the Kouyunjik Collections of the British Museum. London – Chicago: University of Chicago 1892–1914. Charles Virolleaud, L’astrologie Chaldéenne. Le Livre intitule «enuma iluBêl». Paris: Paul Geutner, 1908–1912. Otto Neugebauer, Astronomical Cuneiform Texts. Babylonian Ephemerides of the Seleucid Period for the Motion of the Sun, the Moon, and the Planets vols. I–III. London: Lund Humphries, 1955. Jean-Marie Durand, Archives épistolaires de Mari 1/1. Archives royales de Mari 26. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les civilisations, 1988. Archiv für Orientforschung. Berlin • Graz: Ernst F. Weidner; Horn: Ferdinand Berger & Söhne; Wien: Institut für Orientalistik, 1923–. Wolfram von Soden, Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1959–65. Altorientalische Forschungen. Berlin: Akademieverlag, 1974–. Archives roayales de Mari: transcites et traduites. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale; Paris: editions Recherche sur les Civilosations, 1950–. Georges Dossin, La correspondence féminine. Archives royales de Mari X. Textes cuneiforms du Louvre 31. Paris: Libraire Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1967. Georges Dossin et al., Textes divers. Archives royales de Mari XIII. Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1964. Jean-Marie Durand, Archives épistolaires de Mari I/1. Archives royales de Mari 26. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1988. Charles-François Jean, Lettres diverses. Archives royales de Mari II, traduction. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1950. Alter Orient und Altes Testament. Kelevaer: Butzon & Bercker, NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag. Münster: Ugarit, 1968–. Acta Sumerologica. Hiroshima: University of Hiroshima, 1979–. Baghdader Mitteilungen. Berlin: Mann, 1960–2007. Heinrich Zimmern. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der babylonischen Religion. Die Beschwörungstafeln Šurpu, Ritualtafeln für Wahrsager, Beschwörer und Sänger. Leipzig: Leipzig J. C. Hinrichs, (1896–99) 1901. Bibliotheca Orientalis. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1943–. Albert T. Clay, Epics, Hymns, Omens and other Texts. Babylonian Records in the Library of J. Pierpont Morgan IV. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1923.

Abbreviations CAD

ix

The Assyrian Dictionary of the University of Chicago. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1956–2010. CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly. Washington: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1939–. Centaurus Centaurs; International Magazine of the History of Science and Medicine. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1950–. CDA Jeremy Black, Andrew R. George, Nicholas Postgate (eds.), A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1999. CDLJ Cuneiform Digital Library Journal; http://cdli.ucla.edu/?q=publications/ journal. CDLI Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative; http://cdli.ucla.edu. CNI Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications, Copenhagen. CT Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum. London: The British Museum, 1896–1990. CT 37 Sidney Smith, Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, part 37. London: The British Museum, 1923. CT 39 Cyril J. Gadd, Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, part 39. London: The British Museum, 1926. CT 49 Douglas A. Kennedy, Late Babylonian Economic Texts. Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum. London, part 49. London: The British Museum, 1968. CT 58 Bendt Alster and Markham J. Geller, Sumerian Literary Texts. Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum. London, part 58. London: The British Museum, 1990. CUSAS David I. Owen (ed.), Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology. Bethesda, Maryland: CDL, 2007–. Emar VI Daniel Arnaud, Recherches au pays d’Aštata Emar VI/I–III: Textes sumériens et accadiens. Editions recherché sur les civilisations, Symthèse 18. Paris: Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1985–86. FS Walker Cornelia Wunsch (ed.), Mining the Archives. Festschrift for Christopher Walker on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday, 4 October 2002. Dresden: Islet, 2002. GAG Wolfram von Soden, Grundriss der akkadischen Grammatik. Roma: Editrice Ponteficio Istituto Biblico, 1995 (3rd edition). HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual. Cincinnati, Ohio: Hebrew Union College, 1924–. HUCA Supp.  Hebrew Union College Annual, Supplement. Cincinnati, Ohio: Hebrew Union College, 1976–. Isis Isis; International Review Devoted to the History of Science and its Civilisation. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1913–. JANES The Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1968–81. JEOL Jaarbericht van het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Gezelschap (from 1945: Genootschap) “Ex Oriente Lux”. Leiden: Brill, 1933–. JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies. New Haven, Conn.; Cambridge, Mass.; Philadelphia, Penn.; Boston, Mass., 1947–. JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, 1942–. KAL Keilschrifttexte aus Assur literarischen Inhalts. Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft. Wiesbaden Harrassowitz, 2007–. KAR Erich Ebeling, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur religiösen Inhalts. Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 28, 34. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1919–23.

x

Abbreviations

Otto Schroeder, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur verschiedenen Inhalts. Leipzig: Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1920. LBAT Theophilus G. Pinches, Johann N. Strassmaier, Abraham J. Sachs, and Johann Schaumberger. Late Babylonian Astronomical and Related Texts. Brown University Studies vol. XVIII. Providence, RI: Brown University, 1955. LKA Erich Ebeling, Literarische Keilschrifttexte aus Assur. Berlin: AkademieVerlag, 1953. LTBA Lubor Matous and Wolfram von Soden, Die lexikalischen Tafelserien der Babylonier und Assyrer in den Berliner Museen. Berlin: Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Vorderasiatische Abteilung, 1933. MARI Mari, annals de recherches interdisciplinaires. Paris: Édition Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1982–1997. MDOG Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin. Berlin: Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft, 1898–. MSL Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon. Roma: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1937–. MSL 5 Benno Landsberger, The Series ḪAR-ra = ḫubullu Tablet I–IV. Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon vol. V. Roma, Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1957. MSL 9 Benno Landsberger and Miguel Civil, The Series ḪAR-ra = ḫubullu Tablet XV and Related Texts. Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon vol. IX. Roma, Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1967. MV Finkelstein  M. deJong Ellis (ed.), Essays in the Ancient Near East in Memory of Jacob Joel Finkelstein. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, 1977. N.A.B.U. Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires. Paris: Société pour l‘ètude du Proche-Orient ancien, 1987–. NFT Gaston Cros, Léon Heuzey, and François Thureau-Dangin. Nouvelles fouilles de Tello. Paris: Leroux, 1910–1914. OIS Oriental Institute Seminars. The Oriental Institute of Chicago, 2004–. OLZ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung. Berlin: Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1898–. OrNS Orientalia Nova Series. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1932–. PBS Publications of the Babylonian Section, The Museum of the University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: The University Museum, 1911–. PIHANS Publications de l’Institut historique- archaélogique néerlandais de Stambul. Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut, 1956–. PRAK Henri de Genouillac, Premières recherches archélologiques à Kich. Mission d’Henri de Genouillac, 1911–12. I: Rapport sur les travaux et inventaires (1924), II: Notes archéologiques et iventaires (1925). Paris: Édouard Champion, 1924–25. RA Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale. Paris: Ernst Leroux, 1884–. RIMA 2 A. Kirk Grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC I (1114– 859 BC). Toronto, Buffalo, London: Toronto University Press, 1991. RINAP 4 Erle Leichty, The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon, King of Assyria (680–669 BC). The Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian Period 4. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2011. RSO Rivista degli studi orientali. Roma: Bardi Editore, 1907–. SAA State Archives of Assyria. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1987–. SAA 3 Alasdair Livingstone, Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea. SAA 3. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1989. SAA 4 Ivan Starr, Queries to the Sungod: Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria. SAA 4. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1990. KAV

Abbreviations

xi

Hermann Hunger, Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings. SAA 8. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1992. SAA 10 Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars. SAA 10. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993. SAA 19 Alan Lenzi, Secrecy and the Gods. Secret Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia and Biblical Israel. SAA 19. Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2008. SAAB State Archives of Assyrian Bulletin. Padova: Sargon, 1987_. SpTU I Hermann Hunger, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 1. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka Band 9. Berlin: Gebrüder Mann, 1976. SpTU II Egbert von Weiher, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 2. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka Band 10; Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1983. SpTU III Egbert von Weiher, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 3. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsbemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka Band 12. Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1988. SpTU IV Egbert von Weiher, Uruk. Spätbabylonische Texte aus dem Planquadrat U 18 Teil 4. Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka, Endberichte Band 12. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 1993. TCL 10 Charles-F. Jean, Contrats de Larsa. Textes cunéiformes, Musée du Louvre 10. Paris: Geuthner, 1926. TCL 16 Henri de Genouillac, Textes religieux sumériens du Louvre. Textes cunéiformes, Musée du Louvre 16. Paris: Geuthner, 1930. TCS 4 Erle Leichty, The Omen Series Šumma izbu. Texts from Cuneiform Sources, vol. 4. Locust Valley, N.Y.: Augustin, 1970. TIM Texts in the Iraq Museum. Published by the Directorate General of Antiquities, Baghdad. Leiden: Brill, 1964–. ThesCRA, vol. III  Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum: Divination, Prayer, Gestures and Acts of Prayer, Gestures and Acts of Veneration, Hikesia, Asylia, Oath, Malediction. Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 2005. TJA Emile Szlechter, Tablettes juridiques et administratives de la IIIe dynastie d’Ur et de la Ire Dynastie de Babylone. Paris: Recueil Sirey, 1963. UCP University of California Publications in Semitic Philology. Berceley, Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1907–63. UET 6/1 C. J. Gadd and S. N. Kramer, Literary and Religious Texts, First Part. Ur Excavation Texts VI. London: The Trustees of the Two Museums 1963. UET 6/2 C. J. Gadd and S. N. Kramer, Literary and Religious Texts, Second Part. Ur Excavation Texts VI. London: The Trustees of the Two Museums 1966. VS Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der (Königlichen) Museen zu Berlin. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1971–. WdO Welt des Orients. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1947–. YOS Yale Oriental Series. Babylonian Texts. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1915–. YOS 10 Albrecht Goetze, Old Babylonian Omen Texts. Yale Oriental Series – Babylonian Texts, 10. New Haven, CN: Yale University; London: Geoffrey Cumberlege; Oxford: University Press, 1947. ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie. (Leipzig •) Berlin • New York • Boston: de Gruyter, 1886–. SAA 8

Preface This volume comprises a collection of revised papers originally used in the workshop Divination: Science Masked by Religion ? on July 21, 2014, as part of the 60th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale in Warsaw. The principle of the workshop was: There is no doubt that Ancient Near Eastern divination is firmly rooted in religion, since all ominous signs were thought to have been sent by gods, and the invocation of omens was embedded in rituals. Yet, the omen compendia display many aspects of a generally scientific nature. In their attempt to note all possible changes to the affected objects and to arrange their observations systematically for reference purposes, the scholars produced texts that resulted in a rather detailed description of the world, be it with respect to geography (the urban or rural environment on earth, or celestial and meteorological phenomena observed in the sky), biology (the outer appearance of the bodies of humans or animals, or the entrails of sheep), sociology (behaviour of people) or others. Based on different divination methods and omen compendia, the question to be discussed during this workshop was whether the scholars had a scientific approach, presented as religion, or whether the Ancient Near Eastern divination should be considered purely religious, and that the term ‘science’ is inappropriate in this context. An additional area to be explored was the cultural system in which divination and religion as well as other cultural conceptions have developed and used to function together.

The workshop attracted a large audience, and lively discussions emerged. The success of this workshop was largely due to the contribution of the participants themselves, and I am grateful to each and every one of them. Each participant revised their presentations for publication in this volume. My special thanks go to Ulla S. Koch for her valuable contribution, although sadly she was not able to attend the workshop itself. Last but not least, I am indebted to Jim Eisenbraun for publishing the proceedings of this workshop, and I would like to thank him for his priceless cooperation. Jeanette C. Fincke, Leiden, September 2015

xiii

Divination between Religion and Science JoAnn Scurlock To sort out the position of Mesopotamia vis-à-vis the Great Debate between Religion and Science that is so central to Western culture, it is necessary to have definitions of both Religion (with a capital R) and Science (with a capital S) that are based on actual rather than imagined reality, that do not take sides in the debate, and that, although of necessity based in our culture, are culture-neutral—that is, that are neither designed nor used to distinguish between our culture and our imagined culture ancestors on the one hand and the rest of humanity on the other. To do this, we need to identify the two ends of the continuum—that is, the extremes that will allow us to place everybody else in terms of which of the two they most closely approximate. We shall correspondingly define Religion (with a capital R) as a philosophically rational system that, like that Greek philosophy on which Protestant Fundamentalism is ultimately based, rejects this-world realities (and facts based on their observation via the senses) in search of eternal truths realized (for the philosophers) by the unaided intellect and (for the religious) by the pure soul or, as we Americas now call it, “going with your gut.” Reconnecting eternal truth with this “vale of tears” yields a religious vision of a God who is in control of every little thing that happens in the world. But you do not have to believe in God to be religious in this sense. Philosophically rational theories provide exactly the same comfort to the atheist that religion provides the faithful. What is attractive about philosophical rationality is that it requires no research, special knowledge, or even prolonged thought, and it gives you absolute, irrefutable, certainty. And here is where the confusion arises. Lay persons, many of them pretending to Science (that is to say, theoretical anthropologists and sociologists) imagine Science (with a capital S) to be identical with Religion except that it substitutes dead matter bound by immutable rules for the divine hand. This is, in my humble opinion, simply a matter of one Religion at loggerheads with another. From where I sit, the real story of the 17th-century Scientific Revolution was the, to this day not entirely resolved, struggle of Scientific (with a capital S) speculations to fight their way past the Religious (with a capital R) certainty of a mechanistic philosophy that denied, and to some extent continues to deny, the existence of gravity, electricity, germs, evolution, and even life itself. 1 Indeed, the modern Intelligent Design movement is 1.  For a discussion of these matters, see Brian Easlea, Witch-hunting Magic and the New Philosophy: An Introduction to the Debates of the Scientific Revolution 1450–1750 (Sussex: Harvester, 1980) 45–195.

1

2

JoAnn Scurlock

virtually a direct citation of the arguments of mechanistic philosophers, complete with the mathematical underpinnings. 2 And these arguments, themselves, go back, in their strange inverted way, to statements made in Plato’s Timaeus: “On this wise, using the language of probability, we may say that the world came into being—a living creature truly endowed with soul and intelligence by the providence of God.” 3 If Science (with a capital S) is to be different from Religion (with a capital R), it needs actually to be different in some significant respect. And such a difference is readily to hand. In opposition to philosophical rationality, people I would refer to as real Scientists (with a capital S) are empirically rational. That is, they are looking to solve this-world problems and to explain observed realities, and the one thing they are not, and can never be, is absolutely one-hundred percent certain. And it is precisely this lack of absolute certainty that gets Science into trouble. God is Truth and Truth is certain. If there is no certainty in this world, then God is irrelevant if not non-existent. To elaborate on this point. I think most people would consider Einstein a real scientist, and he signed off on what is now known as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. This states that you actually alter the subject of study by the act of measuring it. To be more precise, the more certain you can be about the value of the x in your equation, the less certain you can be about your y and even if it were possible to be absolutely certain about the value of x you would then have absolutely no idea what y might be. In other words, science is never sure. What we can do is to predict, but only within certain parameters. So fifty percent of silver atoms passing through a magnetic field will go up and the rest down, but there is no way we will ever be able to know how an individual silver atom is going to act. Similarly, those pretty spheres and dumbbells representing the orbit of electrons are as close an approximation as we can get to where the actual electron is likely to be at any given time, not an actual representation of the electron in orbit. Scientists need hardly be atheists to qualify for Science (with a capital S). Indeed, belief in God, even as the creator, is no bar to science, as long as God is not imagined as personally controlling everything in nature at every second, and there is no insisting on a ridiculously short time table for creation. To know is that this is, at least from the perspective of my father’s generation in central Kansas, a Protestant versus Catholic debate, with Catholics firmly on the Science side of the argument. To summarize, the Religion pole is philosophically rational; it distrusts if not actually rejects observed reality—an observation becomes a fact only if substantiated by or illustrative of deeper meanings. Its goal is in locating eternal truths and/ or achieving absolute certainty. The Religion pole is also predisposed to imagine a fully controlled situation with maximal interference either by an all-seeing God or by intransigent Laws of Nature. The Science pole, by contrast, is empirically rational; it is based in practical solutions to real world problems and/or desires to explain observed realities. It looks for regularities, but expects uncertainty. Measured on this scale, Hippocratic Medicine gets high marks for Science on the control end of the scale. Gods, insofar as they were believed to exist, were non2. For the use of mathematical arguments as “proof ” of intelligent design, see Edward J. Larson, “ID in the Courts: Anti-evolutionism for the 21st Century,” American Journal of Legal History 54 (2014) 151. 3.  Timaeus, 30b

Divination between Religion and Science

3

interventionist, or at least they did not cause diseases. 4 The alternative of attribution of disease to natural causes did not in itself spoil things since these so-called natural causes were both supernatural by our definition of the word (that is, spirits) and subject to manipulation. 5 Classic in this regard is the Hippocratic recommendation to persuade a prolapsed uterus to return to its proper place by putting sweet smelling substances to its’ owner’s nose. 6 All this is to say that the so-called “natural” causes were not only capable of changing their minds, but could be forced to do so. 7 Good thing, too, since otherwise the sick would have been hopelessly doomed and nature would genuinely have had to have been allowed to take its course. Even today, the extreme religious reject any form of medical treatment as an interference with God’s plan. Even the less extreme regard illness or misfortune of any kind as God’s punishment for sin, and believe that the only real recourse is to throw oneself on God’s mercy in prayer. In short, it is precisely the retention of what we would call supernatural forces and the practice of what we would call magic in the Hippocratic system that qualifies it as Scientific. Where Hippocrates and company get their high marks for Religion is in their burning desire to rise above the status of mere craftsmen suffered by doctors before them by embracing philosophical rationality. There was nothing wrong with ancient Greek powers of observation despite their famous distrust of the senses—in fact, their powers were unparalleled. The problem was that Greek philosophers were not interested in mere practicalities. Consequently, Hippocratic doctors’ observations, whether watching untreated patients either recover or die, Tuskeegee study style, or actually purging a slave to death as part of medical instruction 8 were designed to discover and/or demonstrate eternal truths about the nature of the universe, not to devise treatments for disease.  9 Indeed, treatments such as there were tended to be generated from theory and not seriously tested on real patients. Or as Guido Majno put it more brutally: “The few experiments worthy of the name in the Hippocratic books are mostly analogies with irrelevant facts, which are themselves not necessarily correct.” 10 Hippocratic treatises recommend an anti-coagulant to “treat” bleeding, 11 and the patient who died from meningitis after being given an unnecessary hole in the head without antiseptics was a “bad patient” and the death in question had “nothing to do with the treatment.” 12 Moreover, a “beautiful” prognosis was “He will die.” 13 Beautiful, of course, because it was certain. In short, Hippocratic medicine in toto 4.  Sacred Disease 1, 4; Airs, Waters, Places 22. For more, see JoAnn Scurlock, “From Esagil-kinapli to Hippocrates,” Journal des médecines cunéiformes 3 (2004) 21–2. 5.  For details, see JoAnn Scurlock, “Ancient Mesopotamian Medicine” in A Companion to the Ancient Near East (ed. Daniel Snell; Oxford: Blackwell, 2005) 307–09. 6.  Places in Man 47. 7.  For more on this subject, see Scurlock, “From Esagil-kin-apli to Hippocrates,” 16–20. 8.  The Nature of Man 6. 9.  For more on this subject, see Scurlock, “From Esagil-kin-apli to Hippocrates,” 24–30. 10.  Guido Majno, The Healing Hand: Man and Wound in the Ancient World (Cambridge: Harvard, 1975) 176–77. 11.  Ibid. 150–53 (Patient No. 1). 12.  Ibid. 166–69 (Patient No. 7). 13.  See the discussion in ibid. 171.

4

JoAnn Scurlock

lies nearer to the Religion pole or would do, if real definitions, and not prior prejudice, were ever applied to the debate. And what about Mesopotamia? On the subject of interventions, Mesopotamians were much more willing than Hippocratic physicians to see involvement from the gods, although not nearly so much as is usually asserted. It is hardly the case that: “The Mesopotamians believed that disease was a punishment inflicted by the gods upon men for their sins.” 14 Even in the Diagnostic and Prognostic Series, it is not at all uncommon for entries to attribute medical problems to malfunctioning body parts and specially named syndromes rather than gods, ghosts or demons. 15 When lines from the Diagnostic series appear cited in therapeutic texts, the alleged divine causal agent is surprisingly frequently not even mentioned. 16 At the treatment end, non involvement is even more striking, with elaborate rituals the exception rather than the rule and a surprisingly large number, even of treatments for witchcraft(!), that have no recitations of any kind attached to them. 17 In fact, careful examination of texts from all over the Ancient Near East (and not just Mesopotamia) reveals a situation in which the gods, however, important and powerful they may be, do not exactly give what is going on below on earth their undivided attention, tending to intervene in human affairs only when angry or asked, even begged, to do so. Classic are Hittite prayers in which the gods are chided for allowing the Kaškean barbarians to destroy their sanctuaries. And if the quantity of offerings diminishes as a result, the gods have only themselves to blame. 18 Sentiments of this sort reach even to the Hebrew Bible—the priests of Baʿal are mocked for their inability to attract their god’s attention to the pyre that he is supposed to set afire to prove his godhood. So where is he? Perhaps he has gone to sleep or is off in a private corner relieving himself (1 Kings 18.27). Elijah may have laughed, but the fact was that his own god, Yahweh, needed to be kept localized in his sanctuary by a constant round of offerings failing which it might not be possible even to reach him, a matter of some serious soul searching when the Temple was destroyed. 19 For Mesopotamians, it is clear enough that the feeding, housing, clothing and bathing of gods was hardly necessary—in so far as such things were needed, the 14.  Georges Roux, Ancient Iraq, 3rd ed. (London: Penguin Books, 1992) 366–67; cf. at length, Karel van der Toorn, Sin and Sanction in Israel and Mesopotamia (SSN 22; Assen: van Gorcum, 1985) 56–93. For a full discussion, see JoAnn Scurlock, Magico-Medical Means of Treating Ghost-Induced Illnesses in Ancient Mesopotamia (Ancient Magic and Divination 3; Leiden: Brill/Styx, 2006) 73–74. 15.  For a full discussion of the ancient Mesopotamian diagnostic system, see JoAnn Scurlock and Burton R. Andersen, Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2005) 429–528 (Chapter 19). 16.  This is especially true of ghost headaches and roaring in the ears. For examples with, and without, attribution to a ghost, see Scurlock, Ghost-Induced Illnesses, 11–4. 17.  Numerous examples are to be found in Tzvi Abusch and Daniel Schwemer, Corpus of Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraft Rituals, vol. 1 (Ancient Magic and Divination 8/1; Leiden: Brill, 2011), especially Text Groups 1 and 2. Most medical treatments had a recitation that could be used if desired; the point is that it was not considered necessary to use them. 18.  This is the gist of Arnuwanda I’s prayer to the Sungoddess of Arinna, although not quite so baldly stated (Itamar Singer, Hittite Prayers [Writings from the Ancient World 11; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002] 40–43; cf. 52–54 [Muršili II]). 19.  See JoAnn Scurlock, “The Techniques of the Sacrifice of Animals,” Andrews University Seminary Studies 44 (2006) 39.

Divination between Religion and Science

5

gods could very well do this for themselves and did so before mankind had been created. Indeed, mankind would never have been created at all if the Anunnaki gods had not gone on strike, burned their tools, and marched in a body on Enlil’s house. 20 What all this priestly activity achieved was to make the gods available for help in solving practical this-world problems like winning a war and healing a sick child. 21 But, it may be objected, what about divination? Well, what about it? People seem to assume that divination is about determining the will of the gods, a sort of animated astrological fatalism. It was nothing of the kind. I have (and in print) argued for prophecy as a form of divination. 22 What I was not trying to do, and need to do now, is to distinguish between the two (and to explain Israelite prophetic rejection of most forms of divination). Both prophecy and divination are forms of communication between man and god which allow the former to discover what is going to happen in the future. The difference comes in how the production of that future is imagined, and this difference speaks directly to our definitions of Science (with a capital S) and Religion (with a capital R). Religion assumes that all that happens on earth (including illness) is an expression of God’s will, and prophecy sorts with Religion in having as its goal the communication of that will. So prophecies, whether from Israel, Mari or Assyria share a common pattern of presentation in which the divinity whose will it is speaks directly through the mouth of the prophet. Examination of actual prophecies often reveals a more complex thought process than simple inspiration would produce or, to put it differently, the most spectacular prophecies let you know how they can be so sure of what they say. So, Isaiah 36–37 derives what the comedian/ political analyst Steven Colbert has dubbed “truthiness” from Sennacherib’s siege of Jerusalem, while Nahum derives his from the fall of Nineveh. 23 However, although based on historical events, they differ from Mesopotamian examples of historical omen divination in that the events being presented are themselves signs from God communicating his will to mankind. In ancient Mesopotamia, the omens of divination came in solicited and unsolicited forms. The solicited are the familiar mancies (liver, smoke, oil, etc.). Unsolicited included chance happenings, natural phenomena and historical events. Where divination sorts with Science (with a capital S) is in regarding the future as essentially an uncertain quantity. Liver omens were valid only for a specified period. 24 And this only completes the ruins of the will-of-the-gods approach. In oracle question after oracle question of Esarhaddon, the first thing to be asked after posing the question is “Does your great divinity know it?” 25 A “no” answer to this question on the part of the god would, therefore, include, among other possibilities, the divinity not knowing anything about the matter. Oblique references to getting into trouble by eating 20.  Atrahasis I 57–71. 21.  See Scurlock, “From Esagil-kin-apli to Hippocrates,” 16. 22.  See JoAnn Scurlock, “Prophecy as a form of Divination; Divination as a form of Prophecy” in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (ed. Amar Annus; OIS 6: Chicago: Oriental Institute, 2010) 276–316. 23. Ibid. 24.  For a discussion, see Ivan Starr, Queries to the Sungod: Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria (State Archives of Assyria 4; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1990) xvi–xvii. 25.  See ibid., xx.

6

JoAnn Scurlock

ill-omened as opposed to good-omened meat suggest that, by eating, or declining to eat, the animal of the divinatory sacrifice, one could also accept or reject the omen that it represented. 26 In the unsolicited omens, the lack of inevitability is even more striking. A bad omen? There is a problem? There were reams and reams of rituals designed to get rid of every conceivable bad omen. To note is that these rituals are designed to directly cancel the omen (literally dumping it symbolically into the river) with the gods called in as patrons and guarantors of the enterprise. So much for the future being the product of the divine will. What is revealed by the gods via unsolicited omens was what was about to happen, not necessarily what they wanted to happen one way or another or, to put it differently, in a polytheistic system, it is always possible for one god to be angry and the others not at all. If the gods were so bloody minded, and such a unified front against mankind, they would not have given humans rituals with which to cancel bad omens. Or as one rather exasperated scholar wrote to Esarhaddon, the god who made the earthquake also made the apotropaic ritual to get rid of the earthquake). 27 Indeed, the entire enterprise is a sort of early warning system allowing humans to avert problems before they can occur, a sort of preventative medicine but for general bad luck. And Mesopotamian historical omens are of a piece with this approach. Their purpose, which is what gets them branded as somewhere between false prophecy and political propaganda is precisely the fact that they were intended to display what could happen rather than to demonstrate the will of the gods. In the Marduk prophecy, I would argue that the intent was to persuade Aššurbanipal to rebuild Babylon promising him, as a reward, Marduk’s patronage of his planned Elamite campaign. The Netherworld vision, by contrast, warned Aššurbanipal of divine displeasure if Babylon was not left in ruins. Aššurbanipal heard what he wanted to hear, and the rest is, as they say, history. In short, the Mesopotamian religio-divinatory system in toto falls at the Scientific end of the spectrum or would do, if real definitions, and not prior prejudice, were ever applied to the debate. It is not that eternal truths were of no interest to Mesopotamians; indeed they invented the concept of an eternal world that inspired Greek philosophy and ultimately Religion (with a capital R). What they did not do was to reject this world in its favor. Their big questions were the big questions of Science and not of Religion and the answers are to match. The reactions of the religious to those answers range from puzzled observation (Walton’s “functional explanations”) 28 to denunciations as “irrational.” 29 Scientists, by contrast, are intrigued. Indeed, the Big Bang Theory is just a disenchanted version of Marduk’s defeat of Tiamat and, as I am told, with just about as much hard mathematical evidence to support it. 26.  For a discussion of this issue, see JoAnn Scurlock, “Animal Sacrifice in Ancient Mesopotamian Religion,” in A History of the Animal World in the Ancient Near East (ed. Billie Jean Collins; Leiden: Brill, 2002) 399. 27.  See Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars, State Archives of Assyria 10 (Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993), no. 56 (ABL 355) rev. 2–12. 28.  For a full discussion of this issue, see John H. Walton, Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2011). 29.  For references, see Claus Westermann, Genesis 1–11 (translated by John J. Scullion; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1984 [German ed. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neurkirchener Verlag, 1974]) 108–10.

Divination between Religion and Science

7

And if Mesopotamian divination was itself essentially some form of science, it is no surprise that Mesopotamian medicine was scientific as well. Mesopotamian diagnostics are clearly distinguished from other forms of divination, 30 but they share a common concern with communication. Divinatory languages presume communication with gods; Mesopotamian medicine presumed communication with a variety of illnesses, not all, even not most, of which were caused by gods. Even when they were, the god, as often as not, acted through other agents (referred to as šedu) with whom one was actually attempting to communicate. This reality had at least two consequences. One was that medical diagnosis had to be devised as its own system (hence the differences in phraseology) 31 and the other was that the level of certainty of having figured out the system was correspondingly much less. The illness or its causal agent, if any, communicated with you, the doctor, by means of a sort of unsolicited omen in the form of signs and symptoms, and you responded with medicine. Nothing about the communication from the illness told you what to do, so you just tried things out until you found something that worked. If it worked, that was a “yes” from the illness and if it didn’t, that was a “no.” We call this “testing” and so did they, and to say that something was “tested” was the highest possible recommendation. 32 A passage in the so-called Sin of Sargon even refers to a sort of double blind testing. 33 But there was a potential catch—that lingering sense of uncertainty. What if the illness took its offering and then refused to go away? This is where gods of healing came into play. As with the gods of divination, they gave mankind rituals (especially recitations) 34 with which to ensure that the offerings got to the illness and that it fulfilled its side of the bargain and indeed departed. Where the causal agent was a ghost or witchcraft, the god of justice could also be enlisted to conduct what was essentially a trial of an uncooperative illness causer. We may laugh, but this sort of rigamarolle does indeed make medicine work better, by convincing the patient that he is on the way to recovery. Nothing prevented humans from adding new omens to the corpus and, indeed new material was being incorporated as late as Aššurbanipal’s Elamite campaigns. 35 Similarly, new treatments (and new uses for plants acquired through empire) were being devised till the end of Mesopotamian civilization. The colophons of Aššurbanipal forbid stealing the tablet or erasing the king’s name and putting your own in its place, but none warn against adding to or changing either omens or medical lore. By contrast, the Esarhaddon Succession Treaty specifically forbids altering the terms of the agreement. More extreme along the same trajectory was the burning 30.  See JoAnn Scurlock, “Physician, Exorcist, Conjuror, Magician: A Tale of Two Healing Professionals,” in Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretative Perspectives (ed. Tzvi Abusch and Karel van der Toorn; Ancient Magic and Divination 1 (Groningen: Styx, 1999) 73–74. 31.  See Scurlock, Ghost-Induced Illnesses, 75. 32.  For more details, see Scurlock, “Ancient Mesopotamian Medicine,” 309. 33.  See Alasdair Livingstone, Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea, State Archives of Assyria 3 (Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1989), no. 33, obv. 13′-16′, rev. 11′–20′. 34.  For a classic example or two, see Scurlock, “Ancient Mesopotamian Medicine,” 312–14. 35.  For details, see Ivan Starr, “Historical Omens Concerning Ashurbanipal’s War Against Elam,” AfO 32 (1985) 60–67, and Beate Pongratz-Leisten, “The King at the Crossroads: Between Divination and Cosmology,” in Divination, Politics, and Ancient Near Eastern Empires (ed. Alan Lenzi and Jonathan Stökl; Ancient Near East Monographs 7; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2014) 33–48.

8

JoAnn Scurlock

death of Tyndale. He was executed, not for adding to or changing the Bible’s meaning, but merely for daring to translate it into vernacular English. Similar problems (if less violently resolved) have arisen with translating the Koran out of Arabic. Even so, the difference in certainty as reflected in the number of possible “yes” answers in medical texts by comparison with ordinary divination is astounding. The odd omen has more than one predicted outcome, and you have nipḫat barim (hot air but no agreement among diviners), but nothing in the divinatory corpus will have prepared you for the plethora of proffered treatments in the medical corpus, with dozens of treatments just for simple problems like headaches and upset stomachs. This plethora is usually held up to ridicule as a sign of things not “really” working or otherwise disqualifying Mesopotamian medicine from Science; in fact, it is precisely this that places this aspect of Mesopotamian culture firmly in the category of Science (with a capital S). Modern doctors look for signs and symptoms just as ancient Mesopotamians did. Both believe that external attackers invisible to the naked eye are responsible for some, but not all, illnesses. So much so that modern Medicine was denounced by Protestant divines as a revival of “Babylonian demonology.” 36 Both, at least in America, have a philosophy of “use whatever works” and worry later about why it works. (So the reason that aspirin actually works has been discovered within my lifetime). The Mesopotamian equivalent is the concept of ikkibu, which explains why a particular substance is effective in dealing with a spirit. It could mean either that the spirit loved it so much it would do anything to get it or that it hated it so much that it would go to any length to get away from it. Those are opposite things— they knew this, of course, they just didn’t care why it was working so long as it worked. And that is how one word comes to mean itself and its opposite. A visit to the nearest modern pharmacy will also reveal that we, too, have dozens of treatments for common problems such as headache and upset stomach. What makes both modern and ancient enterprises Scientific is that it is assumed that intervention is possible with, or without prayer, and that the object of the exercise is not to discern the will of God(s) but to find out what will happen without intervention and then to attempt to intervene, assuming that the situation is not, in fact, hopeless. In conclusion, Religion (with a capital R) is philosophically rational. It rejects this-world realities in search of eternal truths and presupposes a God or gods in control of every little thing that happens in the world. Religion expects absolute certainty and will settle for nothing less. By contrast, Science (with a capital S) is empirically rational. It looks to solve this-world problems and to explain observed realities. It presupposes a God or gods that may not even exist and, even if he does/ 36.  “This primitive germ theory has, in fact, a great advantage over the modern successor, for to the imagination of primitive man the germ is obliging enough to take a tangible shape. It does not hide itself, as the modern germ insists upon doing, so as to be discernible only when isolated and under the gaze of a powerful microscope, nor must its existence be hypothetically assumed. The ancient germ was not ashamed of itself; it showed its teeth and even its tail and its horns. The germ was a demon, an evil spirit that was sufficiently accommodating to sit for its portrait. . . . In these times when we are living under the germ theory of disease, there would be a certain poetic justice in the apparition of an old Asu of Babylonia-Assyria rising out of his grave, and exclaiming with a bony finger directed to the ultramodern pathologist, ‘There, I told you so thousands of years ago—it’s all due to the demons.’ ” (Morris Jastrow, “Babylonian-Assyrian Medicine,” Annals of Medical History 1 [1917] 232, 257).

Divination between Religion and Science

9

they do, interfere(s) little, if at all, in what happens on earth. Science would love certainty but is prepared to live with mere probability. Any actually practiced system of medicine will, of necessity, fall somewhere between these two poles. It is nonetheless possible to use the endpoints to define whether two systems to be compared are closer to one pole or the other. By this measurement, then, Hippocratic medicine is closer to Religion and Mesopotamian medicine to Science; prophecy is closer to Religion and divination to Science; and, finally, Mesopotamian divination is closer to Religion and Mesopotamian medicine to Science.

Bibliography Abusch, Tzvi, and Daniel Schwemer. Corpus of Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraft Rituals, vol. 1. Ancient Magic and Divination 8/1. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Easlea, Brian. Witch-hunting Magic and the New Philosophy: An Introduction to the Debates of the Scientific Revolution 1450–1750. Sussex: Harvester, 1980. Jastrow, Morris. “Babylonian-Assyrian Medicine,” Annals of Medical History 1 (1917) 231–57. Larson, Edward J. “ID in the Courts: Anti-evolutionism for the 21st Century.” American Journal of Legal History 54 (2014) 147–67. Livingstone, Alasdair. Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea. State Archives of Assyria 3. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1989. Majno, Guido. The Healing Hand: Man and Wound in the Ancient World. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975. Parpola, Simo. Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars. State Archives of Assyria 10. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993. Pongratz-Leisten, Beate. “The King at the Crossroads: Between Divination and Cosmology.” Pp. 33–48 in Divination, Politics, and Ancient Near Eastern Empires. Edited by Alan Lenzi and Jonathan Stökl. Ancient Near East Monographs 7. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2014. Roux, Georges. Ancient Iraq, 3rd edition. London: Penguin Books, 1992. Scurlock, JoAnn. “Physician, Exorcist, Conjuror, Magician: A Tale of Two Healing Professionals.” Pp. 69–79 in Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretative Perspectives. Edited by Tzvi Abusch and Karel van der Toorn. Ancient Magic and Divination 1. Groningen: Styx, 1999. _________. “Animal Sacrifice in Ancient Mesopotamian Religion.” Pp. 361–87 in A History of the Animal World in the Ancient Near East. Edited by Billie Jean Collins. Leiden: Brill, 2002. _________. “From Esagil-kin-apli to Hippocrates.” Journal des médecines cunéiformes 3 (2004) 10–30. _________. Magico-Medical Means of Treating Ghost-Induced Illnesses in Ancient Mesopotamia. Ancient Magic and Divination 3. Leiden: Brill/Styx, 2006. _________. “Ancient Mesopotamian Medicine.” Pp.  302–15 in A Companion to the Ancient Near East. Edited by Daniel Snell. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005. _________. “The Techniques of the Sacrifice of Animals.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 44 (2006) 13–49. _________. “Prophecy as a form of Divination; Divination as a form of Prophecy.” Pp. 277–316 in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Edited by Amar Annur. Oriental Institute Seminars 6: Chicago: Oriental Institute, 2010. Scurlock, JoAnn, and Burton R. Andersen. Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2005.

10

JoAnn Scurlock

Singer, Itamar. Hittite Prayers. Writings from the Ancient World 11. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002. Starr, Ivan. “Historical Omens Concerning Ashurbanipal’s War Against Elam.” Archiv für Orientforschung 32 (1985) 60–67. Starr, Ivan. Queries to the Sungod: Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria. State Archives of Assyria 4. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1990. Toorn, Karel van der. Sin and Sanction in Israel and Mesopotamia. Studia Semitica Neerlandica 22. Assen: van Gorcum, 1985. Walton, John H. Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2011. Westermann, Claus. Genesis 1–11. Translated by John J. Scullion. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1984 (German edition Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neurkirchener Verlag, 1974).

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena Made for Divinatory Purposes Ulla Susanne Koch Copenhagen

As the theme of the 2014 Warsaw workshop itself indicates, there is a tendency in Assyriological scholarship to juxtapose divination and science in the modern sense. 1 This is not the aim of the present paper. To my mind, it is only meaningful to pose the question whether the observations made in connection with the performance of extispicy were biased, if we for the time being disregard that the aim of modern science is fundamentally different from the aim of divination. While both are knowledge generating systems, which both produce insight useful to the communities within which they operate, their domains are fundamentally different. Modern science strives to explain the workings of the natural world in and by itself, to procure knowledge about our physical reality, whereas divination is a form of communication with the supernatural, which aims to procure knowledge about the vagaries of human existence. In Mesopotamian divination, parts of the natural world were considered the gods’ writing board, and those parts were avidly observed, carefully described, the observations recorded, and regularities calculated with increasing mathematical precision and ingenuity. This careful observation of natural phenomena is, however, a superficial similarity with natural sciences; divination served a grander purpose than mapping the laws of nature—it dealt with the judgments of the gods. The present small study investigates whether one of the basic principles, or ideals, that defines modern science—namely, that of freedom from bias—was applied in Mesopotamian divination. I look primarily at extispicy. In other words, if we look at performances of divination as repeated experiments, can we detect some form of bias?

Divination and Knowledge It is common even today to describe Mesopotamian divination as concerned with “predicting the future.” 2 This approach risks being not only mistaken, since it is 1.  Also reflected in the 2009 University of Chicago Oriental Institute Seminar Science and Superstition: Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. The papers from this conference were published by Amar Annus, Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (OIS 6; Chicago: The University of Chicago, 2010). 2. This view is found in recent studies, for instance by Piotr Steinkeller, “Of Stars and Men: The Conceptual and Mythological Setup of Babylonian Extispicy,” in Bibliocal and Oriental Essays in Memory of William L. Moran (Rome: Biblical and Gregorian Press, 2005) 11–47, and Stefan Maul, Die

11

12

Ulla Susanne Koch

quite evident that not only the future but also the present and the past were under investigation, 3 but it may also prove to be misleading. To narrow the subject matter of Mesopotamian divination down to the temporal perspective risks missing the mark altogether and cutting off valuable pathways of investigation. 4 A more open definition would be to describe Mesopotamian divination (just like any other form of divination) as a knowledge-generating system in the sense that it provided “information believed to be true,” which is the working epistemological definition of “knowledge.” Obviously, the knowledge obtained by divination would not withstand the litmus test of modern Cartesian skepticism, but from an emic perspective, the evidence and authority of tradition was overwhelming and, indeed, it would be anachronistic and unfounded to assume divination was ever even questioned in ancient Mesopotamia. Today, similarly undocumented bodies of expertise are widely accepted in the Western world: the skills of mastering the stock market and pronouncing forecasts on economic and societal developments are in high demand and held in high esteem. Even though history and statistics prove the experts wrong over and over again, we still have faith in them. The Nobel Prize-winning economist and experimental psychologist Daniel Kahneman has investigated this phenomenon among other apparently irrational ways humans understand the world. In Thinking Fast and Slow, 5 he has presented the main results from a life of research into human thought processes. His main thesis is that humankind has two fundamentally different cognitive mechanisms, which he calls Systems 1 and 2. System 1 is the fast, knee jerk evaluation, which draws on our stored knowledge and preconceptions. Drawing on this is the least energy consuming and connected with cognitive ease. System 2 demands a conscious effort to make calculations or analyze facts, perhaps even looking for new information. His argument is that humans, like all other living things, are programmed to spend as little energy on any given task as possible and that making rapid decisions can be lifesaving in certain situations. From a purely evolutionary perspective, it makes sense to rely on System 1. Because we are predisposed to use System 1, because it demands the least cognitive strain, it feels pleasant and thus convincing. System 1 and 2 are not structures of the brain or innate reflexes, they are simply a model for what he and his colleagues have observed in psychological experiments as well as other sources of hard facts analyzed statistically. Among many other phenomena, one of the things Kahneman has observed is cognitive illusions. A cognitive illusion allows System 1 to jump to conclusions. A cognitive illusion is not necessarily part of our innate mental make-up but is typically socially accepted and becomes part of us by cultural osmosis. It is an illusion, because it leads us to draw wrong conclusions, or at least conclusions that do not Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient: Zeichen des Himmels und der Erde (Munich: Beck. 2013), e.g., pp. 12, 118. 3.  Ulla Susanne Koch, “Concepts and Perception of Time in Mesopotamian Divination,” in Time and History in the Ancient Near East. Proceedings from the 56th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Barcelona 26–30 July 2010 (ed. Lluis Feliu; Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 2013) 127–42. 4.  As already pointed out by Friedrich H. Cryer in Divination in Ancient Israel and its Near Eastern Environment: A Socio-Historical Investigation (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 142; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994). 5.  Daniel Kahneman, Thinking Fast and Slow (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011).

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

13

withstand closer analysis of the statistical realities. It is not empirically true. In the case of divination, the illusion of validity can be observed. We have a tendency to trust our evaluation of a given situation if we make it with cognitive ease—that is, if it intuitively makes sense to us and appears to us to be cogent. This gives us a pleasant feeling and strengthens our belief. We do not question it, since our feeling of knowing the truth is convincing and System 1, as it so often does, rules the day. The illusion of validity can be founded in the practice of skill and hard won expertise; the conclusions themselves may be false but reaching them requires the application of expertise. Kahneman based his conclusions on an investigation of the stock market. Statistically, stock brokers, professional and amateurs alike, would achieve the same or better results by their daily trading if they left the bourse to its own devices. The ideas they act upon have little or no effect. This is a simple reality that is based on hard facts. Over a 50-year period, even the trading carried out by the most experienced and knowledgeable traders makes no difference, and from one year to another, the difference is so small as to have no statistical significance. Nonetheless, traders feel that they make a difference and have a legitimate skill. This is what Kahneman calls the illusion of skill, which is so convincing that a whole industry and all of western society accepts it in spite of the clear evidence of the numbers. One of the reasons for this is that the stock traders do indeed have a field of expertise that requires years of education, and their work involves analysis of complex information. The application of this expertise creates the illusion of skill, of performing a task with valid results. Another reason is cultural and social. The acceptance of the validity and value of the kind of expertise the stockbrokers acquire and apply is very strongly ingrained in the financial world. In Kahneman’s experience, boards of directors presented with hard facts choose to explain them away in order to maintain their view of the world. Many ordinary people also enjoy following the stock market and trading bonds in a minor way, even though everything tells them to leave it alone. Social and cultural acceptance reinforces the illusion: the feeling of confidence and validity is overwhelming and persuasive; mere facts cannot make it go away. Another cognitive illusion that is relevant in the case of divination is what Kahneman dubs the illusion of pundits. This refers to the situation in which we intuitively feel that we have succeeded in explaining historical events because of social, economic, or other factors that appear to make sense of what has happened, whether it be economic bubbles, terrorist attacks, or election landslides. Since it is relatively easy to explain the past, it must be possible to make reliable predictions as well, we instinctively assume. Western society spends huge amounts of time and money on this kind of expertise. Kahneman has demonstrated that the predictions made by experts are actually less reliable than if alternate scenarios had been selected by the toss of a coin. Still, we have a deep-seated need for knowledge, and the amount of real expertise and knowledge that pundits display reinforces the illusion of validity—again despite everything hard facts should teach us about their reliability. These are the same kinds of illusions we can observe in action when it comes to divination. The diviners were highly trained experts who mastered complex fields of learning that demanded knowledge, accuracy, and integrity. The illusions of validity and skill were at play. Just as today, actual evidence that contradicted the illusions

14

Ulla Susanne Koch

was easy to explain away within the accepted framework. The illusions were enhanced culturally and socially. The ultimate sources for the information obtained through divination were the gods, and their existence, knowledge, expertise, and reliability were never questioned, and hence the information had to be accepted as knowledge. Cicero lets the stoic philosopher Chrysippus express this sentiment exactly: If there are gods and they do not declare to men what things are going to be, either they do not cherish men, or they do not know what will happen, or they think that it is of no importance to men to know what will be, or they do not think it is worthy of their own majesty to give advance signs to humans of what will be, or not even the gods themselves are able to give signs. But gods do cherish us, for they are beneficent to and friends of the race of men. And they do know what things have been established and designated by themselves. And it is of importance to us to know what things will happen, for we will be more cautious if we know. And the gods do not consider this alien to their own majesty, because nothing is more outstanding than beneficence. Nor are they unable to foreknow things that will happen. . . . Gods exist, and therefore they give signs. And, if they give signs, they do give methods to us for the art of divination, for otherwise they would be giving signs in vain. And, if they give us these methods, divination does not not exist. Therefore divination exists.    (Cicero, De Divinatione 1.38.82–3).

Even though Cicero himself was a practicing augur, he probably did not subscribe to this view. As the diligent philosopher he was, he submitted it to skeptical reasoning. 6 But that kind of sophistic scrutiny is not attested in Mesopotamian sources. The only evidence of skepticism ever expressed in ancient Mesopotamia toward divination was directed against the diviners, who were the weak link in the chain of communication with the gods. 7 The most skeptical of all Mesopotamian literary texts, the mischievous Dialogue of Pessimism, does not mention divination specifically, but with its famous nihilistic approach, it dismisses sacrificing to the gods as a way of teaching the gods to dog your step making demands: “Slave listen to me.” “Yes, my master, yes!” “Fetch me water for my hands right away and give it to me so that I can sacrifice to my god.” “Do sacrifice, master, do sacrifice. The man who sacrifices to his god is happy, he will earn credit.” “No, slave, I certainly will not sacrifice to my god.” “Do not sacrifice, master, do not sacrifice, you can teach the god to keep running

6.  Cicero’s erudite work De Divinatione (On Divination) consists of two books and draws upon the works of stoic Greek philosophers (Friedrich Pfeffer, Studien zur Mantik in der Philosophie der Antike (Munich [Beck, 1976] 44–112). The first book contains anecdotes and traditional arguments supporting the existence of divination, the second a skeptic cross-examination mainly reasoning against it. See, for instance, M. Schofield, “Cicero for and against Divination,” Journal of Roman Studies 76 (1986) 47–65. 7.  The topic of the unreliability of diviners has been discussed many times elsewhere. There are plenty of examples from the Neo-Assyrian royal archives of diviners being suspected of fiddling the results of their observations. Another aspect is that diviners, as keepers of important knowledge pertaining to the security of the State, were regarded as potential threats. They might leak information to the enemy or spy on their masters.

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

15

after you like a dog, he will demand either rites, or a (figurine of) Lātarāk, 8 or anything else.” 9

The dialogue does not question the existence of supernatural beings, or doubt that you may engage in dialogue with them; you can even spoil them with your attention. There can be no doubt then that divination was viewed as a means of producing knowledge.

Striving for Objectivity? We may grant divination that it supplies valuable and (perceived) valid knowledge, but does it adhere to perhaps the most important ideal of modern natural sciences: that research should be free of bias? The modern researcher should eliminate, or at least isolate, all random factors that could somehow influence the outcome of an experiment, including of course his own intentions and ideas. Therefore, experiments should be repeatable, theories open to falsification, and researchers free from political, religious, or economic pressure. With a positivistic ideal, such factors are perceived as sources of error; science tainted by bias is worthless and even unethical and causes scandal in academia. Sources of error of course also include the researcher’s own preconceptions, intentions or purposes, and any cultural values he brings with him to the lab. A true scientist should be aware of his own influence on the observations he is making and, if possible, isolate or eliminate them. Some of these ideals certainly were applied to observations made for divinatory purposes, others manifestly were not. It is often assumed that divination was a skewed business, and many lean to the opinion that the diviner consciously or unconsciously tended toward finding results to suit the bias of his client—or his own ulterior motives. Precisely because it is natural to be skeptical of a human who claims to be the mouthpiece of the gods, divinatory practices are generally constructed to reduce, or at best to eliminate, such doubt. It is in the interest of both the diviner and his client that the information gained is bona fide knowledge. From the point of striving for perceived objectivity, divination is definitely a positivistic endeavor. A lot of effort is put into making the divination process appear as a direct, if convoluted, communication with the supernatural exactly to contravene any lurking suspicions of unreliability the client may harbor. The diviner has to appear as a neutral part, a mere lens through which communication passes with minimal distortion. The media the diviner uses are probably selected exactly because it is beyond human powers to influence them; nobody can change the innards of a lamb, influence the weather or make the celestial bodies change their course. This at least was the case before massive pollution and the advancement of veterinary medicine. Even if the planets are not out of reach any longer and we can predict every movement of the celestial bodies, apart 8.  The passage is a little obscure. Lambert read ila la ta-šal and translated it as a name of an other­ wise unknown ritual “Do not consult your god.” Von Soden suggested the reading (d)La-ta-rak instead (Weisheitstexte I. Texte aus der Umwelt des alten Testaments [Güterslohn: Gerd Mohn, 1990] 58–63), which is followed here and by most others. Lātarāk was a protective deity and figurines of Lātarāk were buried at doorways to keep out evil (Lambert, “Lulal/Lātarāk,” in Reallexikon der Assyriologie 7 [1990] 163–64). Nevertheless, it was not common that a god would request a specific figurine of a minor deity. 9. Wilfred G. Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1960) 139–49.

16

Ulla Susanne Koch

from the fluke meteor, we still cannot force the Moon to go into eclipse or the planets to appear in conjunction. The Mesopotamian diviner would follow a fixed set of rules when he interpreted the innards of a sheep or studied the phases of the Moon and the course of an eclipse. The technical divination texts attest to the conscientious work and meticulous observations of Mesopotamian diviners; accuracy was evidently a necessary prerequisite 10 for performing divination. There can be little doubt that they made their observations with scrupulous care, and we have evidence from the Neo-Assyrian court that diviners would argue over celestial observations. 11 We know that extispicy in the first millennium was always performed by two specialists, one making the observations and the other checking up on him. The Neo-Assyrian reports sometimes mention two diviners involved in the extispicy, one called ‘seer’ (bārû) and the other ‘reporter’ (bēl ṭēmi). 12 However, what do we know about the rules and principles of interpretation themselves? It is, I suggest, ridiculous to suggest that the rules of interpretation were elicited in a positivistic manner. Divination was not based on empirical observation of the coincidence of a given phenomenon and a historical event. The theoretical foundation of divination itself can never be tested and falsified; at least it never was by its practitioners in Mesopotamia. However, a divination result could and would be tested. A performance of extispicy typically consisted of two experiments: a first inspection (reštītum) and a check-up (piqittum). 13 A sign of uncertain significance could be investigated further by extispicy. Other methodologies and ideals of objectivity characteristic of modern science clearly would make good sense to a diviner. The ritual setting of extispicy worked, among other things, to eliminate pollution of the divination procedure: the diviner explicitly states that he himself has no influence on the outcome, and safeguards were in place against such malpractice. Disclaimers, the so-called ezib-formulas, were recited prior to the sacrifice in order to protect the query from the effects of ritual mistakes and mishaps; Šamaš was asked to disregard (ezib) a number of possible disturbing occurrences. There were a number of standard ezibs, which sometimes were supplemented by special ezibs suited to the occasion. They detailed circumstances that did not change the situation itself but that may influence the performance of the ritual: for instance: “Disregard that an angry man, or one in distress, angrily spoke the words of his report” (SAA 4 81, 18). In the formulaic oracle questions and queries, the diviner explicitly stressed his neutrality: “Your great divinity, Šamaš, knows; I, your slave, a Seer, do not know.” 14 Indeed, to 10.  Wilfred G. Lambert, “The Qualifications of Babylonian Diviners,” in Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 24. Mai 1994 (ed. Stefan Maul; Cuneiform Monographs 10; Groningen: Brill, 1998) 141–58. 11.  Ulla Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology: An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination (CNI Publications 19; Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 1995) 64. 12.  Chief Seer (bārû) Ninuāja is “reporter” in SAA 4 326, 328; the eunuch and Seer Dannāja is “reporter” in SAA 4 282, 300, 303, 304, 324, 331 and Seer in 316. Sometimes, up to ten people appear to have been involved in the interpretation and observation of a single extispicy, SAA 4 18, 129, 139. 13.  For example, most of the reports edited in Ivan Starr, Queries to the Sungod: Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria (SAA 4; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1990) contain multiple extispicies pertaining to the same question. See also Eleanor Robson, “Empirical Scholarship at the NeoAssyrian Court,” in The Empirical Dimension of Ancient Near Eastern Studies (ed. G. Selz and K. Wagensonner; WOO 6; Vienna: LIT, 2011) 603–29. 14. Wilfred G. Lambert, Babylonian Oracle Questions (Mesopotamian Civilizations 13; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2007) no. 18:18 and passim.

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

17

judge by the sources the reliability of the ritual procedure was never subject to any doubt. Individual diviners potentially had access to very sensitive matters of state, and it was of course recognized that they as mere mortals were fallible, or liable to fall under pressure and to compromise their craft. 15 As mentioned, the experiment could and would be repeated either routinely or if the first result was unsatisfactory or indecisive—all of which amounts to a rather positivistic approach. Suspending for the time being the fundamental differences between science and divination, the questions here are: was there a built-in bias in the rules of interpretation, as evidenced in the omen compendia? Or, whether these rules were biased or not, was there a preponderance of observations of certain phenomena that were, according to the hermeneutic rules, positive (or negative) for the cause of the client? To investigate this, I have compiled small databases of astrological and extispicy reports. The size of the available material is limited, which increases the likelihood of error, but nevertheless I base my argument on the available facts. Since the wonderful on-line edition of the corpus of the State Archives of Assyria (http://oracc​ .museum.upenn.edu/saao/) has made compiling statistics relatively simple, I rest my investigation to a large extent on qualified searches of this database. 16

Biased Premises? There is only a little evidence that a tendency to positive/negative oracular answers was actually inherent in the predefined premises. Again, it is a main characteristic of any kind of divination that the experiment and phenomena observed appear to be random. A draw of cards, a throw of dice, or figurations of coffee grinds are all examples of this. However, one instance of such an inherent bias is perhaps found in the interpretation of lunar eclipses. The few preserved Old Babylonian lunar eclipse texts have not been published yet, 17 but they contain material closely related to that of the standard astrological omen series Enūma Anu Enlil tablets 15–17. One of the elements taken into consideration in the interpretation of a lunar eclipse was the direction in which the eclipse shadow entered and exited the lunar disc. The quadrants of the lunar disc were equated with political entities. In the first millennium at least, more than one set of schemata existed, 18 but the one most often applied to the movement of the eclipse shadow was: north: Akkad; east: Subartu; west: Amurru; and south: Elam. Thus, a lunar eclipse that began in the eastern quadrant of the Moon would affect Subartu. According to F. Rochberg, this paradigm existed in embryonic form in the Old Babylonian texts. However, the 15.  See, for example, Joel Sweek, “Inquiring for the State in the Ancient Near East: Delineating Political Location,” in Magic and Divination in the Ancient World (AMD 2; Leiden / Groningen: Brill / Styx, 2002) 41–56. 16. The on-line version of Hermann Hunger, Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings. State Archives of Assyria VIII (SAA 8) (Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1992), incorporates a number of minor corrections made by Hermann Hunger; see http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/knpp/letters ­queries­andreports/saa8corrections/. 17.  For a description of their form and contents, see Francesca Rochberg-Halton, Aspects of Celestial Divination: The Lunar Eclipse Tablets of Enūma Anu Enlil (AfO Beiheft 22; Horn: Ferdinand Berger & Söhne, 1988) 19–22; and Francesca Rochberg, “Old Babylonian Celestial Divination,” in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty (ed. A. K. Guinan et al.; Leiden: Brill, 2006) 341–48. 18.  Several different schemata coexisted in the first millennium; see Rochberg-Halton, Aspects of Celestial Divination, 53–55 and Koch-Westenholz Mesopotamian Celestial Divination, 104–11.

18

Ulla Susanne Koch

Old Babylonian schema appears to have been different. East was associated with Subartu and west with Amurru, but both north and south were associated with Akkad. Though Elam is mentioned in some omens, it seems to be a later addition to the schema for the interpretation of the movement of the eclipse shadow. 19 Now, lunar eclipses always begin on the eastern side of the Moon and move toward the western side. At least for a Babylonian, Subartu was the enemy, so in most cases the eclipse would be ill-portending for the enemy, even more so after the southern quadrant became associated with the arch-enemy Elam. However, the eclipse shadow would also often at least touch the northern and southern quadrants and thus affect Akkad itself. Since regularity and conformity with the ideal was always considered positive, it is not surprising that a regular lunar eclipse was worst for the enemy. Similarly, in extispicy, there is an inherent bias toward a favorable outcome for “us,” since normal and healthy organs and the simple occurrence of certain natural grooves on the lobes of the liver were all positive signs. Seeing that the sheep selected for divination had to be young, virginal, and to all appearances perfect, chances are they would be healthy too. For instance, the mere presence of a heart was favorable, and it is not very likely that a sheep with missing vital organs ever lived to see the Seer’s offering table. But apart from this characteristic of the semantics of Mesopotamian divination, one could ask whether the observations themselves were indeed unbiased. In my case study 20 of astrological reports pertaining to the same night, it became clear that most of the astrologers noted a majority of positive signs. Even though they had observed the same night sky, they not only saw different phenomena, but they also chose different omens to explain them. When it comes to celestial divination, the hermeneutic process 21 leaves quite some room for the person of the diviner to influence the outcome. First, he may have bad eyesight or other external things may impede his observation; second, he may consciously or unconsciously neglect to make some of the possible observations that the stars of the night sky presented him with. Finally having made his observations, he was free to choose from the polysemic omen compendia the interpretation, which he thought fit—or which he happened to know by heart. Clearly, Babylonian astrology cannot be said to be a positivistic endeavor; it was inherently skewed in the rules of interpretation of the phenomena and subject to many factors of human error and judgment. This does not diminish the achievement of sustained observation and collection of data, which led to the development of the mathematical astronomical texts in the late first millennium b.c.e. and which undoubtedly had divination as its impetus, if not its only goal.

Bias in Astrological Observations? It is immediately clear from the themes of first-millennium astrological reports that not all celestial phenomena were of equal interest; the diviner did not scan 19. Rochberg-Halton, Aspects of Celestial Divination, 54. 20. Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Celestial Divination, 140–51. 21.  For the divination process, see Ulla Koch, “Sheep and Sky: Systems of Divinatory Interpretation,” in The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture (ed. K. Radner and E. Robson; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010) 447–69. A more detailed description is included in my book on divinations texts from the first millennium (Mesopotamian Divination Texts: Conversing with the Gods; Guides to the Mesopotamian Textual Record 7; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2015).

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena the sky for any and all phenomena. Celestial omen compendia were already being compiled in the Old Babylonian period; nevertheless, so far, there are no preserved astrological reports from the second millennium. A few references to solar and lunar eclipses are the only recorded celestial observations, and these were invariably interpreted by performing extispicy, not by applying the astrological omen tradition. To gain an impression of the phenomena, on which the scholars at the Neo-Assyrian court focused their attention, I have compiled a small database of the main topics of the reports published in SAA 8. 22 I have relied on the headlines given them by H. Hunger, with only a few additions or modifications when I judged that the headline did not cover the most important astrological topic of the report. I have not included the equally relevant material from the letters (published most recently in SAA 10). See Appendix Table I (pp.  28ff.) for references. Clearly, lunar phenomena played the preeminent role, closely followed by certain observations of the planets. If we divide the reports by topic according to Enūma Anu Enlil, the following picture emerges. The celestial omen series Enūma Anu Enlil itself is not particularly biased toward lunar omens: the section concerning lunar phenomena held approximately onethird of the omen material. In many ways, the Moon was ideal for the Mesopotamian variety of divination. It is easy to observe, and the true intricacies of its movement require very close observation and analysis. It did come under close scrutiny, and in the last centuries of the first millennium, its movements were described in mathematical terms with truly impressive precision. The bias toward lunar observations can 22.  The total number of reports in SAA 8 is 567; however, SAA 8 510 has been joined to SAA 8 475. For the planetary phenomena observed, see David Brown Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology (Cuneiform Monographs 18; Groningen: Styx, 2000).

19

Table 1.  Astrological Observations, Main Topics of the Reports of SAA 8 Observation Equinox

Reports 3

Fixed star?

10

Full Moon

109

Geological

10

Hemerological

13

Jupiter

19

Jupiter and Mars

1

Jupiter and Moon

8

Jupiter and Venus

5

Lunar phenomena

11

Lunar Eclipse

22

Mars

23

Mars and Moon

5

Mars and Saturn

6

Mars and Venus

3

Mars, Saturn and Moon Mercury

7 30

Mercury and Moon

2

Mercury and Venus

2

Meteor

5

Meteorological

35

Moon and Fixed Stars

32

New Moon Saturn

112 9

Saturn and Moon

10

Saturn and Venus

1

Solar

6

Solar Eclipse

5

Terrestrial

2

Uncertain

28

Venus

26

Teratology Total

6 566

20

Ulla Susanne Koch

Table 2.  Main topics of reports according to the sections of Enūma Anu Enlil.

only be described as cultural, not scientific, and was presumably closely linked to the importance of the cultic calendar, which was regulated by the Moon. The ominous significant days around the lunar quarters were always observed. The interpretation of astrological signs was rather complex, and the astrologer would always quote full omens with protasis and apodosis. As an indication of whether an observation was considered particularly unfavorable, I have looked for situations where the scholars mention the necessity or possibility of performing an apotropaic ritual. Apart from the times when the king had to go through the substitute king ritual (šar puḫi) due to certain kinds of lunar eclipses, apotropaic rituals are only rarely mentioned in the reports and letters. The performance of rituals is discussed frequently in the letters (SAA 10); these mentions are only considered here when directly associated with an astrological observation. During an eclipse other rituals than šar puḫi could be relevant and the references to these are included below. Apotropaic rituals may certainly have also been performed when not specifically referred to. For instance, a total of 5 reports (see Appendix Table I, pp.  28ff.) mention full moon on the 16th but only one writer urges the king to have a ritual performed. Nevertheless, the bias seems to be toward making favorable observations, if my assumption is valid that reference to apotropaia indicates seriousness. Without a doubt, the most sinister sign was a total lunar eclipse perhaps followed by observations of Jupiter, the planet most closely associated with “us,” and Mars, the planet most closely associated with “the enemy.” 23 23.  In Hellenistic astrology, Jupiter was benefic and Mars malefic; see Francesca Rochberg-Halton, “Benefic and Malefic Planets in Babylonian Astrology,” in A Scientific Humanist: Studies in Memory of Abraham Sachs (ed. E. Leichty et al.; Philadelphia: University Museum, 1985) 323–28. The connota-

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

21

Table 3.  Astrological causes for apotropaic rituals. Cause for Ritual

Report/Letter

Field star near moon

SAA 8 22 

Jupiter in lunar halo

SAA 8 71 

Conjunction of Mars and Saturn in lunar halo

SAA 8 82 

Venus

SAA 8 163, SAA 8 461

Rainbow (?)

SAA 8 206

Conjunction of Jupiter and Mars

SAA 8 288

Full Moon on 16th

SAA 8 320 

Lunar eclipse

SAA 8 467, SAA 10 240, 313, 347

Earthquake

SAA 10 10, 56, 202

Solar eclipse

SAA 10 25

Lightning

SAA 10 42, 69

Eclipse (?)

SAA 10 55, 89, 114

Conjunction of Jupiter and Mercury

SAA 10 67

Mars bright and retrograde

SAA 10 206

Uncertain

SAA 10 278

Jupiter morning first in Anu stars

SAA 10 362

Mars

SAA 10 381

Bias in Extispicy Observations? Whereas the laws of physics restrict celestial bodies to move in certain ways, there is no similar regularity to most of the ominous significant changes in the viscera of sheep. Most of the changes to the liver were caused by parasites or disease, 24 some were hereditary characteristics, and some changes could be caused by a certain diet. Also, there is no physical reason why the right or the left side should be more or less often affected. So, unlike in the case of the significance of the lunar quadrant and the eclipse’s shadow, there is no reason why it would be advantageous that certain parts of the viscera pertain to the enemy and certain to us. There was no inherent bias toward favorable phenomena, apart from the fact that only young and healthy animals were chosen for inspection and thus were more likely to have sound (favorable) organs. Obviously, the right–left, healthy–deceased, long–short, and strong–weak dichotomies have a cultural basis, not a scientific one. Since the Seer could not alter the innards, we must assume that he recorded what he observed or, rather, what he noticed, just as the astrologer did. In cognitive psychology, it has long been recognized that people see what they expect to see, and tions of Jupiter and Mars are of course much more complex: see, e.g., Brown, Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology, 64–74. 24. Detailed described by Rosmarie Leiderer, Anatomie der Schafsleber im babylonischen Leber­ orakel: Eine makroskopisch-analytische Studie (Munich: W. Zuckschwerdt, 1990).

22

Ulla Susanne Koch

not only in social contexts. 25 Theories of cognitive psychology operate with external and internal factors that modify perception. 26 Our perception of external observed structures is modified by our previous experience and defined by our knowledge of cultural and linguistic schemata. When we observe a moving light in the sky, we select certain aspects of it that determine what we actually perceive. I might see an airplane and my friend an intergalactic battle ship, and we might both testify with conviction that that is what was there. We will also both be able to argue for our observation. Simply put, we see what we look for, or what we are primed to look for. 27 Therefore, it is likely that the diviner, looking at the liver of a freshly butchered lamb, was disposed to see certain signs rather than others. These could be positive or negative depending on psychological factors totally out of our grasp. A diviner might perceive it to be his duty and pride to warn of disasters or he might want to give reassurance. This kind of personal psychological bias undoubtedly existed, but we have no way of telling when either was at play. The case study mentioned above indicated that the astrologers closest to the king and court were also the most worried; at least, they reported the most observations with negative interpretations, whereas those farther afield seem to have favored more optimistic observations of movements of the heavenly bodies to observe. In the following, I will make an admittedly very small case study of the practice of extispicy since I limit the study to recordings of changes to a groove on the lobus sinister of the Liver called the Presence (or “Station,” manzāzu, Old Babylonian also “Outlook,” naplaštum/naplasum) in reports on acts of extispicy from the Old Babylonian, Middle Babylonian, and Neo-Assyrian periods. I hope to get an indication of whether the phenomena observed changed and whether there is any indication of bias or a change in bias.

How to Observe and Interpret the Presence? The Presence groove is simply a pressure mark made on the liver by other entrails; it has no physiological significance and no modern name. When the groove was visible, it indicated that the god had accepted the offering and had been present during the ritual. This groove was always the first ominous phenomenon to be noted in extispicy reports: if it was missing, the extispicy was in principle void. I know of only two instances where the Presence was recorded as absent, and in both cases the diviner continued to make his observations. 28 Evidently, the Presence was not a sine qua non. Given that the visibility of the groove was positive in itself, the likelihood of a favorable omen must be said to be inherently greater than for an unfavorable one. For divinatory purposes, all the ominous parts of the entrails were perceived to be covered by a grid of positive and negative fields. These are in evidence in the 25.  As the Danish psychologist Franz From tested already in 1953, Om oplevelsen af andres adfærd: et bidrag til den menneskelige adfærds fænomenologi (Copenhagen: Nyt Nordisk, 1953). 26.  See, for instance, Geir Kaufmann and Astrid Kaufmann, Psykologi i Organisasjon og Ledelse (Oslo: Fakbokforlaget, 2005) 131–37. 27.  See, for example, Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, 52–70 for a description of this phenomenon. 28. One Old Babylonian and one Neo-Assyrian; see Appendix Table II no. 39 (p.  40 below) and Table V in SAA 4 280.

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

23

Table 4.  Ominous fields of the Presence. Left

The Presence

Right

Base

–

+

+

Middle

+

+

-

Top (head)

-

+

+

Above top

-

+

+

omen compendia and listed in the explanatory texts known as “orientation tablets” because they indicate a positive field as “right” and a negative one as “left.” In this context, right and left have nothing to do with actual orientation but are simply shorthand for “auspicious/pars familiaris/pertaining to us” and “ill-portending/pars hostilis/the enemy side.” 29 A change in any of these fields could be either negative or positive yielding a favorable or unfavorable omen. 30 If a negative change, like a hole, had occurred in a positive field, the result was negative. Of course, this is a simplification of the hermeneutics of divination, there is some evidence in the reports from Mari that individual signs were used in the interpretation at this point. 31 Nevertheless, for all practical purposes, this was how extispicy worked. Despite the fact that the most important thing about the Presence was simply whether it was visible or not, this mark on the liver was also subdivided into positive and negative fields for further interpretation: 32 the ominous significance of changes to the Presence is summarized in table 4. 33 In my reading of the extispicy reports, I have drawn partly on information in the reports themselves, and partly on the omen compendia, which contain some of the observations as part of omens, 34 but I have mainly applied the simple arithmetic of extispicy based on Table 3 and 4. The formal reports from the reign of Assurbanipal (SAA 4 279–354) contain separate summaries of the unfavorable signs of the extispicy and are thus very helpful, when it comes to determining the positive/ negative value of a sign. However, some signs were ambiguous even to trained diviners, and since I am not a trained diviner, some uncertainty remains, indicated by the question marks. 29.  The first edition of these interesting texts was made by Jean Nougayrol in “Le foie ‘d’orientation’ BM 50494,” RA 62 (1968) 31–50. The orientation texts are published in Ulla Koch, Secrets of Extispicy: The Chapter Multābiltu of the Babylonian Extispicy Series and Niṣirti bārûti. Texts Mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Libraries (AOAT 326; Münster: Ugarit, 2005). 30.  See the lists of the significance of various changes in Jan-Waalke Meyer, Untersuchungen zu den Tonlebermodellen aus dem Alten Orient (AOAT 39; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, 1987) 179 and Koch, Babylonian Liver Omens, 41–42 and 252–64. 31. ARM 26 7 and 169. See the edition in Wolfgang Heimpel, Letters to the King of Mari: A New Translation, with Historical Introduction, Notes, and Commentary (Mesopotamian Civilizations 12; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2003). They both mention the Foot-mark as an indication of enemy activity. 32.  For more details, see Meyer, Untersuchungen, 93–119. 33. Based on Meyer, Untersuchungen, 179 and 252–64 and Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens. 34.  For references to omens in the compendium, see Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 80–82.

24

Ulla Susanne Koch

Table 5.  Significance of changes to the Presence. Observation

Significance

2 arāku īšu, šakānu, šalāmu kabāsu kakku karû nabalkutu pašātu pūṣu šamāṭu zaqāru šēpu

Double Long Present and correct Obliterated Weapon-mark Short Overturned Efface White spot Flatten Point Foot-mark

+ + +

šīlu (1 or 2)

Hole

-

+ -

Table 6.  Observations of the Presence in Old Babylonian reports. Presence phenomenon observed

Significance

Attested

[Broken away]

?

 6

Obliterated (kabāsu)

Negative

 1

Foot in right side of Outlook (šēpu)

Negative

 1

Hole in left side (šīlu)

Positive (?)

 3

It does not have an Outlook

Negative

 1

It has a Presence/Outlook

Positive

31

Left overturned (nabalkutu)

Negative

 1

Long

Positive

 2

Outlook approach the Path

Negative

 1

Outlook in base of Outlook (i.e., 2)

Positive

 1

Right side [break]

?

 1

Thick and shrunken

Negative

 1

Top [break]

?

 1

Top flattened (šamāṭu)

Negative

 1

Top pointed (zaqāru)

Positive

 2

Two Holes in right side (šīlu)

Negative

 1

Total

55

Negative

 8

Positive

39

Uncertain

 8

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

25

Table 7.  Observations of the Presence in Middle Babylonian reports. Presence phenomenon observed

Significance

Attested

[Break] bends and reaches base

Negative (?)

 1

[Broken away]

?

 4

Flattened (šamāṭu]

Negative

 1

In the top [break]

?

 1

It has a Presence

Positive

32

[Break] on the left

?

 1

Top has white spots

Negative

 1

Top pointed

Positive

 6

Top pointed like the tip of a thorn

Negative

 1

Weapon across top and descends

Negative

 1

Total

49

Negative

 5

Positive

38

Uncertain

 6

Extispicy Reports A total of 55 35 Old Babylonian reports are known to me. A single manuscript may contain more than one report, typically the first inspection and the check-up. The references are listed in the Appendix Table II (pp. 39ff.). The overwhelming majority of observations are positive, and more than half merely record that the groove was present. Apart from the use of two names for the groove, the variation in terminology is quite limited. The database of Middle Babylonian extispicy reports used here are those edited by Fritz R. Kraus in Opferschauprotokolle; 36 the references are listed in Appendix Table III (pp.  41ff.). Some of the manuscripts are collections of extispicy reports and contain more than the two inspections normally required. As in the Old Babylonian reports, in the Middle Babylonian reports the majority of observations are positive and the variation is not great. The corpus of Neo-Assyrian reports is the largest, with some 20 more reports than are preserved in the two samples from the second millennium. References are listed in Appendix Table IV (pp.  42ff.). Out of the preserved 79 observations of the Presence, 33 merely note that it was there. This observation was often listed together with the Path and other markings on the liver. Only three passages are so fragmentary that it is not possible to see what kind of phenomenon was recorded, 35.  Excluding YOS 10 10, which does not concern an extispicy of a sheep. 36.  Fritz R. Kraus, ”Mittelbabylonische Opferschauprotokolle,” JCS 37 (1985) 127–218.

26

Ulla Susanne Koch

other than that it pertained to the Presence. Two passages only permit one to tell which part of the Presence was observed, not what it looked like. In the first-millennium extispicy omen series, Bārûtu, six tablets were devoted to omens concerning the appearance and changes in the Presence, 37 probably totalling at least 400–500 different entries. 38 However, the actual observations recorded in the Neo-Assyrian reports on acts of extispicy show considerably less variation. One explanation for this is that many omens in fact described the same phenomenon, only couched in different technical terms. The mukallimtu commentaries served to streamline this, systematically citing omens from different parts of Bārûtu and grouping them according to their protases. In theory, the diviner making his observations could cite any of these; in practice, he seems to have relied on a limited number of technical terms. There appears to have been a change in the practice of extispicy, as exemplified here by the observations of the Presence. 39 The observations are more detailed, with much more frequent references to subsections of the groove. Apart from the 34 observations pertaining to the mere visibility of the Presence—including the one where it is absent—and the five observations that are fragmentary, there are 40 observations that mention changes in one of the fields of the groove. In contrast to what we saw in the Old Babylonian and Middle Babylonian reports, the number of positive and negative observations are the same. However, it is noteworthy that apart from the simple observation that the Presence is there, there are only 3 different positive changes mentioned and 14 negative. This suggests that the diviners kept a sharp eye out for changes that influenced the oracle answer negatively—that is, they appear biased to look for adverse signs. E. Robson 40 made a similar observation in her study of the reports from Assurbanipal’s court. She noticed that out of 37 reports with preserved summary sections, 30 had a negative result. She concluded that it seems that the normal appearance of ominous features did not count toward determining the outcome; and she suggests that they had become neutral rather than positive at this stage. This need not be the case; it could just as well be that the bias of the observer, the diviner, was directed against identifying negative signs, not that the basic rules of interpretation had changed. As noted above, in the first millennium, the potentially ominous phenomena observed and recorded were less varied than the omen compendia alone would lead one to believe. The number of omens pertaining to a given part of the exta in Bārûtu is no indication of this part’s importance in divination. The lobus pyramidalis, the Finger, was not always mentioned in reports even though quite a large section of the extispicy omen compendium was devoted to it, and it played a large role in the more speculative extispicy texts. 41 In Bārûtu, 11 tablets were concerned with changes to 37. Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, chapter 3. 38.  Tablet 4 and 6, which are best preserved and include an omen count, both contained around 70 omens. 39.  Ulla Jeyes pointed out that the practice of extispicy became increasingly exact and standardized in what she described as “a move toward a scientific method in “Divination as a Science in Ancient Mesopotamia,” JEOL 32 (1993) 23–41. 40.  Robson, “Empirical Scholarship,” 14–15. 41.  The texts concerned with the calculation of the stipulated term are all based on observations of the Finger: Koch, Secrets, 447–79; Nils P. Heeßel, “The Calculation of the Stipulated Term in Extispicy,” in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (OIS 6; ed. A. Annus; Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010) 163–75.

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

27

Table 8.  Observations of the Presence in Neo-Assyrian reports Presence phenomenon observed

Significance

Attested

Absent

Negative

1

Base effaced (pašāṭu)

Negative

2

Base [break]

?

1

Base flattened (šamāṭu)

Negative

4

Bifurcation toward right side (larû)

Negative

1

Curved turns to Weapon

Negative

2

Filament across base

Negative

2

Filament across top

Negative

1

[Broken]

?

3

Hole above top

Negative

2

Hole in middle right side

Positive

1

Hole in right side

Negative

4

Hole in top

Negative

1

Left side [break]

?

1

Long

Positive

1

Middle effaced (pašāṭu)

Negative

12

Middle split (paṭāru)

Negative

1

Present (šakānu)

Positive

33

Top overturned (nabalkutu)

Negative

1

Top pointed (zaqāru)

Positive

2

Top split (paṭāru)

Negative

2

Two like a cross (išpallurtu)

Negative

1

Total

79

Negative

37

Positive

37

Uncertain

5

the Finger and 14 tablets were devoted to the lungs, but neither the lungs nor the Finger seem to play any role at all. By the first millennium, the liver was by far the most important organ for divinatory purposes, while skeletal features, lungs, heart, and other innards only rarely were considered or at least only rarely attested in the reports. In other words, the sample of significant signs had become smaller since the second millennium, as attested by the Old Babylonian and Middle Babylonian reports. This means that statistically the frequency of extreme results—the occurrence of overwhelmingly negative or positive signs—should be higher than in the larger samples found in the earlier reports. This would have been practical for divinatory purposes, where you aim is to get an annu kēnu, a firm “yes,” or a clear

28

Ulla Susanne Koch

rejection. A clear answer is desirable, and that is what you get when you limit the sample size. 42

Conclusion If we regard divination as repeated experiments similar to modern scientific experiments, suspending for the time being the fundamental differences between science and divination, the conclusion must be that observations made for divinatory purposes were not free from bias. There are no strong inherent reasons in the premises and hermeneutic rules of the omen compendia to conclude that positive occurrences should be more frequent than negative or vice versa, so in principle we should expect positive and negative results to be equal. This is not the case, both in astrological and extispicy observations; there appears to be a tendency to look at the bright side. As I have argued, this bias needs in no way be intentional. Being overly optimistic with regard to the success of a planned undertaking is part of the human condition, 43 which is probably a good thing for the survival of our species, but it is not very scientific. This tendency was apparently contravened in the practice of extispicy. In the first millennium b.c.e., there appears to have been a shift in the bias of the diviners toward negative observations, as evidenced by the increase in negative and more detailed observations of the Presence. The liver, exemplified by this groove, came under closer scrutiny as other parts of the entrails lost significance. The combination of detailed inspection and reduction of sample size meant that extispicy was continually optimized to give clear answers and thus provide socially, if not scientifically, useful knowledge.

Appendix: Tables with Source References I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Equinox

  3

Equinox on [. . .]

  1

SAA 8 142 Equinox on Nisan 15

  1

SAA 8 141 Equinox on Nisan 6

  1

SAA 8 140 Fixed star? (could refer to planet)

 10

Goat Star

  1

SAA 8 74

42. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, 110–20. 43.  Dubbed the “planning fallacy” by Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, 248–50.

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

29

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Occultation of Old Man Star

  2

SAA 8 30; SAA 8 408 Occultation of Pleiades

  3

SAA 8 351; SAA 8 443; SAA 8 455 Occultation of Virgo(?)

  1

SAA 8 399 Regulus Bright

  1

SAA 8 29 Swallow Star

  1

SAA 8 77 Yoke Star

  1

SAA 8 546 Full Moon

109

Full Moon

  2

SAA 8 138; SAA 8 558 Full Moon on 12th Day

  1

SAA 8 88 Full Moon on 13th Day

 11

SAA 8 64; SAA 8 134; SAA 8 136; SAA 8 194; SAA 8 266; SAA 8 267; SAA 8 306; SAA 8 360; SAA 8 458; SAA 8 474; SAA 8 479 Full Moon on 14th Day

 69

SAA 8 15; SAA 8 16; SAA 8 17; SAA 8 18; SAA 8 19; SAA 8 21; SAA 8 22; SAA 8 65; SAA 8 89; SAA 8 90; SAA 8 108; SAA 8 109; SAA 8 122; SAA 8 123; SAA 8 135; SAA 8 151; SAA 8 152; SAA 8 160; SAA 8 161; SAA 8 167; SAA 8 172; SAA 8 186; SAA 8 195; SAA 8 196; SAA 8 197; SAA 8 198; SAA 8 199; SAA 8 200; SAA 8 201; SAA 8 268; SAA 8 269; SAA 8 270; SAA 8 271; SAA 8 272; SAA 8 274; SAA 8 293; SAA 8 294; SAA 8 347; SAA 8 348; SAA 8 361; SAA 8 362; SAA 8 374; SAA 8 394; SAA 8 395; SAA 8 404; SAA 8 405; SAA 8 410; SAA 8 411; SAA 8 425; SAA 8 426; SAA 8 427; SAA 8 450; SAA 8 459; SAA 8 464; SAA 8 471; SAA 8 480; SAA 8 488; SAA 8 493; SAA 8 501; SAA 8 517; SAA 8 518; SAA 8 519; SAA 8 520; SAA 8 521; SAA 8 522; SAA 8 523; SAA 8 524; SAA 8 525; SAA 8 526 Full Moon on 15th Day SAA 8 23; SAA 8 24; SAA 8 67; SAA 8 91; SAA 8 92; SAA 8 137; SAA 8 153; SAA 8 173; SAA 8 174; SAA 8 202; SAA 8 203; SAA 8 275; SAA 8 276; SAA 8 295; SAA 8 396; SAA 8 397; SAA 8 465; SAA 8 481; SAA 8 499; SAA 8 527; SAA 8 528 Full Moon on 16th Day SAA 8 25; SAA 8 111; SAA 8 177; SAA 8 320

21

4

30

Ulla Susanne Koch

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Full Moon on wrong day

1

SAA 8 333 Geological

10

Earthquake

7

SAA 8 315; SAA 8 366; SAA 8 434; SAA 8 490; SAA 8 495; SAA 8 496; SAA 8 555 Earthquake in Šebat

1

SAA 8 36 Earthquake in Tebet

1

SAA 8 37 Earthquakes in Adar and Nisan

1

SAA 8 8 Hemerological

13

Hemerology

9

SAA 8 162; SAA 8 164; SAA 8 204; SAA 8 231; SAA 8 233; SAA 8 235; SAA 8 236; SAA 8 379; SAA 8 565 Hemerology for Ab 27–29

1

SAA 8 234 Hemerology for Month Iyyar

2

SAA 8 232; SAA 8 567 Hemerology for the 1st of Nisan

1

SAA 8 38 Jupiter Comet and Evening Last of Jupiter

19 2

SAA 8 339; SAA 8 456 Jupiter Near Regulus

1

SAA 8 489 Morning First of Jupiter SAA 8 54; SAA 8 84; SAA 8 115; SAA 8 144; SAA 8 170; SAA 8 184; SAA 8 211; SAA 8 228; SAA 8 254; SAA 8 289; SAA 8 323; SAA 8 326; SAA 8 356; SAA 8 369 Occultation of Jupiter

14

2

SAA 8 100; SAA 8 438 Jupiter and Mars

1

Conjunction of Jupiter and Mars

1

SAA 8 288

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

31

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Jupiter and Moon

8

Jupiter and Cancer in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 6 Jupiter and Regulus in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 205 Jupiter and Scorpius in Lunar Halo

2

SAA 8 147; SAA 8 370 Jupiter in Lunar Halo

4

SAA 8 71; SAA 8 215; SAA 8 277; SAA 8 398 Jupiter and Venus

5

Conjunction of Venus and Jupiter

3

SAA 8 212; SAA 8 214; SAA 8 244 Jupiter and Venus Observations

1

SAA 8 248 Jupiter Near Venus

1

SAA 8 448 Lunar Earthshine

11 1

SAA 8 470 Invisibility of the Moon

1

SAA 8 346 Lunar Halo

2

SAA 8 406; SAA 8 533 Lunar Omens

2

SAA 8 515; SAA 8 534 Moon

3

SAA 8 207; SAA 8 229; SAA 8 332 Two Lunar Discs

2

SAA 8 359; SAA 8 431 Lunar Eclipse Eclipse

22 3

SAA 8 94; SAA 8 179; SAA 8 230 Eclipse of the Moon Observed SAA 8 4; SAA 8 103; SAA 8 208; SAA 8 279; SAA 8 300; SAA 8 316; SAA 8 336; SAA 8 382; SAA 8 467; SAA 8 469; SAA 8 487; SAA 8 535

12

32

Ulla Susanne Koch

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Predicting an Eclipse of the Moon

3

SAA 8 250; SAA 8 251; SAA 8 388 The Moon Will not Make an Eclipse

4

SAA 8 42; SAA 8 46; SAA 8 321; SAA 8 447 Mars Evening Last of Mars at Month’s End

23 1

SAA 8 7 Mars in Cancer, not Retrograde

2

SAA 8 380; SAA 8 462 Mars in Cancer, not Stationary

1

SAA 8 101 Mars Stationary

6

SAA 8 45; SAA 8 52; SAA 8 53; SAA 8 81; SAA 8 85; SAA 8 387 Morning First of Mars

4

SAA 8 114; SAA 8 143; SAA 8 341; SAA 8 419 Sighting of Mars

9

SAA 8 76; SAA 8 80; SAA 8 97; SAA 8 216; SAA 8 219; SAA 8 284; SAA 8 312; SAA 8 452; SAA 8 542 Mars and Moon

5

Mars and Aries in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 412 Mars and Taurus in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 364 Mars in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 376 Mars Near Moon

2

SAA 8 311; SAA 8 484 Mars and Saturn

6

Conjunction of Mars and Saturn

3

SAA 8 48; SAA 8 49; SAA 8 491 Conjunction of Saturn and Mars

1

SAA 8 327 Mars Near Saturn

1

SAA 8 125 Mars Near Saturn, Full Moon on 16th Day

1

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

33

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations SAA 8 102 Mars and Venus

3

Mars Approaches Venus

1

SAA 8 400 Mars Near Venus

1

SAA 8 415 Venus and Mars

1

SAA 8 541 Mars, Saturn and Moon

7

Mars and Saturn in Lunar Halo

3

SAA 8 169; SAA 8 383; SAA 8 416 Mars and Saturn in Lunar Halo on Full Moon Day

2

SAA 8 82; SAA 8 168 Mars, Saturn and Regulus in Lunar Halo

2

SAA 8 41; SAA 8 181 Mercury Conjunction of Mercury and Regulus

30 1

SAA 8 245 Evening First of Mercury

5

SAA 8 337; SAA 8 340; SAA 8 486; SAA 8 503; SAA 8 504 Morning First of Mercury

6

SAA 8 50; SAA 8 157; SAA 8 249; SAA 8 253; SAA 8 325; SAA 8 477 Sighting of Mercury

18

SAA 8 70; SAA 8 73; SAA 8 113; SAA 8 146; SAA 8 190; SAA 8 217; SAA 8 220; SAA 8 259; SAA 8 281; SAA 8 371; SAA 8 381; SAA 8 407; SAA 8 414; SAA 8 437; SAA 8 454; SAA 8 505; SAA 8 545; SAA 8 549 Mercury and Moon

2

Mercury in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 93 Mercury Near New Moon

1

SAA 8 258 Mercury and Venus

2

Venus and Mercury in Sagittarius

1

SAA 8 51 Venus and Mercury Setting SAA 8 2

1

34

Ulla Susanne Koch

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Meteor

5

Meteor

4

SAA 8 158; SAA 8 334; SAA 8 432; SAA 8 552 Two Meteors

1

SAA 8 335 Meteorological Clouds

35 1

SAA 8 401 Fog SAA 8 34; SAA 8 79; SAA 8 98; SAA 8 313; SAA 8 328; SAA 8 352; SAA 8 353; SAA 8 385; SAA 8 417; SAA 8 433; SAA 8 453 Lightening

11

1

SAA 8 554 Lunar and Solar Haloes

1

SAA 8 532 Rain

2

SAA 8 314 SAA 8 435 Rainbow

1

SAA 8 223 Red Clouds

1

SAA 8 78 Red Glow

1

SAA 8 35 Red Sky

1

SAA 8 309 Red Sun

1

SAA 8 308 Thunder

14

SAA 8 1; SAA 8 31; SAA 8 32; SAA 8 33; SAA 8 43; SAA 8 99; SAA 8 182; SAA 8 221; SAA 8 222; SAA 8 354; SAA 8 365; SAA 8 444; SAA 8 468; SAA 8 553 Moon and Fixed Stars

32

Antares

1

SAA 8 377 Bow Star SAA 8 155

1

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

35

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Cancer

7

SAA 8 20; SAA 8 178; SAA 8 428; SAA 8 460; SAA 8 482; SAA 8 494; SAA 8 543 Cancer and Gemini

1

SAA 8 124 Cancer and Planets

1

SAA 8 429 Cancer and Regulus

1

SAA 8 299 Gemini and Perseus

1

SAA 8 112 Hyades

1

SAA 8 298 Moon wears Rainbow Crown

1

SAA 8 206 Pleiades

6

SAA 8 72; SAA 8 273; SAA 8 296; SAA 8 529; SAA 8 531; SAA 8 548 Regulus

3

SAA 8 278; SAA 8 283; SAA 8 363 Scorpius

4

SAA 8 66; SAA 8 307; SAA 8 430; SAA 8 466 Stars

2

SAA 8 483; SAA 8 530 Taurus

1

SAA 8 68 Virgo

1

SAA 8 378 New Moon New Moon on 1st Day SAA 8 9; SAA 8 10; SAA 8 28; SAA 8 57; SAA 8 58; SAA 8 59; SAA 8 83; SAA 8 86; SAA 8 87; SAA 8 105; SAA 8 106; SAA 8 116; SAA 8 117; SAA 8 118; SAA 8 119; SAA 8 130; SAA 8 131; SAA 8 132; SAA 8 133; SAA 8 148; SAA 8 149; SAA 8 165; SAA 8 187; SAA 8 188; SAA 8 189; SAA 8 252; SAA 8 256; SAA 8 257; SAA 8 290; SAA 8 291; SAA 8 303; SAA 8 318; SAA 8 329; SAA 8 330; SAA 8 342; SAA 8 343; SAA 8 372; SAA 8 373; SAA 8 389; SAA 8 409; SAA 8 418; SAA 8 420; SAA 8 421; SAA 8 422; SAA 8 423; SAA 8 439; SAA 8 445; SAA 8 446; SAA 8 449; SAA 8 463; SAA 8 475; SAA 8 492; SAA 8 498; SAA 8 506; SAA 8 507; SAA 8 508; SAA 8 509

112 57

36

Ulla Susanne Koch

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations New Moon on 28th Day

2

SAA 8 14; SAA 8 63 New Moon on 29th Day

1

SAA 8 457 New Moon on 30th Day SAA 8 11; SAA 8 12; SAA 8 13; SAA 8 60; SAA 8 61; SAA 8 62; SAA 8 107; SAA 8 120; SAA 8 121; SAA 8 126; SAA 8 127; SAA 8 128; SAA 8 129; SAA 8 150; SAA 8 171; SAA 8 176; SAA 8 183; SAA 8 191; SAA 8 192; SAA 8 193; SAA 8 262; SAA 8 263; SAA 8 264; SAA 8 265; SAA 8 292; SAA 8 304; SAA 8 305; SAA 8 319; SAA 8 331; SAA 8 344; SAA 8 345; SAA 8 358; SAA 8 375; SAA 8 390; SAA 8 391; SAA 8 392; SAA 8 393; SAA 8 424; SAA 8 440; SAA 8 441; SAA 8 442; SAA 8 472; SAA 8 478; SAA 8 485; SAA 8 512; SAA 8 513; SAA 8 514 New Moon on X

47

4

SAA 8 139; SAA 8 260; SAA 8 261; SAA 8 511 Predicting Months’ Lengths

1

SAA 8 516 Saturn

9

Morning First of Saturn in Leo

1

SAA 8 324 Occultation of Saturn

1

SAA 8 166 Saturn Retrograding from Scorpius to Libra

1

SAA 8 386 Saturn Stationary(?)

1

SAA 8 547 Saturn Stationery in Cancer

1

SAA 8 39 Sighting of Saturn

4

SAA 8 180; SAA 8 209; SAA 8 218; SAA 8 550 Saturn and Moon Conjunction of Saturn and the Moon

10 1

SAA 8 350 Saturn and Cancer in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 317 Saturn and Regulus in Lunar Halo SAA 8 40

1

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

37

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Saturn in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 154 Saturn in Lunar Halo, Full Moon on 14th Day

1

SAA 8 110 Saturn Near Moon

3

SAA 8 95; SAA 8 297; SAA 8 544 Saturn, Cancer, and Regulus in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 301 Saturn, Regulus, and Orion in Lunar Halo

1

SAA 8 302 Saturn and Venus

1

Venus Near Saturn

1

SAA 8 500 Solar

6

Solar Halo

4

SAA 8 44; SAA 8 69; SAA 8 210; SAA 8 413 Sun

2

SAA 8 26; SAA 8 310 Solar Eclipse

5

Eclipse of the Sun

3

SAA 8 3; SAA 8 280; SAA 8 384 Eclipse of the Sun in the Morning

1

SAA 8 104 The Sun Did not Make an Eclipse

1

SAA 8 47 Terrestrial

2

Snake Omens

1

SAA 8 243 Cow, Falcon, Snake

1

SAA 8 237 Uncertain

28

(no title)

24

SAA 8 75; SAA 8 159; SAA 8 224; SAA 8 225; SAA 8 226; SAA 8 227; SAA 8 285; SAA 8 286; SAA 8 355; SAA 8 368; SAA 8 402; SAA 8 436; SAA 8 473; SAA 8 476; SAA 8 497; SAA 8 556; SAA 8 557; SAA 8 559; SAA 8 560; SAA 8 561; SAA 8 562; SAA 8 563; SAA 8 564; SAA 8 566

38

Ulla Susanne Koch

I.  Celestial observations, main topics of Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian astrological reports from SAA 8. Celestial Observations Planet

2

SAA 8 213; SAA 8 551 Planetary Omens

1

SAA 8 502 Worrisome Watch

1

SAA 8 322 Venus Evening First of Venus

26 3

SAA 8 175; SAA 8 247; SAA 8 367 Evening Last of Venus

3

SAA 8 5; SAA 8 96; SAA 8 156 Evening/morning First of Venus

1

SAA 8 27 Evening/morning Last of Venus

1

SAA 8 536 Morning Last of Venus

5

SAA 8 56; SAA 8 145; SAA 8 338; SAA 8 403; SAA 8 451 Predicting Morning First of Venus in Leo

1

SAA 8 246 Ritual before Venus and Sirius

1

SAA 8 163 Sighting of Venus

11

SAA 8 55; SAA 8 185; SAA 8 255; SAA 8 282; SAA 8 349; SAA 8 357; SAA 8 461; SAA 8 537; SAA 8 538; SAA 8 539; SAA 8 540 Teratology

6

Birth Omens

6

SAA 8 238; SAA 8 239; SAA 8 240; SAA 8 241; SAA 8 242; SAA 8 287 Total

566

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

39

II.  Observations of the Presence in Old Babylonian reports on acts of extispicy. No.

Registration no.

Observation

Reference

1

Meissner

ki.gub i-šu

Babyloniaca 2 pl. 6

(1)

2

Meissner

ki.gub a-ri-ik

Babyloniaca 2 pl. 6

(2)

3

Meissner

Babyloniaca 2 pl. 6

(3)

4

MLC 294

i-na zag ki.gub 2 ši-lu-ú na-du-ú Broken

5

CBS 1462b

ki.gub i-šu

JCS 11 90 and 96

1

6

CBS 1734

Broken

JCS 11 93 and 98

1

7

VAT 6678

re-eš ki.gub zu-qú-úr

Babyloniaca 3 pl. 9

1

8

CBS 1462a

ki.gub i-šu

JCS 11 92 and 98

1

9

MLC 291

ki.gub a-na broken

JCS 11 91 and 99

1

10

YBC 11056

re-eš ki.gub ša-mi-iṭ

JCS 11 91 and 99

1

11

MLC 2255

ki.gub a-ri-ik

JCS 11 93 and 100

12

na-ap-la-aš-tam i-šu

RA 41, 49–53

(1)

na-ap-la-aš-tam i-šu

RA 41, 49–54

(2)

14

Istanbul Tello 1486 Istanbul Tello 1486 MLC 86

na-ap-la-aš-tam i-šu

YOS 10 8

(1)

15

MLC 86

na-ap-la-aš-tam i-šu

YOS 10 8

(2)

16

YBC 5018

broken

YOS 10 7

(1)

17

YBC 5018

na-ap-la-aš-tam i-šu

YOS 10 7

(2)

18

YBC 5018

YOS 10 7

(3)

19

na-ap-la-aš-tum a-na pa-da-anim iq-ri-ib Strassbourg 370 ki.gub i-šu

1

20

BM 78680

ma-az-za-za-am i-šu

Documents cunéiformes de Strass­ bourg I CT 4 34b

21 22

CUA 101 YBC 5105

ki.gub du-un-nu-un-ma ik-ta-ri igi.bar i-šu

JCS 11, 93 and 104 YOS 10 19

1 1

23

UMM G 15

ki.gub ù gír ka-ab-su

1

24

UMM G 33

ki.gub tuk

TJA pl. 28

25

AO 7607

Broken

JCS 21, 221

26

AO 7615

ki.gub tuk

JCS 21, 221

1

27

BM 12287

i-na gùb ki.gùb ši-lum na-di

JCS 21, 222

1

28

BM 12287

ki.gub tuk

JCS 21, 222

1

29

BM 78564

ki.gub tuk

JCS 21 , 223

1

30

BM 78655

ki.gub tuk

JCS 21, 223

1

31

BM 81364

ki.gub i-šu?

JCS 21, 224

1

13

JCS 11 89

unpublished

1

1

1

40

Ulla Susanne Koch

II.  Observations of the Presence in Old Babylonian reports on acts of extispicy. No.

Registration no.

32

LB 1835

33

Observation

Reference JCS 21, 225

1

MAH 16274

ma-[az-za-zu-um] i-na re-eš [xxx] pa-da-an i-mi-tim [xxx] ki.gub tuk

JCS 21, 226

1

34

YBC 16148

ki.gub tuk

1

35

VAT 13451

Broken

MV Finkelstein, 201–3 VS 22 81

36

VAT 13158

re-eš ki.gub zu-qúr

AoF 11, 100

1

37

VAT 17542

ma-an-za-za-am i-šu

VS 24 no. 116

1

38

BM 85217

(1)

39

BM 85217

i-na i-mi-it-ti na-ap-la-aš-tim ši- FS Walker, 136 pu na-ap-la-aš-tam i-na-aṭ-ṭa-al na-ap-la-aš-tam ú-ul i-šu FS Walker, 136

40

BM 85217

na-ap-la-aš-tam i-šu

FS Walker, 136

(1)

41

BM 85214

na-ap-la-aš-tam i-šu

FS Walker, 138

(1)

42

BM 85214

FS Walker, 138

(2)

43

BM 97919

na-ap-la-aš-tum i-na iš-di na-ap-la-aš-tim ki.gub tuk

FS Walker, 236

1

44

BM 97433

broken

FS Walker, 237

1

45

BM 97920

i-na zag ki.gub ši-lum na-di

FS Walker, 237

1

46

BM 26594

ki.gub tuk

FS Walker, 239

1

47

BM 130838

ki.gub tuk

FS Walker, 241

1

48

A 860

ARM 26 113

1

49

A 1081

na-[ap-la-su-um] i-na qa-qar ki-it-tim [ša-ki-in] na-ap-la-su-um ša-ki-in

ARM 26 96

(1)

50

A 1081

na-ap-la-su-um ša-ki-in

ARM 26 96

(2)

51

A 4222

na-ap-la-su-um ša-ki-in

ARM 26 100-bis

1

52

A 4337

[na-ap-la-su-um] ša-kín

ARM 26 155

1

53

M 6410

na-ap-la-s[ú š]a-ki-in

ARM 26 161

(1)

54

M 6410

na-ap-la-su-um ša-ki-in

ARM 26 161

(2)

55

M 7529

na-ap-la-sú š[u-me-lam] na-baa[l-k]u-ut

ARM 26 185

1

(2)

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

41

III.  Observations of the Presence in Middle Babylonian reports on acts of extispicy. No

Registration no.

Observation

Reference

1

Ni 105

re-eš ki.gub zuq-qúr

Kraus, JCS 37 01 (1) a

2

Ni 1156+13056

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 02 (2′) a

2

Ni 1156+13056

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 02 (4′) a

3

Ni 2389

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 03 (2) a

4

Ni 2389

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 03 (3) a

5

Ni 2575+13054+13062 ki.gub i-šu

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (1) a

6

Ni 2575+13054+13062 re-eš ki.gub zu-qúr

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (10) a

7

Ni 2575+13054+13062 ki.gub i-šu

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (2) a

8

Ni 2575+13054+13062 ki.gub i-šu

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (3) a

9

Ni 2575+13054+13062 ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (4) a

10

Ni 2575+13054+13062 ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (5) a

11

Ni 2575+13054+13062 ki.gub i-šu

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (5) a

12

Ni 2575+13054+13062 re-eš ki.gub zu-qúr

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (6) a

13

Kraus, JCS 37 04 (9) a

14

Ni 2575+13054+13062 re-eš ki.gub gim kir4 giš.dalla e-ed Ni 2894 ki.gub tuk

15

Ni 13051

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 06 (1) a

16

Ni 13052

Kraus, JCS 37 07 (2′) a’

17

Ni 13053

[x x] ik-pi-iṣ-ma suḫus ki.gub ik-šu-ud ki.gub i-šu

18

Ni 13055

ki.gub ša-mi-iṭ

Kraus, JCS 37 09 (1′) a

19

Ni 13057

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 10 (2′) a

21

Ni 13057

ki.gub i-šu

Kraus, JCS 37 10 (3′) a

22

Ni 13058

re-eš ki.gub zu-uq-qú-ur

Kraus, JCS 37 11 (2′) a

23

Ni 13059

ki.gub i-šu

Kraus, JCS 37 12 (3) a’

24

Ni 13060

Kraus, JCS 37 13 (22′) a

25

Ni 13060

[i-na re-]eš ki.gub giš.tukul pari-ik ù šub.šub babbar ma-ṭi-ir

26

Ni 13060

i-na re-eš ki.gub [broken]

Kraus, JCS 37 14 (2) a

27

CBS 10493

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 15 (1) a

28

CBS 10493

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 15 (2) a

29

CBS 10495

ki.gub i-šu

Kraus, JCS 37 16 (1) a

30

CBS 10495

ki.gub i-šu

Kraus, JCS 37 16 (2) a

31

CBS 12696

Broken

Kraus, JCS 37 17 (1) a

32

CBS 12696

Broken

Kraus, JCS 37 17 (2) a

33

CBS 13517

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (1) a

Kraus, JCS 37 05 (8) a

Kraus, JCS 37 08 (3′) a

Kraus, JCS 37 14 (1) a

42

Ulla Susanne Koch

III.  Observations of the Presence in Middle Babylonian reports on acts of extispicy. No

Registration no.

Observation

Reference

34

CBS 13517

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (2) a

35

CBS 13517

re-eš ki.gub zu-uq-qúr

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (3) a

36

CBS 13517

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (4) a

37

CBS 13517

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (5) a

38

CBS 13517

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (6) a

39

CBS 13517

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (7) a

40

CBS 13517

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (8) a

41

CBS 13517

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 18 (9) a

42

CBS 10176+10808

ki.gub [- -]

Kraus, JCS 37 19 (2) a

43

CBS 10176+10808

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 19 (3) a

44

CBS 10176+10808

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 19 (5′) a

45

CBS 10906

re-eš ki.gub zu-qúr

Kraus, JCS 37 20 (2′) a

46

CBS 10906

ki.[gub xx]

Kraus, JCS 37 20 (3′) a

47

YBC 4363

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 21 (1) a

48

YBC 4363

i-na gùb ki.gub X šub

Kraus, JCS 37 21 (1) b

49

YBC 4363

ki.gub tuk

Kraus, JCS 37 21 (2) a

IV.  Observations of the Presence in Neo-Assyrian reports on acts of extispicy. Observation Absent

Attested 1

(SAA 4 280, 15) Base effaced (pašāṭu)

2

(SAA 4 293, 1) (SAA 4 293, r 1) Base [break]

1

(SAA 4 163, r 5) Base protruding (šamāṭu)

4

(SAA 4 281, 1) (SAA 4 282, 1) (SAA 4 282, 12) (SAA 4 301, 12) Bifurcation toward right side (larû)

1

(SAA 4 285, 1) Curved turns to Weapon

2

(SAA 4 156, r 19) (SAA 4 278, 6) Filament across base

2

(SAA 4 313, 3) (SAA 4 339, 1) Filament across top

1

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

43

IV.  Observations of the Presence in Neo-Assyrian reports on acts of extispicy. Observation

Attested

(SAA 4 281, 2) [Broken]

3

(SAA 4 130, r 13) (SAA 4 233, r 5) (SAA 4 291, 1) Hole above top

2

(SAA 4 43, r 13) (SAA 4 301, 14) Hole in middle right side

1

(SAA 4 285, 3) Hole in right side

4

(SAA 4 9, r 7) (SAA 4 280, 15) (SAA 4 280, 4) (SAA 4 316, 4) Hole in top

1

(SAA 4 3, r 16) Left side [break]

1

(SAA 4 349, 1) Long (arāku)

1

(SAA 4 341, 1) Middle effaced ( pašāṭu) (SAA 4 10, r 3) (SAA 4 20, r 14) (SAA 4 88, r 15) (SAA 4 168, r 3) (SAA 4 279, 1) (SAA 4 286, 1) (SAA 4 290, 25) (SAA 4 293, r 9) (SAA 4 296, 1) (SAA 4 299, 1) (SAA 4 318, 1) (SAA 4 318, 7) Middle split ( paṭāru)

12

1

(SAA 4 68, r 5) Present (šakānu) (SAA 4 3, r 14) (SAA 4 3, r 18) (SAA 4 12, r 4) (SAA 4 12, r 7) (SAA 4 14, e. 1) (SAA 4 20, r 18) (SAA 4 22, 7) (SAA 4 35, r 3) (SAA 4 43, r 14) (SAA 4 43, r 21) (SAA 4 44, r 13) (SAA 4 48, r 14) (SAA 4 57, r 12) (SAA 4 66, r 4) (SAA 4 71, r 10) (SAA 4 71, r 8) (SAA 4 86, r 4) (SAA 4 94, r 11) (SAA 4 94, r 7) (SAA 4 130, r 11) (SAA 4 154, r 15) (SAA 4 204, r 7) (SAA 4 229, r 6) (SAA 4 232, e. 1) (SAA 4 280, 1) (SAA 4 287, 4) (SAA 4 290, 12) (SAA 4 303, 1) (SAA 4 317, 1) (SAA 4 319, 24) (SAA 4 326, 1) (SAA 4 337, 1) (SAA 4 353, 1) Top overturned (nabalkutu)

33

1

(SAA 4 333, 1) Top pointed (zaqāru)

2

(SAA 4 48, r 17) (SAA 4 340, 1) Top split (paṭāru)

2

(SAA 4 44, r 11) (SAA 4 324, 4) Two like a cross (išpallurtu)

1

(SAA 4 292, r 1) Total

79

44

Ulla Susanne Koch

Bibliography Annus, Amar. Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Oriental Institute Seminars 6. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010. Brown, David. Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology. Cuneiform Monographs 18. Groningen: Styx, 2000. Cryer, Frederick H. Divination in Ancient Israel and Its Near Eastern Environment. A SocioHistorical Investigation. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement 142. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1994. From, Franz Om oplevelsen af andres adfærd: et bidrag til den menneskelige adfærds fænomenologi. Copenhagen: Nyt Nordisk, 1953. Heeßel, Nils P. “The Calculation of the Stipulated Term in Extispicy.” Pp. 163–75 in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Edited by A. Annus. Oriental Institute Seminars 6. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010. Heimpel, Wolfgang. Letters to the King of Mari. A New Translation, with Historical Introduction, Notes, and Commentary. Mesopotamian Civilizations 12. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2003. Jeyes, Ulla. “Divination as a Science in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Jaarbericht van het Voor­ aziatisch-Egyptisch Gezelschap “Ex Oriente Lux” 32 (1993) 23–41. Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011. Kaufmann, Geir, and Astrid Kaufmann. Psykologi i Organisasjon og Ledelse. Oslo: Fakbokforlaget, 2005. Koch, Ulla. Secrets of Extispicy: The Chapter Multābiltu of the Babylonian Extispicy Series and Niṣirti bārûti. Texts mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Libraries. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 326. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2005. _________ . “Sheep and Sky: Systems of Divinatory Interpretation.” Pp. 447–69 in The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture. Edited by K. Radner and E. Robson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. _________ . “Concepts and Perception of Time in Mesopotamian Divination.” Pp. 127–42 in Time and History in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 56th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Barcelona 26–30 July 2010. Edited by Lluis Feliu et al. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 2013. Koch-Westenholz, Ulla. Mesopotamian Astrology: An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination. Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications 19. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 1995. Kraus, Fritz R. “Mittelbabylonische Opferschauprotokolle.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 37 (1985) 127–218. Lambert, Wilfred G. “Lulal/Lātarāk.” Pp. 163–64 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie 7. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1990. _________ . “The Qualifications of Babylonian Diviners.” Pp. 141–58 in Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 24. Mai 1994. Tikip santakki mala bašmu. . . Edited by Stefan M. Maul. Cuneiform Monographs 10. Groningen: Brill, 1998. _________ . Babylonian Oracle Questions. Mesopotamian Civilizations 13. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2007. Leiderer, Rosmarie. Anatomie der Schafsleber im babylonischen Leberorakel: Eine makro­ skopisch-analytische Studie. Munich: W. Zuckschwerdt, 1990. Maul, Stefan. Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient: Zeichen des Himmels und der Erde. Munich: Beck, 2013. Meyer, Jan-Waalke. Untersuchungen zu den Tonlebermodellen aus dem Alten Orient. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 39. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener / Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, 1987.

Bias in Observations of Natural Phenomena

45

Nougayrol, Jean. “Le foie ‘d’orientation’ BM 50494.” Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale 62 (1968) 31–50. Pfeffer, Friedrich. Studien zur Mantik in der Philosophie der Antike. Munich: Beck, 1976. Robson, Eleanor. “Empirical Scholarship at the Neo-Assyrian Court.” Pp. 603–30 in The Empirical Dimension of Ancient Near Eastern Studies. Edited by G. Selz and K. Wagensonner. Wiener Offene Orientalistik 6. Vienna: LIT, 2011. Rochberg, Francesca. “Old Babylonian Celestial Divination.” Pp. 341–48 in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty. Edited by A. K. Guinan et al. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Rochberg-Halton, Francesca. “Benefic and Malefic Planets in Babylonian Astrology.” Pp. 323– 28 in A Scientific Humanist: Studies in Memory of Abraham Sachs. Edited by E. Leichty et al. Philadelphia: University Museum, 1985. _________ . Aspects of Celestial Divination: The Lunar Eclipse Tablets of Enūma Anu Enlil. Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 22. Horn: Ferdinand Berger & Söhne, 1988. Schofield, Malcolm. “Cicero for and against Divination,” Journal of Roman Studies 76 (1986) 47–65. Soden, Wolfram von. Weisheitstexte I. Texte aus der Umwelt des alten Testaments. Güters­ loh: Gerd Mohn, 1990. Starr, Ivan. Queries to the Sungod: Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria. State Archives of Assyria 4. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1990. Piotr Steinkeller. “Of Stars and Men: The Conceptual and Mythological Setup of Babylonian Extispicy.” Pp. 11–47 in Biblical and Oriental Essays in Memory of William L. Moran. Rome: Biblical and Gregorian Press, 2005. Sweek, Joel “Inquiring for the State in the Ancient Near East: Delineating Political Location.” Pp.  41–56 in Magic and Divination in the Ancient World. Ancient Magic and Divination 2. Leiden / Groningen: Brill / Styx, 2002.

“Shamash, great lord, whom I am asking, answer me with reliable ‘Yes!’ ” The Influence of Divination on the Result of War Krzysztof Ulanowski When we consider the case of divination in Mesopotamian culture, we are initially confronted with a lot of theoretical material. The quality and quantity of the evidence is connected with the time and events in the history of the region. Nevertheless, from the contemporary point of view, it is a gigantic challenge to understand the rules and results of rediscovered material. It is difficult to abstract principles from the theoretical issues, but the main purpose of my contribution is to present the possible practical application of divination. In my opinion, warfare is one of the best fields in which a practical approach can be adopted. War, of course, demands theoretical preparation, but most important is the practical outcome—who is ultimately the victor and who is the loser. The practical effects of war decide the fate of diviners and the further development of divination.

War as an Ideological Factor War was deeply rooted in Mesopotamian culture, because it belonged to the gifts offered by civilization: it was one of the MEs. 1 For Mesopotamians, the arts of war, plunder, and taking booty were aspects of civic behavior. These are forms of behavior of people who have become urbanized—that is, settled into urban communities interacting within urban social structures. 2 In the case of Mesopotamian civilization, one may refer not only to The Gilgamesh Epic, but to many other Sumerian literary texts that have war as their leading motif, such as The Victory of Eanatum of Lagash, The Victory of Entemena of Lagash over Umma, The Victory of Utuhengal of Unug over Guti, Enmerkar and Ensuhgirana, The Lugalbanda Poems, Gilgamesh and Agga of Kish, Gilgamesh and Huwawa. 3 Among the many descriptions of war, it is not difficult to find even poetic accounts. The myth Anzu, the Bird Who Stole Destiny, in the description of the struggle between Anzu and the god Ninurta, uses the words: “Both were bathed in the sweat 1.  Jean Bottéro, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992) 235–36. 2.  Zainab Bahrani, Rituals of War: The Body and Violence in Mesopotamia (New York: Zone Books, 2008) 10. 3.  See Herman Vanstiphout, Epics of Sumerian Kings: The Matter of Aratta (Atlanta: SBL, 2003); Krystyna Szarzyńska, ed., Eposy sumeryjskie (Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Agade, 2003).

47

48

Krzysztof Ulanowski

of battle” 4 The Seven (Sebeti) who accompanied the war god Erra (Nergal) told him that war is a very noble profession: “Going to the field for the young and vigorous is like to a very feast.” 5 Departure on a campaign in Neo-Assyrian times began with special initiation rituals in the capital. 6 These rituals consist of a declaration of war, sacrifices, 7 asking the gods for active participation in the campaign, swearing in a substitute (the prince, successor to the throne or vizier) in the presence of the god Shamash, guaranteeing adherence to oaths. 8 In Mari times, for example, the Annunitum, the goddess connected with the warlike aspect of Ishtar (Inanna), ordered a war. 9 The king is often presented as going on annual campaigns, so plenty of military detail is provided. The detail falls into three main categories: (a) preparations (and justifications) for war; (b) accounts of the king’s movements, the peoples he has slaughtered and subjugated, and the towns and cities captured and looted; and (c) detailed lists of booty. 10 The Assyrian kings emphasized at every step that they are professionals in matters of war: beloved of the queen—the goddess Ishtar, goddess of everything—(and) merciless weapon that makes the enemy land trembled, am I. A king, expert in battle and war. 11

There is a Mesopotamian tradition of a victory over all nations in one year. 12 However, the military aspect of kingship is a later phenomenon and becomes a permanent part of the expression of the king’s role in the Middle Assyrian period. 13 Before war, the Assyrian kings ask the gods about the positive possibility and choice of planning and waging war. The king wants assurance from the gods that their weapons and army will prevail. 14 In questions concerning sieges, the kings ask the gods about the strategies they should use. Once this is known, the capture of a city by the Assyrian kings is certain. The capitulation of an earthly state was rationalized as the capitulation of its pantheon to the supreme might of the god 4.  “Anzu, the Bird Who Stole Destiny” iii, 8, in Benjamin R. Foster, From Distant Days: Myth, Tales, and Poetry of Ancient Mesopotamia (Bethseda: CDL, 1995) 128; “Mit o ptaku Anzu” tab. iii, in Mity akadyjskie (ed. M. Kapełuś; Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Agade, 2000) 73. 5.  “How Erra Wrecked the World” i, 52, in Foster, From Distant Days, 135; “Erra” tab. i, in Mity akadyiskie, 94. 6.  One of them could be 7 days of circles performed by Zimri-Lim before the campaign, to wash off any evil. See text 26 5 in Wolfgang Heimpel, Letters to the King of Mari: A New Translation, with Historical Introduction, Notes, and Commentary (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2003) 177–78. The other ritual is connected with braking the cup and “opening” the weapons; see text 26 205 in Heimpel, Letters, 256 and similar text 26  216 in Heimpel, Letters, 261. 7.  In Mari, see the example of Zimri-Lim; see text 26 5 in Heimpel, Letters, 177–78. 8.  Walter Mayer, Assyrien und Urartu I: Der Achte Feldzuf Sargons II. im Jahr 714 v. Chr. (AOAT 395/1. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2013) 6. 9.  Text 26 150 in Heimpel, Letters, 233. 10.  Any annals of any of the kings provide abundant examples of it. See Benjamin R. Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature (Bethesda: CDL, 2005) 790–813. 11.  98, 22–23, RINAP 4, 185. 12.  Luis R. Siddall, The Reign of Adad-nīrārī III: An Historical Analysis of an Assyrian King and His Times (Leiden: Brill, 2013) 33. 13.  Ibid., 152; Peter Machinist, “Literature and Politics: The Tukulti-Ninurta Epic and the Bible,” CBQ 38 (1976) 455–74. 14.  Davide Nadali, “Assyrian Open Fields Battles: An Attempt at Reconstruction and Analysis,” in Studies on War in the Ancient Near East: Collected Essays on Military History (ed. J. Vidal; AOAT 372; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2010) 130.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

49

Ashur and its subsequent abandonment by its own gods, who were understood as being enraged with their own people. In the opinion of Sargon II, it was the duty of every god to honor Ashur. When Assyria’s enemies were defeated, it was not merely because they had been abandoned by their own gods, angered by some unspecified wrong; rather, the enemy was overcome because his gods had left their homes to journey to Assyria in order to dutifully praise Ashur. 15 Practical application of this motif was the capture of the divine images by the Assyrians. Foreign gods could be transported honorably to Assyria, seated upon their thrones, or hacked to pieces like firewood. Only the figures more revered by the vanquished nation were exiled to various parts of the Assyrian Empire and dedicated to Ashur. 16 Even external sources showed the supremacy of the Assyrians who boasted having conquered various enclaves and city-states of western Asia whose gods could not save them. 17 The Assyrian army was officially undefeated. 18 According to the royal inscriptions, the Assyrians never lost a battle. A concomitant censorship in the Assyrian visual sources includes a taboo on representation Assyrian military defeats, symptoms of physical weakness on the part of the great king or his army, or scenes revealing the offensive military strength of the opposition (formed battles lines, etc.). Every element of every victorious Assyrian campaign was an act of religious imperialism, since the entire enterprise of conquest was undertaken at the command of Ashur and the great gods of Assyria and, concomitantly, every act of political rebellion against the Assyrian state could be rationalized as both treason and apostasy. 19 The material referring to war is very substantial. We have the chronicles of the campaigns, 20 royal inscriptions, and epic poems to celebrate the Assyrian kings; the prayer to the god Ashur becomes a real historical narrative (best exemplified in the cases of Sargon II and Esarhaddon). 21

Divination in General and Extispicy in Particular It is said that out of 3,594 “Babylonian literary and scientific texts” in the library of Ashurbanipal (kept in the British Museum), 270 cannot be classified, 1,085 are “archival texts” and 645 are “divination reports.” Of the other 1594 texts, i.e., the “library texts,” 746 are divinatory (46,8%), which constitutes a huge amount. 22 15.  Morton Cogan, Imperialism and Religion: Assyria, Judah and Israel in the Eight and Seventh Centuries b.c.e. (Missoula, MT: Society of Biblical Literature and Scholars Press, 1974) 20. 16. Ibid., 22–41. 17.  2 Kgs 19:10–13; Isa 37:11–13. 18.  Luis R. Siddall, The Reign, 98; Davide Nadali, “Outcomes of Battle: Triumphal Celebrations in Assyria,” in Rituals of Triumph in Mediterranean World (eds. A. Spalinger and J. Armstrong; Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2013) 75. 19.  Steven W. Holloway, Aššur is King! Aššur is King! Religion in the Exercise of Power in the NeoAssyrian Empire (Leiden: Brill, 2002) 93. 20.  Walter Mayer, “Waffenreinigung im assyrischen Kriegsritual” in Kult, Konflikt and Versöhnung: Beiträge zur kultischen Sühne in religiösen, socialen und politischen Auseinandersetzungen des antiken Mittelmeerraumes (ed. R. Albertz; AOAT 285; Münster, Ugarit-Verlag, 2001) 129. 21.  Mario Liverani, “The Deeds of Ancient Mesopotamian Kings,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East (ed. J. M. Sasson; New York: Hendrickson, 2006) 3/4: 2358. 22.  Jeanette C. Fincke, “The Babylonian Texts of Nineveh: Report on the British Museum’s Ashurbanipal Library Project,” AfO 50 (2003–4) 130.

50

Krzysztof Ulanowski

The art of successful war was strictly connected with divination. Divination was used in wartime to locate as yet invisible enemy troops or to learn the outcome of a battle in advance. The course of battle was determined by the gods. Very detailed and specific questions about battle plans and strategies are posed by the kings. 23 In Mesopotamia the people believed in fate (šīmtu), 24 meaning that destiny is determined by (divine) decree. 25 The main code of Mesopotamian politics was then provided by divination. Knowledge of the will of the gods was believed to be gained by consulting diviners. They viewed themselves as integral links in a chain of transmission going back to the gods. A privileged place for the occurrence of such signs was the entrails and livers of sacrificial animals, for it was believed that the gods placed such signs there. 26 The liver 27 of a sacrificial lamb was regarded as the “tablet of the gods.” 28 The oracle was described as having been written (šatāru) into the body of the animal, just as other ominous signs were written into the sky or the city and could be read by expert seers, the bārû priests. Although the gods wrote their decision on the liver, the diviner delivered his report to the king in written form, and the decision of the king was reported to others sometimes via expedited tablets. 29 The most important kind of divination was extispicy, 30 the examination of the “victim’s” entrails. 31 The Akkadian word translated ‘extispicy’ is tērtum, which 23. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 185–86; Fabrice de Backer, L’art du siege néo-assyrien (Leiden: Brill, 2013) 134. 24.  See Jack N. Lawson, The Concept of Fate in Ancient Mesopotamia of the First Millennium (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994). 25.  Francesca Rochberg, The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004) 196. 26.  Dale Launderville, Piety and Politics: The Dynamics of Royal Authority in Homeric Greece, Biblical Israel, and Old Mesopotamia (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003) 214, 216. 27.  Jeanette C. Fincke, “Omina, die göttlichen “Gesetze” der Divination,” JEOL 40 (2006–2007) 147 n. 109. 28.  Johannes J. A. van Dijk, Albrecht Goetze, and Mary I. Hussey, Early Mesopotamian Incantations and Rituals (Yale Oriental Series 11; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985) 23, lines 15–16; cf. Abraham Winitzer, “The Divine Presence and Its Interpretation in Early Mesopotamian Divination,” in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (ed. A. Annus; Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010) 180; see Wilfred G. Lambert, “The Qualifications of Babylonian Diviners” in Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburstag am 24. Mai 1994. tikip santakki mala bašmu. . . , (ed. S. M. Maul; Cuneiform Monographs 10; Groningen: Styx, 1998) 147; see Ivan Starr, The Rituals of the Diviner (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 12; Malibu: Undena, 1983) 30. 29. SAA 19, 121. 30.  Even the external sources confirms that extispicy held an extremely important place in Mesopotamia: Ezekiel 21:26, Diodorus Siculus 2.29; see Heinrich Zimmern, Beiträge zur Kenntnis der babylonischen Religion: Die Beschwörungstafeln Šurpu, Ritualtafeln für den Beschwörer und Sänger (Assyriologische Bibliothek 12; Leipzig: Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1901) 84. 31.  Stefan M. Maul, “Divination Culture and the Handling of the Future,” in The Babylonian World (ed. G. Leick; New York: Routledge, 2008) 361; Walter Burkert, The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995) 49–51; Stefan Oświęcimski, Zeus daje tylko znak, Apollo wieszczy osobiście. Starożytne wróżbiarstwo greckie (Wrocław: Ossolineum, 1989) 34–43; Ulla Jeyes, “The Act of Extispicy in Ancient Mesopotamia: An Outline,” in Assyriological Miscellanies I (ed. I. M. Diakonoff et al.; Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen Institute of Assyriology, 1980) 13–32; Jussi Aro, “Remarks on the Practice of Extispicy in the Time of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal,” in La divination en Mésopotamie ancienne et dans les regions voisines (ed. J. Nougayrol et al.; Paris, 1966) 109–17; Ivan Starr, “In Search of Principles of Prognostication in Extispicy,” HUCA 45 (1974) 17–23; Jan-Waalke Meyer, Untersuchungen zu den Tonlebermodellen aus dem Alten Orient (AOAT 39; Kevelaer / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Butzon & Bercker / Neukirchener Verlag, 1987).

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

51

means ‘directive’. 32 The main areas that were searched were the liver, lung, and heart. 33 Extispicy makes it possible to communicate with the divine sphere in order to find out the will of the gods concerning specific events and to align one’s deeds with that will. 34 The extispicy ritual itself was presented as a dialogue. The diviner asked (saʾālu) and the god answered (apālu), preferably with a firm ‘yes’. In queries, the question is formulated directly to the god Shamash: “Does your great divinity know it? Is it decreed and confirmed in a favorable case (of extispicy) by the command of your great divinity, Shamash, great lord? Will he who can see, see it? Will he who can hear, hear it?” 35 The closing formula of queries sums up: “Be present in this ram; place an affirmative answer, favorable, propitious omens of the flesh of the query (tamītu) by the command of your great divinity so that I may see them.” 36 Just as the art of successful war was strictly connected with divination, so also was the development of extispicy connected with war. What is important to this mutual relationship is the rise of the related literature within the 150-year period during which Mesopotamia descended into intraregional war. The Old Babylonian era, in which extispicy texts first appeared, was one that suffered from chronic warfare, and divination and diviners figured prominently in the courts and councils of the warring states of nineteenth- and early eighteenth-century Babylon, Mari, and Larsa. 37 The interest in military action is not difficult to spot: omen after omen fears the “fall of the army while attacking,” 38 that the “army will not reach its destination,” 39 that “the enemy will strike at the core of your army,” 40 that “you will lead away in captivity the population of the city you are besieging, but another will enter it” 41—information so specific that it borders on the tactical. 42 From a “technical” perspective, some of the segments of the liver had names that reflected either their physiological function or symbolic importance: Head, Gates, Path, etc. 43 Any study of the terminology of Babylonian extispicy is complicated by

32.  More narrowly defined, the word têrtu referred to the ominous signs derived from the inspection of the exta, while lipit qāti designated the inspection of the exta itself, and nēpeštu was the general term for the ritual acts performed in the course of extispicy; see SAA 4, xvii. See Heimpel, Letters, 173. 33.  Ulla S. Koch, Secrets of Extispicy: The Chapter Multābiltu of the Babylonian Extispicy Series and Nisirti bārûti Texts Mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library (AOAT 326; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2005) 74–83. 34.  Nils P. Heeßel, “The Calculation of the Stipulated Term in Extispicy,” in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (ed. A. Annus; Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010) 164; Ulla Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens: The Chapters Manzāzu, Padānu and Pān Tākalti of the Babylonian Extispicy Series Mainly From Aššurbanipal’s Library (Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 2000) 13. 35.  SAA 4, xx. 36.  SAA 4, xxviii. 37. Seth F. C. Richardson, “On Seeing and Believing: Liver Divination and the Era of Warring States (II),” in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (ed. A. Annus; Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010) 239. 38.  1 obv. 15′ in Ulla Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy: Omen Texts in the British Museum (Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1989) 100. 39.  Ibid., 2 obv. 15′. 40.  Ibid., 4 rev. 13′. 41.  Ibid., 13 obv. 8′. 42.  See Richardson, On Seeing and Believing, 247. 43.  Sarah I. Johnston, Ancient Greek Divination (Oxford: Blackwell, 2008) 126–27.

52

Krzysztof Ulanowski

several problems 44 but Jeyes made the perceptive observation that some of the basic principles of extispicy were similar to those of palmistry: each part of the liver was associated with specific areas of human existence. “The Hole was associated with death, the ‘Weapon’ with warfare, the ‘Foot’ with approaching enemy.” 45 The role of the ‘Weapon’ (kakku, gištukul) 46 and ‘Path’ (padānu) had particular associations with war, battles, power, and armed forces. 47 The majority of the apodoses of the ‘Weapon’ compendia and of omens from all over the series with a ‘Weapon’ in the protasis concern warfare and the armed forces. 48 Generally, the ‘Weapon’ presages bad military news for the party whose side it faces, so that the one on the right facing left implies defeat of the enemy. 49 Danānu (kal), the ‘Strength’ deals with secrets but also with military strength and impregnability. 50 Nīru (šudun, al.te), the ‘Yoke’ refers to attack by various kinds of pest and other unwelcome guests, including Subartu and Elam. 51 The vast majority of padānu(m) (gír), the ‘Path’ apodoses concern the army (or the enemy army) and warfare and all its doings. 52 For example: “If the Path is concentrated and short: Your army will not reach its goal.” 53 “If the top of the Presence is split and the Gall Bladder is wobbly: the enemy army will not achieve its enterprise.” 54 Padān šumēl marti (gír 150 zé), the ‘Path to the left of the Gall Bladder’ like the Path, was connected with warfare. Pallurtu/pillurtu/ išpallurtu (bar-tum), the ‘Cross’ was a universally negative mark associated with chaos and anarchy. 55 Šišītu, the ‘Membrane’ was associated with witchcraft, and sometimes results in confusion in the army. Šulmu (silim), the ‘Well-being’ concerns the army and the changing fortunes of war. 56 Tīb šumēlim (zi 150), the ‘Rise of the Left’ refers to warfare. 57 See Chapter 3 of the Babylonian extispicy series bārûtu, Manzāzu, ‘the Presence’ (E = Emar VI 670, A = KAR 456 [VAT 10536]): E 4, A 7′ If the Presence is contracted and turns into Request: The city will be seized E 5, A 8′ If the Presence is contracted and turns into a Request and is dark: The city will be seized and its army [——] E 6, A 9′ If there are two Presences: For warfare: An ambiguous omen, in the prince’s sacrifice god will in[voke] god. E 9 [If the Presence] lies crosswise: For warfare: Wailing will fall upon my army [——] 44.  Ulla Jeyes, “The “Palace Gate” of the Liver: A Study of Terminology and Methods in Babylonian Extispicy,” JCS 30 (1978) 210. 45. Jeyes, The Act of Extispicy, 25. 46. Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 48–51, Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy, 51–92. 47. Manfred Hutter, Religionen in der Umwelt des Alten Testaments I: Babylonier, Syrer, Perser (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1996) 100. 48.  Piotr Michałowski, “How to Read the Liver—in Sumerian,” in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty (ed. A. K. Guinan et al.; Leiden: Brill, 2006) 251; Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 51. 49. Michałowski, How to Read the Liver, 256; Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 50. 50. Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 46–47. 51.  Ibid., 58. 52.  Ibid., 58–60; Koch, Secrets of Extispicy, 24. 53. 42 Padānu Commentary 1:66 in Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 32. 54. SAA 4, 324, obv. 4 (Presence = ‘station’). 55. Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 60. 56. Ibid., 66–67. 57.  Ibid., 69.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

53

E 12, A 11′ If the normal Presence is there and a second one is placed on the left: The king will resettle his abandoned territory (E: The prince [will conquer] a land not his own). A 13′ If the normal Presence is there and a second one is placed in the left Door Jamb of the Palace Gate: The high priestess [————] (B: [the enemy] will send you a plea for a peace agreement. E 16, 17 If in the Door Jamb of the Presence, above the Presence, a second Presence is placed. For Warfare: The gods will not come to the aid of the owner of the sacrifice, in the future: Someone else’s god will fall upon the man. E 19 If the normal Presence is there and a second one is drawn in the middle of the Presence: The . . . protective gods will return to my army. E 24 If the Presence’s horns are turned and point to the Gall Bladder: The prince will repel the enemy land in battle. E 25 If the Presence’s horns are turned and point to the right plain: The enemy will repel the prince’s land in battle. E 27, 28 If the Presence is effaced: For warfare: Defeat of the army, in the future: There will be pestilence in the land. E 29 If there are 3 Presences: For warfare: An indecisive omen. E 30, 31 29 If there are 3 Presences and the right and left Presence are turned and point to the normal one: The auxiliary troops of the prince will rebel against him and rise with evil intent. E 32, 33 If there are 3 Presences and the right and left Presence are turned and point to the normal one, and a hole lies in the centre of the n[ormal one]: The auxiliary troops of the prince will rebel against him and bring about his defeat. A rev. 6′ If there are 5 Presences and there are Holes in their centers: Un[reliable omens for the diviner, defeat of the army]. A rev. 8′ If there are 6 Presences: Attack of Elam. 58 Manzāzu Tablet 2(?) (A = K. 2258 + K. 3271, B = K. 9991): A 13′ 32 If a Hole lies in the left side of the Presence: Defeat of the enemy army. A 20′, B 6′ 39 [———-] two Requests lie and they are dark: The Twin Gods will strike your army. 59

Even the best-trained bārû priests are helpless in the face of some divine judgments. One also has to contend with ambiguous or indecisive omens, 60 which required another extispicy ritual or permitted people to make their own decisions on the course of affairs. The case could be even worse: an unreliable prediction about the enemy army. And some cases are especially difficult; we can understand why the kings needed the support of the well-trained specialists: “If you perform an extispicy and in a favourable one there are three Throne Bases: for warfare means defeat, it is unfavourable,” or another one: “If you perform an extispicy and in a favorable extispicy the right side of the Finger is atrophied: defeat of the army, it is unfavorable. In an unfavorable extispicy it is favourable.” 61 In some special cases the situation could be critical: “about the march of the troops and doing [battle] I continually devise (oracular inquires), but an omen does not answer me.” 62 58. Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 71–76. 59.  Ibid., 87–88. 60.  Distant times such as the rule of Naram-Sin may be mentioned. See “Naram-Sin and the Lord of Apišal,” col. vi, 1–3 in Joan G. Westenholz, Legends of the Kings of Akkade (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1997) 185. 61.  “65. Protases in Context” A 12, C 12, 12) in Koch, Secrets of Extispicy, 414. 62.  Text 26 190 in Heimpel, Letters, 248.

54

Krzysztof Ulanowski

The study of all these cases teaches us a lot about times of war in the NeoAssyrian period. The results of divination described in an expressive way the conditions of war. Some results of extispicy can be easily summed up by a clear “success” or “defeat,” but the detailed description shows a wide array of possibilities. There were many different and surprising cases on the battlefield: the rebellion of the army, the army abandons the campaign and embarks on another, a spy infiltrates the army, the king is killed by his own warriors, a disease infects the army, the army constantly trembles (with fear) in its camp, there are requests for weaponry and emblems, the army is cut off from a water supply, fear overwhelms the army, confusion falls on the army, witchcraft seizes the army, a bitter enemy sends a message of friendship, or an infiltrator spreads chaos in the army. 63 Hepatoscopy was more important and more highly valued than other methods of divination, such as, for example, bird oracles, celestial omens, and dreams. 64 In Mari, an archive records how a haruspex used extispicy to confirm prophecies and dreams (the dreams of Assurbanipal also were confirmed by extispicy 65), and even the prediction of a lunar eclipse. Prophecies delivered by an ecstatic also had to be submitted to hepatoscopy in order to be validated. For this process to take place, a hair from the ecstatic’s head and a clipping from the fringe of his garment were sent to represent him in the ritual. 66 Even when astronomical omens became prevalent in the courts of the Assyrian kings in the first millennium b.c.e., 67 in the critical military cases, these omens were submitted to a haruspex for confirmation through hepatoscopy. 68 Extispicy can be performed whenever it is needed; for ominous signs from the sky one has to wait until the gods send them. Even then, a sign in the sky may permit several interpretations. From the time of Sargon II, there is a passage in his letter to the god Ashur about his eighth campaign where celestial omens are checked and confirmed by means of extispicy. 69 Morning First of Jupiter in Iyyar (1) [If Jup]iter becomes steady in the morning: enemy [kings] will be reconciled. (rev.  2) [If] Nēberu rises and the gods get peace: confused (things) will be made bright, blurred (things) will clear; rains and floods will come; the harvest-time grass will last until winter, the winter grass until harvest time; all lands will dwell in quiet; 63.  For many such examples, see Koch, Secrets of Extispicy; Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens; Nils P. Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II: Opferschau-Omina (Keilschrifttexte aus Assur literarischen Inhalts 5; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012); Andrew R. George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts Chiefly in the Schøyen Collection (Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 18; Bethesda: CDL, 2013). 64. Pl. Phaed. 244c; ThesCRA, vol. III, 6. 65.  SAA 4, 202, obv. 1–2. 66.  Texts 26 82, 26 142, 26 229, 26 233 in Heimpel, Letters, 209, 229, 265, 266; Bahrani, Rituals of War, 81. 67.  But we know such situations from the Mari; see text 26 81 in Heimpel, Letters, 209. 68.  Hepatoscopy and extispicy clearly dominated other forms of manticism in Mesopotamian divination. However, in the opinion of Frahm, extispicy in the first millennium b.c.e. lost much of its prestige to astrology; see E. Frahm, “Rising Suns and Falling Stars: Assyrian Kings and the Cosmos,” in Solar Aspects of Royal Power in Old Babylonian Mesopotamia,” in Experiencing Power, Generating Authority: Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia (ed. J. A. Hill, P. Jones, and A. J. Morales; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2013) 106. 69. SAA 8, XIV; SAA 4, XXXII; Starr, Rituals of the Diviner, 5.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

55

enemy kings will be reconci[led; the gods] will accept sacrifices, listen to [pray]ers; they will keep answering the di[viner]’s queries. 70

Bārû The Enmeduranki text, dating from the early Neo-Assyrian period (perhaps ca. 900 b.c.e.) describes the diviner as follows: The learned savant, who guards the secrets of the great gods, will bind by oath before Shamash and Adad by tablet and stylus the son whom he loves and will teach him. When a diviner, an expert in oil, of abiding descent, offshoot of Enmeduranki, king of Sippar, who sets up the holy bowl, holds the cedar, benediction priest of the king, long-haired priest of Shamash, a creature of Ninhursag, begotten by a reverend of pure descent, he himself, being without defect in body and limbs, may approach the presence of Shamash and Adad where (liver) inspection and oracle (take place). 71

The bārû 72 is a diviner; he is first mentioned in the third millennium b.c.e. 73 The bārû was a kind of priest one of whose specialties was divination. The Akkadian noun bārû, which is derived from the verb ‘to see’, literally means ‘observer,’ ‘seer’, or ‘examiner’. He was a specialist who solicited omens from the gods and interpreted the signs thus found. 74 The bārû was an expert in bārûtu, the observation of signs in the world. Shamash inscribes ominous signs into the world—for example, into the body of the sacrificial animals. 75 The diviners in Mesopotamia viewed themselves as integral links in a chain of transmission going back to the gods. A privileged place for the occurrence of such signs was the entrails and livers of sacrificial animals, for it was believed that the gods placed such signs there. Knowledge about the will of the gods was believed to be gained by consulting bārûtu. 76 If messages from the gods were “written” and “coded,” in order to “read” it, one needed a real technician, a specialist initiated in this kind of “writing.” 77 Bārû mediated the will of the gods to the king and made judgments about the congruity between the divine will and the king’s plans. 78 The diviner is depicted as enthroned in the presence of divinity, ready to pronounce the verdict. 79 The bārû priests who dealt with the divination of entrails were a part of the royal court, and they participated in all military expeditions. They were totally subject to the king. The so-called protocol of the diviners, a kind of loyalty oath taken by diviners in which, among other things, one swore not to reveal the content of

70. SAA 8, 254. 71.  See “Enmeduranki Text” lines 19–29 in Lambert, The Qualifications, 152. 72. Hutter, Religionen, 89–90; CAD B 124. 73. Zimmern, Beiträge, 82. 74.  Walter Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East (ed. J. M. Sasson; vol. III & IV; New York: Hendrickson Publisher’s, 2006) 1904. 75. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 63–4, Rochberg, The Heavenly Writing, 48; Giovanni Manetti, Theories of Sign in Classical Antiquity (Bloomington, IND, 1993) 5. 76. Launderville, Piety and Politics, 214, 216. 77. Bottéro, Mesopotamia. Writing, 113. 78.  SAA 19, 77. 79. Ibid., 57. See “Ritualtafeln für den Wahrsager (bārû)” no. 1–20, ll. 122–5 in Zimmern, Beiträge,105.

56

Krzysztof Ulanowski

oracular consultations to unauthorized persons, was an attempt to deal with such potential risk. 80 In the taking of oracles for Zimri-Lim my lord], [in the extispicy, all that i]s pro[duced and that I see], . . . The b[ad und unfavorab]le omen which is produced and I see In taking oracles For Zimri-L[im, my lord, i]n an abnormal birth or in an iznum I will not tell to anyone whomever. 81

Least of all does belief exclude methods of control. Sennacherib (704–681 b.c.e.), proudly tells how he would assemble the diviners in separate groups, so that they could not communicate, and ask his question. The seers’ response was unanimous; we find without surprise that it was what Sennacherib already had surmised would happen. So Sennacherib leaves this counsel to his son: never make any decision without the diviners, but make three or four groups of them. Sennacherib does not mention what he would have done if the seers had disagreed. 82

The Divine Seer: Shamash Shamash is often called “the warrior, the hero.” 83 He marches at the head of the army. 84 Battle standards were carried into battle on chariots (at least in the reigns of Ashurnasirpal II, Shalmaneser III, and Sargon II). They represented Adad and Nergal, 85 but also Shamash and Marduk are mentioned. 86 First of all, the epithet of Shamash who as sun-god could see all from above was ‘divine seer of the land’ (bārû ša māti). 87 There is a known Neo-Assyrian hymn to Shamash, a god of divination, bārû ša mati, “Divine seer of the land:” 88 80.  AEM 1/1, 11–22; see Jimmy J. M. Roberts, The Bible and the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2002) 286; text 26 1 in Heimpel, Letters, 174–75. Mari diviner Ibal-Pi-El is shocked that this secret may be unfolded and taboo broken: see text 26 104 in Heimpel, Letters, 217. 81. 57. M. 13091 = AEM 1/1, 1 lines 1–10; Jimmy J. M. Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts in Transliteration and English Translation,” in Roberts, The Bible and the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake: Eisebrauns, 2002) 251. 82.  SAA 3, 33, obv. 13–7, 21–2; Walter Burkert, “Signs, Commands, and Knowledge: Ancient Divination between Enigma and Epiphany,” in Mantikê: Studies in Ancient Divination (ed. S. I. Johnston and P. T. Struck; Leiden: Brill, 2005) 40. 83.  See Launderville, Piety and Politics, 199; Cynthia Jean, “Magie et Histoire: le rituels en temps de guerre,” in Time and History in the Ancient Near East: Proccedings of the 56th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Barcelona 26–30 July 2010 (ed. L. Feliu, J. LLop, A. Millet Albà, and J. Sanmartìn; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013) 110. 84.  63, VAT 10418 + A 9, 17′ in Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 211. 85. Mayer, Assyrien und Urartu, 97, col. I, 14; Beate Pongrantz-Leisten, Karlheinz Deller, and Erika Bleibtreu, “Götterstreitwagen und Götterstandarten: Götter auf dem Feldzug und ihr Kult im Feldlager,” BaM 23 (1992) 229–340; Beate Pongratz-Leisten,“Mesopotamische Standarten in Literarischen Zeugnissen,” 347–56; Erika Bleibtreu, “Standarten auf neuasyrischen Reliefs und Bronzetreibarbeiten.”. 86. Mayer, Assyrien und Urartu, 97, col. I, 10. 87. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 63–65. 88.  It is worth mentioning that similar words are addressed to Marduk (Bēl): The wide heavens are the whole of your liver Bēl, with your eyes you see all

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

57

O radiance of the great gods, light of the earth Illuminator of the world regions Lofty judge, creator of heaven and earth O Shamash, by your light you scan the totality of lands as if they were cuneiform  signs You never weary of divination. 89

The vast majority of Babylonian oracle questions begins with “Shamash, lord of the judgment, Adad, lord of the inspection.” 90 For the Babylonians, divination and justice went hand in hand; in both cases, it was the fairness of the judgment that was important, whether it was a decision in the heavens or on earth. 91 The judicial role of the sun-god was very important, and probably because of this there are only a few known references to the sun-god during the annihilation of enemies in times of war. 92 Shamash has the power to confuse the path of a treacherous king and undermine the morale of his army during the procedure of divination; he can send him an inauspicious omen portending his defeat. The transgressing of the oath (committing crimes against the god Shamash) by the Kassite king Kashtiliash was the reason for Tukulti-Ninurta going to war. Only the one who keeps their oath, with the god’s help, will win the battle and take a great victory. 93

The Akkad Period I begin the historical overview with the Akkadian Period. Possibly the oldest ritual of divination before a military campaign is described in the Babylonian epic Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes (Legend of Naram-Sin) 94 presenting the king Naram-Sin (2254–2218 b.c.e.): He [Enmerker] summoned the diviners and instructed (them). They “touched” the lambs, [seven for seven]. [He set up] the holy reed altars. [The diviners] spoke thus 95 With your omens, you verify your omens With your glance, you give the decrees.” See Karljürgen G. Feuerherm, “Have Horn, Will Travel: The Journeys of Mesopotamian Deities,” in Travel and Religion in Antiquity (ed. P. A. Harland; Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2011) 90. See also Bahrani, Rituals of War, 81. 89.  Adam Falkenstein and Wolfram von Soden, Sumerische und Akkadische Hymnen und Gebete (Zürich: Artemis, 1953) 247–48. 90.  Dominique Charpin, ““I Am the Sun of Babylon”: Solar Aspects of Royal Power in Old Babylonian Mesopotamia,” in Experiencing Power, Generating Authority. Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia (eds. J. A. Hill, P. Jones and A. J. Morales; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2013) 78; Starr, Rituals of the Diviner, 30, 44–6; Wilfred G. Lambert, Babylonian Oracle Questions (Mesopotamian Civilizations 13; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2007) 62, no. 4b, i. This one is concerning a campaign of a Babylonian king against the Lullubû. 91. Charpin, “I Am the Sun. . . ,” 68, 74; Kim Beerden, Worlds Full of Signs: Ancient Greek Divination in Context (Leiden: Brill, 2013) 34. 92. Frahm, Rising Suns, 101. 93.  Peter Machinist, The Epic of Tukulti-Ninurta I: A Study in Middle Assyrian Literature (Ph.D. diss.; NELC Yale University: New Haven 1978) 76–79, ii 13′–24′. 94.  “Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes” in Westenholz, Legends, 263–68. 95.  Ibid., “Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes” 14–17, 72–75 (pp. 305, 317).

58

Krzysztof Ulanowski

The belief that disaster falls upon those who ignore omens goes back at least to Naram-Sin, who does not comply with the divine words heard during extispicy. He inquires of the gods by means of extispicy, but when the omens were unfavorable, he decides to ignore them and attacks. Protecting his shameful decision Naram-Sin explains: Thus I said to my heart (i.e., to myself), there were my words: What lion (ever) performed extispicy? What wolf (ever) consulted a dream-interpreter? 96

This act of disobedience gave rise to a series of military defeats and was detrimental to the entire kingdom. The legend also mentions the reign of Enmerkar of Uruk, who also “committed a shameful act” and did not hear the gods’ decisions. For his disloyalty Shamash punished: . . . his ghost, the ghosts of [. . .], the ghost(s) of his family, the ghost(s) of his offspring, the ghost(s) of his   offspring’s offspring. 97

This kind of attitude to the gods’ verdicts brings a disaster, and only the second consultation of the omens and adherence to these and the help of the goddess Ishtar, can change the situation for the better. 98 This legend “was the classic propagator of extispicy, which it presented as an infallible means of studying the divine will, and as a necessary prerequisite for any important undertaking.” 99 Naram-Sin is officially the cursed one who did not care for gods or for omens and made his decisions according to purely human evaluation. 100 Even in the Bible, King Saul is defeated and killed because he joins battle with the Philistines without favorable omens, being unable to obtain them through any of the means available to him: dreams, the Urim (a type of dice), prophets, 101 or even necromancy. 102 Shulgi also boasts of using extispicy to determine not only cultic matters but also military action. 103

Mari and the Old Babylonian Period In the Old Babylonian period, diviners are also primarily seen to be engaged in state business having to do with diplomacy and military matters. One may summarize the functional role of diviners in the vast majority of texts as being in service to the king in a variety of ways related to intelligence: as diplomats and spies in foreign courts, on the march with armies, in private counsel to kings, in charge of fortresses. 104 The divin-

120.

96.  Ibid., 79–81 (p. 317). 97. Ibid., 24–27 (pp. 306–7); Legend of Naram-Sin, 22–24 in Foster, From Distant Days, 174. 98. Westenholz, Legends, “Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes,” 108–19, 124–48 (pp. 321, 323–27). 99.  Michael A. Flower, The Seer in Ancient Greece (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008)

100. Liverani, The Deeds of Ancient Mesopotamian Kings, 2364. 101.  Ed Noort, “Numbers 27,21: The Priestly Oracle Urim and Tummim and the History of Reception” in All Those Nations. . . : Cultural Encounters within and with the Near East (ed. H. L. J. Vanstiphout; Groningen: Styx, 1999) 109–16; for the interesting parallel between the Assyrian and Hebrew tradition, see Wayne Horowitz, “Urim and Thummim in Light of a Psephomancy Ritual from Assur (LKA 137),” JANES 21 (1992) 95–115. 102.  1 Samuel 28–31. 103.  “Šulgi Hymn B” lines 131–49 in Richardson, On Seeing and Believing, 230. 104. Richardson, On Seeing and Believing, 250.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

59

ers of Mari accompanied troops on campaign, often working in teams of two. 105 The diviner Erib-Sin performs extispicies for the well-being of the troops with a validity of one month’s time: The path was in place. The palace gate was sound. The cleft was in place. The two bases of the shepherd were attached right and left. The finger was sound. The outgrowth was a (male) battle ax. Lung and heart [were] sound. My upper parts were sound. In my verification the outlook was in place. The path descended toward the seat of the left. The palace gate was sound. The cleft was in place. The two bases of the shepherd were pulled out on the right and attached on the left. On the left, he (the god) broke the finger. The outgrowth was a (female) battle ax. Lung, heart, and my upper parts were sound. My extispicies were sound for their days. 106

In the second millennium b.c.e., the Mari kings eagerly employed diviners. More than 45 diviners are known by name from the court of Zimri-Lim alone, posted in more than two dozen foreign palaces, fortresses, and towns. Many oracles from the Mari period have been preserved. 107 All the regions, especially border ones—that is, those at risk of war—had to have their diviner. 108 Letters to the king also mentioned purifiers (mussirū) which probably administered the swearing of oaths to persons in the presence of divine weapons. 109 The questions asked before going on a campaign were always set: If [the troops], whom he dispatched to Hammu-Rabi, (arrive), will Hammu-Rabi not catch, not kill, not cause to kill, not detain for evil or peaceful intentions those troops? Will those who went out through the gate of Mari alive enter the gate of Mari alive? 110

Išhi-Addu, who was a diviner and military officer, 111 made an extispicy on seizing the city in the next 3 days. 112 A diviner accompanied the king into battle: 113 Ilšu-naṣir, the bārûm-priest, a servant of my lord “leads” the forces of my lord A Babylonian bārûm-priest goes With the Babylonian forces These 600 troops are (now) In Šabazim. The bārûm-priests are gathering Omens. When an omen appears favorable 150 soldiers Go out and 150 return. 114 105.  Text 26 145 in Heimpel, Letters, 173, 231. 106.  Ibid., Text 26 96 (p. 213), and see also text 26 97–100′ (pp. 213–15), as well as Hali-Hadun and Ilšu-naṣir text 26 101 (p. 215); Išhi-Addu texts 26 113, 116–117, 120–129 (pp. 220–25). 107.  Prophecy and other forms of divination were used in foreign politics as well as in interior politics; see Jonathan Stökl, “Mine is Bigger than Yours: Divination (Ethical) Demands and Diplomacy in the Ancient Near East,” paper read at the ISBL (EABS) International Meeting 2010, Tartu. 108. Heimpel, Letters, Text 26 138 (p. 227). 109.  Ibid., Text 26 44 (p. 199). 110.  Ibid., Text 100′ (p. 215). 111.  Ibid., 220. 112.  Ibid., Text 26 117 (p. 221). 113. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 188; Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy, 15–16. 114.  ARMT II, 22 23–31; see Sa-Moon Kang, Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1989) 42.

60

Krzysztof Ulanowski

The seer Ašqudum was married to a princess and occasionally led military expeditions. 115 His house, which covered more than a thousand square meters, resembled a scaled-down palace, which indicates his prestige and wealth. 116 The seers depicted themselves not just advisers to kings and generals but as individuals who could literally win battles. 117 The notion of leading an army may go back to the Near East. The expression “go in front of the army” was used by the Babylonian seer. 118 The diviners predicted the threat of Babylon. 119 In the Old Babylonian letters to Zimri-Lim the god Addu is quoted for this admonition to the king. There are many examples of texts found at Mari, Eshnunna, 120 and Emar 121 connected to military affairs: This is what I (Adad [Addu] lord of Aleppo) d[esire] from you. When you go out on campaign. Do not go without an oracle, You will go out on a campaign. If I do not You will [not] g[o] out the gate. 122 A female ecstatic rose in the temple of Annunitum, And said, “Zimri-Lim, You shall not go on campaign. Stay in Mari. 123

It is worth comparing these two passages with the aforementioned story of Naram-​ Sin: “Tie up your weapons and puts (them) into the corners! Guard your courage! Take heed of your own person! Let him roam through your land and do not go out to him!” 124 And the other ones are connected with the most important matters of war: Now go, I have sent you. To Zimri-Lim you will speak as follow: 115. Heimpel, Letters, Text 26 27 (p. 191). 116. Flower, The Seer, 50. 117. Heimpel, Letters, Texts 26 26–38 (pp. 191–96). 118.  In the Old Babylonian period, there are references to the diviner as “the one who walks in front of the army.” See Martin L. West, The East Face of Helicon (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003) 349; Michael A. Flower, “The Iamidae: A Mantic Family and Public Image,” in Practitioners of the Divine: Greek Priests and Religious Officials from Homer to Heliodorus (ed. B. Dignas and K. Trampedach; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008) 203; Flower, The Seer, 96; Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy, 22–23. 119.  See Heimpel, Letters, text 26 160 (p. 237). 120.  Jimmy J. M. Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 157–253; Martii Nissinen, Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East (Atlanta: SBL, 2003) 13–95; see Charpin, “I Am the Sun, 78–79. 121.  Israel Ephʾal, The City Besieged: Siege and Its Manifestations in the Ancient Near East (Jerusalem: Magnes, 2013) 136–37, 153, 161; Akio Tsukimoto, “Akkadian Tablets in the Hirayama Collection (I),” ASJ 12 (1990) 190, 7:29–37; Daniel Arnaud, Recherches au pays d’Aštata: Emar 6/Textes sumériens et accadiens/ 4, Textes de la bibliothèque, transcriptions et traductions (Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations, 1987) 42, lines 8–19. 122.  2.A.15= AEM 1/1, 233 11′–17′; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 169; see Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens, 15, compare also text 26 237 in Heimpel, Letters, 268. 123.  17.A.994 = ARM X 50 = AEM 1/1, 237 22–25; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 199. 124.  “Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes,” 164–66 in Westenholz, Legends, p. 329.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

61

“Send your messengers to me And place your complete report Before me, And the kings of the (Ben)jaminites I will cause to flop In fisherman’s basket, And [I will s]et them before you.” 125 [M]orever Nergal, the [k]ing of Hubšalum St[o]od by your [si]de And by side of your army in the slaughter Whatever you vowed, And a large bronze sword Have made, and let them take (them) to Nergal. 126 To my lord speak: Thus says Šibtu, your maidservant: With regard to the report on the campaign on which my lord plans to go, (to obtain) oracles I caused a man and a woman To drink. I questioned (them), and the omen Is very favorable for my lord. . . . I asked, “Shall my lord draw near to battle?” They answered, “A battle will not be fought. As soon as he (Zimri-Lim) approaches, His (Išme-Dagan’s) auxiliary troops Will be scattered And they will cut off the hea[d of Išme]-Dagan And under the foot of my lord They will place (it).” . . . Adad is indeed the lord of decisions – Who g[o] at the side of my lord. 127 To my lord, Speak: Thus says Šibtu, your maidservant: In the temple of Annunitum which is inside the city Ahatum, the servant girl of Dagan-Malik, Fell into an ecstatic trance, and she spoke as follows, Saying, “Zimri-Lim, Even thought you have neglected me, I will bend over you In love. Your enemies 125.  3.A.222 = AEM 1/1, 229 32–39; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 171. 126. 5.A.4260 = AEM 1/1, 194 24–30, Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 177; text 26  194 in Heimpel, Letters, pp. 249–50. 127.  11.A.966 = ARM X 4 = AEM 1/1, 207 1–34; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 187–89; text 26  207 in Heimpel, Letters, p. 257; Dominique Bonatz, “Ashurbanipal’s Headhunt: An Athropological Persspective,” Iraq 66 (2004) 100.

62

Krzysztof Ulanowski I will deliver Into your hand. 128 Thus says Ishtar of Ninet: [“W]ith my strong weapons I will stand by you. 129

The dreams of the Neo-Assyrian king Ashurbanipal have very similar context and meaning: The Crossing of the River Ididʾe The army saw the river Ididʾe which was a raging torrent, and was afraid of crossing. (But) the goddess Ishtar who dwells in Arbela let my army have a dream in the midst of the night (addressing them) as follows: “I shall go in front of Ashurbanipal, the king whom I have created myself!” The army relied upon this dream and crossed safely the river Ididʾe. 130 The Dream of the Priest of Ishtar Ishtar heard my desperate sighs and said (to me in a theophany): “Be not afraid (that you see me)!” (This alone) put confidence in my heart (and she continued): “I have (already) had mercy upon you on account of the prayer you performed (and because) your eyes were full of tears.” (And indeed) in the midst of the (very same) night in which I addressed myself to Ishtar, a šabrû-priest went to bed and had a dream. He woke up with a start and Ishtar made him see a “nocturnal vision”. He reported (it) to me as follows: “The goddess Ishtar who dwells in Arbela entered (the room), quivers hanging at her right and left, holding the bow in her (one) hand, the sharp sword drawn (ready) for battle. She stood before you, speaking to you like a real mother. (Then) Ishtar, the most high among the gods, called you to give you the following order: ‘Wait with the attack (because) wherever you intend to go, I, myself, shall set out for!’ (Then) you said to her as follows: ‘Wherever you go, I will go with you, Supreme Lady!’ (But) she repeated (her command) as follows: ‘You stay here, the place where you (should be); eat, drink wine, make merry, pay homage to (my) godhead while I shall go and accomplish this task and make you obtain your heart’s desires! (Then) your face will not be pale, your feet will not shake (any more) and you need not wipe off your (cold) sweat (even) in the thick of the battle!’ (Thereupon) she wrapped you in her sweet (smelling) baby-sling protecting your entire body. (Then) her countenance shone like fire and she went out (of the room), in rage to defeat your enemies, proceeding in the direction of Teumman, king of Elam, who had made her very angry.” 131 She (prophetess) spoke to me as follows, saying, “Dagan sent me. Write to yo[ur] lord That he should not worry and the land Should [not] worry. 132 128.  14.A.671 = ARM X 8 = AEM 1/1, 214 1–14; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 193. 129.  31.A.2666 = AEM 1/1, 193 16–18; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 217. Ištar of Ninet or Eštar of Ninet in Mari, see text 26 192 in Heimpel, Letters, 248–49 and similar texts 26 213–214 in Heimpel, Letters, 260. 130.  “The Crossing of the River Ididʾe” in A. Leo Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East, with a Translation of an Assyrian Dream Book (Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1956) 249. 131.  “The Dream of the Priest of Ishtar,” in Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams, 249. 132.  28.M.13843 = ARM XIII 114 + AEM 1/1, 210 10–14; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 215.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

63

Dagan instructe[d me] Saying, “I will open the battle.” 133 “Wherever you go, happiness Will constantly meet you. The battering ram And the siege tower are given to you. They will go at your side. They will be your companions.” 134 The king without consulting the god Shall not make a treaty” 135 [My lord] wrote me [as follow]s say[ing], “The dream which I saw was disturbing. . . . As soon as I heard the tablet of my lord, I summoned the diviners, and The question as follows I asked them, saying, [“M]y lord made an urgent question And [wro]te to me. What do you counsel? 136

The Mari prophetic texts forecast the latest Assyrian divinatory texts. Not only the structure but the content and main points are very similar. It is impossible to go on a campaign without an oracle, the assurance of the gods’ presence, and conviction of victory. Despite the large difference in time—more than a thousand years— the kings are associated with the same gods: Ishtar, Adad (Addu), 137 and Nergal (not Ashur of course, as this is a god strictly linked to the city of Assur but, for example, in the case of Mari, it is Dagan 138). Even the sign of victory is the same—namely, the head of the defeated ruler. The diviners are part of the military cortege: they participate and enable the dialogue between the gods and the king. The result of divination is known only to the king. Without the gods’ agreement, it is impossible to begin a war or to finish it—that is to say, to make a treaty.

Tamītus and Queries In a series of queries 139 to Shamash, the Assyrian kings determined the course to be taken in battle. The best-known queries are from the Neo-Assyrian period, but we know them already from the Old Babylonian (1900–1595 b.c.e.) and the Kassite periods (1475–1155 b.c.e.) as well. The earliest queries, known as tamītu texts, have a grammatical or semantic formulation similar to the Neo-Assyrian omens. The similarity indicates that the Neo-Assyrian queries were based on a long tradition of 133.  38.M.7306 = AEM 1/1, 205 = ARMT XXV, 816 7–8; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 229. 134.  34.A.925 + A.2050 = AEM 1/1, 199 11–14; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 221. 135.  34.A.925 + A.2050 = AEM 1/1, 199 49–50; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 225; and see p. 285. 136.  48.M.5704 = AEM 1/1, 225 6–19; Roberts, “The Mari Prophetic Texts,” 241. 137. Heimpel, Letters, Text 26 176 (p. 243). 138.  Ibid., Text 26 27 (p. 192). 139.  The extispicy queries were among the earliest sources published; see Jörgen A. Knudtzon, Assyrische Gebete an den Sonnengott für Staat und königliches Haus aus der Zeit Asarhaddons und Asurbanipals (Leipzig: Eduard Pfeiffer, 1893); Zimmern, Beiträge zur Kenntnis der babylonischen Religion; Ernst G. Klauber (ed.), Politisch-religiöse Texte aus den Sargonidenzeit (Leipzig: Pfeiffer, 1913).

64

Krzysztof Ulanowski

oracular military strategies going back to the beginning of the second millennium. 140 The queries are attested only to Shamash, but the earlier tamītus and ikribus, from the Old Babyblonian period, were directed to Shamash and Adad, sometimes only to Shamash. 141 A Babylonian tamītu text is a question addressed to the Babylonian gods Shamash and Adad as a duo, 142 and begins: “Shamash, lord of the judgment, Adad, lord of the inspection.” 143 As a source of history, the importance of queries is enhanced by the fact that they are free of any kind of tendentious editing, which characterizes the annals and other related royal records, or the self-serving interests permeating the correspondence of courtiers. The diviners may have manipulated some of the results of the extispicies but not the fact stated in the queries placed before the god of justice. 144 The military queries are characterized by the fact that they refer to the immediate future and “further” future. These queries do not have even the stipulated term 145 and would presumably be followed by a more specific query with a stipulated term if the gods were agreeable to the idea. These queries concern situations on an existing battlefield: the outcome of an on-going siege, 146 an attack on the army already engaged in a mission, 147 on-going hostilities 148 or taking up negotiations. 149 Examples of “further” future could include Esarhaddon’s query concerning sending an army to plunder the district of Karkašši 150 or capturing the city Amul 151 or even longer-term schemes, such as Esarhaddon’s plans to attack Egypt. 152 Sheep’s livers show the main features of importance for the diviner of the OB period 153 and Mari. 154 The preserved models of sheep’s livers represent specific situations. For example: If an enemy plans an attack against a city and its plan is revealed, it will look like this. If the enemy musters which hostile intent but the prince’s [army(?)], however considerable it may be, is not powerful enough, (it will look like this). 155

Several tamītus offer questions posed by kings about campaigns or other matters of historical interest. 156 140. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 183. 141. SAA 4, xxix. 142. Lambert, Babylonian Oracle Questions, VII, 1. 143.  Ibid., 5. 144.  SAA 4, xiv. 145.  See SAA 4, 30, 33. 146. SAA 4, 3. 147. SAA 4, 9. 148. SAA 4, 10, 66. 149. SAA 4, 57. 150. SAA 4, 62. 151. SAA 4, 63. 152. SAA 4, 84; Ulla S. Koch, “Concepts and Perception of Time in Mesopotamian Divination,” in Time and History in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 56th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Barcelona 26–30 July 2010 (ed. L. Feliu, J. Llop, A. Millet Albà, and J. Sanmartìn; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013) 137–38. 153.  Stephanie Dalley, “Occasions and Opportunities: To the Persian Conquest,” in The Legacy of Mesopotamia (ed. S. Dalley; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998) 20–21, nos. 10–11; Farber, Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination, 1905, fig. 2. 154. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 88, fig. 3.1. 155.  See Jean-Jacques Glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles (Atlanta: SBL, 2004) 9, ref. no. 31. 156. Lambert, Babylonian Oracle Questions, 20.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

No. 1. A Campaign of Hammurabi of Babylon 1.  Shamash, lord of the judgment, Adad, lord of the inspection, 2.  Concerning the soldiers of the palace, the soldiers of the palace gate, the chariot soldiers, 3.  The foot soldiers, the elite soldiers, the desert soldiers, 4.  The grouped soldiers, the Sutian and country soldiers, 5.  Soldiers that Marduk rules over, 6.  As many as Hammurabi, king of Babylon, 7.  Calls together, organize and disbands: 8.  Should he select and choose chariots and infantry, 9.  Should Adanshu-likshud, son of Sin-nahrani, 10.  Who supervises the infantry, 11.  Take control and lead them from the base camp? 12.  Should he take the eastern route 13.  Along the bank of the Tigris, 14.  And go to Kasalluhhu? 15.  Will they then, by the might of his victory, by. . . speaking, 16.  By every kind of skilled operation 17.  And all available kinds of battle equipment, 18.  Take that city Kasalluhu? 19.  Will they then safely return with a share of the abundant profit 20.  And spoil of the city? 21.  And will they send back news of success to the owner of his woolen 22.  Fringe, that the seer may see, and the hearer may hear? 23.  Your divinity, Shamash and Adad, etc.    24–25.  A tamītu concerning Hammurabi’s going on a campaign to seize Kasalluhu.   . . . 49.  by disturbing, overturning, pushing, by revolt, 50.  by trickery, by siege, by smooth talk, 51.  by undermining, by sheer might, by encircling, 52.  by heaping up earth, by causing distress, 53.  by (cutting off) food supply, by breaching (the walls), 54.  by siege tower, by battering ram, by claw, 55.  by ladder, by boring engines, 56.  by cutting through the wall, by ramp, 57.  by spreading confusion, by causing panic, 58.  by the robber’s dagger, by hunger, 59.  [by] famine, by want, by thirst, 60.  [by] soaking in water, by night in the open, 61.  [by] as many [tricks] as there are, 62.  they will [not] surround [the. . .] armies that are stationed in the city, will they, 63.  [will not] destroy their wall, 64.  will not seize their city gate, 65.  will not cut off their [escape route], 66.  will [not] desecrate their temples, 67.  will not everywhere set [fire] 68.  to their houses, their [buildings], their property, 69.  will not take, rob or carry off [the. . .]. 70.  which are in this city, 71.  will not take them captives, 72.  refugees, prisoners or fugitives,

65

66

Krzysztof Ulanowski 73.  will not bring about their collapse, defeat and overthrow 74.  will not cause noise, dismay? From confusion and panic 75.  within this city, 76.  will not reduce them to shrieking, 77.  will not turn them into a ruin heap, will they? 78.  Or, the resident senior man who lives in that city 79.  will not go out of his mind, 80.  will not lose his reason, will not confer with the enemy army, 81.  will not open the bridge of the city gate, 82.  and will not send out the troops, the sphere of Marduk 83.  and Samsu-ditana, son of Ammi-saduqa, king of Babylon, 84.  will not allow the enemy army into the city, will he? 85.  A tamītu concerning the safety of the city. 157

This is a clear example of how detailed the questions were and how deep faith was in the necessity of such questioning in achieving success. There are, of course, many tamītus connected to war—for example, no. 4, Questions to Shamash and Adad concerning a campaign of a Babylonian king against the Lullubû, the siege of the city, another military campaigns 158 and no. 5, A question to Shamash and Adad concerning a military campaign (should a king of Babylon undertake a military campaign against enemy): 1.  Shamash, lord of the judgment, Adad, lord of the inspection . . . 2.  To defeat, to pillage [and to plunder] 4.  should he (king of Babylon) assemble his army, his land, his camp, his allies, should he call up [his] chariots [and] the chariots of his land, all there are, 5.  should he, at the command [of. . .]. . . , call up the battle warriors who go at his side, and the important . . . . 7.  and who he had disband by a friendly agreement [. . .] under oath by Marduk his lord and . [. . . . .]. together with the armies of Enlil, Shamash and Marduk, 8.  and [. . .]. . . should he take hold of [his] chariot yoke and direct his team 9.  [and with] these [armies] should he set [out] from the gate of Babylon [. . .]. . . . . . pass through his lands, cross over all rivers and streams 10.  That confront him, should he break through contingents, districts, upper and lower [. . . . .]. . . , 12.  (Relying) upon(?) your great divinity, Marduk, lord of the magic knot, [. . . . .] to go on his campaign, to direct the march, to. . . his foes, 13.  To fell his adversaries and opponents, to seize his enemies: in the course of that campaign 15.  (. . .) Will he reach that enemy land safely, 16.  And when he has reached that enemy land, whether they confront him in open battle. [. . .]. . , in hand-to-hand fighting, or whether in the course of besieging strong cities 17.  And fortifications where they engage with him, will Enlil, lord of weapons, . . [. . . and] Ishtar, mistress of conflict who engages in warfare, 18.  Give him their mighty weapons and consolidate him in standing pose? [. . .] of his dread. Will the king of his enemy land whose [. .] . . will be assembled for him 157.  “ND 5492 (IM 67692)” in Lambert, Babylonian Oracle Questions, 24–29 no. 1. 158. Ibid., 62–67 no. 4.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

67

21.  [. . .]. . will his weapons prevail over his enemy’s weapons? 22.  [. . .]. The overthrow, drubbing and spoils of the army of that enemy 23.  [. . .] will the desertion and revolt of the army of that enemy be brought about before his own army? 24.  [. . .] within this year, at the command of Shamash and Adad, your great divinity, is it decreed and sure, and 25.  [. . .] will they destroy his strong walls? 39.  may hear the enemy’s marching so that he becomes scared [and the enemy to his right and left is] sitting in ambushes. 159

This way of questioning shows first of all that the questioner was experienced in matters of war and that every aspect of war was treated entirely seriously: in this area, there was no place for even the smallest mistake. We can observe that the presence of the gods and their favor have a very special effect on the success of the expedition. Therefore, rulers care about the presence of the divine standards, which were treated as the personal representation of gods during the campaign. The Balawat Gates 160 of Shalmaneser III (858–824 b.c.e.) and palace reliefs from the reign of Ashurnasirpal II (883–859 b.c.e.), Sargon II (721– 705 b.c.e.) and Sennacherib (704–681 b.c.e.) indicate that standards, mounted on chariots, accompanied the Assyrian army on campaigns and received rites within the army cantonments. The portable battle-standards receive the same cultic attentions as their stationary counterparts housed in the Assyrian city-temples. 161 Among the hundreds of queries to Shamash from the reign of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal, nine relate to the fate of cities that were in danger of siege by enemies of Assyria or enemy cities that the Assyrian kings planned to capture. We should consider these queries much as we did the case of the Old Babylonian tamītus: “Will they capture the city of GN through friendliness or peaceful negotiations (which result in) a treaty invoking the names of god and goddess, or by force? By famine, hunger and want, or by thirst? Or by waging war, or by powerful weapon? By (scaling) ladders, or by means of battering rams, or a tunnel, or a breach? Or by water that softens [bricks]? Or by negligence (of the defenders), or through lack (of soldiers in the city)? Or through insurrection, revolt and rebellion? Or through any ruse of capturing a city? Will they enter that city?” 162

There are numerous examples of queries connected with military affairs. Of the 121 datable Reports, 115 were recorded in the years 679 to 665 b.c.e. 163

Will Ursaya of Urartu Invade Šubria? (10) Will they kill what there is to kill, plunder what there is to plunder, and loot what there is to [loot]? Will they annex (any) of the fortresses of Šubria, few or many, and turn (them) into their own? 159. Ibid., 71–73 no. 5, comp.  Israel Ephʾal, “Ways and Means to Conquer a City, Based on Assyrian Queries to the Sungod” in Assyria 1995: Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Symposium of the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, Helsinki, September 7–11, 1995 (ed. S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting; Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1997) 52–53. 160. See John M. Russell, The Writing on the Wall: Studies in the Architectural Context of Late Assyrian Palace Inscriptions (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1999) 80–81. 161. Holloway, Aššur is King! 172–73. 162. Ephʾal, Ways and Means, 51, see reference nos. 8–25. 163. SAA 8, xx, xxii.

68

Krzysztof Ulanowski (rev. 9) (and whether) they will [annex (any) of] the cities of Šubria, fe[w or many], and turn (them) [into] their [o]wn. 164

Giving a Princess in Marriage to Bartatua, King of the Scythians (4) if Esarhaddon, king of [Assyria], gives him [Bartatua] a royal daughter in marriage, will Bartatua, king of the Scythians, speak with [Esarhaddon, king of Assyria], in good faith, true and honest words of peace? (8) Will he keep the treaty of [Esarhaddon, king of Assyria]? Will he do [whatever i]s pleasing to Esarhaddon, king of Assyria? 165

Will Scythians Invade Assyria through Passes of Hubuškia? (6) Will they move out and go through the passes [of Hubuškia] to the city Harrania (and) the city Anisus? Will they take much plunder and heavy booty from the territory of [Assyria]? Does your great divinity [know it]? 166

Will Mannean Troops Capture Šarru-iqbi? (2) or through lack (of soldiers), or [through . . . . . .], (3) or by means of ramps, or [battering-rams, or] famine, hunger and wa[nt . . . . . .]? (5) [Will they conquer] the city Šarru-iqbi by their fearfulness? [Will the Mannean] troops [through] any [ruse] of conquering a city [drive the forces] of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria [out of it], and will they capture that city, Šarru-iqbi? 167

Will Army of Assyria Retake Dur-Illil? (2) [Dur-Illil, a fortress of Esarhaddo]n, king of Assyria, located on the border [of Mannea, which the Manneans captured] and took possession of — (4) should [NN together with men, hors]es, and an army, as (great as) he wishes, go [to capture that city, Dur-Il]lil and (will they), 6) be it by means of [war, or by means of friendliness and peace]ful negotiations, [or by means of a tunnel or breach, or by means of] hunger, (8) or through lack [of soldiers in the city], or by means of ramps, [or by . . .]. . . , o[r by . . . , or through any ru]se of conquering a city, (11) [will the army of Esarhaddon, king of As]syria, [capture] that city, Dur-Illil? [Will they conquer it]? Will it be delivered to them? 168

Esarhaddon and Dur-Illil (2) [. . . . . .]. . . Will they mount [a dangerous attack on . . . . . .], (and) ki[ll and plunder (them)]? (3) [Will Esarhaddo]n, king of Assyria, be troub[led and angry]? 169

Will the Army of Assyria Defeat the Manneans? (5) [If he goes and . . . , will the weapons and army] of Esarhaddon, king Assyria, (6) [prevail], overwhelm and be victorious over [the weapons of . . .]? 170

164. SAA 4, 18 10–11, rev. 9. 165. SAA 4, 20 4–9. 166. SAA 4, 23 6–10. 167. SAA 4, 29 2–8. 168. SAA 4, 30 2–12. 169. SAA 4, 32 2–3. 170. SAA 4, 33 5–6.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

69

Will Mamitiaršu of Media and Kaštaritu of Karkašši become Allies? (2) [Kašt]aritu, city lord of Karkaššî, who wrote to Mamiti[aršu, a city lord] of the Medes, as follows: “Let us act together [and break away] from [Assyria]” — (4) Will [Mami]tiaršu listen to him? Will he comply? Will he be pleased? Will he become hostile to Esarhaddon, king of [Assyria] this year? Does your great divinity [know it]? (7) Is the [hosti]lity of Mamitiar[šu], a city lord of the Medes, [against Esarhaddon, ki]ng of Assyria, [decreed and confirmed] in a favo[rable case . . . . . .] 171

Will Kaštaritu Conquer Kišassu? (2) From this day, the 3rd day of this month, the month Iyyar (II), to the 11th day of the month Ab (V) of this year, for these 100 days and nights, the term stipulated for the performance of (this) extispicy — within this stipulated term, (4) will Kaštaritu with his troops, or the troops of the Cimmerians, or the troops of the Medes, or the troops of the Manneans, or any other enemy, strive and plan? (6) Will they, be it by means of pressure, or by force, or by waging war, or [by means of a tun]nel or breach, or (scaling) ladders, or by means of ramps or [battering]rams, or famine, (9) or by a treaty invoking the names of god and god[dess], or through friendliness or peaceful negotiations, or through any ru[se of captu]ring a city, capture the city Kišassu? Will they enter that city, Kišassu? (12) Will they conquer that city, Kišassu? Will it be de[live]red to them? Does your great divinity know it? 172

Should Esarhaddon Send his Messenger to Kaštaritu? (2) [Should Esarhad]don, ki[ng of Assyria, send] the messenger whom he wishes [to Kašt]ar[itu, city lord] of Karkaššî? [And if Esarhaddo]n, king of Assyria, [sends his messenger to go to K]aštaritu, [will he, on the advice of his coun]sellors, [seize] that messenger, [question him], (and) kill him? 173

Should Esarhaddon Send an Army to Plunder Karkašši? (2) [Should] Esarhaddon, king of A[ssyria, strive and plan]? Should he send [magnates and governors], together with men, horses, [and an army, as great as they wish], against Kaštaritu [of Karkašš]î and the t[roops (allied) with him], to wage war at the c[ity K]asasu? I[f he, having planned, sends them], (6) will the magnates and governors, (with) the army of [Esa]rhaddon, king of Assyria, conquer [that city] and will they, as long as they are in the district of K[arkaššî], march about [wherever] they wish? (9) Will they stay a[live and w]e[ll], will they be saved, will they [escape] and evade them? Will they [come out] safely fr[om the district] of Karkaššî? (11) Will they attain their objective? [. . . . . .] Will they re[turn ali]ve from that (expedition), [set foot] on Assyrian soil and com[e before Esarh]addon, king of Assyria? Does your great divinity [know it]? 174

Conquest of the city was very common practice during the military campaign and is reported not only in the Assyrian palace reliefs but also in biblical sources. 175 171. SAA 4, 41 2–8. 172. SAA 4, 43 2–13. 173. SAA 4, 57 2–7. 174. SAA 4, 62 2–6, 9–12. 175.  See 2 Kings 18:17, 19.8; 2 Chronicles 32:9.

70

Krzysztof Ulanowski

The Neo-Assyrian Period The magic of the state, especially during the time of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, was a significant dimension of the functions of political power and military practice. 176 At the international level, questions related to military campaigns are the most frequently recurring themes. Various questions about warfare are settled with divination: what is the right moment to go to war? What are the required forces? Which techniques and which itinerary would help? What is the level of safety? What are the enemies’ intentions? What are the chances of success? and so on. These questions are by far the biggest group in the queries to the sun-god. Some letters of astrologers and exorcists also deal with this matter, probably when the king is looking for additional reassurance. Akkullanu’s letter about the portent of an Assyrian victory over the Cimmerians (657 b.c.e.) displays the scribe’s ability to explain signs to the king and influence him into going to war. Assurbanipal’s annals describe the Cimmerians as rebellious tribes, but we learn from this letter that they had conquered Syria at this time and that the king was waiting for good omens to gain control over the region again. In a long astrological report, Akkullanu explains to his king that, according to several omens, the Westland will perish and the king of Assyria will succeed. Quite remarkable is the alternation of the interpretations of omens, negative for the Cimmerians and positive for Assyria, found in the EAE, in reports from famous scholars, and in other sources. 177 The Assyrian haruspex covered all manner of potential procedures and outcomes. But this relentless repetition was never meaningless. Instead, it reveals a profound anxiety about coming events, an anxiety that lay beneath the external display of power and propaganda of an invincible Assyrian might. 178 In the Neo-Assyrian queries to Shamash, an entire complicated battle strategy was drawn out on a papyrus and placed before the god, in front of his cult statue in the temple. The questioner then asked “Should this particular strategy, on this document, be followed?” The strategy was not written out in detail, like the other queries but put before the god in the form of a drawing or diagram. The god, in the guise of his cult statue, observed the document and gave his response through the entrails of the sacrificial animal, which was offered at the same time as the submission of the document for divine consent. 179 As was mentioned above, the bārû was part of the royal court and participated in all military expeditions. They used catalogues of battle omens and strategic queries to decide about the strategy of war. 180 They were responsible for providing medical help, 181 as well as spiritual and funeral services during times of war. 182 There are many well-known representations of extispicy in military camps in Neo-Assyrian art. On the reliefs from Ashurnasirpal II’s (883–859 b.c.e.) palace in 176. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 206. 177. SAA 10, 100. 178. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 186. 179.  Ibid., 188. 180.  Erica Reiner, Astral Magic in Babylonia (Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1995) 64; Bahrani, Rituals of War, 190–91, figs. 7.1–2. 181.  It is known from the contract from Idalion on Cyprus between its king Stasikypros and the physician Onasilos concerning the treatment of the wounded during a possible siege. There are no data that this physician was a kind of priest or diviner; see Ephʾal, The City Besieged Siege, 168; Olivier Masson, Les inscriptions chypriotes syllabiques (Paris: de Boccard, 1961) 235–44, no. 217. 182.  De Backer, L’art, 116.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

71

Nimrud, from the ninth century b.c.e., the presence of the bārû priest (identified by his hat and fringed robe) in military campaigns is confirmed. In a relief depicting scenes of war from the king’s campaigns, a priest in a military camp is shown leaning over the altar, in the process of examining the entrails of a sacrificial animal. 183 In most of these scenes, the priest stands in front of an altar, a high, table-like object with animal legs carved as its support. The priests wear tall headgear, a rounded dinos-like vessel is in some cases set in front of them on a stand. These oracular consultations are requests for signs of sanction from the gods at the moment of battle and were a necessary step in justifying war and ensuring victory through the approval of the war by the divine. These catalogued battle omens and strategic queries reveal an intense anxiety and unease about deciding the tactics and strategies of war. 184 Extispicy was performed in Tiglath-Pileser III’s (744–727 b.c.e.) camp. 185 Bēl-apla-iddina combined his activities in the field of extispicy with being a commanding officer: Moving on from the city, Anat I besieged the city Sūru, the fortified city of Kudurru, governor of the land Suhu. Trusting in extensive Kassite troops he attacked me to wage war and battle. I besieged the city (and) on the second day fought my way inside. In the face of my mighty weapons, Kudurru with 70 of his soldiers fell back to the Euphrates to save his life. I conquered the city, (iii 20) I captured 50 cavalrymen together with the troops of Nabû-apla-iddina, king of Karduniaš, Zabdānu his brother with 3,000 fighting men, (and) Bēl-apla-iddina the diviner, their commanding officer.  186

In the eighth campaign of Sargon II (721–705 b.c.e.), a haruspex was evidently present at the king’s camp. In the same campaign, a scholar took part as well. 187 In a detail within Sennacherib’s (704–681 b.c.e.) relief series of the battle of Lachish, two priests in tall hats are performing a ceremony before an altar within the military camp. 188 The representation of two priests performing a ceremony in front of 183.  British Museum 124548, the North West Palace, king Ashurnasirpal II during the campaign of about 880 b.c.e. See Ernest A. W. Budge, Assyrian Sculptures in the British Museum: Reign of Ashurnasir-pal (London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1914) pl. XVI; Dominique Collon, “Depiction of Priests and Priestesses in the Ancient Near East,” in Priests and Officials in the Ancient Near East: Papers of the Second Colloquium on the Ancient Near East, the City and Its Life, Held at the Middle Eastern Culture Centre in Japan (Mitaka, Tokyo, March 22–24, 1996) (ed. K. Watanabe; Heidelberg: Winter, 1999) 24, fig. 23; Reiner, Astral Magic, 64; Bahrani, Rituals of War, 190–91, figs. 7.1–2; Alasdair Livingstone, “New Dimensions in the Study of Assyrian Religion,” in Assyria 1995: Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Symposium of the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project. Helsinki, September 7–11, 1995 (ed. S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting; Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1997) 173, fig. 3; Paul Collins, “Attending the King in the Assyrian Reliefs,“ in Assyrian Reliefs from the Palace Ashurnasirpal II: A Cultural Biography (ed. A. Cohen and S. E. Kangas; Hanover: NH: Hood Museum of Art, Dartmouth College, 2010), 190–91, fig. 7.8. 184. Bahrani, Rituals of War, 188–89, figs. 7.1–2. 185.  From Nimrud, carved about 730–727 b.c.e.; BM: Original Drawing I, 14, see Richard D. Barnett and Margarete Falkner, The Sculptures of Aššur-nasir-apli II (883–859 b.c.), Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 b.c.), Esarhaddon (681–669 b.c.) from the Central and South-West Palaces at Nimrud (London: The British Museum. 1962) 18–19, pl. LX, Or. Dr. I: pl. XIV. 186.  A.0.101.1, iii 16–20, in: RIMA 2, 213. 187.  SAA 4, xxx; see also Frederick M. Fales, Guerre et paix en Assyrie: Religion et impérialism (Paris: du Cerf, 2010) 139; Paul E. Botta and Eugène N. Flandin, Monument de Ninive (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1849–50) vol. 2, pl. 146. 188.  BM 124914, South West Palace, see Richard D. Barnett, Erika Bleibtreu, and Geoffrey Turner, Sculptures from the Southwest Palace of Sennacherib at Nineveh (London: British Museum Press, 1998)

72

Krzysztof Ulanowski

an incense-burner, an altar, and a chariot, sometimes with divine standards, is repeated continuously. 189 This scene occurs in four of Sennacherib’s camps and it has its own space inside the camp, always on the top left-hand side with the two priests looking toward the right. 190 We have only a few pieces of correspondence between Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal with haruspices. Anyway, they play an important role in the policy-making decisions of both kings. We also know of, not an oracular but rather a literal, text The Sin of Sargon, in which Sennacherib commissioned diviners to discover the cause of his father’s fate. 191 Due to the letter of the divinatory Babylonian priest Kudurru to Esarhaddon, we know of the presence of priests in the camp during the battle. 192 We know the list of scholars accompanying Esarhaddon when the second invasion of Egypt took place. The list starts with seven astrologers (ṭupšar enūma anu enlil, literally, ‘scribe of the canonical omen series Enūma Anu Enlil’; often abbreviated to ‘scribe’, ṭupšarru), followed by nine exorcists (āšipu), then five diviners (bārû), nine physicians (asû), and six lamenters (kalû). So far, this is the expected range of experts representing the five main branches of Mesopotamian scholarship. 193 They are followed by another three groups of advisers, three ‘bird watchers’ (dāgil iṣṣūri), three so-called hartibē, and three ‘Egyptians scribes’ ( ṭupšarru Muṣurāyu). 194

Conclusions Studying these cases teaches us a lot about the waging of war in Mesopotamia. The results of divination described the conditions of war in an expressive way. Some results of extispicy can be summed up clearly as “success” or “defeat,” but the detailed descriptions show a wide array of possibilities. There were many different and surprising cases on the battlefield: the rebellion of the army, the army abandons the campaign and embarks on another, a spy infiltrates the army, the king is killed by his own warriors, a disease infects the army, the army constantly trembles (with fear) in its camp, a request for weaponry and emblems, the army is cut off from a water supply, fear overwhelms the army, confusion falls on the army, witchcraft seizes the army, a bitter enemy sends a messages of friendship, an infiltrator makes chaos in the army. There are many signs connected directly with gods: the gods come to the aid of the prince’s army, the gods inflict confusion on the army, the god has not heard the prince’s prayer, the army is forsaken by its gods and walk in misery, 165, fig. 2; Bahrani, Rituals of War, 188; Maria G. Micale and Davide Nadali, “The Shape of Sennacherib’s Camps: Strategic Functions and Ideological Space,” in Nineveh: Papers of the 49th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Part One, Iraq 66 (2004) 171–72. 189.  Room V, slab 43; Room X, slab 7; Room XXXVI, slabs 15–16; Room XLVIII, slab 20; see Erika Bleibtreu, “Kulthandlungen im Zeltlager Sanheribs” in Meqor Hajjim: Festschrift für Georg Molin zu seinem 75. Geburtstag (ed. I. Seybold; Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1983) 43–48; Collon, Depiction of Priests, 24–25. 190.  Micale and Nadali, The Shape, 165–66. 191.  SAA 4, XXXI; see Hayim Tadmor, Benno Landsberger, and Simo Parpola, “The Sin of Sargon and Sennacherib’s Last Will,” State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 3 (1989) 3–51. 192.  SAA 10, 371, rev. 6–11. 193.  Karen Radner, “The Assyrian King and his Scholars: The Syro-Anatolian and the Egyptian Schools,” in Of God(s), Trees, Kings, and Scholars: Neo-Assyrian and Related Studies in Honour of Simo Parpola (ed. M. Luukko, S. Svärd and R. Mattila; Helsinki: The Finnish Oriental Society, 2009) 222. 194.  Ibid., 223.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

73

the gods abandoned the army, divine protection gives courage, a sweet breeze comes from the god to the army, the enemy reaches a sacred place, the protective gods return to the army. There are also specific descriptions of divination that clearly show the result without further unnecessary explanation: the Twin Gods strike your army, Weapon of Sargon, Omen of Gilgamesh, Omen of Naram-Sin, Reign of Nergal (annihilation), Weapon of Shamash (Weapon of power), Shamash will walk at the side of the army (it is favourable), Isthar will walk at the side of the army (it is favourable), hand of Isthar (it is unfavourable), Sin will walk at the side of my army (it is favourable), hand of Sin (it is unfavorable). All this allows me to summarize that the Mesopotamians could not wage war without divination. The divinatory measures were used in each phase of the war. Those who failed to properly prepare divine consultation were condemned to the role of outsider and gained a dubious fame for millennia (Naram-Sin). However, the development of divination was involved in a strict manner with war. War was a practical testing ground for divination; during war, divinatory procedures and predictions were verified by brutal reality. Those who made a mistake in reading divine judgments usually did not receive a second chance. Consulting the gods was both the source of epoch-defining successes and spectacular failures. Ideology, of course, explained post factum all defeats as human errors or disobedience. Divination, in difficult times of war, provides hope that everything is under control; it is enough to simply carefully listen to divine judgments.

Bibliography Arnaud, Daniel. Recherches au pays d’Aštata. Emar 6/Textes sumériens et accadiens/ 4, Textes de la bibliothèque, transcriptions et traductions. Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations, 1987. Aro, Jusso. “Remarks on the Practice of Extispicy in the Time of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal.” Pp. 109–17 in La divination en Mésopotamie ancienne et dans les regions voisines. Edited by J. Nougayrol et al. Paris:, 1966. Bahrani, Zaina. Rituals of War: The Body and Violence in Mesopotamia. New York: Zone Books, 2008. Barnett, Richard D., Erika Bleibtreu, and Geoffrey Turner. Sculptures from the Southwest Palace of Sennacherib at Nineveh. London: British Museum Press, 1998. Barnett, Richard D., and Margarete Falkner. The Sculptures of Aššur-nasir-apli II (883–859 b.c.), Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 b.c.), Esarhaddon (681–669 b.c.) from the Central and South-West Palaces at Nimrud. London: The British Museum, 1962. Beerden, Kim. Worlds Full of Signs: Ancient Greek Divination in Context. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Bleibtreu, Erika. “Kulthandlungen im Zeltlager Sanheribs.” Pp.  43–48 in Meqor Hajjim: Festschrift für Georg Molin zu seinem 75. Geburtstag. Edited by I. Seybold. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1983. Botta, Paul E., and Eugène N. Flandin, Monument de Ninive. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1849–50. Bottéro, Jean. Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods. Chicago. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1992. Budge, Ernest A. W. Assyrian Sculptures in the British Museum: Reign of Ashur-nasir-pal. London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1914.

74

Krzysztof Ulanowski

Burkert, Walter. The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995. _________. “Signs, Commands, and Knowledge: Ancient Divination between Enigma and Epiphany.” Pp. 29–50 in Mantikê: Studies in Ancient Divination. Edited by S. I. Johnston and P. T. Struck. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Charpin, Dominique. ““I Am the Sun of Babylon”: Solar Aspects of Royal Power in Old Babylonian Mesopotamia.” Pp. 65–96 in Experiencing Power, Generating Authority: Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Edited by J.  A. Hill, P. Jones and A. J. Morales. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2013. Cogan, Morton. Imperialism and Religion: Assyria, Judah and Israel in the Eight and Seventh Centuries b.c.e. Missoula, MT: Society of Biblical Literature and Scholars Press, 1974. Collins, Paul. “Attending the King in the Assyrian Reliefs.“ Pp. 181–97 in Assyrian Reliefs from the Palace Ashurnasirpal II: A Cultural Biography. Edited by A. Cohen and S. E. Kangas. Hanover, NH: Hood Museum of Art, Dartmouth College, 2010. Collon, Dominique. “Depiction of Priests and Priestesses in the Ancient Near East.” Pp. 17– 46 in Priests and Officials in the Ancient Near East: Papers of the Second Colloquium on the Ancient Near East, the City and Its Life, Held at the Middle Eastern Culture Centre in Japan (Mitaka, Tokyo, March 22–24, 1996). Edited by K. Watanabe. Heidelberg: Winter, 1999. Dalley, Stephanie. “Occasions and Opportunities: To the Persian Conquest.” Pp. 9–33 in The Legacy of Mesopotamia. Edited by S. Dalley. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. De Backer, Fabrice. L’art du siege néo-assyrien. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2013. Ephʾal, Israel. “Ways and Means to Conquer a City, Based on Assyrian Queries to the Sungod.” Pp. 49–53 in Assyria 1995: Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Symposium of the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project: Helsinki, September 7–11, 1995. Edited by S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting. Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1997. _________. The City Besieged: Siege and Its Manifestations in the Ancient Near East. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2013. Fales, Frederick M. Guerre et paix en assyrie: Religion et imperialism. Paris: du Cerf, 2010. Falkenstein, Adam, and Wolfram von Soden. Sumerische und Akkadische Hymnen und Gebete. Zürich: Artemis, 1953. Farber, Walter. “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Pp. 1895–1909 in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vols. III–IV. Edited by J. M. Sasson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2006. Feuerherm, Karljürgen G. “Have Horn, Will Travel: The Journeys of Mesopotamian Deities.” Pp. 83–97 in Travel and Religion in Antiquity. Edited by P. A. Harland. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2011. Fincke, Jeanette C. “The Babylonian Texts of Nineveh: Report on the British Museum’s Ashurbanipal Library Project.” AfO 50 (2003–4) 111–49. _________. “Omina, die göttlichen “Gesetze” der Divination.” JEOL 40 (2006–2007) 131–47. Flower, Michael A. “The Iamidae. A Mantic Family and Public Image.” Pp. 187–206 in Practitioners of the Divine: Greek Priests and Religious Officials from Homer to Heliodorus. Edited by B. Dignas and K. Trampedach. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008. _________. The Seer in Ancient Greece. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. Frahm, Eckart “Rising Suns and Falling Stars: Assyrian Kings and the Cosmos.” Pp.  97– 120 in Solar Aspects of Royal Power in Old Babylonian Mesopotamia” in Experiencing Power, Generating Authority: Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Edited by J. A. Hill, P. Jones and A. J. Morales. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2013.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

75

Foster, Benjamin R. From Distant Days: Myth, Tales, and Poetry of Ancient Mesopotamia. Bethseda: CDL, 1995. _________. Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature. Bethesda: CDL, 2005. George, Andrew R. Babylonian Divinatory Texts Chiefly in the Schøyen Collection. Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology. CUSAS 18. Bethesda: CDL, 2013. Glassner, Jean-Jacques. Mesopotamian Chronicles. Atlanta: SBL, 2004. Heeßel, Nils P. “The Calculation of the Stipulated Term in Extispicy.” Pp. 163–75 in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Edited by A. Annus. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010. _________. Divinatorische Texte II: Opferschau-Omina. Keilschrifttexte aus Assur literarischen Inhalts 5. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012. Heimpel, Wolfgang. Letters to the King of Mari: A New Translation, with Historical Introduction, Notes, and Commentary. Winona Lake: Eisenbraunes, 2003. Holloway, Steven W. Aššur is King! Aššur is King! Religion in the Exercise of Power in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Horowitz, Wayne. “Urim and Thummim in Light of a Psephomancy Ritual from Assur (LKA 137).” JANES 21 (1992) 95–115. Hutter, Manfred. Religionen in der Umwelt des Alten Testaments I: Babylonier, Syrer, Perser. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1996. Jeyes, Ulla. “The “Palace Gate” of the Liver: A Study of Terminology and Methods in Babylonian Extispicy.” JCS 30 (1978) 209–33. _________. “The Act of Extispicy in Ancient Mesopotamia: An Outline.” Pp. 13–32 in Assyriological Miscellanies I. Edited by I. M. Diakonoff et al. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen Institute of Assyriology, 1980. _________. Old Babylonian Extispicy: Omen Texts in the British Museum. Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1989. Johnston, Sarah I. Ancient Greek Divination. Oxford: Blackwell, 2008. Kang, Sa-Moon. Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1989. Kapełuś, Magdalena (ed.). Mity akadyjskie. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Agade, 2000. Koch, Ulla S. Secrets of Extispicy: The Chapter Multābiltu of the Babylonian Extispicy Series and Nisirti bārûti Texts mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 326. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2005. _________. “Concepts and Perception of Time in Mesopotamian Divination.” Pp.  127–42 in Time and History in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 56th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Barcelona 26–30 July 2010. Edited by L. Feliu, J. Llop, A. Millet Albà, and J. Sanmartìn. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013. Koch-Westenholz, Ulla. Babylonian Liver Omens: The Chapters Manzāzu, Padānu and Pān Tākalti of the Babylonian Extispicy Series Mainly From Aššurbanipal’s Library. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2000. Lambert, Wilfred G. “The Qualifications of Babylonian Diviners.” Pp. 141–58 in Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65: Geburstag am 24. Mai 1994 tikip santakki mala bašmu. . . Edited by S. M. Maul. Cuneiform Monographs 10. Groningen: Styx, 1998. _________. Babylonian Oracle Questions. Mesopotamian Civilizations 13. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2007. Launderville, Dale. Piety and Politics: The Dynamics of Royal Authority in Homeric Greece, Biblical Israel, and Old Mesopotamia. Michigan: Eerdmans, 2003. Lawson, Jack N. The Concept of Fate in Ancient Mesopotamia of the First Millennium. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994. Liverani, Mario. “The Deeds of Ancient Mesopotamian Kings.” Pp. 2353–66 in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by J. M. Sasson, vols. III–IV. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2006.

76

Krzysztof Ulanowski

Livingstone, Alasdair. “New Dimensions in the Study of Assyrian Religion.” Pp. 165–77 in Assyria 1995: Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Symposium of the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project: Helsinki, September 7–11, 1995. Edited by S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting. Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1997. Machinist, Peter. “Literature and Politics: The Tukulti-Ninurta Epic and the Bible.” Catholic Biblical Quaterly 38 (1976) 455–82. _________. The Epic of Tukulti-Ninurta I: A Study in Middle Assyrian Literature. Ph.D. dissertation. NELC, Yale University: New Haven, 1978. Manetti, Giovanni. Theories of Sign in Classical Antiquity. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1993. Masson, Olivier. Les inscriptions chypriotes syllabiques. Paris: de Boccard, 1961. Maul, Stefan M. “Divination Culture and the Handling of the Future.” Pp.  361–72 in The Babylonian World. Edited by G. Leick. New York: Routledge, 2008). Mayer, Walter. “Waffenreinigung in assyrischen Kriegsritual.” Pp. 123–33 in Kult, Konflikt and Versöhnung: Beiträge zur kultischen Sühne in religiösen, socialen und politischen Aueinandersetzungen des antiken Mittelmeerraumes. Edited by R. Albertz. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 285. Münster, Ugarit-Verlag, 2001. _________. Assyrien und Urartu I: Der Achte Feldzuf Sargons II. im Jahr 714 v. Chr. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 395/1. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2013. Meyer, Jan-Waalke. Untersuchungen zu den Tonlebermodellen aus dem Alten Orient. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 39. Kevelaer / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Butzon & Bercker / Neukirchener Verlag, 1987. Micale, Maria G., and Davide Nadali. “The Shape of Sennacherib’s Camps: Strategic Functions and Ideological Space.” Pp. 163–75 in Nineveh: Papers of the 49th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Part One. Iraq 66 (2004). Michałowski, Piotr. “How to Read the Liver—in Sumerian.” Pp. 247–57 in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty. Edited by A. K. Guinan et al. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Nadali, Davide. “Assyrian Open Fields Battles: An Attempt at Reconstruction and Analysis.” Pp. 117–52 in Studies on War in the Ancient Near East: Collected Essays on Military History. Edited by J. Vidal. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 372. Münster: UgaritVerlag, 2010. _________. “Outcomes of Battle: Triumphal Celebrations in Assyria.” Pp. 75–94 in Rituals of Triumph in Mediterranean World. Edited by A. Spalinger and J. Armstrong. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Nissinen, Martii. Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East. Atlanta: SBL, 2003. Noort, Ed. “Numbers 27,21: The Priestly Oracle Urim and Tummim and the History of Reception.” Pp. 109–16 in All Those Nations. . . Cultural Encounters within and with the Near East. Edited by H. L. J. Vanstiphout. Groningen: Styx, 1999. Oppenheim, A. Leo. The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East, with a Translation of An Assyrian Dream Book. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1956. Oświęcimski, Stefan. Zeus daje tylko znak, Apollo wieszczy osobiście: Starożytne wróżbiarstwo greckie. Wrocław: Ossolineum, 1989. Pongrantz-Leisten, Beate, Karlheiz Deller, and Erika Bleibtreu. “Götterstreitwagen und Götterstandarten: Götter auf dem Feldzug und ihr Kult im Feldlager.” BaM 23 (1992) 291–356. Radner, Karen. “The Assyrian King and His Scholars: The Syro-Anatolian and the Egyptian Schools.” Pp. 221–38 in Of God(s), Trees, Kings, and Scholars: Neo-Assyrian and Related Studies in Honour of Simo Parpola. Edited by M. Luukko, S. Svärd, and R. Mattila. Helsinki: The Finnish Oriental Society, 2009.

The Influence of Divination on the Result of War

77

Reiner, Erica. Astral Magic in Babylonia. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1995. Richardson, Seth F. C. “On Seeing and Believing: Liver Divination and the Era of Warring States (II).” Pp. 225–66 in Divination and Interpratation of Signs in the Ancient World. Edited by A. Annus. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010. Roberts, Jimmy J. M. “The Mari Prophetic Texts in Transliteration and English Translation.” Pp. 157–253 in J. J. M. Roberts, The Bible and the Ancient Near East. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2002. Rochberg, Francesca. The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Russell, John M. The Writing on the Wall: Studies in the Architectural Context of Late Assyrian Palace Inscriptions. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1999. Siddall, Luis R. The Reign of Adad-nīrārī III: An Historical Analysis of an Assyrian King and His Times. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Starr, Ivan. In Search of Principles of Prognostication in Extispicy.” HUCA 45 (1974) 17–23. _________. The Rituals of the Diviner. Bibliotheca Masopotamica 12. Malibu: Undena, 1983. Szarzyńska, Krystyna (ed.). Eposy sumeryjskie. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Agade, 2003. Tadmor, Hayim, Benno Landsberger and Simo Parpola. “The Sin of Sargon and Sennacherib’s Last Will.” State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 3 (1989) 3–51. Tsukimoto, Akio. “Akkadian Tablets in the Hirayama Collection (I).” ASJ 12 (1990) 177–259. Van Dijk, Johannes J. A., Albrecht Goetze, and Mary I. Hussey. Early Mesopotamian Incantations and Rituals. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985. Vanstiphout, Herman. Epics of Sumerian Kings: The Matter of Aratta. Atlanta: SBL, 2003. West, Martin L. The East Face of Helicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Westenholz, Joan G. Legends of the Kings of Akkade. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1997. Winitzer, Abraham. “The Divine Presence and its Interpretation in Early Mesopotamian Divination.” Pp. 177–97 in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Edited by A. Annus. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010. Zimmern, Heinrich. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der babylonischen Religion: Die Beschwörungstafeln Šurpu, Ritualtafeln für den Beschwörer und Sänger. Assyriologische Bibliothek 12. Leipzig: Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1901.

Sheep Anatomical Terminology in the šumma immeru Omen Series and Additional Texts Yoram Cohen

Tel Aviv University

1. Introduction The šumma immeru omens are concerned with the behavior of the sacrificial animal, a male lamb or young sheep, before and at the time of its slaughter and immediately following its killing. 1 The protases of the omens observe the sheep’s general behavior, as well as the appearance of its particular body parts, upon which the results are drawn in the apodoses. The omens were collected in what we call today compendia and represented by various recensions. There is an Old Babylonian recension, which will be the main source of this discussion. It is represented by three tablets, published in YOS 10 as nos. 47, 48, and 49. 2 A post-Old Babylonian recension is represented by manuscripts from Emar and Hattuša. 3 One manuscript from Assur represents the early Middle Babylonian recension. 4 The so-called “canonical” or “standard” recension is represented by Middle Babylonian (Assur), Neo-Assyrian (Nineveh) and Late Babylonian Urukean manuscripts. 5 Lately, another recension has been added; it is represented by an incomplete manuscript from the Sealand Dynasty (early sixteenth century). 6 1.  This paper is based on part of my comprehensive study of the šumma immeru omen series, which was supported by an ISF Grant, no. 360/12. A monograph dedicated to the series and related texts is forthcoming. For the time being, one can consult Erle Leichty, “Ritual, ‘Sacrifice’, and Divination in Mesopotamia,” in Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient near East (ed. Jan Quaegebeur; Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 55; Leuven: Peeters, 1993) 237–42. I wish to thank Nicla de Zorzi, Jeanette Fincke, Uri Gabbay, and Nils Heeßel in all matters Assyriological; and Nimrod Marom, Lidar Sapir-Hen, and Assaf Yasur-Landau for their valuable assistance regarding questions of archaeozoology. 2. There is no edition at hand, but some citations are given in the dictionaries; consult JeanJacques Glassner, “Écrire des livres à l’époque Paléo-Babylonienne: le traité d’extispicine,” ZA 99 (2009) 1–81; idem, “Le crops de la victime dans le sacrifice divinatoire,” in Akkade Is King: A Collection of Papers by Friends and Colleagues Presented to Aage Westenholz on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday 5th of May 2009 (eds. Gojko Barjamovic, Jacob L. Dahl, Ulla S. Koch, and Joan Westenholz; PIHANS 118; Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 2011) 143–50. 3.  Yoram Cohen, “Akkadian Omens from Hattuša and Emar: The Šumma Immeru and Šumma Ālu Omens,” ZA 97 (2007) 233–51; Daniel Arnaud, Recherches au pays d’Aštata: Emar VI: les textes sumériens et accadiens (Paris: ERC, 1985), no. 698. 4.  Nils P. Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II: Opferschau-Omina (KAL 5; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012), no. 83. 5. Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, no. 85; Bruno Meissner, “Omina zur Erkenntnis der Eingeweide des Opfertieres,” AfO 9 (1933) 118–22 and 329–30; and Jan van Dijk and Werner Mayer, Texte aus dem Rēš-Heiligtum in Uruk-Warka (Baghdader Mitteilungen Beiheft 2; Berlin: Mann, 1980), no. 63. 6.  Andrew R. George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts Chiefly in the Schøyen Collection (CUSAS 18; Bethesda MD: CDL, 2013), no. 22.

79

80

Yoram Cohen

This paper will discuss the anatomical body parts found in the šumma immeru omens and related texts. Particular attention will be given to two body part terms whose meanings have so far remained unclear: a bone part called singaggarītum; and an anatomical part called isru, which, while not appearing in the šumma immeru omens, notably opens the bārûtu series. At the close of the paper, the relationship between various omen collections, among them the šumma immeru omens and the bārûtu series, will be evaluated.

2.  The Inspection of Body Parts in the šumma immeru Series The šumma immeru omen series opens with the slaughter of the sacrificial animal, a young male sheep (YOS 10 47, 1): diš immeru(udu) iš-tu ṭa-ab-ḫu-ú [. . .] If a sheep after being slaughtered [. . .]

At this stage, the animal is ready for inspection. The order of the inspection follows that which is found in the Ritual of the Diviner (YOS 11 23). 7 The diviner starts to inspect the various organs from the head downward and from front to back, while standing at the tail end of the sheep. As in the Ritual of the Diviner, the inspection proceeds from right to left, although not all of the right-to-left procedures were recorded in the šumma immeru series; some body parts are missing the left-sided inspection. 8 More than 30 discrete body parts are examined in the Old Babylonian šumma immeru omens. 9 Most of the terms for the body parts are obvious, designating also human body parts. Others are typical of sheep anatomy and hence will require discussion.

2.1.  The Head Region The inspection of the sacrificial sheep starts from its top. First come the eyes (īnū [written i-ni-šu; i-na-šu]); then the ears (uznān [written uz-na-šu]); the mouth (pû [written pi-i-šu]); and the sheep’s tongue (lišānu [written li-ša-an-šu]. The tongue benefits from four omens that observe its movement (in and out of the mouth), and its appearance. These terms are common enough and do not need to be considered, for they are used for both man and beast. The jaw (isu [written i-sà-šu]) is next; it is followed by the right jaw-bone (eṣem­ tum ša isišu ša imittim). For some reason, the more common term laḫû is not used, although it is not that obvious that both terms are in fact synonymous. 10 7.  Ivan Starr, The Rituals of the Diviner (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 12; Malibu: Undena, 1983). 8.  According to Starr, Rituals of the Diviner, 26 and 29, the Old Babylonian šumma immeru recension, as well as YOS 10 53 (which inspects the carcass of a bird), probably drew out of the same extispicy manuals as did the Ritual of the Diviner. Both texts probe much wider areas than those found in standard extispicy reports. This statement cannot be fully assessed here, but some consideration to the relationship between the šumma immeru series and the Ritual of the Diviner will be given throughout. 9.  The “standard”/“canonical” recension does not deal with so many body parts. 10.  According to CAD I/J 204–5, both isu and lahû are used for animals and humans. There is no diachronic distinction between the two terms because they are found from the Old Babylonian period and beyond. The entries in Hh XV 12ff. show that the terms may have had different shades of meanings:

Sheep Anatomical Terminology in the šumma immeru Series

81

The next body part is the teeth (šinnān/šinnātu [written ši-in-ni-šu]). Note the following omen (YOS 10 47, 13): diš immeru(udu) ši-in-ni-šu i-ka-aṣ-ṣa-aṣ aš-ša-at awīlim(lú) lim i-ni-a-ak-ma i-[na] bītim(é) uṣ-ṣí If a sheep, it bares/gnashes its teeth, the man’s wife will fornicate and she will leave the household.

It is possible that the relationship between the protasis and the apodosis was formed through association with the orifices, when the opening of the vagina in the act of intercourse was paralleled with the opening of the sheep’s mouth. After the teeth, the nose (appu [written ap-pa-šu]) is inspected. The first omen relates to a very wrinkled nose, with the apodosis talking about a man’s financial ruin. The second omen mentions the sheep lifting up its nose, which will see the man’s household spattered. Tears (dīmātu [written di-i-ma-tu-šu) from the eye and mucus (upāṭu [written ú-pa-ṭù]) from the nose arrive next. The apodoses relate understandably to rain and flooding. Following in the head-region is the temple (nakkaptu [written na-ak-ka-ap-ta-šu]), and then the nape (kutallu [written ku-ta-la-šu]). From nape, we move to cheek (lētu [written li-is-sú-ú]), kept distinct from the jaw (isu). The cheek of the right-side is dark, and the apodosis is negative as expected (YOS 10 47, 20): 11 diš immeru(udu) li-is-sú-ú ša i-mi-tim tar-ka-at be-el immerim(udu) as-sí-nu-útam i-pi-e-eš If a sheep, its right cheek is dark, the client will perform the assinnu-service.

After the slaughter, it was important to observe whether or not a sound was emitted through the throat (urʾudu [written ú-ur-ḫu-sú-ú). 12 If a sound was heard, it was considered a negative omen. The apodosis speaks of ‘a wailing of difficulty in the client’s house’. At the moment of the slaughter, consideration was given to the blood (damū [written da-mu-ú-šu]): a deep-red color was a favorable omen. The inspection of the blood invites the inspection of the gore or excrement ( paršum [written pa-arša-am]) dropped by the sheep.

2.2.  The Lower-end and End Parts The inspection now moves to the lower end and extremities of the animal. The first item is the hoof, or more precisely the hoof nail-part (ṣupru [written ṣú-pu-ur i-mi-ti-šu/šu-me-li-šu]). Two omens are dedicated to the splitting of the nail-part; the apodoses are negative. 13 me.zé = isu, ‘jaw’; me.zé kud.da = lašhu, ‘short-jaw’ (referring to the part of the jaw inside the mouth; CAD L: 108); and me.zé gíd.da = laḫû, ‘long-jaw, jaw-bone, cheek’. The isu may have referred to the upper and lower jaws, but the laḫû possibly denotes only the lower jaw. See Barbara Böck, Die Babylonisch-Assyrische Morphoskopie (Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 27; Vienna: Institut für Orientalistik der Universität Wien, 2000) 50 n. 237. 11. George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts, 145, notes that the technical terms, such as ‘dark’ or ‘pale’ given to various body parts were perhaps terms that were “not literal but metaphorical or symbolic, and were susceptible to an interpretation that we cannot grasp.” 12. The observation does not relate here to the trachea because the organ is observed from the outside. 13.  The next two entries are probably concerned with the head, but the protases are broken so this is not certain.

82

Yoram Cohen

The behind (šuburru [written šu-bu-ur-ri-šu]), but not the anus here, is the following organ. 14 Then there are a few omens concerned with the movement of the sheep itself in the wake of its slaughter. The subject of blood is picked up again: the sheep’s blood is apparently coagulated and from this condition one draws omens. Further descriptions relate to its movement before its body is opened for inspection. As the text says (YOS 10 47, 34): diš [immeru(udu)] la-a-ma te-ep-tu-ú-šu i-ta-ru-ur ḫa-a-tum e-li um-ma-nim i-ma-qú-ut If [a sheep] starts to quiver before you open it (for inspection), terror will fall upon the army.

The diviner continues to inspect the rear of the sheep, moving to view the nimšū (written ni-im-šu), the sciatic or thigh nerve. 15 The next organ is the tail (zibbatu [written zi-ib-ba-as-sú]), which receives an exceptionally large number of omens: a total of twelve. The tail is divided to left and right regions and to thick (kuburša) and thin (qutunša) parts. The possibility of dividing the tail into regions is probably what made it an attractive organ on which to apply the principles of divination. The next organ is the anus (qinnātu [written qí-in-na-tum]). Three omens are dedicated to it. As much as the teeth represent an opening, which led to the apodosis dealing with intercourse (see above, YOS 10 47, 13), so does the anus. Consider the following omen (YOS 10 47, 49): [diš] qí-in-na-tum ⸢pi⸣-i-ša ip-t[e-ni]-te ù zi-ib-ba-tum pi-i-ša i-[n]i !-a-a[k] [o-o-o]x u[ṣ ?-ṣí-ma o-o aš-ša-a]t awīlim(lú) lim i-na ni-a-ki-im iṣ-ṣa-ba-at [If] the anus keeps op[ening] its mouth and then the tail fornicates! with its mouth, [. . .] . . . will lea[ve and the wif]e of the man will be caught in the act of fornicating.

2.3.  The Bone Parts The inspection proceeds to focus on the bones of the sacrificial animal. First is the shoulder bone or scapula (naglabu [written na-ag-la-bu-um]). The bone is divided to two parts: the ridge of the bone (qaran naglabim) and the broader and flat part, called the blade (dūr naglabim). 16 Remarkably, the scapula is awarded 15 omens (surpassing the tail). Perhaps this is not surprising, given the popularity of scapulimancy (divination based on reading the scapula) in the ancient world. Was there bone divination of this kind in Mesopotamia? This question will be dealt with in section 3. The lower bone parts come next. The kiṣallu (written ki-ṣa-lum) can be identified with the talus or astragal or, more likely here, with the tarsal calcaneus (carpal bone; see fig. 1), because this is a bone that can be felt and seen on the outside of the animal, unlike the astragal. The kiṣallu has perforations (palšat); it can also have an extra bone, simply called eṣemtu(m) watartu(m) ‘extra bone’. Note that this part 14.  The word is a loan from Sumerian sa-dúr → Akkadian sudurru, ‘posterior;’ see CAD S 343. 15.  A commentary from Uruk equates between Sumerian sa.meš, Akkadian šerʾānu, ‘tendon’, and nimšu, which leaves the identification of the term rather secure; see CAD Š/2 309. 16.  The word naglabu in Akkadian literally means ‘razor’, derived from the verb gullubu, ‘to shave’. The Sumerian term is uzu-maš-sìla, ‘a goat meat-cut’.

Sheep Anatomical Terminology in the šumma immeru Series

Fig. 1. The tarsal calcaneus (the bone situated obliquely to the right; author’s photograph).

83

Fig. 2. The talus (author’s drawing, based on Septimus Sisson, The Anatomy of the Domestic Animals [4th edition; Philadelphia and London: W. B. Saunders, 1953] 148, fig. 148).

of the leg joint, called the talus, consists of five bones. Hence, it can be imagined how an extra-bone was thought to have joined the other five to form six (see fig. 2). Whether an extra-bone was something ever observed or not is not known, but it is not a regular feature of sheep anatomy. The next bone term is obscure: eṣmētum ša singaggarītim ṣeḫḫerētum. Here is the part’s omen (YOS 10 47, 69): diš e-eṣ-me-tum ša sí-in-ga-ga-ri-tim ṣe-eḫ-ḫe-re-tum ša i-mi-tim pu-ul-lu-ša mārat(dumu.munuš) šarrim(lugal) a-na ḫa-ri-mu-tim uṣ-ṣí If the small bones of the right singaggarītu are pierced, the king’s daughter will become a prostitute.

The word was left without a translation in the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary, apart from the mention that it is a part of the foot (CAD S 284). The AHw (p. 1039b) translates the term as ‘throat’ (‘Kehle’), but this, as will be shown, is incorrect. The word singaggarītu means the ‘small bones of the bone of the reed-dam’ or the ‘small-bones of the reed-dam bone’. The ‘small bones’ are the eṣmētum ṣeḫḫerētum; this much is clear. What about the ‘reed-dam bone’? The word singaggarītu can be analyzed thus: *(e)ṣem-qān-irrītim ‘the reed-dam bone’. Consider the Hg list of Hh XV (MSL 9, pp. 35, 37), lines 43/46: [uzu.zi.in].gi.kéš.da = sin-ga-an-gu-ri-tum = ḫa-mu-ri-tú [uzu.zi.in].gi.kéš.da = sin-ga-gu-ri-tu = ḫa-mu-ri-tu

84

Yoram Cohen

Figs. 3a and 3b. The metatarsus bone (author’s photographs).

These entries are to be understood: [zi.in] = sin and gi.kéš.da = ga-gu-ri-tu. 17 The rendering of *sin- is from the Sumerian zi.in, a back formation from Akkadian (e)ṣem (see below); as for the origin of *-gaggurītu, note the entry Hh IX (MSL 7, p. 52), line 318: gi.giš.kéš.da = qa-an ir-ri-ti ‘dam of reeds’ (lit., ‘reed of the dam’) 18

Hence *-gaggurītu was formed on the base of *ganurītu/ganurrītu (qan-i/urriti; with nasalization). The Akkadian word ḫamurītu that was given in the Hg list above as the equivalent of singaggarītu is in fact a variant of *ganurītu. 19 As is 17. Note also Hh XV (MSL 9, p. 13), line 247 : [uzu.k]a.kéš.da = [sin-ga-gu-ri]-tum. Although broken, the reconstruction of uzu.zi.in (in [uzu.zi.in].gi.kéš.da) is probably secure. Sumerian zi.in.gi is equated with kiṣallu, ‘astragal’ (see CAD K 434 for the data). It can be argued, however, that the Sumerian word *zingi is probably a part-phonetic and part-logographic back-formation from the Akkadian *(e)ṣen-ki(ṣalli), hence it is to be differentiated in our discussion of the formation of the word singaggarītu and its Sumerian writing (although there may have been cross-influences between the spellings of the words). 18.  CAD I/J 180, sub irritu. 19.  Nicla Zorzi suggested to me that it is likely that at some early stage of the omen the bone was pronounced as sin-ḫamurīti (i.e., with /ḫ/ rather than with /g/), sparking the apodosis dealing with ḫarimtu ‘prostitute’.

Sheep Anatomical Terminology in the šumma immeru Series

85

well known, /g/ and /ḫ/ can easily alternate. To support the explanation of the word singaggurītu, note the compound bone term (to be discussed below) eṣēnṣēru ← *eṣem-ṣēri, ‘back-bone’. Following this discussion, it is suggested to identify the singaggurītu bone with the sheep’s metatarsus. The metatarsus bone, as can be seen in fig. 3, clearly has two small bones on its right and the left; these are the eṣmētum ṣeḫḫerētum. When viewed together with the bone, they resemble two dams made of reed bundles. 20 After the metatarsus, the lower part of the leg is reached. This is the hoof (larsinu [written la-ar-sí-nu]). This bone part will be treated in section 3. From the feet, we climb to the breast (irtu [written gaba]) and then move to the breastbone. The breastbone, or possibly the xiphoid (kaskasu [written ka-aska-sú]), has 11 omens, with the usual signs: dark (tarik), bent (kapiṣ), and lying down (naparqud). 21 Both sides of the flat bone give the diviner plenty of opportunity to play off the right side against the left. Two apodoses of the kaskasu omens are remarkable because of the appearance of the rare R-stem of danānu (YOS 10 47, 74–75): diš ka-as-ka-[sú] i-mi-tam ka-pi-iṣ a-na lúnakrika(kúr) ka tu-ud-da-na-an-na-an If the breastbone is bent on the right side, you will vie for superiority over your enemy. diš ka-as-ka-⸢sú⸣ šu-me-lam ka-pi-iṣ lúnakirka(kúr) ka ú-da-na-an-na-kum If the breastbone is bent to the left side, your enemy will vie for superiority over you.

The R-stem of the very same verb appears in the Ritual of the Diviner 22 in the protasis that describes the very same bone that we are concerned with—the kaskasu (Starr, Rituals of the Diviner, 31, line 29): ka-as-ka-su-um i-mi-it-tam a-na qé-er-bi-nu-um li-ik-pi-iṣ li-da-na-an-ni-in The breastbone on the right side will be bent toward the inside and be of equal thickness.

The next organ to be observed is the ribcage (ṣēlum [written ṣi-lum]). When both sides of the ribcage are treated, the term is given in the plural (written ṣi-lu kila-lu-un, ‘both sides of the ribcage’). 23 The next omens are concerned with the ribs themselves (sikkat ṣēli [written kak.ti]). At this stage it is possible that the diviner took apart the lamb, butchering it, as the text informs us (YOS 10 49, 5): diš sikkat ṣēli(kak.ti) ša irti(gaba) i-na ša-ma-ṭi-i-ka a-na 2-na ti-iṣ-bu-ta mātum (kalam) iṣ-ṣa-ba-at i-ta-ka-al 20.  The anatomical identification of singaggarītu with the metatarsus was suggested to me by Lidar Sapir-Hen, director of the Archaeozoological Lab at the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. For the use of reeds in dams and barrages, see CAD Š/3 368–69, sub šūru, ‘reed bundle’. 21.  This anatomical part is not clearly identified: according to CAD K 244, it is the soft part of the sheep’s breast-bone. The Sumerian term is kak.zag.ga. The Lexical list (Hg) gives additional information about this body part: it is a ši-ti-iq ir-ti ‘breast-bone’, ‘sternum’. Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 43, suggests the xiphoid process, which is very plausible. 22.  As noted already by Starr, Rituals of the Diviner, 67. 23.  The mention of the neck (kišādu) at this point in YOS 10 47, 83 is perhaps misplaced; in the parallel text, YOS 10 48, it appears in line 8.

86

Yoram Cohen If the rib(s) of the breastbone of the breast, upon you tearing (it) out, the two are both joined, (the people of) the country will fight one another and devour one another.

Two omens are dedicated to the vertebrae and the transverse processes. The vertebra is called the kunuk eṣemṣēri (written ku-nu-uk e-ṣi-im-ṣi-ri), ‘the cylinder-seal of the backbone’. The kunukku, ‘cylinder-seal’, was chosen as a term for the vertebra because of the similarity of its shape to the bone part (just as the naglabu, ‘razor’, defines the scapula; see above). The term eṣemṣēru is a nominal compound: the *eṣem is the stem of eṣemtu; ṣēru is ‘back’. 24 The transverse process of the vertebra is called kislu (written ki-is-li). 25

2.4.  The Final Parts Inspected in the Sheep The next parts come at the end of the inspection of the sheep’s body. They are found in YOS 10 49, which in fact is the continuation of YOS 10 47, and YOS 10 48, which parallels omens of YOS 10 47 and YOS 10 49. 26 However, as will be demonstrated, the procedure of the inspection of the sheep body parts does not end with the YOS 10 manuscripts. Two additional sources, the Ritual of the Diviner and the Sealand Dynasty šumma immeru compendium, will help us complete the sequence of the inspection of the external body parts, before the diviner turns to examine the internal parts of the sheep. In YOS 10 49, after the inspection of the kunuk eṣemṣēri, the šutqum (written šu-ut-qú-um) is observed. However, it is not clear to what body part it refers. The CAD suggests as a tentative translation ‘esophagus’, but this is not certain, because the focus of the investigation is now on the back and ribcage area. 27 This term requires more investigation to determine its exact nature. The next organ in YOS 10 49 is the upper frame of the animal or the back of the ribcage, called bamtum (written ba-am-tum). It is equated with the ribs or the side of the body (ṣēlu) in the commentary K. 3667. 28 And following the bamtum, is the šubtum or šuptum (written šu-ub-tum), another obscure part; in the commentary K. 3667 it is compared with the irtum ‘breast’. 29 At this point, the Old Babylonian recension ends. However, it can be argued that the omens relating to the body of the sheep continued to be generated. As said above, this argument can be supported on account of evidence found in two sources—the Ritual of the Diviner and the post-Old Babylonian Sealand Dynasty šumma immeru recension. The barûtu series, which will be dealt with below, also supplies us with some information regarding how the inspection probably continued. 24.  Harri Holma, Die Namen der Körperteile im Assyrisch-Babylonischen: eine lexikalisch-etymolgische Studie (Leipzig: A. Pries, 1911) 50–52. Cf. *sinniš in sinnišānu, ‘in the manner of a woman’, ← sinništu, ‘woman’. 25.  CAD K 425. The bi-form kaslu may also mean ‘tendon’, but more research is required on this body part; cf. Moshe Held, “Studies in Comparative Semitic Lexicography,” in Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on His Seventy-Fifth Birthday, April 21, 1965 (ed. Hans Gustav Güterbock and Thorkild Jacobsen; Assyriological Studies 16; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965) 395–406. 26.  The relationship between the three Old Babylonian manuscripts will be elaborated in my forthcoming edition and discussion of the series; see n. 1 above. 27.  CAD Š/3 404; see also Starr, Rituals of the Diviner, 76–77. George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts, 144, opts for a neutral translation of ‘cleft’. 28. Starr, Rituals of the Diviner, 94. 29. Ibid.

Sheep Anatomical Terminology in the šumma immeru Series

87

As was seen throughout the discussion, the Ritual of the Diviner shares some traits with the šumma immeru omens: it proceeds to inspect the sheep in basically the same order, it lists the same body parts, and it shares some formulations with the series. 30 Hence, one can assume that additional body parts of the sheep (excluding the inner parts) listed in the Ritual of the Diviner were also part of the šumma immeru omens. To demonstrate, in addition to the body parts šutqum and bamtum, we find in the Ritual of the Diviner (lines 40 and 69/128) a sequence of two more items: the šašallu and qerbītu. In this respect, note the following: the recently published Sealand Dynasty šumma immeru recension includes the šutqu, ‘cleft’ (or esophagus), and the bantu (for bamtum), ‘upper ribcage’, which were already encountered in both the Old Babylonian šumma immeru omens and the Ritual of the Diviner. 31 Then, as in the Ritual of the Diviner, arrive the šašallu and the qerbītu. 32 What is the šašallu (written ša-ša-al-lum)? In the CAD, it is translated as tendon of the hoof or heel, but according to its use in the El-Amarna letters (EA 211 and 215), it must mean ‘back’. Accordingly, in the present context, the term perhaps designates the thick back muscles. 33 The next item is the qerbītu (written qí-ir-bitum), which is again unclear. It is not very likely to have referred to the inner parts of the sheep, as the word may seem to imply. 34 It can be tentatively considered as the ‘inside surface of the chest wall’. 35 It is at this stage that the diviner started to inspect the inner parts of the animal—its intestines and stomach—and the inspection of the outer parts came to an end.

3.  Bone Parts in Mesopotamian Divination Section 2.3 dealt with the bone parts in the šumma immeru series—namely, the kiṣallu, ‘astragal’, the naglabu, ‘shoulder-blade’, the eṣmētum ša singaggarītim ṣeḫḫerētum, ‘small bones of reed-dam-bone’, and the kunuk eṣenṣēri, ‘vertebra’, with its kislu, ‘transverse process’. Was there bone divination in Mesopotamia? There is possibly some evidence of manipulating bones by throwing them or writing on them for the purpose of divination, as is found in the Classical world and Chinese culture. 36 The archaeological evidence from the Levant and Mesopotamia of reworked bones, such as astragals or scapula, is rather abundant. These bones probably served in divination (or games), but there is little correlation between these finds and textual evidence. 37 30.  See also n. 8 above. 31. George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts, no. 22. The colophon of the Sealand Dynasty tablet states that it is the 5th tablet (⸢ki⸣.5.kam) of a series (not named). One can assume that tablets 1 to 4 dealt with the sequence of body parts from the head of the sheep to the whereabouts of the kunuk eṣemṣēri, ‘the vertebra’, if we follow the order of the Old Babylonian šumma immeru recension. 32.  In the Emar recension, after the bamtum come the head and the blood flowing from it. There is no consideration of the three other body parts just mentioned—namely, the šutqu, the šašallu and the qerbītu—hence the sequence was already different from the Old Babylonian recension. 33.  Thus suggested by George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts, 144; see CAD Š/2 168–70. 34. Starr, Rituals of the Diviner, 95. 35.  Following George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts, 144. 36.  Irving, L. Finkel, “On the Rules for the Royal Game of Ur,” in Ancient Board Games in Perspective (ed. idem; London: British Museum Press, 2007) 16–32. 37.  See, for example, Claudia Minniti and Luka Peyronel, “Symbolic or Functional Astragali from Tell Mardikh-Ebla (Syria) During the Middle Bronze Age,” Archaeofauna: International Journal of Archaeozoology 14 (2005) 7–26; Nicolò Marchetti, “Divination at Ebla during the Old Syrian Period: The

88

Yoram Cohen

However, there is now growing evidence of the interest that bones of the sacrificial animal sparked among Mesopotamian diviners. Nils Heeßel presents a Middle Babylonian manuscript from Assur: the beginning of all the protases are missing because the tablet is broken away. 38 However enough remains for Heeßel to restore line 15 of the reverse of tablet on the basis of YOS 10 47, 69 (cited above) as follows: [šumma eṣmētum ša singaggarītim ṣeḫḫerētum ša zag p]u-ul-lu-ša mārat(dumu. munuš) šarri(lugal) a-na ḫa-ri-mu-tim uṣ-ṣi [If the small bones of the right singaggarītu are pi]erced, the king’s daughter will become a prostitute.

One can assume that because the eṣmētum ša singaggarītim are to be confidently restored here, other bones are to be completed in the missing protases of the Middle Babylonian manuscript, whether the kiṣallu, the kunuk eṣemṣēri, or others. Indeed, the colophon of this tablet, although partly broken, states clearly enough, thus: [32 mu].bi eṣ-me-tum, [32 lin]es: “Bones.” This important tablet shows us that compendia of bone parts from the sacrificial sheep existed. Other parts of the sacrificial sheep also generated omen compendia. Recently, Andrew George published a collection of omens from the land of Tigunānum, some of which are novel. One incomplete tablet among this collection is concerned with the body parts already encountered in the discussion. Omens were taken on the basis of observation of the lower parts of the sheep’s legs, after being cut off from the animal. The colophon informs that these omens are “(f)ifteen (omens) from stumps of front fetlocks (kursinnū) and hooves (ṣuprātum).” 39 As George explains, “these omens are related to those taken from the carcass of the sacrificial lamb immediately after slaughter, when the victim’s limbs were carefully inspected as part of an examination of the entire body.” 40 The bārûtu series of the diviner was a major work, which summed up all the knowledge required of the professional diviner in his task. It was comprised of ten chapters and included more than a hundred tablets. 41 The first chapter of the bārûtu series, called isru, was made up of four tablets. The first tablet was concerned with the isru (an unknown body part; further discussion below); the second tablet with the kunukku (vertebra); the third tablet dealt with the sikkat ṣēli (the ribs); and the fourth tablet with the kaskasu (breastbone or xiphoid process). There was also a mukallimtu commentary to this chapter (K. 3978+; unpublished) that explicated difficult terms. 42 It is clear that all the identifiable items of this chapter relate to bone parts. Hence, this is an additional argument for omens generated from specific bones. But what about the isru? It must be related, but to which part of the sheep’s body? This remains still an unsolved problem in scholarship, but some contribution Archaeological Evidence,” in Exploring the Longue Durée: Essays in Honor of Lawrence E. Stager (ed. David J. Schloen; Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009) 279–95. 38. Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, no. 2. 39. George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts, Appendix, no. III (“Omens from Severed Hooves and Fetlocks”). 40. George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts, 286. 41.  For a synoptic chart of the bārûtu series, see Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 7. The series is not yet fully or systematically published. 42.  For this type of commentary, see Eckart Frahm, Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries: Origins of Interpretation (Guides to the Mesopotamian Textual Record 5; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2011) 42–47.

Sheep Anatomical Terminology in the šumma immeru Series

89

to its meaning can be made here. 43 The Ritual of the Diviner (line 136) informs that the isru part along with the kursinnu was sacrificed to Šamaš and Adad and, hence, it was an object worthy of observation: Šamaš be-el di-nim Adad be-el ik-ri-bi ù be-ri-im na-ši-a-ku-nu-ši-im is-ra-am kuur-sí-in-na-am [. . .] ša i-mi-tim Šamaš the judge, Adad lord of the prayer and divination, I offer you the isru and fetlock [of the sheep] of the right-hand side.

It can be added that the commentary K. 3978+ (the commentary of the first chapter of the bārûtu) states that there are four isru body parts. 44 Hence, the isru is probably related to the feet of the sacrificial animal. 45 A further look at the commentary reveals additional information. There the isru is equated with the larsinnu, ‘hoof ’:  46 [šumma . . . lar]-sin-nu imitti namir . . . lar-sin-nu isru ina lišāni [If the right ho]of is bright. . . . The hoof (larsinnu) (is equivalent to) the isru in the synonym list. 47

Is the isru indeed the hoof? Apparently not, for it must remembered that the ancient commentaries are not modern dictionary entries and what was considered as equivalent in the eyes of the ancient scholars was not necessarily identical. 48 Indeed, coming back to the series of the bārûtu, it is to be noted that the first tablet of the isru opens with omens relating to the isru and closes with those relating to the larsinu. Hence, the two body parts—the isru and the larsinnu—must remain distinct, although they are obviously related, as the commentary revealed to us. Hopefully, more research will help us pinpoint the anatomical identification of the isru.

4. The šumma immeru Omens and the bārûtu Series The discussion of the body parts in the first chapter of bārûtu series invites a comparison with the sequence of the parts found in the Old Babylonian šumma immeru recension. Chapter 1 of the bārûtu includes the isru, larsinu, kunukku, 43.  See the status questionis on this issue in Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 52, Bemerkung I 0. 44.  K. 3978+ i 13 (cited in Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 53, Bemerkung I 10): [be] ina is-ri 4-šúnu bùr.meš šub.meš, ‘[If] in the isru-s: four of them are perforated’. A “live report” of the inspection of the isru body part following the slaughtering of the sheep is recorded in a letter to the king of Mari, ARM 26/1, 116 rev. 2′–5′. This report will be dealt with elsewhere; for now see the comments of J.-M. Durand in ibid. 45.  As stated by Ivan Starr, “Chapters 1 and 2 of the Bārûtu,” SAAB 6 (1992) 45–53. 46.  K. 3978+ i 8. Note that this sentence, which I quote from CAD P 221 and I/J 203, was read incorrectly. The word lar-sin-nu was read as pa-sin-nu, leading to the entry of the lemma *pasinnu, which in fact is a ghost word and therefore needs to be erased from the dictionary. That the sign PA is to be read as /lar/ in this very commentary was stated in Wolfram von Soden, “Seltene Akkadische Wörter,” Studia Orientalia 46 (1975) 325. Although von Soden did not discuss the word isru, he recognized that the sign PA can stand as the logographic writing for larû ‘branch’, a feature of the liver in omen texts; this leads to the phonetic rendering of PA as /lar/; see also Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 71, Bemerkung Vs. 1–8. 47. For ina lišāni as a reference to a lexical or synonym list, see Frahm, Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries, 88–94, esp. 90. 48.  Consider the equivalents the K. 3667 commentary gives (see above), where bamtum = ṣēlu and šubtum = irtum.

90

Yoram Cohen

sikkat ṣēli, and kaskasu. The šumma immeru omens include in sequence the following parts: larsinnu, irtu, kaskasu, ṣēlum, sikkat ṣēli, and kunuk eṣemṣēri. With this apparent similarity of content, it can be asked: Was there a relationship between the šumma immeru series and the bārûtu series? And did the šumma immeru omens serve as the source materials of Chapter 1 of the bārûtu? A few preliminary considerations can be brought forth. It is clearer now more than before that the series of the bārûtu was already in the making, perhaps earlier than suspected, during the second half of the second millennium. This is evident by a few “forerunners” found at Assur that Heeßel recently published. 49 One “forerunner” tablet from Assur (no. 4) includes omens dealing with the isru (most likely; the protases are broken here), the kunukku, the sikkat-ṣēli, and the kaskasu, precisely the body parts that are the concern of Chapter 1 of the bārûtu. There is also a “forerunner” (no. 6) dedicated to the kunukku, ‘vertebra’ and another (no. 7) probably dedicated to the kaskasu, ‘xiphoid’ or ‘breastbone’. Another “forerunner” (no. 8) is dedicated to the tirānū, ‘the intestines’. Its colophon lists it as the ‘8th tablet’ (dub 8-kam.ma) of a series (which remains unnamed). In the bārûtu series, the tirānū omens occupy the second chapter (through tablets 5 to 12). 50 Hence, it can be seen that, with these “forerunners,” the composition of the bārûtu moves closer to the period of the Old Babylonian šumma immeru recension. This can support the argument regarding the influence of one composition on the other, or the reliance of both (and also of the Ritual of the Diviner) on common materials that were in circulation during the Old Babylonian and the post-Old Babylonian periods. The relationship between both compositions can be also argued on the basis of their content (as was partly demonstrated in section 3) and on the basis of mutual formulations. The last point invites a much more thorough investigation than can be afforded here, so a single example will suffice for now. The following apodosis is found in the isru chapter of the bārûtu compendium KAR 423, obv. 10: 51 [be ina isrū . . . ] šub.meš-ú uš-šer udu.níta gaz kúr [If in the isru parts so-and-so] occurred. Ignore the sheep! Kill the enemy!

This sentence is typical of the šumma immeru omens and, as far as I know, unique to the series, apart from its mention in the bārûtu series and its commentaries. It is represented by Emar and Middle Babylonian manuscripts and explicated in a late commentary dedicated to the series. 52 The Emar recension (line 13) reads: 53 49.  The “forerunners” published by Heeßel are according to his understanding Middle Babylonian; see idem, Divinatorische Texte II, 15. 50.  And consider here Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 13–15. 51.  The same sentence is also found in the commentary of the isru chapter of the bārûtu, K. 3978+ i 13 (as noted by Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 53, Bemerkung I 10). KAR 423 = Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, no. 1. KAR 423 was long considered to be a proto-version of the canonical bārûtu series. However, it has now been demonstrated to be in fact a Neo-Assyrian creation; see Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, 52. It is an excerpt of the standard bārûtu series. First comes the chapter isru, with a collection (liqtu) of ten omens; then comes the kaskasu, with a total of five omens. The text proceeds with omens from the tīrānū, ‘intestines’, and following that, the manzāzu, ‘presence’, of the liver. 52.  The Uruk commentary SpTU 1 72, rev. 2. This text was most recently edited by Yoram Cohen, “Commentary on Šumma immeru, Izbu aḫû (CCP no. 3.6.3.E),” Cuneiform Commentaries Project (2016), at http://ccp.yale.edu/P348493 (accessed March 2, 2016). See also Matthew Rutz, “SpTU 1 72: Šumma Immeru and Šumma Izbu in Late Babylonian Uruk,” N.A.B.U. 2014, no. 3 (2014) 115–17. 53. Arnaud, Recherches, no. 698.

Sheep Anatomical Terminology in the šumma immeru Series

91

diš udu . . . muš-šèr udu-ma du-uk lú kúr If a sheep so-and-so. . . . Ignore the sheep! Kill the enemy!

And the early Middle Babylonian recension (lines 7–8) has: 54 [be udu]. . . a-na gištukul šà udu la tu-ba-a uš-še-er udu du-uk kúr [If a sheep] so-and-so. . . . As for (a question concerning) war: you will not inspect the exta of the sheep. Ignore the sheep – kill the enemy.

This demonstrates a shared formulation between the bārûtu series and the šumma immeru omens. When this sentence came to be shared between the two and where its origin lies are questions that remain unanswered. However, some time-frame for such a meeting can be imagined, once we understand that the bārûtu series in some “forerunner” form was in existence before the first millennium. Of course, more research is required to investigate the relationship of the Old Babylonian šumma immeru recension and the bārûtu series and other omen compendia. This paper has introduced more than 30 sheep body parts listed in the šumma immeru omen series and additional omen compendia and discussed their order of observation. It elucidated some obscure terms of sheep body parts. In addition, it demonstrated that the Old Babylonian šumma immeru omens in our hand do not represent the entire sequence of the examination of external body parts of the sheep. The Ritual of the Diviner and the Sealand Dynasty šumma immeru recension were shown to include additional parts of the sheep. Attention was also given to recently published materials that manifest the generation of omens from bones and other parts cut off from the body of the sacrificial sheep, probably at its inspection. Last, the relationship between the great bārûtu series and the šumma immeru omen series was considered: common terms and a shared formulation hinted at a closer relationship than perhaps previously suspected. These were only preliminary yet necessary steps to investigate further the history of extispicy procedures and illuminate the practices of the Babylonian science of divination. 54. Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, no. 83.

Bibliography Arnaud, Daniel. Recherches au pays d’Aštata: Emar VI: les textes sumériens et accadiens. Paris: ERC, 1985. Böck, Barbara. Die Babylonisch-Assyrische Morphoskopie. Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 27. Vienna: Institut für Orientalistik der Universität Wien, 2000. Cohen, Yoram. “Akkadian Omens from Hattuša and Emar: The Šumma Immeru and Šumma Ālu Omens.” Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 97 (2007) 233–51. _________. “Commentary on Šumma immeru, Izbu aḫû (CCP no. 3.6.3.E),” Cuneiform Commentaries Project (2016), at http://ccp.yale.edu/P348493 (accessed March 2, 2016) Dijk, Jan van, and Werner Mayer, Texte aus dem Rēš-Heiligtum in Uruk-Warka. Baghdader Mitteilungen Beiheft 2. Berlin: Mann, 1980. Frahm, Eckart. Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries: Origins of Interpretation. Guides to the Mesopotamian Textual Record 5. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2011.

92

Yoram Cohen

Finkel, Irving L. “On the Rules for the Royal Game of Ur.” Pp. 26–32 in Ancient Board Games in Perspective. Edited by Irving L. Finkel. London: British Museum Press, 2007. George, Andrew R. Babylonian Divinatory Texts Chiefly in the Schøyen Collection. Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology (CUSAS) 18. Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2013. Glassner, Jacques. “Écrire des livres à l’époque Paléo-Babylonienne: le traité d’extispicine.” Zeitschirft für Assyriologie 99 (2009) 1–81. _________. “Le crops de la victime dans le sacrifice divinatoire.” Pp. 143–50 in Akkade Is King: A Collection of Papers by Friends and Colleagues Presented to Aage Westenholz on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday 5th of May 2009. Edited by Gojko Barjamovic, Jacob L. Dahl, Ulla S. Koch, and Joan Westenholz. PIHANS 118. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 2011. Heeßel, Nils P. Divinatorische Texte II: Opferschau-Omina. Keilschrifttexte aus Assur literarischen Inhalts (KAL) 5. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012. Held, Moshe. “Studies in Comparative Semitic Lexicography.” Pp. 395–406 in Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on His Seventy-Fifth Birthday, April 21, 1965. Edited by Hans Gustav Güterbock and Thorkild Jacobsen. Assyriological Studies 16. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press, 1965. Holma, Harry. Die Namen der Körperteile im Assyrisch-Babylonischen: eine lexikalisch-etymolgische Studie. Leipzig: A. Pries, 1911. Leichty, Erle. “Ritual, ‘Sacrifice’, and Divination in Mesopotamia.” Pp. 237–42 in Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient near East. Edited by Jan Quaegebeur. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 55. Leuven: Peeters, 1993. Marchetti, Nicolò. “Divination at Ebla during the Old Syrian Period: The Archaeological Evi­ dence.” Pp. 279–95 in Exploring the Longue Durée: Essays in Honor of Lawrence E. Stager. Edited by David J. Schloen. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009. Meissner, Bruno. “Omina zur Erkenntnis der Eingeweide des Opfertieres.” Archiv für Orientforschung 9 (1933) 118–22 and 329–30. Minniti, Claudia, and Luka Peyronel. “Symbolic or Functional Astragali from Tell MardikhEbla (Syria) During the Middle Bronze Age.” Archaeofauna: International Journal of Archaeozoology 14 (2005) 7–26. Rutz, Matthew. “SpTU 1 72: Šumma Immeru and Šumma Izbu in Late Babylonian Uruk.” N.A.B.U. 2014, no. 3 (2014) 115–17. Soden, Wolfram von. “Seltene Akkadische Wörter.” Studia Orientalia 46 (1975) 323–32. Starr, Ivan. The Rituals of the Diviner. Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 12. Malibu: Undena, 1983. _________. “Chapters 1 and 2 of the Bārûtu.” State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 6 (1992) 45–53.

Some Remarks about the Old Babylonian Libanomancy Texts Maria Stella Cingolo

Sapienza — Università di Roma

Introduction The subject of this contribution is the only two known Old Babylonian texts of libanomancy, a divinatory practice that was attested in Mesopotamia exclusively in the south of Babylonia during the second millennium b.c.e.. Libanomancy is based on the examination of the flame and the smoke rising from the “(aromatic) burnt offering” (as indicated by the Akkadian term qutrēnu), their direction, shape, and movements. 1 In Mesopotamian divination, it is appropriate to distinguish two classes of deductive omens: Author’s note:  This paper draws attention to the main issues of my Ph.D. dissertation that I defended in June 2014 at the Sapienza University in Rome under the supervision of my professor, Dr. L. Verderame. I am referring to my dissertation by way of a brief introduction to the context and, in particular, for the epigraphic and philological edition of the texts mentioned. For this mantic practice, the term “libanomancy” is still in use in the academic literature, even if etymologically it appears inappropriate (see paragraph 1 below). But in order to avoid any confusion, I am adopting here the term as it is conventionally used. I am indebted to Dr. J. C. Fincke for her support, and to my professor Dr. W. Mayer for his encouragement. I wish to express my gratitude to Prof. Dr. A. Autiero of Muenster University, and to Dr. S. G. Kochuthara, for the English revision of this article, their kindness, and their unique assistance. Any inaccuracies and mistakes are my own. 1.  The initial philological study and translation of the Akkadian term qutrēnu, attested in the libanomancy texts A and B, was conducted by Erich Ebeling, “Weissagungen aus Weihrauch im Alten Babylonien,” in Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 29 (Berlin: Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1935) 869 and then by Giovanni Pettinato, “Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi,” RSO 41 (1966) 303–27. Respectively, they translated this term “smoke” and “incense.” I would translate it “(aromatic) burnt offering” according to the lexical equivalences and to the Sumerian and Akkadian sources of different ritual contexts. See below paragraphs 4 and 5. For Mesopotamian libanomancy, see Henri F. Lutz, “An Old Babylonian Divination Text,” UCP 9/5 (1929) 367–77; Ebeling, Weissagungen aus Weihrauch, 869–80; Pettinato, Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 303–27; Robert D. Biggs, “A propos des textes de libanomancie,” RA 63 (1969) 73–74; Erle Leichty, “Smoke Omens,” in Essays on the Ancient Near East in memory of Jacob Joel Finkelstein (Memoirs of the Connecticut Academie of Arts & Science 19; ed. M. de Jong Ellis. Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1977) 143–46; Irving L. Finkel, “A New Piece of Libanomancy,” AfO 29/30 (1983/84) 50–56. For a general discussion of the issue, see Stefan M. Maul, “Omina und Orakel. A. In Mesopotamien,” Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 10 (ed. D. O. Edzard; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003) 45–88 and idem, Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient: Zeichen des Himmels und der Erde (Munich: Beck, 2013) with related bibliography.

93

94

Maria Stella Cingolo 1.  omina impetrativa, when the ominous sign was provoked on purpose by means of various techniques (this is the case in, e.g., extispicy, lecanomancy, aleuromancy, and libanomancy). 2 2.  omina oblativa, when the sign was observed in the surrounding environment (in Mesopotamia first of all celestial and meteorological phenomena and teratomancy as well as all terrestrial signs recorded in the series šumma ālu). 3 Contrary to the omina oblativa that were visible to anyone, the omina

2. Observation of the entrails of an animal, especially of a lamb. The documentation of this method is extensive. See in particular Ulla Jeyes, “The Act of Extispicy in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Assyriological Miscellanies (ed. I. M. Diakonoff et al.; Copenhagen, Institute of Assyriology, University of Copenhagen, 1980) 12–32 and idem, Old Babylonian Extispicy: Omen Texts in the British Museum (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1989). See more recently Ulla Koch-Westenholtz, Babylonian Liver Omens: The Chapter Manzāzu, Padānu and Pān tākalti of the Babylonian Extispicy Series mainly from Aurbanipal’s Library (CNI publication 25; Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 2000) and Ulla Koch, Secrets of Extispicy: The Chapter Multābiltu of the Babylonian Extispicy Series and Niṣirti bārîti Texts mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library (AOAT 326; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2005). Observation of oil drops sprinkled into water and vice versa. G. Pettinato, Die Ölwahrsagung bei den Babyloniern (Studi Semitici 21 and 22; Rome: Istituto di Studi del Vicino Oriente, 1966), collected nine tablets from the Old Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian periods that belong to six different texts. In the meantime, three more unpublished fragments dating back to the Old Babylonian can be added. I am grateful to Christopher B. F. Walker who gave me the opportunity to work on a cluster of unpublished tablets in the Student’s Room of the British Museum’s Middle East Department during my brief stay in London in 2013. I was able to identify the hitherto unknown fragments BM 87635, BM 87642, and BM 87655, which deal with divination using oil and water. Observation of flour poured into water, fire, or into a different kind of flour. See in particular Jean Nougayrol, “Aleuromancie babylonienne,” OrNs 32 (1963) 381–86; Stefan M. Maul, “Aleuromantie: von der altorientalischen Kunst, mit Hilfe von Opfermehl das Mass göttlichen Wohlwollens zu ermitteln,” in Von Göttern und Menschen: Beiträge zu Literatur und Geschichte des Alten Orients (ed. Dahlia Shehata, Frauke Weiershäuser, and Kamran V. Zand; Leiden, Mass.: Brill, 2010) 115–30; and idem, Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient. In his review of Jeyes, The Act of Extispicy, Robert D. Biggs, “Book Review: Death in Mesopotamia. Papers Read at the XXVII Rencontre Assyriologique International,” JNES 42/4 (1983) 314, considered this aleuromancy text as a libanomancy handbook, where qutrēnu is written KU; in the reading qu2 it is the abbreviation of qutrēnu. For evidence of the flour used by diviners, see Johannes Renger, “Untersuchungen zum Priestertum in der altbabylonischen Zeit 2. Teil,” ZA 59 (1969) 208, note 946, or the more recent contribution of Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy, 15 n. 44; for the edition and the translation, I refer to M. S. Cingolo, La Libanomanzia nella Tradizione Mantica Mesopotamica (Ph.D. diss., Sapienza University of Rome, 2014). Observation of the smoke and the flame exhaling from “the (aromatic) burnt offering” (Akkadian term qutrēnu). For all references, see n. 1 above. 3.  Omens derived by the observation of celestial and meteorological phenomena. They were collected in the series enūma anu enlil, “When Anu and Enlil.” See more recently Jeanette C. Fincke, “The Solar Eclipse Omen Texts from Enūma anu Enlil,” BiOr 70.5/6 (2013) 582–608, with the related bibliography she has provided. Omens obtained from the appearance of an abnormal or malformed premature baby or newborn baby. These were collected in the series šumma izbu, “If an izbu.” See Erle Leichty, The Omen Series Šumma Izbu (Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Augustin, 1970) and Nicla De Zorzi, Divinazione e intertestualità: la serie divinatoria šumma izbu e il suo orizzonte culturale (Ph.D. diss., University of Venice Ca’ Foscari, 2011). See more recently Jeanette C. Fincke, “Divination im Alten Orient: Ein Überblick,” in Divination in the Ancient Near East: A Workshop on Divination Conducted during the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Würzburg, 2008 (ed. J. C. Fincke; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2014) 1–20 esp. n. 6. Omens derived by the observation of each category of visible phenomena and circumstances, starting from the location of artifacts, minerals, and plants, including also animal behavior. They are collected in the 107 tablets series called šumma ālu ina mēlê šakin, “If a city is set on a height.” The complete edition of the texts is not available. See in particular Sally M. Freedman, If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian Omen Series Šumma Ālu ina Mēlê Šakin, vol. 1, Tablets 1–21 (Philadelphia: Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 1998) and idem, If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian

Some Remarks about the Old Babylonian Libanomancy Texts

95

impetrativa required a specific ritual context and a specialist in charge of the divinatory practice, the bārû, ‘seer’. 4 Traditionally, libanomancy belongs to the category of the omina impetrativa, because the ominous sign was provoked through a ritual rather than merely observed among the different natural and cultural phenomena.  5

1.  A Preliminary Remark about the Term “Libanomancy” With reference to this specific divinatory practice, which is attested in southern Mesopotamia during the second millennium b.c.e., the traditional term “libanomancy” is nowadays still in use in the academic literature, but it seems that this term is not the most appropriate. Indeed, etymologically speaking, this word comes from the Greek terms libanos meaning ‘frankincense’ and manteia meaning ‘divination’ (deriving in turn from the noun mantis ‘diviner’). Therefore, literally, the term indicates a method of divination carried out using frankincense. But the actual object observed in the Old Babylonian libanomancy texts is the qutrēnu. 6 This Akkadian term does not mean ‘incense’ as scholars understand it nowadays (which, conversely, is: boswellia sacra or Omani frankincense). Actually, the Akkadian labanātu / lubunītu, corresponding to Hebrew levona and Greek libanos ‘incense,’ is attested in the context of divination in Mesopotamia only during the Late Babylonian period. 7

2.  The Documentation The extensive documentation on Mesopotamian divination can be divided into primary sources and secondary sources, as they are understood here. The primary sources consist of documents dealing with the “theory of divination”—that is, omen collections; 8 these are perhaps the most reliable pieces of evidence for libanomancy. The secondary sources comprise documents, such as commentaries, reports, letters, and ritual prayers, concerning the so-called “practice.”  9 I would like to emphasize Omen Series Šumma Ālu ina Mēlê Šakin, vol. 2, Tablets 22–40 (Philadelphia: Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 2006). 4.  For a summary of the Old Babylonian function of the bārû, see Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy, 15–17. See also Pettinato, Die Ölwahrsagung (Studi Semitici 21) 37–39. For the ritual, see more recently Fincke, Divination im Alten Orient, 1–20. 5. Traditionally, Mesopotamian divination is classified according to Jean Bottéro, “Symptômes, signes, écritures,” in Divination et Rationalité (ed. J. P. Vernant; Paris: Seuil, 1974) 127, but today his study is no longer relevant. 6.  For the Akkadian qutrēnu, see section 4 of the present essay. 7.  AHw: 522. 8.  They mostly consist of handbooks and the iškārū-series. For a general concept of canonicity, see William W. Hallo, “The Concept of Canonicity in Cuneiform and Biblical Literature: A Comparative Appraisal,” in The Biblical Canon in Comparative Perspective: Scripture in Context IV (ed. K. Lawson Younger, Jr., William W. Hallo, and B. F. Batto; Lewiston: Edwin Mellen, 1991) 1–19. For a critique of the use of this term in relation to the Mesopotamian divination, see David Brown, Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology (Cuneiform Monographs 18; Groningen: Styx, 2000) 11–30. 9.  The traditional classification of “theory” and “practice” in divination is due to Bottéro, Symptomes, signes, écritures, 70–197.

96

Maria Stella Cingolo

that this second group is not attested in relation to libanomancy; to date, new sources relating to the “practice” of this divination method have not been found. Libanomancy omen collections are attested for the second millennium b.c.e. only, which leads to the conclusion that, during the first millennium b.c.e., this mantic practice might have been pushed back in favor of the more successful extispicy.

3.  The Tablets Only handbooks are attested for libanomancy. There are only four tablets known, and all of them date to the Old Babylonian period, coming from the south of Babylonia. 10 Three manuscripts (a, b, c) reflect the same tradition (text A), while the fourth tablet (text B) represents a different tradition. Since the written literature on the interpretation of divinatory methods begins only with the Old Babylonian period, it is surprising to find diverging recensions during such an early stage of tradition. 11 The full text A can be reconstructed with the help of three sources: UCBC 755 (a) and its duplicates CBS 156 (b) and AfO 29 (c).  12 Text B (represented solely by the tablet CBS 14089) shows considerable difficulties in its reconstruction because the tablet is very damaged. 13 10. The cuneiform signs adopted in manuscripts a, b, and c are written in the Old Babylonian ductus, just like the other tablets published in Albrecht Goetze, “Old Babylonians Omen Texts,” YOS 10 (1947). All of these tablets show a mixture of “archaic cursive” and “younger cursive,” which is clear evidence of a previously written tradition. Overall, we can recognize the South Babylonian spelling conventions, the same ones noted in the majority of the YOS 10 tablets. For this type of compendia, see especially Jean J. Glassner, “Écrire des livres à l’époque pléo-babylonienne: le traité d’extispicine,” ZA 99 (2009) 5–6. For a more precise and comparative analysis aimed at dating and obtaining the provenience of these tablets, see Cingolo, La libanomanzia nella tradizione mantica mesopotamica, chapter 3. 11.  I am indebted to Dr. J. C. Fincke for this suggestion. 12.  UCBC 755 (UCP 9/5). It is a well-preserved tablet (12.3 × 8.8 × 2.8 cm) housed in the Phoebe Hearst Museum of Antropology (University of California Berkeley Collection). It was first edited by Henri F. Lutz, UCP 9/5, 367–77; then by Ebeling, Weissagungen aus Weihrauch, 869–80 and Pettinato, Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 303–27. The transliteration and a brief commentary are given by Biggs, RA 63, 73–74, and Leichty, “Smoke Omens,” 143–46. The collation of the other two manuscripts b and c and the translation of the initial 16 omens are provided by Finkel, AfO 29/30, 50–56. The photograph can be found on CDLI site, http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/dl/photo/P248160.jpg CBS 156. This tablet has been identified and published in a brief note as a “libanomancy text” by Leichty, “Smoke Omens,” 143–46. Another study was published by Finkel, AfO 29/30, 50–56, who collated the tablet with the manuscript a and the new fragment c. The photograph can be found on CDLI, http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/dl/photo/P257721.jpg Fragment published in AfO 29. No museum number is given, since it belongs to a private collector in London. Therefore, this tablet fragment is not available for collation. It was published for the first time by Finkel, AfO 29/30, 50–56, who studied it with help of a photograph. No details about its provenience and date are provided. 13.  CBS 14089 (PBS 1/2 99). This tablet is housed in the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology in Philadelphia. It is very much damaged on the surface and lacks most of the lower part of the obverse and most part of the reverse. A first copy with edition was published by Lutz, UCP 9/5, 367–77. Later, Ebeling, aus Weihrauch, 870 published a revised transliteration and translation after comparing this text with UCBC 755 (manuscript a in this essay). Pettinato, Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 303–27 edited this tablet as text B, together with the much better preserved text A (UCBC 755). Yet, although he analyzed text A carefully, he did not comment much on text B. Becauase it was very damaged, it could not be studied easily. Biggs, RA 63, 73–74 and Leichty, “Smoke Omens,” 143–46 have provided the most recent contributions and have offered some suggestions for improved readings, but not a new text edition. The photograph can be found on CDLI, http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/dl/ photo/P269101.jpg

Some Remarks about the Old Babylonian Libanomancy Texts

97

Text A is represented mostly by tablet a: UCBC 755. There are 32 omens recorded, covering the events from the burst of flame to the time when the smoke of the burnt offering blows over. Text B is represented only by tablet CBS 14089 (PBS 1/2 99). This text is very much damaged and includes only 11 fragmentary omens, followed by a kind of colophon. 14

4.  The Akkadian Term qutrēnu in the Libanomancy Texts Pettinato (Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 310) translated the term qutrēnu, 15 which is attested in manuscript a and in text B, with ‘incense’. He did not try to identify it with a specific incense, but referred simply to rīqu, 16 ‘aromatic plants’. 17 According to him, libanomancy texts dealt with incense as the material stuff as well as with the smoke given off. Leichty (“Smoke Omens”) and Biggs (RA 63) translated that term more generally with ‘smoke’. In his translation, Finkel (AfO 29/30) used the term ‘incense’ and added the word ‘smoke’ when the observed ominous sign that seemed to derive only from the smoking product. Finally, Maul (Aleuromantie: von der altorientalischen Kunst) wrote about ‘Rauchopfer’ (smoking offering) in this context. CAD offers two more meanings: ‘censer’ and ‘incense’. The grammatical interpretation of GAG § 56, 39: 86 is “bestimmter Rauch,” that is to say ‘certainly smoke’. 18 14.  For an interpretation of this “colophon,” see Pettinato, Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 310. Compare with similar Old Babylonian colophons in the lecanomancy corpus (Pettinato, Die Ölwahrsagung [Studi Semitici 22] 5–79). For colophons in general, see Hermann Hunger, Babylonische und assyrische Kolophone (AOAT 2; Kevelaer: Buton & Berger; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1968). 15. Manuscript a shows the logographic incipit be (šumma) na (qutrēnam). According to Ebeling (Weissagungen aus Weihrauch, 870), na is an abbreviation of the Sumerian expression nig2.na, which corresponds with Akkadian nignaqqu, ‘censer’. The first sign nig2 referred to the structure of the censer, and na therefore coincided with its contents; in addition, the sign na can be compared with the syllabically written qu2-ut-ri-nu-um found in text B. For the main meanings of na, see Ebeling, Weissagungen aus Weihrauch, 870. For a further reading of logographic na.ne (qutrēnu), see Niek Veldhuis, “Divination: Theory and Use,” in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty (Cuneiform Monographs 31; ed. A. K. Guinan; Leiden: Brill, 2006) 487–97; and idem, “The Sumerian Word na-IZI,” Cuneiform Digital Library Notes 2003:2. I refer in particular to Walther Sallaberger, “The Sumerian Verb na de5(-g) ‘to clear’,” in An Experienced Scribe Who Neglects Nothing: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Jacob Klein (ed. Y. Sefati, P. Artzi, C. Cohen, B. L. Eichler, and V. A. Hurowitz; Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2005) 237 nn. 3 and 4 and his bibliography for an interesting reading proposal. 16. Sumerian šim. AHw II: 988 translates Akkadian rīqu ‘Duft-stoff, Würzholz’; CAD R 368 translates it ‘aromatic plant’ and CDA 305 ‘aromatic substance’. Akkadian urû (Sumerian šim.ḫi.a) is a generic term to indicate a mixture of fragrant oils, which is translated ‘Bez. für Räucher-Kräuter’ in AHw III 1436; ‘an aromatic plant’ in CAD U/W: 260; and ‘aromatics’ in CDA 427. In AHw I 345, Akkadian ḫīlu (Sumerian a.kal) is translated ‘Harz’; in CAD Ḫ 188 ‘exudation of plants, resins’; and in CDA 116 ‘exudation, resin’. Reginald C. Thompson, A Dictionary of Assyrian Botany (London: British Academy, 1949) 338 uses the word ‘gum’ as translation. Furthermore, Akkadian qutrēnu is translated ‘Weihrauch-(opfer)’ in AHw II 930 and ‘incense’ in CAD Q 323 and CDA 292. See section 4 of this essay for further details. 17.  For Akkadian rīqu, see MSL V 103, 125: giš.šim = riq-qu (= 241, 25) and Thompson, A Dictionary of Assyrian Botany, 335. Pettinato, La libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, referred to the lexical equivalence between qutrēnu and rīqu in LTBA vol. 2, vi 358–59. 18. Initially, Ebeling (Weissagungen aus Weihrauch, 870) referred to this divination practice as “capnomancy.” Deriving from the ancient Greek capnos ‘smoke’ and manteia ‘divination’, capnomancy

98

Maria Stella Cingolo

In general, the aromatic plants 19 used in rituals were essentially aromatic oils and herbs such as those attested in BBR 75–78, 43–44; 95, 27; 100, 28, 20 such as cedar resin (gišerin, erēnu), cedar oil (i3 gišerin), cypress resin (giššu.ur2.min3, šurmēnu), cypress oil (i3 šu.ur2.min3) and juniper essence (resin) (šim.li, burāšu). 21 Libanomancy texts explain very little about the procedure of this divination method. 22 The knowledge of the main steps concerning the burnt offering process has been made possible through the protases of text A, which are presented below: A §1 [šumma qutrēnam ina] sarāqika nipihšu išta[ppu . . .], ‘[If, when] you 23 scatter [the (aromatic) burnt offering], its blaze varies in inte[nsity, . . .].’ A §11 šumma qutrēnum muḫḫāšu kīma tupšikki dŠamaš. . . , ‘If the (aromatic) burnt offering, as it concerns its upper part (i.e., smoke) (is) like Šamaš’s basket, . . .’ A §13 šumma qutrēnum rikissu haniq. . . , ‘If the (aromatic) burnt offering, during its fueling, is constricted, . . .’ A §22 šumma qutrēnum sasqâ[m ir]piš. . . , ‘If the (aromatic) burnt offering, (you scatter) sasqû-flour (and) [it incr]eases, . . .’

First, we find the description of the initial burning of the flame, then the emanation of the smoke, and subsequently the fueling and the scattering of the ritual flour sasqû. 24 No oils, resins, or aromatic plants are actually named; there is only one attestation of a specific kind of ritual flour, qēmu (zi3), which is the same one attested in the Old Babylonian prayer of a bārû for a good extispicy. 25 was a mantic method carried out through smoke observation. It has to be underlined that capnomancy does not necessarily occur in a sacral context. 19.  All of these aromatic essences are listed in the series ḪAR-ra = ḫubullu III 92–123. See Benno Landsberger, The Series ḪAR-ra = ḫubullu: Tablets I–IV (MSL 5; Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1954). For aromatics in Mesopotamia, see Henri Limet, “Pharmacopée et Parfumerie Sumériennes,” Revue d’Histoire de la Pharmacie 25 (1978) 147–59; Francis Joannès, “La Culture Matèrielle à Mari V: les Parfums,” MARI 7 (1993) 251–70; and Michael Jursa, “Die Kralle des Meeres und andere Aromata,” in Philologisches und Historisches zwischen Anatolien und Sokotra: Analecta Semitica In Memoriam Alexander Sim (ed. Werner Arnold et al.; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009) 147–80; see more recently Hagan Brunke and W. Sallaberger, “Aromata für Duftöl,” in Why Should Someone Who Knows Something Conceal It? Cuneiform Studies in Honor of David I. Owen on His 70th Birthday (ed. A. Kleinerman and J. Sasson; Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2010) 41–47. For the entire history of the research and a specific bibliography, see the recent contribution by Robert Middeke-Conlin, “The Scents of Larsa: A Study of the Aromatics Industry in an Old Babylonian Kingdom,” Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 1 (2014) 1–53. 20.  See Pettinato, Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 317 n. 9. The bārû chopped the cedar (erēnu) and sprinkled it (Zimmern, BBR 75–78, 62); then he sprinkled the juniper (burāšu) (ibid., 68) and finally the fine flour (maṣḫātu) (ibid., 75). In Zimmern, BBR 1–20, 35 only juniper (burāšu) and flour (qēmu) are attested. For the correspondence between this first millennium ritual and the second millennium ritual, see Pettinato, Die Ölwahrsagung (Studi Semitici 21) 45. 21.  Robert J. Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology 3 (Leiden: Brill, 1965) ii; Reginald C. Thompson, On the Chemistry of the Ancient Assyrians (London: Luzac, 1925) 282; CAD E 274; Thompson, On the Chemistry, 283; Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology, ii; Thompson, On the Chemistry, 286; Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology, 8; AHw 139; Thompson, On the Chemistry, 258. 22.  See in particular Pettinato, Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 309 and 316–17. 23.  The singular second person refers to the bārû. For further details and remarks, see Pettinato, Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 317. 24.  Attested in text B, obv. 2. 25.  For the text edition, see Albrecht Goetze, “An Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priest,” JCS 22 (1968) 25–29; translations are available in Benjamin Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature (3rd ed.; Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2005) 209–11; Marie-Joseph Seux, Hymnes et prieres

Some Remarks about the Old Babylonian Libanomancy Texts

99

It must be emphasized that in all the Mesopotamian sources Akkadian qutrēnu has a generic meaning, taking on different materials according to the different rituals and sociocultural contexts. 26 Metonymically, it could also indicate the offering container itself, which was the sacred brazier. 27 It is not clear whether the qutrēnu of the libanomancy texts might be the burnt aromatic offering stricto sensu, in which case the material consisted of aromatic herbs and oils, often with the added flour, or if it consists of the edibles offered to gods. 28 In any case, Mesopotamian libanomancy should be understood more correctly as a form of empiromancy (Maul, Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient, 147).

5.  Toward the Sitz im Leben of Libanomancy A brief discussion of the historical-religious phenomenon as discussed in the various publications about Mesopotamian divination is needed. Traditionally, libanomancy has been assumed to be a substitute for extispicy, used by poor people and not usually directed to a royal recipient (Pettinato, La Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi and Leichty, “Smoke Omens”). Like lecanomancy and aleuromancy, libanomancy seems to be a less expensive 29 alternative compared with far more costly extispicy. But the apodoses in libanomancy omens, apart from situations in which the subject is the generic awīlum “man” or a “sick” person (marṣum), usually refer to the king and his troops as well as to military and business expeditions, just as is the case in extispicy. More recently, libanomancy has been assumed to be a circumstantial substitution for extispicy (Maul, Aleuromantie: von der altorientalischen Kunst, and idem, aux dieux de Babylonie et d’Assyrie (Paris: Le Cerf, 1976) 467–70; Ivan Starr, The Rituals of the Diviner (Malibu: Undena Publications,1985); Piotr Steinkeller, “Of Stars and Men: The Conceptual and Mythological Setup of Babylonian Extispicy,” in Biblical and Oriental Studies in Memory of William L. Moran (ed. Augustin Gianto; Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2005) 11–47. All these studies place the context among the bārû’s activities, as they are described in other ritual texts such as the Old Babylonian diviner’s prayer. See in particular Starr, The Rituals of the Diviner, 44–60. For a more recent work, see Alan Lenzi, Reading Akkadian Prayers and Hymns: An Introduction (Ancient Near East 3; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011). For the nocturnal setting of Babylonian extispicy, see in particular Steinkeller, Of Stars and Men, and Jeanette C. Fincke, “Ist die Mesopotamische Opferschau ein nächtliches Ritual?” BiOr 66 (2009) 519–58. 26.  The Akkadian qutrēnu (translated ‘incense’) is always attested in extispicy rituals, in exorcism rituals, and in necromancy. It is also attested in oneiromancy, in namburbû texts, and in the context of medical fumigation. For more evidence, see in general CAD Q, ad qutrīnu. 27.  See CAD Q 324. 28.  See in general Werner Mayer and Walther Sallaberger, “Opfer A I,” in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 10 (ed. D. O. Edzard; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003) 93–106. For food offerings, see more recently Stefan M. Maul, “Den Gott ernähren. Überlegungen zum regelmässigen Opfer in altorientalischen Tempel,” in Transformations in Sacrificial Practices: From Antiquity to Modern Times. Proceedings of an International Colloquium, Heidelberg [12–14, July 2006] (ed. Eftychia Stavrianopoulou, A. Michaels, and Claus Ambos; Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2008) 76–78. For a bibliography on the “fumigant offering,” see idem, Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient. 29.  Old Babylonian documents show that aromatic oils and herbs were relatively inexpensive. For example, cedar resin (šim du10.eren) was sold at the price of 1200 shekels for 1 shekel of silver in YBC 5765. In TCL 10, 72 juniper wood (geš za.bal), used as “incense” for a court sacrifice, was sold at 720 shekel for one shekel of silver. Both texts are from Larsa. For the price relation to other resins (for example, the myrtle resin), see Middeke-Conlin, The Scents of Larsa, 23, on §3.4.5. Despite their cheap price, aromatics were broadly used at royal courts. See Jean Bottéro, Mythes et rites de Babylone (Geneva: Skatline, 2010 [1985]) 46.

100

Maria Stella Cingolo

Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient). It was probably performed when there was a need to get a quick result, as Maul has shown in one of his most recent contributions on aleuromancy. According to this idea, libanomancy was especially used in the course of battles. From a semiological perspective, it is possible that the naturalia such as oil, flour, and “incense” represented the offerings, just as the sacrificial animal did in extispicy. According to Maul (Aleuromantie: von der altorientalischen Kunst, 117) they can work as connecting links in the communicative process between man and god as well, because they are a “Frucht menschlicher Arbeit.” The fact that libanomancy is a procedure simpler than the more complex extispicy and consequently produces less complex omens might be, according to Pettinato, the reason for the receding of libanomancy in the first millennium b.c.e..  30 Nevertheless, to consider the burnt offering as a “replacement” for the blood sacrifice, as Maul claims, in my opinion seems to ignore the real differences between the blood sacrifice and the offering, 31 and this idea needs further discussion. Particularly, a further investigation of the ritual use of naturalia such as aromatic oils and aromatic plants and their symbolic use is necessary. This can be accomplished through the study of the above-mentioned “practice” documents, such as the letters, the extispicy reports, and the ritual prayers. Both Sumerian and Akkadian written sources clarify that the burnt offering served to summon and feed the gods daily. 32 One could reasonably suppose that libanomancy itself was not necessarily and exclusively practiced as a replacement for extispicy. Indeed, one probably accompanied the other, just as the aromatic burnt offering accompanied the blood sacrifice. On the other hand, the aromatic burnt offering was also a way for the bārû to purify himself 33 and to be able to report the deity’s verdict in the extispicy, too. 34 The sacral use of qutrēnu and its exclusive role oriented to assure the god’s presence in every ritual is quite evident. Therefore, the contents of some apodoses can be related to the contemporary Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priest (Goetze, An Old Babylonian Prayer, 25–29) and to the pre-extispicy namburbû texts, 35 where the use of qutrēnu is basic in assuring the deity’s presence at the extispicy ritual: 30.  “[. . . l’esame del fumo non poteva allettare i bārû, sempre intenti a rendere più complicate la loro “scienza,” ed è così che va spiegata presumibilmente la mancanza di testi libanomantici del I millennio” (Pettinato, Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi, 308). 31.  See Mayer and Sallaberger, Opfer A I, 93–106. 32.  See, for example: ūmišam uqtattar, ‘every day (he) makes a fumigant offering’ in CT 37 46:15. 33.  For all the bārû’s requirements before he can perform extispicy, see Wilfred G. Lambert, “The Qualifications of Babylonian Diviners,” in Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65 Geburtstag am 24 Mai 1994: tikip santakki mala bašmu . . . (ed. Stefan M. Maul; Cuneiform Monographs 10; Groningen: Styx, 1998) 141–58. 34.  See the comparative study of the biblical prophet Isaiah and the Babylonian diviners by Victor A. Hurowitz, “Isaiah’s Impure Lips and Their Purification in Light of Akkadian Sources,” HUCA 60 (1989) 39. 35.  About the burnt offering attested in some namburbû texts, Caplice wrote: “It is clear that burning them on a censer was part of the normal banquet situation among human beings in the Neo-Assyrian period, so that their use in rituals providing a divine banquet was natural” (Richard I. Caplice, “The Akkadian Namburbi Texts” [Sources of the Ancient Near East I/1 9; Los Angeles, Cal.: Undena Publications, 1974] n. 11). In this sense, see K. 10664: 9 in idem, “Namburbi Texts in the British Museum I,”

Some Remarks about the Old Babylonian Libanomancy Texts

101

A §26: ilum ša tašālu ina nīqīka izzaz, ‘the deity you called will stay at sacrifice.’ A §27: manzāz ili ummān[im] ‘station of the arm[y]’s deity.’ B §1: ilum izzaz ‘the deity will be present.’ B §2: dIštar ina qqim 36 wašbat ana ālik şābim u3 harrānim damiq ‘Ištar will stay at the censer: for the one who leads the troops and the military campaign it will be secure.’

The gap in the documentation relating to the “practice” of libanomancy (contrary to what we have about contemporary extispicy) goes alongside the new evidence of the šumma qutrēnu omens in the first millennium series šumma ālu, among the observed sacred flame omens. 37 Libanomancy, at least in the first millennium b.c.e., could be possibly considered to be a “deductive–spontaneous” form of divination, obtained by observing the burnt offering in any ritual. In particular, this interesting piece of evidence opens up the possibility that the Sitz im Leben of libanomancy could indeed be placed during a preliminary step of the better-known extispicy. 38

Final Questions and Remarks Hence, some final questions should be raised: A.  Contrary to extispicy, is it possible that libanomancy was not provoked intentionally, to make the deity answer a specific question? B.  Could libanomancy have been practiced during one of the ritual steps in the course of invoking the deity in extispicy? C.  Could libanomancy handbooks be included among the varous records of terrestrial signs, at least for the first millennium b.c.e.?

During the initial phase of collecting records, a deep relationship between the need for a scientific confirmation on the one hand and the religious practice of divine OrNS 34 (1964) 112–13, which precisely shows the bārû’s personal preparation for the divinatory act of extispicy. 36.  The last three signs are not graphically correct. In a note, Leichty, “Smoke Omens,” 143, proposed the interpretation i-na ⟨na⟩-aq-bi-im, ‘Inanna is resident in the ⟨na⟩qbu?’ But the sign that Leichty reads as /bi/ clearly is /qi2/. Thus, my interpretation is i-na ⟨nig2-na⟩-aq-qi-im, taking into account an elided writing to express the pronunciation. For the use of an elided writing to express the pronunciation, see Finkel, AfO 29/30. Compare the parallel ilum ša tašālu / ina niqīka izzaz, ‘the deity you called will stay at sacrifice’ in text A: §26. It seems closed to the Ištar bēlet tahāzim, ‘Ištar, lady of the battle’ of the Old Babylonian Ritual (Goetze, An Old Babylonian Prayer, 27), where the goddess, together with other gods (in primis Šamaš and Adad, then Anu and Nerigal) sits down (wašābu) at the paššūru, ‘the offering table’, to enjoy the offering and to ensure a valid extispicy outcome. 37.  It is very likely that libanomancy was attested even in the first millennium. A Neo-Assyrian tablet from Nineveh, K. 04097 (CT 39, 34–36: 80) shows omens with the incipit šumma (be) qutrēnu (qu2na.da). In addition, the omens in šumma ālu 50, 51, 52, where the flame (izi) and its fume (qatāru) were observed from the sacral nignaqqu, should be referred to as a kind of libanomancy. 38.  In a Neo-Assyrian compendium we find the bārû’s offerings that were indispensable to the divinatory examination listed as oil, one bird, the issur ḫurri (a species of dove, according to Jean-Marie Durand, “Les prophéties des textes de Mari,” in Oracles et Prophéties dans l’Antiquité: Actes du colloque de Strasbourg [15–17 juin 1995] [Travaux du Centre de Recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Gréce Antiques 15; ed. J.-G. Heintz; Paris: De Boccard, 1997] 115–34) one dove, “incense,” and finally the sacrificial sheep (Jean Nougayrol, “Rapports paleo-babyloniens d’haruspices,” JCS 21 [1967] 35–37, lines 6–12).

102

Maria Stella Cingolo

invocation on the other hand can be observed. In my personal view, I do not want to exclude that, first of all, we need to relate the lexical-list format and every kind of scientific form of cataloguing (involving omen collections) to the Mesopotamian polytheistic system of mind and to the power of writing. 39 In effect, both mind and soul belong together to that person who was accustomed to practicing divination and writing about it. 39.  I would like to thank prof. Dr. A. M. G. Capomacchia and her historical-religious point of view for this suggestion.

Bibliography Biggs, Robert D. “A propos des textes de libanomancie.” RA 63 (1969) 73–74. _________. “Book Review: Death in Mesopotamia: Papers Read at the xxvii Rencontre Assyriologique International.” JNES 42/4 (1983) 314–15. Bottéro, Jean. “Symptômes, signes, écritures.” Pp.70–197 in Divination et Rationalité. Edited by Jean P. Vernant. Paris: Seuil, 1974. _________. Mythes et rites de Babylone. Geneva: Skatline Reprints, 2010 (1985). _________. Uomini e dèi della mesopotamia. Alle origini della mitologia. Turin: Einaudi, 1992. Brown, David. Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology. Cuneiform Monographs 18. Groningen: Styx, 2000. Brunke, Hagan, and Walther Sallaberger. “Aromata für Duftöl.” Pp. 41–74 in Why Should Someone Who Knows Something Conceal It? Cuneiform Studies in Honor of David I. Owen on His 70th Birthday. Edited by Alexandra Kleinerman and Jack Sasson. Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2010. Caplice, Richard. I. “Namburbi Texts in the British Museum 1.” OrNS 34 (1965) 105–31. _________. The Akkadian Namburbi Texts: An Introduction. Sources of the Ancient Near East I/1 9. Los Angeles, Cal.: Undena, 1974. Cingolo, Maria S. La libanomanzia nella tradizione mantica mesopotamica. Ph.D. dissertation. Sapienza University of Rome, 2014. De Zorzi, Nicla. Divinazione e intertestualità: la serie divinatoria šumma izbu e il suo orizzonte culturale. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Venice Ca’ Foscari, 2011. Durand, Jean-Marie. “Les prophéties des textes de Mari.” Pp. 115–34 in Oracles et Prophéties dans l’Antiquité. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg (15–17 juin 1995) Travaux du Centre de Recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Gréce Antiques 15. Edited by Jean-Georges Heintz. Strasbourg: Pub Université Strasbourg II, 1997. Ebeling, Erich. “Weissagungen aus Weihrauch im Alten Babylonien.” Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 29 (1935) 869–80. Ebeling, Erich. “Parfümrezepte und Kultische Texte aus Assur.” Orientalia (1950) 17–19. Fincke, Jeanette C. “Ist die Mesopotamische Opferschau ein nächtliches Ritual?” BiOr 66 (2009) 519–58. _________. “The Solar Eclipse Omen Texts from Enūma anu Enlil.” BiOr 70.5/6 (2013) 582–608. _________. “Divination im Alten Orient: ein Überblick.” Pp. 1–20 in Divination in the Ancient Near East: A Workshop on Divination Conducted during the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Würzburg, 2008. Edited by Jeanette C. Fincke. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2014. Finkel, Irving L. “A New Piece of Libanomancy.” AfO 29/30 (1983/84) 50–5. Forbes, Robert J. Studies in Ancient Technology 3. Leiden: Brill, 1965.

Some Remarks about the Old Babylonian Libanomancy Texts

103

Foster, Benjamin. Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature. 3rd ed. Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2005. Freedman, Sally M. If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian Omen Series Šumma Ālu ina Mēlê Šakin. Vol. 1: Tablets 1–21, Philadelphia: Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 1998. _________. If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian Omen Series Šumma Ālu ina Mēlê Šakin. Vol. 2: Tablets 22–40, Philadelphia: Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 2006. Glassner, Jean J. “Écrire des livres à l’époque pléo-babylonienne: le traité d’extispicine.” ZA 99 (2009) 1–81. Goetze, Albrecht. Old Babylonians Omen Texts. Yale Oriental Series 10. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1947. _________. “Reports on Acts of Extispicy from Old Babylonian and Kassite Times.” JCS 11 (1957) 89–105. _________. “An Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priest.” JCS 22 (1968) 25–29. Hallo, William W. “The Concept of Canonicity in Cuneiform and Biblical Literature: A Comparative Appraisal.” Pp. 1–19 in The Biblical Canon in Comparative Perspective: Scripture in Context IV. Edited by K. Lawson Younger, Jr., William W. Hallo, and B. F. Batto. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen, 1991. Hunger, Hermann. Babylonische und assyrische Kolophone. AOAT 2. Kevelaer: Buton & Berger / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1968. Hurowitz, Victor A. “Isaiah’s Impure Lips and Their Purification in Light of Akkadian Sources.” HUCA 60 (1989) 39–89. Jeyes, Ulla. “The Act of Extispicy in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Pp. 12–32 in Assyriological Miscellanies. Edited by I. M. Diakonoff et al. Copenhagen: Institute of Assyriology, University of Copenhagen, 1980. _________. Old Babylonian Extispicy: Omen Texts in the British Museum. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1989. Joannès, Francis. “La Culture Matèrielle à Mari V: les Parfums.” MARI 7 (1993) 251–70. Jursa, Michael. “Parfüm (rezepte).” Pp. 335–36 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 10. Edited by D. O. Edzard. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2005. _________. “Die Kralle des Meeres und andere Aromata.” Pp. 147–80 in Philologisches und Historisches zwischen Anatolien und Sokotra. Edited by Werner Arnold et al. Analecta Semitica in Memoriam Alexander Sim. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009. Klengel, Horst. Altbabylonische Texte aus Babylon. Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der staatlichen Museen zu Berlin 22. Berlin: Akademie, 1983. _________. “Altbabylonische Texte aus Babylon. Eine Nachlese zu VS 22.” AfO 11 (1984) 92–109. Koch-Westenholz, Ulla S. Babylonian Liver Omens: The Chapter Manzāzu, Padānu and Pān tākalti of the Babylonian Extispicy Series mainly from Aurbanipal’s Library. Copenhagen: CNI Publications, 2000. _________. “Old Babylonian extispicy reports.” Pp.  131–45 in Mining the Archives: Festschrift for Christopher Walker on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. Edited by Cornelia Wunsch. Dresden: Islet, 2002. Koch, Ulla S. Secrets of Extispicy: The Chapter Multābiltu of the Babylonian Extispicy Series and Niṣirti bārîti Texts mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library. AOAT 326. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2005. Lambert, Wilfred G. “Questions Addressed to the Babylonian Oracle: The tamītu Texts.” Pp.  85–98 in Oracles et propheties dans l’antiquité. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg (15–17 juin 1995) 15. Edited by Jean-Georges Heintz. Strasbourg, 1997.

104

Maria Stella Cingolo

_________. “The Qualifications of Babylonian Diviners.” Pp. 141–58 in Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65 Geburtstag am 24 Mai 1994: tikip santakki mala bašmu. . . . Edited by Stefan. M. Maul. Cuneiform Monographs 10. Groningen: Styx, 1998. _________. Babylonian Oracle Questions. Mesopotamian Civilizations 13. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2007. Landsberger, Benno. The Series ḪAR-ra = ḫubullu. Tablets I–IV. Materialien zum su­meri­ schen Lexikon 5. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1954. Leichty, Erle. The Omen Series Šumma Izbu. Locust Valley NY: J.J. Augustin Publisher, 1970. _________. “Smoke Omens.” Pp.  143–46 in Essays on the Ancient Near East in Memory of Jacob Joel Finkelstein. Memoirs of the Connecticut Academie of Arts & Sciences 19. Edited by M. de Jong Ellis. Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1977. Lenzi, Alan (ed.). Reading Akkadian Prayers and Hymns: An Introduction. Ancient Near East 3. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011. Limet, Henri. “Pharmacopée et Parfumerie Sumériennes.” Revue d’Histoire de la Pharmacie 25 (238) (1978) 147–59. Lutz, Henri F. “An Old Babylonian Divination Text.” Pp. 367–77 in University of California Publications 9/5. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1929. Matouš, Lubor, and Wolfram von Soden. Die lexikalischen Tafelserien der Babylonier und Assyrer in den Berliner Museen 1 and 2. Berlin: Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Vorderasia­ tische Abteilung, 1933. Maul, Stefan M. Zukunftsbewältigung: Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Löserituale (Namburbi). Baghdader Forschungen 18. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern, 1994. _________. “Omina und Orakel. A. In Mesopotamien.” Pp. 45–88 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 10. Edited by D. O. Edzard. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003. _________. “Den Gott ernähren. Überlegungen zum regelmässigen Opfer in altorientalischen Tempeln.” Pp.  75–86 in Transformations in Sacrificial Practices: From Antiquity to Modern Times. Proceedings of an International Colloquium, Heidelberg, 12–14, July 2006. Edited by Eftychia Stavrianopoulou, A. Michaels, and C. Ambos. Berlin: LIT, 2008. _________. “Aleuromantie: von der altorientalischen Kunst, mit Hilfe von Opfermehl das Mass göttlichen Wohlwollens zu ermitteln.” Pp. 115–30 in Von Göttern und Menschen: Beiträge zu Literatur und Geschichte des Alten Orients. Edited by Dahlia Shehata, Frauke Weiershäuser, and Kamran V. Zand. Leiden: Brill, 2010. _________. Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient: Zeichen des Himmels und der Erde. Munich: Beck, 2013. Mayer, Werner R., Walther Sallaberger, and Ulla Seidl. “Opfer.” Pp. 93–106 in vol. 10 of Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie. Edited by D. O. Edzard and M. P. Streck. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003. Middeke-Conlin, Robert. “The Scents of Larsa: A Study of the Aromatics Industry in an Old Babylonian Kingdom.” Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 1 (2014) 1–53. Nougayrol, Jean. “Aleuromancie babylonienne.” Orientalia 32 (1965) 381–86. _________. “Rapports paleo-babyloniens d’haruspices.” JCS 21 (1967) 219–35. Pettinato, Giovanni. “Libanomanzia presso i Babilonesi.” Rivista degli studi orientali 41 (1966) 303–27. _________. Die Ölwahrsagung bei den Babyloniern. Studi Semitici 21 and 22. Rome: Istituto di Studi del Vicino Oriente, 1966. Renger, Johannes. “Untersuchungen zum Priestertum in der altbabylonischen Zeit 2. Teil” ZA 59 (1969) 104–230.

Some Remarks about the Old Babylonian Libanomancy Texts

105

Sallaberger, Walther. “The Sumerian Verb na de5(-g) ‘to clear’.” Pp. 229–53 in An Experienced Scribe Who Neglects Nothing: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Jacob Klein. Edited by Yitschak Sefati, Pinhas Artzi, Chaim Cohen, Barry L. Eichler, and Victor A. Hurowitz. Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2005. Seux, Marie-Joseph. Hymnes et prieres aux dieux de Babylonie et d’Assyrie. Paris: Du Cerf, 1976. Starr, Ivan. “Notes on Some Published and Unpublished Historical Omens.” JCS 29 (1977) 157–166. _________. The Rituals of the Diviner. Malibu: Undena, 1985. Steinkeller, Piotr. “Of Stars and Men: The Conceptual and Mythological Setup of Babylonian Extispicy.” Pp. 11–47 in Biblical and Oriental Studies in Memory of William L. Moran 48. Edited by Augustinus Gianto. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2005. Thompson, Reginald C. On the Chemistry of the Ancient Assyrians. London: Luzac, 1925. _________. A Dictionary of Assyrian Botany. London: British Academy, 1949. Veldhuis, Niek. “On Interpreting Mesopotamian Namburbi Rituals.” Archiv für Orientfor­ schung 42/43 (1995/1996) 145–54. _________. “The Sumerian Word na-IZI”, Cuneiform Digital Library Notes 2003:2 (see http:// cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdln/php/indexyear.php?year=2003). _________. “Divination: Theory and Use.” Pp.  487–97 in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty. Edited by A. K. Guinan. Cuneiform Monographs 31. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Zimmern, Heinrich. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der babylonischen Religion. Die Beschwörungstafeln Šurpu, Ritualtafeln für Wahrsager, Beschwörer und Sänger. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, (1896–99) 1901.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise: enūma anu enlil Jeanette C. Fincke London / Leiden

Introduction Trying to understand the mechanisms of the world and the laws of nature is one of the primary desires of human beings. This understanding would enable them to brave the elements and to ensure both survival and food requirements for their people on a permanent basis. Furthermore, it would guarantee the existence of the human race by motivating fertility and reducing infant mortality. Even so, within the evolution of the human race, documenting the history of modern science is a recent phenomenon. Early tribes developed their own comprehensions of the situations and events they confronted. Forces of nature seemed to appear out of nowhere, sometimes with devastating results for the community, and at other times unexpectedly supporting their needs. Such supernatural occurrences soon came to be considered as acts of the gods or the spirits. Once the natural elements and phenomena were given a “face” and a name, they turned into entities amenable to influence. Gods were modeled on human beings and were thought to have the same needs of body and soul. Worshiping and nourishing them were created for them. Soon, they were grouped together like human society, and family bonds and hierarchies were created for them. To wield influence, supplicants did not address just one god but also sought support from members of his family or from gods superior to him. Naturally, there were some aggressive, power-hungry spirits who stirred up strife among the gods and between gods and humans and they were given special attention during cultic worship. As they evolved, gods came to be connected with more complex ideas rather than with just one specific element. Soon this multifaceted concept became mirrored in nature-based religions. In order to comprehend everyday procedures and phenomena as signs given by gods to inform the people about future events, divination procedures and apotropaic rituals were developed to deflect any predicted evil and exert an influence for good on the future. 1 This is a situation to be Author’s note:  This study is part of my research project Solar Eclipses in Their Ancient Near Eastern Perception that I conducted in 2013–14 at the School of Oriental and African Studies, London, funded by the M4Human programme of the Gerda Henkel-Stiftung in co-finance with the European Commission. Writing the article I enjoyed the facilities of the Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, Leiden, as Visiting Research Scholar. I would like to thank Theo Krispijn and Dr. A. H. (Bram) Jagersma, both Leiden, as well as Dr. Mathieu Ossendrijver, Berlin, for providing me with important references for this study. 1.  For the apotropaic rituals, see the detailed study by Stefan M. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung: Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Löserituale (Namburbi)

107

108

Jeanette C. Fincke

seen in various parts of the world as well as in the ancient Near East. The earliest attestations of divinatory rituals preformed to obtain such ominous guidance are recorded in cuneiform texts from Ebla, modern Syria, dated to the third millennium b.c.e., where inspecting a sheep’s liver or entrails is the preferred method for fulfilling this purpose. 2 It was in the inhabited areas—that is, the cities and villages—that searching for ominous signs in the environment produced was most frequent. 3 By contrast, the uninhabited area in Mesopotamia consisted of large areas of open steppe and desert, only bounded by mountains in the far north. The view was uninterrupted except occasionally by a young boy herding sheep and goats. Only near the rivers and wadis did small strips of vegetation and agriculture provide something different for the eye. Encountering ominous signs in that environment is a rare event, so it is hardly surprising that people looked skyward where much more happened. At daytime, sunrise and sunset color the sky in various hues, a spectacle intensified by clouds, sandstorms moving like huge black walls toward the observer, and many other meteorological phenomena. At night, the spectacle is even more impressive. Then the sky forms a totally black background, with no light from human settlements. Along with the moon, hundreds of smaller and larger points of light move across the sky. People naturally observed these movements and tried to understand their significance. With the Mesopotamian landscape in mind, it is easy to understand why divination and especially observing celestial and terrestrial phenomena became so important in ancient Near Eastern society, or at least at the royal court, for divination. The vast majority of our records dealing with divination come from specialized archives and libraries of the Assyrian and Babylonian temples 4 and royal palaces, so it remains unclear if ordinary town or country folk followed the same procedures. Among the cheaper methods of divination, the poorer population could have simply used smoke, oil, flour, lots, or dice, 5 whereas “higher society” preferred to arrange (Baghdader Forschungen 18; Mainz am Rhein: Von Zabern, 1994). See also Ann Kessler Guinan, “A Severed Head Laughed: Stories of Divinatory Interpretation,” in Magic and Divination in the Ancient World (ed. L. Ciraolo and J. Seidel; Ancient Magic and Divination II; Leiden: Brill-Styx, 2002) 7–40, and S. M. Maul, “Die Wissenschaft von der Zukunft: Überlegungen zur Bedeutung der Divination im Alten Orient,” in Babylon: Wissenskultur in Orient und Okzident (ed. E. Cancik-Kirschbaum, M. von Ess, and J. Marzahn; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011) 135–51. 2.  See Pelio Fronzaroli, “Divinazione a Ebla,” in Miscellanea Eblaitica 4 (Quaderni di Semitistica 19; Florence: Dipartimento di linguistica, Università di Firenze, 1997) 1–22, and Alfonso Archi, “Divination at Ebla,” in Festschrift für Gernot Wilhelm anläßlich seines 65. Geburtstages am 28. Januar 2010 (ed. J. C. Fincke; Dresden: Islet, 2010) 45–56. 3.  The handbook with the omens that would have been applied to observations on earth is called šumma ālu in mēlê šakin. This omen series covers 120 tablets, the first 40 of which have been edited by Sally M. Freedman in her two volumes If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian series Šumma alu ina mēlê šakin, Volume 1: Tablets 1–21 (Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 17; Philadelphia: Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 1998), and Volume 2: Tablets 22– 40 (Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 19; Philadelphia: Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 2006). The last tablet has been edited by Walther Sallaberger, “Das Erscheinen Marduks als Vorzeichen: Kultstatue und Neujahrsfest in der Omenserie šumma ālu,” ZA 90 (2000) 227–62. 4.  The scholars at the temples, of course, primarily assisted the royal court. Thus also the “private” libraries and archives of any scholar affiliated to a temple are here considered part of the temples. 5.  For libanomancy (the shape of smoke), see Irving L. Finkel, “A New Piece of Libanomancy,” AfO 29/30 (1983–84) 50–55, and Erle Leichty, “Literary Notes. Smoke Omens,” in Essays in the Ancient Near East in Memory of Jacob Joel Finkelstein (ed. M. deJong Ellis; Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1977)

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

109

an inspection of the entrails of a sheep, which involved a very detailed and costly ritual. 6 Judging from the reports and letters written to the Neo-Assyrian sovereigns Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal (basically seventh century b.c.e.), 7 the king and his entourage seem to have preferred divinations based on unprovoked occurrences in both inhabited and uninhabited regions, 8 and in particular ominous signs in the sky. Because of their size, the earth and the sky offer the largest variety of possible phenomena 9 and were the obvious spheres for the interpretation of them. Accuracy required observers all over the country, because different weather conditions in different places prevented every sign from being seen everywhere. The Babylonian scholar Bēl-ušēzib reported such a situation to king Esarhaddon (680–669 b.c.e.): Now there are clouds everywhere; we do not know whether the eclipse took place or not. Let the lord of kings write to Assur and all the cities, to Babylon, to Nippur, to Uruk and Borsippa; maybe they observed it in these cities. 10

No doubt, the Neo-Assyrian royal court had the financial resources to commission observers all over the country to keep a close watch and to send reports with their observations to the king.

143–44. For lecanomancy (oil poured out into a bowl of water), see Giovanni Pettinato, Die Ölwahrsagung bei den Babyloniern (Studi Semitici, 21–22; Rome: Instituto di Studi del Vicino Oriente, Università di Roma, 1966), and S. M. Maul, “Omina und Orakel. A. Mesopotamien,” in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie, Vol. 10 (ed. D. O. Edzard and M. P. Streck; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2003) 83–84 § 9. For aleuromancy (divination using flour), see Jean Nougayrol, “Aleuromancie babylonienne,” OrNS 32 (1963) 381–86, and S. M. Maul, “Aleuromantie. Von der altorientalischen Kunst, mit Hilfe von Opfermehl das Maß göttlichen Wohlwollens zu ermitteln,” in Von Göttern und Menschen: Beiträge zu Literatur und Geschichte des Alten Orients für Brigitte Groneberg (ed. D. Shehata, F. Weihershäuser and K. Zand; Cuneiform Monographs, 41; Leiden: Brill, 2010) 115–30. For psephomancy (divination by lots), see Irving L. Finkel, “In Black and White: Remarks on the Assur Psephomancy Ritual,” ZA 85 (1995) 271–76. For astragalomany (divination by dice), see Ernst F. Weidner, “Ein Losbuch in Keilschrift der Seleukidischen Zeit,” Syria 33 (1956) 175–83, and Jean Bottéro, “Deux curiosités assyriologiques 1. Jou graphique ou talisman?,” Syria 33 (1956) 17–25, 30–35. 6.  For this ritual, see recently J. C. Fincke, “Ist die mesopotamische Opferschau ein nächtliches Ritual?” BiOr 66.5–6 (2009) 519–58. 7.  Hermann Hunger, Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings (SAA 8; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press 1992), and Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars (SAA 10; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press 1993); see also below The Significance of EAE among Other Texts and Compositions with Astronomical Concern group IV. 8.  See n. 3. 9.  The royal court seemed to have used the other options for unprovoked omens only for special occasions, such as teratomancy (birth omens; Akkad. šumma izbu; for this, see basically Erle Leichty, The Omen Series Šumma Izbu [TCS 4; Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Augustin, 1970], and Sally Moren, “šumma izbu XIX: New Light on the Animal Omens,” AfO 27 [1980] 53–70); orneiromancy (dream interpretation: see A. Leo Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East: with Translation of an Assyrian Dream-Book [Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1956]); physiognomic omens (signs seen on the healthy human body; Akkad. alandimmû: see Barbara Böck, Die babylonischassyrische Morphoskopie [AfO Beih. 27; Vienna: Institut für Orientalistik der Universität Wien, 2000]); or the calendrical omens of the series iqqur īpuš (see René Labat, Un calendrier babylonien des travaux des signes et des mois (séries iqqur īpuš) [Paris: Champion, 1965]; my new edition of this series is in an advanced state of preparation for publication). 10.  K. 722 (Parpola, Letters [SAA 10], 95 no. 114) obv. 5–10: . . . en-na im.diri.meš la-ka-a-ma (6) ki-i an.ge6 iš-ku-nu ù la iš-ku-nu (7) ul ni-di en lugal.meš a-na bal.til.ki a-na uru ka-la-ma (8) a-na tin.tir.ki a-na en.líl.ki a-na unug.ki (9) ù bár.sipa.ki liš-pur mìn-de-e-ma (10) ina šà-bi uru.me an-nu-ti i-ta-mar-ú!.

110

Jeanette C. Fincke

The Background for Observations of the Sky in Mesopotamia Astronomical observations are at least as old as settled populations, since agriculture and livestock production guaranteeing survival depend on knowing the seasons determined by the solar year. This was the basis of the economic system of central Mesopotamia, where early on temples and palaces accumulated huge agricultural units, and large numbers of people gathered at farmsteads to process the products. These people needed to be fed, and the farmers had to deliver the yield from working on their land. This situation stimulated a system of administration and the development of writing. The temples and palaces stored the harvest and served people their rations. A workman could store much less than a large farmstead, so an individual’s ration was for less than a year. By observing the phases of the moon, the month was adopted as a basic time unit and the first lunar crescent after the new moon marked the beginning of a month. Both the sun and the moon were accurately observed in Mesopotamia to give a clear understanding of the seasonal changes in the lengths of the day and night watches. 11 For the purpose of administration, each month was considered to have 30 days 12 instead of the 29.53 13 that would have been mathematically correct. The discrepancy between the solar year (365.242 days) 14 and the lunar year (360 days, or astronomically 354.367 days) soon became visible. Intercalary months were added to align the years. 15 The earliest attestation for introducing intercalary months can be found among the tablets of Kušim, the s a n g a working in temple administration in the Uruk III or Ǧemdat Nasr period, which means around 3000 b.c.e. 16 One of his lists of barley refers to an account period of 36 months (Erlenmeyer 4.25), 17 or three years, one of which had an intercalary month. Further suggestions of intercalated months can be found among the administrative tablets and letters from the Ur III period (ca. 2113–2004 b.c.e.) and the Old Babylonian period (ca. 1800–1595 b.c.e.), as well as from the Neo-Assyrian period, 11.  For a literary hint at the knowledge of this change, see the Old Babylonian copy of the Sumerian narrative about Inana discussed by David Brown and Gábor Zólyomi, “ ‘Daylight Converts to Night-Time’: An Astrological-Astronomical Reference in Sumerian Literary Context,” Iraq 63 (2001) 149–54, esp. 149–51: (lines 146–47) “From now on the normal length of daylight becomes shorter, daylight converts to night-time. From today when its (= the day’s) watch is 3 (units) long, daylight is equal to night-time.” 12.  In the first millennium b.c.e., the number of days for each month was more adapted to the astronomical reality; see, e.g., John M. Steele, “The Length of the Month in Mesopotamian Calendars of the First Millennium b.c.e.” in Calendars and Years: Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near East (ed. J. M. Steele; Oxford: Oxbow, 2007) 133–48. 13. I use the number given for the synodic month, which means the time after which the moon reaches exactly the same position facing the sun, as seen from the earth. 14.  In order to facilitate calculations, I use the tropical year for the sun, which is defined by the period the sun reaches exactly the same position in the cycle of seasons, as seen from the earth. 15.  See also John P. Britton, “Calendars. Intercalations and Year-Length in Mesopotamian Astronomy” in Calendars and Years: Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near East (ed. J. M. Steele; Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2007) 115–32. 16.  See Hans J. Nissen, Peter Damerow, and Robert K. Englund, Frühe Schrift und Techniken der Wirtschaftsverwaltung im alten Vorderen Orient: Informationsspeicherung und -verarbeitung vor 5000 Jahren (Verlag Franzbecker, 1990) 66–75 (reference by courtesy of Theo Krispijn). 17.  H. J. Nissen et al., Frühe Schrift und Techniken, 66–67, 67 Abb. 9a.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

111

especially from the seventh century onward. 18 The Old Babylonian documents prove that the king ordered the addition of an intercalary month (itu.diri.ga), most probably upon the advice of a scholar. Counting the number of intercalary months in kings’ regnal years does not produce a regular cycle. 19 The decision to intercalate a month must have been entirely based on ad hoc observations. A regular intercalary system is found later, from the mid-seventh century b.c.e. onward. In a 19-year cycle there were seven intercalary months. 20 From 367 b.c.e. onward, the pattern of intercalations was standardized, both the month (the sixth, ulūlu, or the twelfth, adāru, month) and the regnal leap year (years 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19). 21

The Earliest Observations of Celestial Phenomena as Ominous Signs Observing the motion of the sun and the moon naturally led to the examination of the stars and constellations. All heavenly bodies seemed to move freely across the sky and they were considered to be gods themselves, or at least controlled by gods. A bilingual hymn of the first millennium b.c.e. to the weather god Adad describes “the gods of heaven ascended to heaven.” 22 The sun and moon had a role dominating the day and the night. As such, they figure among the main gods of many Mesopotamian pantheons. The sun itself, šamsu, is seen as the heavenly representation of the Sumerian god du t u and the Akkadian god Šamaš, 23 and the moon, sînu, the heavenly representation of the Sumerian moon god dn a n n a (or dEN.ZU) and the Akkadian god Su’ēn (later Sîn). 24 Texts from Šuruppak, dated to the Fāra period (the late fourth or early third millennium b.c.e.) show the earliest connection between gods and stars. Nisaba, a goddess commonly connected with barley, is there closely connected with stars. 25 She is 18.  See Hermann Hunger, “Kalender,” in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archä­ o­logie 5 (ed. D. O. Edzard; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1976–1980) 298. 19.  For the disproportionate large number of intercalary months added during the reign of Samsuiluna see Marten Stol, Studies in Old Babylonian History (PIHANS 40; Leiden: Nederlands HistorischArchaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1976) 58: years 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 20, 23, 27. For those of Ammiṣaduqa, see Erica Reiner and David Pingree, Babylonian Planetary Omens Part One: enūma anu enlil Tablet 63: The Venus Tablet of Ammiṣaduqa (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 2/1; Malibu: Undena, 1975) 23: years 4, 5, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17+a, 17+d. 20. See Richard A. Parker and Waldo H. Dubberstein, Babylonian Chronology 626 b.c. – a.d. 75 (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 24; Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1956) 1, 5 plate I. 21.  See Parker and Dubberstein, Babylonian Chronology , 2–7, especially the table on p. 5 (plate I). 22. IVR2 28 no. 2 (K. 4614) obv. 19–20: d ìm - me - e r - a n - n a - ke4 a n - n a b a - a n - e11-d è (20) dingir. meš šá šá-me-e a-na an-e i-te-lu-ú. 23.  See, e.g., Janice Polonski, The Rise of the Sun God and the Determination of Destiny in Ancient Mesopotamia (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 2002). See also Daisuke Yoshida, Untersuchungen zu den Sonnengottheiten bei den Hethitern: Schwurgötterliste, helfende Gottheit, Feste (Texte der Hethiter 22; Heidelberg: Winter, 1996). 24.  See, e.g., Åke Sjöberg, Der Mondgott Nanna-Suen in der sumerischen Überlieferung (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1960); Mark G. Hall, A Study of the Sumerian Moon-God, NANNA/Suen (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1985). See also Gabriele Theuer, Der Mondgott in den Religionen Syrien-Palästinas unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von KTU 1.24 (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 173; Freiburg: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000). 25.  For the barley goddess Nisaba in connection with stars, see Bendt Alster, “Sumerian Literary Tradition,” JCS 28 (1976) 116–20, Gebhard Selz, “Nissaba(k), “Die Herrin der Getreidezuteilung,” in DUMU-E2-DUB-BA: Studies in Honor of Åke W. Sjöberg (ed. H. Behrens; Occasional Publications of the

112

Jeanette C. Fincke

called “the woman (of the) ‘heavenly star’ ” (m u n u s m u l - a n , lugal-e, line 694) or “the woman of the stars” (m u n u s m u l - m u l - l a , BRM IV 46:4 26), and her temple in Ereš is called “house of the heavenly star(s), house of lapis lazuli” (é m u l - ( m u l - ) a n é z a - g ì n , Sumerian Temple Hymns, line 29 27), to reflect her routine of “continuously consulting the lapis lazuli tablet” (d u b z a - g ì n - t a a d g i 4 - g i 4 - g i 4, Sumerian Temple Hymns, line 538 28). The “lapis lazuli tablet” is a metaphor for the dark blue sky traversed slowly day and night by the heavenly bodies as tiny shiny dots. The “lapis lazuli tablet” is a term for a map of the stars. Nisaba “placed the tablet of the ⟨heavenly⟩ star(s) on her knees (and) consulted it” (d u b m u l ⟨ - a n ⟩ d u 1 0 - g a b í - g á l - l a - a a d i m - d a - g i 4 - a, Gudea cyl. A 5:26–6:1 29). In Sumerian, this tablet (d u b ) of the “heavenly star(s)” (m u l - a n ) corresponds to Akkadian šiṭir šamê, “script of heaven,” where stars are associated with cuneiform characters, a concept that can be traced back to the 22nd century b.c.e. 30 Around this time, the expressions “matter of heavenly star(s)” (n í g m u l - a n ) and “heavenly star(s)” (m u l - a n ) were used as metaphors for “message” and “script,” indicating that celestial phenomena were to be understood as messages from gods. 31 If these messages were not in the written texts, the texts were being compared to the writing of the “heavenly star(s),” whereby the resplendence of the stars and of the goddess was conferred on the composition being written. 32 In either case, Nisaba is not only the lady of the heavenly stars but also the one interpreting the messages of the constellations, pointing the way to using celestial phenomena for divination in the early third millennium b.c.e. It is therefore possible that the impression from a seal cylinder of the scribe Adda depicting the gods of the eastern sky (BM 89115) that dates to the Old Akkadian period (ca. 2340–2200 b.c.e.) also had a divinatory background (see fig. 1). 33 On the very left stands a lion (i.e., mul.ur.maḫ, Akkad. nēšu, the constellation Leo) behind the god Ninurta (i.e., Saturn), the god of war. To his right, on top of the left fringe of a mountain, stands the winged Ištar (Venus), the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 11; Philadelphia: Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 1989) 491–97; see also Ulla Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology: An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination (CNI Publications 19; Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 1995) 32. 26.  See already Victor Scheil, “IV. La déesse Nisaba,” OLZ 7 (1904) 252–55. 27.  See Åke W. Sjöberg and Eugen Bergmann, The Collection of Sumerian Temple Hymns (Texts from Cuneiform Sources 3; Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Augustin 1969) 48. 28.  See Sjöberg–Bergmann, Sumerian Temple Hymns, 49. 29.  See Selz, “Nissaba(k),” 494. See also the edition by Willem H. P. Römer, Die Zylinderinschriften von Gudea (AOAT 376; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2010) 12 (transliteration), 47 (translation) of Gudea cyl. A IV 26–V 1: d u b - m u l- a n d u10- g a im - m i- g ál (1) a d i m- d a b6- g i4- g i4, “(Nisaba) hatte eine TafelHimmels­sterne(?) auf die Knie gelegt, zog sie zu Rate.” 30.  See recently Gebhard Selz, “The Tablet with ‘Heavenly Writing’ or How to Become a Star,” in Non licet stare caelestibus. Studies on Astronomy and Its History offered to Salvo de Meis (Indo-Iranica et Orientalia 13; ed. A. Panaino; Milano / Udine: Mimesis, 2014) 51–67. 31. See Walther Sallaberger, “Nachrichten an den Palast von Ebla: Eine Deutung von níg-mul(an),” in Semitic and Assyriological Studies Presented to Pelio Fronzaroli by Pupils and Colleagues (ed. by G. Conti et al.; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2003) 600–625, esp. 613–15 (reference by courtesy of Bram Jagersma). 32.  See Jacob Klein and Yitschak Sefati, “The “Stars (of) Heaven and Cuneiform Writing,” in He Has Opened Nisaba’s House of Learning: Studies in Honor of Åke Waldemar Sjöberg on the Occasion of His 89th Birthday on August 1st 2013 (ed. L. Sassmannshausen; Cuneiform Monographs 46; Leiden: Brill, 2014) 85–102 (reference by courtesy of Bram Jagersma). 33. See, e.g., Rainer M. Böhmer, Die Entwicklung der Glyptik während der Akkad-Zeit (Unter­ suchungen zur Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 4; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1965) Tafel XXXII no. 377 (BM 89115) (courtesy Theo Krispijn).

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

113

Figure 1.  Seal impression on tablet BM 89115, depicting the gods that represent the eastern sky (Akkad period). © The British Museum.

goddess of war and fertility, shown with weapons and dates growing from her shoulder. She is announcing the rising of Šamaš (sunrise), now that the god has seen his way through the mountains of the underworld. Enki, the god of sweet water and wisdom, stands by streams of water, with fish flowing from his shoulders to the right of the mountain. He has a raven (i.e., mul.uga.mušen, Akkad. āribu, the constellation Corvus) on his right hand and reaches to the left toward Šamaš. Behind Enki stands his double-faced vizier Ušmu (who may also represent a constellation as yet unidentified). These are hints that certain constellations conveyed messages from gods about future events already in the early third millennium b.c.e. But Sumerian texts use the word g i s k i m (var. i s k i m ), “sign, signal,” only occasionally for an “ominous sign.” The three examples known to me all come from school exercise tablets from Ur that were most probably written during the Old Babylonian period (ca. 1800–1595 b.c.e.). 34 Since students wrote these tablets as part of their school education, it cannot be excluded that the scholarly Sumerian in these compositions was influenced 34.  One example can be found in a prayer to the moon-god Nanna by Rīm-sîn (UET 6/1 106; RīmSîn G). Here, the word gi s k i m is used twice in the meaning of an “(favorable) ominous sign” without indication of the divination method: line 42: gi s k i m s a g9- s a g9- g a ḫ a - r a - g á - g á, “may there be (favorable) ominous signs provided for you,” and lines 46–47: š a g4 dn a n n a dn i n - g a l - b i g i s k i m s a g9- s a g9- g a (47) nam-⸢tìl⸣-la d a - r í- š è ḫ é - m e - k á r - k á r, “may there be (favorable) ominous signs of life provided for you in the heart of Nanna and Ningal.” For this composition, see Horst Steible, Rīmsîn, mein König: Drei kultische Texte aus Ur mit der Schlußdoxologie dri-im-dsîn lugal-mu (Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 1; Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1975) 93 (transliteration) and 95 (translation); http://etcsl.orinst. ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/etcsl.cgi under c.2.6.9.7. In the Collection 5 of Sumerian proverbs, the divination technique referred to is clearly extispicy (Collection 5:46): a n š e ba r - u d u - ḫ i - a - ka g i s k i m nu - m u - e - d a - t u ku, “using a donkey in place of a sheep will not provide you with an ominous sign,” see http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/etcsl.cgi under c.6.1.05 (so as in March 2015; quoted with a slightly modified translation). Bendt Alster, Proverbs of Ancient Sumer: The World’s Earliest Proverb Collections (Bethesda, MD: CDL, 1997) 126 translates “. . . you get no recognition” because of the variant n u - m u- n i - z u given in UET 6/2 234, and understands

114

Jeanette C. Fincke

by their vernacular Akkadian and contemporary writing styles. From the Old Babylonian period onward, Sumerian g i s k i m was commonly used as a logogram (giskim) for Akkadian ittu, “ominous sign.”  35 Perhaps it was an unintentional replacement for the usual Sumerian expression i n i m - g a r , “the given word; (oracular) utterance; ominous sign” for a later edition of the text. Still, one of these exercise tablets does use g i s k i m for heavenly phenomena in a Sumerian proverb: “When . . . answers . . . it is a good ominous sign from heaven” (UET 6/2 312: 1–2: a n ḫ u l ? - b a D I - b i g i 4 - g i 4 (2) g i s k i m - z i a n - n a   3 6 ).

Forerunners of the Series EAE The series EAE lists individual celestial and meteorological phenomena together with their ominous interpretation in conditional clauses, in which the astronomical observations can be found in the protasis and the prediction in the apodosis. These conditional clauses, commonly referred to as omens, constitute rules for interpreting a range of phenomena. 37 There are no Sumerian omens from the third or second millennium b.c.e. Only one bilingual Sumerian-Akkadian omen text has so far been published, which is a careful translation by a Late Babylonian scholar from Uruk of Akkadian omens into Sumerian (SpTU I 85). 38 Sumerian scribes may never have written omens, or for some reason or other such texts have not been found. We do not know. 39 The earliest omen texts dealing with celestial and meteorological events combine more than one subject, including regularly recurring phenomena which can be observed by an inexperienced eye (see fig. 2). In one tablet, meteorological events are mixed with lunar phenomena, 40 and in another with solar events. 41 The vast this proverb as “one is foolish for using a relatively valuable animal when a less valuable one would do” (p. 402). 35.  For the difference between the ominous sign (Akkadian ittu, plural ittatu, logogram giskim) and the (evil or positive) radiation of this sign that is affecting people (Akkadian iṭṭu, plural idātu, logogram á) see Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 6–8. 36.  See Alster, Proverbs of Ancient Sumer, 318, 473. 37.  See recently J. C. Fincke, “Omina, die göttlichen “Gesetzte” der Divination,” JEOL 40 (2006) 131–47. 38. Hermann Hunger, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 1 (Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka Band 9; Berlin: Mann, 1976) 90, quotes Erica Reiner who had told him about unpublished bilingual celestial omens. 39.  Since omen compendia as such are not mandatory for the practice of divination, Niek Veldhuis, If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty, (ed. A. K. Guinan et al.; Cuneiform Monographs 31; Leiden: Brill, 2006) 487–97, understands the lack of Sumerian omens as an indicator of the proficiency of Sumerian diviners, who did not need written documentation of omens in order to exercise their profession, while the Akkadian scholars aimed at a record as complete as possible of the knowledge of prior practice and were dominated by the well-established customs of the diviners. Veldhius’s observation, however, is based on one divination method only, extispicy, which is a technique to obtain provoked omens. That this conclusion should also be applied to methods using unprovoked ominous signs such as terrestrial or celestial ones, for which the possible phenomena are substantially larger in number than in the inspection of the entrails of animals, needs to be questioned. 40.  The “Šileiko Tablet,” first published by Victor K. Šileiko, “Mondlaufprognosen aus der Zeit der ersten babylonischen Dynastie” (Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Sciences de l’URSS B; 1927) 125–28, and reedited by Wayne Horowitz, “Astral Tablets in The Hermitage, Saint Petersburg,” ZA 90 (2000) 203–5. 41.  BM 92710 (unpublished).

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise General subject

Number of copies

Origin

115 Text

Combining more Weather & lunar than one subject phenomena

1

?

Šileiko tablet

Solar & weather phenomena

1

?

BM 92710

1

Mari

ARM I/1 248

4

Sippar (?)

BM 22606, BM 86381, BM 86383, BM 109154

2

Dūr-abiešuḫ George, CUSAS 18, 2013, 13 and 14

1

?

Just one subject

Lunar eclipses

Solar eclipses

7

Dietrich, WZKM 86 (1996) 99–111

Figure 2.  Old Babylonian celestial and meteorological omen tablets.

majority of Old Babylonian celestial omen tablets deal with the lunar eclipse, an impressive recurring event. Seven such tablets are known to date, from various places in Babylonia, including Mari, Dūr-abiešuḫ, and Sippar. 42 The solar eclipse was also noted, with 19 omens in one Old Babylonian tablet. 43 Most Middle Babylonian and Middle Assyrian celestial omen tablets come from the periphery of Mesopotamia (Alalaḫ, Emar, Ḫattuša, Nuzi, Qatna, Susa, and adjacent places in Elam and Ugarit). 44 Apart from a few tablets written in Middle Assyrian ductus, 45 only three tablets of this period are known to have been written in central Mesopotamia. Two come from Babylonia (Nippur and an unidentified location) and one from Assyria (Assur). 46 42.  One tablet from Mari (ARM I/1 248); two tablets from—most probably—Dūr-abiešuḫ (Andrew R. George, Babylonian Divinatory Texts Chiefly in the Schøyen Collection [Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 18; Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2013], nos. 13 and 14); four tablets from—most probably—Sippar (BM 22606, BM 86381, BM 86383, BM 109154; for the provenience of these tablets see George, CUSAS 18, 70). 43.  Manfried Dietrich, “Altbabylonische Omina zur Sonnenfinsternis,” WZKM 86 (1996) 99–111. 44.  See, e.g., Kaspar K. Riemschneider, Die akkadischen und hethitischen Omentexte aus Boǧazköy (Dresdner Beiträge zur Hethitologie 12; Dresden: Technische Universität Dresden, 2004 [reedition of his Habilitationsschrift from around 1973]); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 41–51; Francesca Rochberg-Halton, Aspects of Babylonian Celestial Divination: The Lunar Eclipse Tablets of Enūma Anu Enlil (Archiv für Orientforschungen Beiheft 22; Horn: Ferdinand Berger & Söhne, 1988) 273–79; Matthew T. Rutz, “Textual Transmission between Babylonia and Susa: A New Solar Omen Compendium,” JCS 58 (2006) 63–96; Yoram Cohen, The Scribes and Scholars of the City of Emar in the Late Bronze Age (Harvard Semitic Studies 59; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009) 144, 209–11; and M. T. Rutz, Bodies of Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia: The Diviners of Late Bronze Age Emar and their Tablet Collection (Ancient Magic and Divination 9; Leiden: Brill, 2013). 45.  The Middle Assyrian sources for EAE 20 cannot be dated on other criteria than by the ductus; see Rochberg-Halton, AfO Beih. 22, 175. Nonetheless, Middle Assyrian sign-forms are used until well into the first millennium b.c.e., a period of time that is commonly considered Neo-Assyrian. 46.  See Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 42 (Clay, PBS II.2, pl. 59 no. 123, from Nippur), Rutz, JCS 58 (2006) 83–96 (UM 29-15-393, a Middle Babylonian copy), and Rochberg-Halton, AfO Beih 22, 273–79 (BM 121054, most probably from Assur).

116

Jeanette C. Fincke

The Attestation and General Character of Tablets from the Series EAE At some point, scribes assembled the omens on individual tablets as a series called enūma anu enlil (EAE), thereby producing a manual for more easily identifying phenomena and interpreting them (see fig. 3). Copies of this series were made from the late eighth century until the first century b.c.e. 47 in both Assyria and Babylonia. The experts who had compiled it were based in Babylonia, probably in Babylon itself or Borsippa, as shown by the colophons of some of the earliest copies from the Neo-Assyrian period. 48 Another hint that it originated in Babylonia is found in tablet K. 3561 (+) K. 6141b, a Neo-Assyrian copy of lunar eclipse omens written in Babylonian ductus. 49 The text resembles recension B of EAE 20, with additional sections with lunar eclipse omens, and a colophon indicating that it was written “[according to the text of a writ]ing board from the 11th year of Adad-aplaiddin[a, king of Babylon . . .].” 50 This dates the exemplar to the middle of the eleventh century b.c.e., a period when standard versions of other literary compositions were being made (see below). It was in the reign of Adad-apla-iddina (1068–1047 b.c.e.) that the Babylonian scholar Esagil-kīn-apli reworked earlier omen series of alamdimmû and SA.GIG, dealing with the human body in good and bad physical shape, as the version widely accepted in the first millennium b.c.e. 51 It is therefore possible that the series EAE was also prepared then. However, Tablet K. 3561 (+) K. 6141b makes no claim to be part of the series EAE. Since it has additional sections, one of which duplicates a paragraph of a later EAE tablet (EAE 22), 52 its exemplar could have been one used by the Babylonian compilers of the series. We know that Neo-Assyrian scribes copied tablets with omens from the series and their excerpts as well as from older material. The earliest dated copy of an EAE tablet we have is K. 5281 (AAT 12c), found at Nineveh and a copy of EAE 6 from the lunar 47.  BM 45715 (unpublished) is a tablet with omens on planets and constellations dated to the 180th year of the Arsacid period—namely, 68 b.c.e. BM 36715 (unpublished) is a tablet on lunar eclipses dated to the 144th year of the Arsacid period—namely, 168 b.c.e. 48.  According to the colophons of Nabû-zuqup-kēnu, a scholar who wrote his tablets during the late 8th and early 7th century b.c.e. in Kalḫu under the reign of Sennacherib; see Stephen J. Lieberman, “A Mesopotamian Background for the So-Called Aggadic ‘Measures’ of Biblical Hermeneutics?” HUCA 58 (1987) 204–17, esp. 210–11, and Hermann Hunger, Babylonische und assyrische Kolophone (AOAT 2; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1968) nos. 293–313. The origin of the exemplars he had copied from is Babylon (gaba.ri ká.dingir.ra.ki; see Lieberman, ibid., 210 n. 262) or, once, Babylon and Borsippa (gaba.ri tin.tir.ki bár.sipa.ki; see Lieberman, ibid., 211 n. 263). See also K. 75+ (see Lieberman, ibid., 211 n. 265; Hunger, Kolophone, 94 no. 305; transliteration according to the original tablet) rev. 22: ki-i p[i-i x x x x gaba.ri tin.ti]r.ki šá mdag-ùru-ir dumu mdé-a-pat-ta-ni lú.tin.tir. ki-i, “(he wrote) according to the te[xt of. . . , an exemplar from Baby]lon belonging to (lit., of) Nabû-nāṣir son of Ea-pattani, the Babylonian.” 49.  See Rochberg-Halton, AfO Beih. 22, 175–216 source S. 50. K. 3561 (+) 6141b rev.  58: [ki-i pi-i giš.li].u5.um šá mu 11.kam dim-⸢dumu.nita⸣-sum-n[a lugal ká.dingir.ra.ki . . .], see Rochberg-Halton, AfO Beih. 22, 216 (source S). 51.  Both series have been reedited by Esagil-kīn-apli, who was a contemporary of Adad-apla-iddina, see Irving L. Finkel, “Adad-apla-iddina, Esagil-kīn-apli, and the Series SA.GIG,” in A Scientific Humanist: Studies in Memory of Abraham Sachs (ed. E. Leichty et al.; Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 9; Philadelphia: Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 1988) 143–59; and Nils P. Heeßel, Babylonisch-assyrische Diagnostik (AOAT 43; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2000) 13–17, 104–10. 52.  See Rochberg-Halton, AfO Beih. 22, 216 textual note 4.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise Local Distribution

117

Assyria and Babylonia

Date of the copies of the series EAE

Late 8th until 1st century b.c.e. (NA, NB, and LB periods)

Date of commentaries to EAE

7th until 3rd century b.c.e. (NA, NB, and LB periods)

Origin of the series

Babylonia, most probably Babylon (or Borsippa)

Earliest copy naming the title EAE

718 b.c.e. (eponym of Zēru-ibni); EAE 6 (K. 5281 = AAT 12c) written by Nabû-zuqup-kēnu from Kalḫu

Earliest date of one of the sub-series of EAE

709 b.c.e. (eponym of Mannu-kī-Aššur-lē’i); rikis gerri EAE 6 (K. 5280 = AAT 12b) written by Nabû-zuqup-kēnu from Kalḫu

Date of compiling the series

Before the 8th century b.c.e.

Standardization

Only loosely; the sequence of omens was standardised but not the number of omens; the “master text” rather provided a pool of omens, from which omens were selected → several recensions existed

Figure 3.  The series enūma anu enlil.

section. It was written by Nabû-zuqup-kēnu, son of Marduk-šuma-iqiša, a descendant of Gabbi-ilāni-ēreš, the Assyrian scholar from Kalḫu, who dated it to the reign of Sargon II (721–705 b.c.e.), in the eponym of Zēru-ibni (718 b.c.e.). 53 There must have been earlier copies of EAE from the late second or the early first millennium b.c.e., since even the earliest copies of various sub-series of EAE are dated shortly afterward. K. 5280 (AAT 12b) is a tablet from rikis gerri EAE, the sub-series of EAE, apparently meaning “the structure of the ‘path’ 54 of EAE” or “the outline of the way through EAE,” 55 is dated to 709 b.c.e. It is a copy of the sixth tablet of rikis gerri EAE with omens from the lunar section. It was found at Nineveh, also written by Nabû-zuqup-kēnu, and dated by him to the eponym of Mannu-kī-Aššur-lē’i, governor of Tille. 56 The earliest copies of tablets from the commentary series šumma sîn 53.  K. 5281 rev. 3′–7′ (collated): dub 6.kam* diš  ud an den-líl x[. . .] (4′) ṭup-pi mdag-zu-qu-up-[gi.na lú.dub.sar dumu mdamar.utu-mu-ba-ša dub.sar] (5′) šà.bal.bal mgab-bi-dingir.meš-n[i-kam-eš lú.gal dub.sar uru.ka-làḫ] (6′) ⸢itu.šu ud.22.kam*⸣ li-mu mnu[mun-dù lú.šá-kìn uru.ra-ṣa-pa] (7′) [mu 4.kam mlugal]-gi.na egir-[ú man kur.aš-šur ki] “6th tablet of enūma anu enlil x[. . .]. (4′) Tablet of Nabû-zuqup-[kēnu, scribe, son of Marduk-šuma-iqiša, scribe], (5′) descendent of Gabbi-ilān[i-ēreš, chief scribe. Kalḫu], (6′) month duʾuzu, day 22, eponym of Zē[ru-ibni, governor of Raṣapa]. (7′) [Year 4 of Šarru]-kīn, the lat[er (one), king of the land of Assur].” For the eponym see Alan Millard, The Eponyms of the Assyrian Empire (State Archives of Assyria Studies 2; Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1994) 125. 54.  ‘Path’ in this case has nothing to do with the three paths into which the Ancient Near Eastern astronomers divided the sky; for these, see below, p. 125 and n. 96. 55. For this sub-series, see Jeanette C. Fincke, “The Seventh Tablet of the rikis gerri series of enūma anu enlil,” JCS 66 (2014) 129–48. Nabû-zuqup-kēnu copied another tablet from this sub-series, AAT 73d (K. 3163), dated to 701 b.c.e. (eponym of Ḫanānu, governor of Til-barsip) of which the serial tablet number is lost; for the colophon see Fincke, JCS 66, 131–32. 56.  For the colophon, see Fincke, JCS 66, 132–33 colophon B. For the eponym see Millard, Eponyms, 99.

118

Jeanette C. Fincke

ina tāmartī-šu were also made by Nabû-zuqup-kēnu from originals from Babylon; but unfortunately he never dated those tablets.  57 The same is true for the mukallimtu-series of EAE. 58 But the commentaries labelled ṣâtu and mukallimtu to EAE  59 found at Nineveh were written in perfect Neo-Assyrian or Neo-Babylonian ductus, proving that they are later than the Nabû-zuqup-kēnu tablets. Records of celestial phenomena as ominous signs were being made for a long time in both Assyria and Babylonia, with individual scholars possessing their own tablet collections, 60 showing preferences for their own interpretations. 61 This was still the case in the early seventh century b.c.e., when the series EAE was already established and the palace library at the king’s residence in Nineveh was in the process of establishing its own collection of religious and divinatory texts. Around 670 b.c.e., the scholar and exorcist Adad-šuma-uṣur wrote to king Esarhaddon (680–669 b.c.e.) in Nineveh apologising for his late reply because the king’s request had arrived while he was at the royal palace completing his orders. Only later was he able to access his library at home in order to look up the requested details. 62 Although the information the king had requested in this case related to a ritual and not to the interpretation of ominous signs, his letter indicates that scholars at Nineveh had their own specialised private libraries. Tracing information from one’s own manuscripts was easier than trying to find it in the relevant tablets in libraries organised by others may have prompted scholars continued to maintain their private libraries.

57.  K. 2024+10893 and K. 2171+Sm. 780, both copies of this sub-series’ first tablet. For this subseries see Rykle Borger, “Keilschrifttexte verschiedenen Inhalts. I Der astrologische Text LB 1321,” in Symbolae biblicae et mesopotmaicae Francisco Mario Theodoro de Liagre Böhl dedicatae (ed. A. Beek et al; Leiden: Brill, 1973) 36–43; Ulla Koch-Westenholz, “The Astrological Commentary šumma sîn ina tāmartīšu tablet 1,” Res Orientales 12 (1999) 149–65; Erlend Gehlken, “Die Serie DIŠ Sîn ina tāmartīšu im Überblick,” N.A.B.U. 2007, 3–5 no. 4; and Eckart Frahm, Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries: Origins of Interpretation (Guides to the Mesopotamian Textual Record 5; Münster: Ugarit Verlag, 2011) 155–60. 58.  See Frahm, Commentaries, 133, 155–66, esp. 155–63. 59.  See Frahm, Commentaries, 133–55. 60.  An overview on Assyrian and Babylonian private, palace and temple libraries from the middle of the second until the late first millennium b.c.e. gives Olof Pedersén, Archives and Libraries in the Ancient Near East 1500–300 b.c. (Bethesda, MD: CDL, 1989). For the libraries scribal families and officials living in the Assyrian religious centre Assur have established in their private houses during the NeoAssyrian period, see Olof Pedersén, Archives and Libraries in the City of Assur. A Survey of the Material from the German Excavations Part II (Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Semitica Upsaliensia 8; Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksel, 1986) 29–74 (N 2–4) and 81–85 (N 6–8). For libraries of private families in the Babylonian capital Babylon dating from the Old until the Neo-Babylonian periods, see Olof Pedersén, Archive und Bibliotheken in Babylon. Die Tontafeln der Grabung Robert Koldeweys 1899–1917 (Abhandlungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 25; Saarbrücken: Saarländische Druckerei und Verlag, 2005) 19–37 (A1), 63–5 (A7), 72–82 (M1–4), 93–101 (M8), 192–202 (N9–10), 247–72 (N15), 276–83 (N18–19) [A = Old Babylonian; M = Middle Babylonian, N = Neo-Babylonian]. 61.  See, e.g., the arrangement of protases and apodoses in case of short omens that can be written in two columns with an area of blank space between them (e.g., K. 7941 [AAT 61 = ACh Adad 9]) or, whenever possible, in continuous lines by which two omens are written in the same line, separated by a double or triple Glossenkeil (e.g. K. 2236+2891 rev. 7′–10′ [AAT 28 = ACh Shamash 10]) in order to provide a justified layout and an even type face. 62.  Sm. 1368 (Parpola, Letters [SAA 10], 163–64 no. 202) obv. 8–12: ina šà é.gal . . . (9) . . . ú-še-ṣaan-ni (10) giš.zu ina é šú-u (11) ú-ma-a an-nu-rig giš.zu (12) a-mar pi!-šìr-šu a-na-sa-ḫa, “I had to drive to the palace. . . , and the writing board was in my house. Now then, I can look at the writing board and extract the relevant interpretation.”

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

119

Since each scholar had already developed his own way of recording omens, as independent experts they did not accept the new series EAE as a canonical text to be adhered to word by word 63 following the format and layout of a given tablet (see fig. 3). They rather took EAE to be a standardised set of omens, a kind of master text, from which they could select and follow the same sequence. 64 Alternative predictions could be added to the existing apodoses as variants. In this way the scholars did not essentially change the omens but extended them. Consequently, we find various recensions of this omen series on tablets from both Assyria and Babylonia, some of which vary in the wording of the protases. Furthermore, Assyrian scholars seem to have developed a preference for using the different recensions, as can be seen from the section of lunar eclipse omens in EAE 20. 65 Even so, tablets from the series EAE were copied by both Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian and Late Babylonian scholars. The latest datable tablet with celestial omens that can be associated with EAE (diš  te, “If star x . . .”) was written in year 179 of the Seleucid era (133 b.c.e.). 66 The latest datable commentary to EAE, a commentary on the lunar eclipse tablet EAE 20 of the type ṣâtu u šūt pî malsût iškari ša enūma anu enlil, “ṣâtu (i.e., commented words) and commentary, reading from the series of EAE” (rev. 9′) was written by Tanitti-Anu, son of Anu-balāssu-iqbi from the Aḫu’utu family in Uruk in year 80 of the Seleucid era (232 b.c.e.). 67 63. For standardization of Mesopotamian divinatory series see in general Francesca RochbergHalton, “Canonicity in Cuneiform Texts,” JCS 36 (1984) 127–44, and Stephen J. Lieberman, “Canonical and Official Cuneiform Texts: Toward an Understanding of Assurbanipal’s Personal Tablet Collection,” in Lingering over Words. Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of William L. Moran (ed. T. Abush, J. Huehnergard and P. Steinkeller; Harvard Semitic Studies 37; Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1990) 305–36. For EAE see Ernst F. Weidner, “Die astrologische Serie Enûma Anu Enlil,” AfO 14 (1941– 44) 175–84; Weidner expects a serialization during the second half of the second or the beginning of the first millennium b.c.e. (p. 176). See also Francesca Rochberg, “Continuity and Change in Omen Literature,” in Munuscula Mesopotamica. Festschrift für Johannes Renger (ed. B. Böck, E. Cancik-Kirschbaum and Th. Richter; AOAT 267; Münster: Ugarit Verlag 1999) 416–19; F. Rochberg, In the Path of the Moon. Babylonian Celestial Divination and its Legacy (Studies in Ancient Magic and Divination 6; Leiden: Brill, 2010) 55–83; and Erlend Gehlken, Weather Omens of Enūma Anu Enlil. Thunderstorms, Wind and Rain (Tablets 44– 49) (Cuneiform Monographs 43; Leiden: Brill, 2012) 1, who believes the “ ‘final’ editing of EAE was conducted in the seventh century b.c.” For the serialization of the diagnostic omen series SA.GIG see Finkel, Sachs Memorial Volume, and Heeßel, AOAT 43, 104–09. For the bārûtu series on extispicy see Ulla Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy. Omen Texts in the British Museum (PIHANS 64; Istanbul • Leiden: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut, 1989) 8–14; U. Jeyes, “Assurbanipal’s bārûtu,” in Assyrien im Wandel der Zeiten. XXXIXe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Heidelberg 6.–10. Juli 1992 (ed. H. Waetzoldt and H. Hauptmann; Heidelberger Studien zum Alten Orient Band 6; Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag, 1997) 61–65; and Ulla Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens. The Chapters manzāzu, padānu and pān tākalti of the Babylonian Extispicy Series Mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library (CNI Publications 25; Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 2000) 11–31. 64.  See Jeanette C. Fincke, “The Solar Eclipse Omen Texts from enūma anu enlil,” BiOr 70.5–6 (2013) 582–608. 65.  Recension A seems to have been predominantly transmitted in Assyria, while recension B is attested also in Neo- and Late Babylonian tablets, see Rochberg-Halton, AfO Beih. 22, 174–229. 66.  BM 45715 (unpublished) rev.  16′–18′: . . . itu.⸢gán⸣ ud.⸢5?⸣.kam mu 1-me (17′) 15.kam šá ši-i mu 1-me 79.kam (18′) mar-šá-ka-a-⸢kám⸣ (19′) ⸢lugal⸣ kur.kur.meš, “. . . Month kisīmu, day 5, year 115, which is year 179, of Aršaka, king of the countries.” Year 179 of the Seleucid era = year 115 of the Arsacid era; see Parker and Dubberstein, Babylonian Chronology, 42. 67.  AfO 14, pl. VI (VAT 7825) rev. 16′: unug.ki itu.gud ud.3.kam mu 80.kam msi-lu-ku lugal, “Uruk, month ajjaru, day 3, year 80 of Seleucus, king.” See F. Rochberg-Halton, AfO Beih. 22, 227–28, and Frahm, Commentaries, 45.

120

Jeanette C. Fincke

Some Distinctive Features of the Series EAE It is generally thought that the series EAE was compiled as part of the process of establishing canonical versions of standard literary works in the last third of the second millennium b.c.e. 68 This may well be so, and some peculiarities of the series suggest that literary and religious considerations more than astronomical reflections underlie its primary compilation (see fig. 4). 1. The title of the series enūma anu enlil, “when Anu (and) Enlil,” the first words of the series, embodies the names of the two highest gods of the Sumerian pantheon that were attested already in the Fāra texts (fourth millennium b.c.e.). Enlil is Anu’s first-born son, the supreme god of the Sumerian pantheon, and both represent primary aspects of the universe: Anu, Sumerian da n , represents heaven or the sky, and Enlil, Sumerian de n - l í l , “lord of the wind,” represents the atmosphere. One covers the sphere of celestial activity and the other of meteorological phenomena of the series EAE. The Sumerian version of the mythological introduction to the series names the god e n - k i directly after Enlil: “When Anu, Enlil and Ea, the great gods, by their decision established the eternal order of heaven and earth and the boat of Suen [i.e., Sîn, the “Moon”], the new moon to wax. . .” 69 Ea, Sumerian de n - k i , “lord of the below (or: earth),” is the god of wisdom, who has proved himself a friend for the people on earth in many myths. 70 According to two myths, he was the one who created humankind (enūma eliš) or ordered its creation (Enki and Ninmaḫ). 71 Anu – Enlil – Enki form the supreme triad in the Sumerian pantheon and were accepted as such also in various Akkadian panthea. → The people of the second and the first millennium b.c.e. knew the functions of these gods, so there was no need to change the title of the traditional introduction of the series.

2.  The sequence of the chapters, moon (Sîn) – sun (Šamaš) – weather (Adad) – planets and stars (Ištar), is based on the Babylonian pantheon as described, for example, in the creation myth enūma eliš. 72 The omens on the moon precede those on the sun because Sîn, Sumerian dn a n n a , was a grandson of Anu, the heaven, and the father of Šamaš, Sumerian du t u . The chapter on weather includes phenomena 68.  The 12th and 11th centuries b.c.e. seem to have been a turning point in the tradition of literary works. A process of establishing standard versions of well-known literary works can be observed: Sînleqe-unnini, who established the standard version of the Babylonian epic of Gilgamesh, is believed to have lived between the 13th and 11th century in Uruk; see Wilfred G. Lambert, “Ancestors, Authors, and Canonicity,“ JCS 11 (1957) 1–14, esp. 4. 69.  So according to the version in the Sumerian of the post-Old Babylonian period; the translation is taken from Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 77, where both the Akkadian and Sumerian versions can be found. 70.  See, e.g., Samuel N. Kramer and John Maier, Myths of Enki, the Crafty God (New York: Oxford University, 1989). 71.  See, e.g., Wilfred G. Lambert, Babylonian Creation Myths (Mesopotamian Civilizations 16; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2013) 3–144 (enūma eliš), 330–45 (Enki and Ninmaḫ); Thomas R. Kämmerer and Kai A. Metzler, Das babylonische Weltschöpfungsepos Enūma eliš (AOAT 375; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2012); Carlos A. Benito, “Enki and Ninmaḫ” and “Enki and the World Order” (Ph.D. dissertation; Pennsylvania, 1969) 20–76; and S. N. Kramer and J. Maier, Myths of Enki, 31–37, 211–15; each with further bibliography. 72.  For bibliography, see previous footnote.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

Content related features

Literary features

Features

Examples

Background

121

Scholarly counteraction

Name of the series: enūma anu enlil

Anu, i.e., the sky, and Babylonian Enlil, i.e., the wind or the pantheon Earth’s atmosphere

–––

Sequence of chapters

Moon (Sîn) – sun (Šamaš) Babylonian – weather (Adad) – plan- pantheon ets and stars (Ištar)

–––

Supposed origin of the Ea, the god of wisdom series (NA evidence)

Religious belief

–––

Apodoses predict the future

“. . . , the king will die”

Divinatory conventions

–––

Phenomena that cannot occur in reality

E.g., constellations approaching each other

Religious belief

Text commentaries re­ interpret one or both of the constellations as a planet

(Fixed) sequence of colours

White – black – red – yellow/green

Divinatory conventions

Text commentaries reinterpret some of the colors

Exaggeration

E.g., 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 solar discs rise

Divinatory conventions

––

Figure 4.  The series enūma anu enlil – (some) literary and religious features.

in the Earth’s atmosphere with omens connected with the storm god Adad, Sumerian di š k u r , another son of Anu. The planets and the stars represent the younger generation of gods. Ištar, represented by Venus, is a daughter of Šamaš. But Marduk, represented by Jupiter, rose to become the supreme god of the Babylonian pantheon in the first millennium b.c.e. Before that he was a much younger god and had no major role in the series. It is obvious that the sequence of chapter subjects does not strictly correspond to the family tree of the gods they represent. That Sîn and Šamaš are supreme is certainly based on the sun and the moon controlling the times of day and night, the length of the months and the seasons of the year. → This structure for the series became an accepted standard needing no change.

3.  According to a Neo-Assyrian catalogue of texts and their authors, 73 it was Ea the god of wisdom (Sumerian den-ki) who handed down EAE to the people, implying that those rules for divination had divine authority. Moreover, it endorsed Ea’s character as a friend (or even the creator) of human beings, helping them to survive attacks from other gods documented in various myths (see above). → It is in only one catalogue, from the Neo-Assyrian period, that Ea was thus invoved. Perhaps by not mentioning this fact it was one that was taken for granted.

4.  The sentence in the series EAE follows the traditional formulation for omens, stating phenomena and interpretations as protases and apodoses. Far more people could notice events than there were experts able to interpret them correctly, and the predictions refer to the whole country, economically and politically, with the king as 73.  Wilfred G. Lambert, “A Catalogue of Texts and Authors,” JCS 16 (1962) 59–77; see especially 64 text I) K. 2248 lines 1–4.

122

Jeanette C. Fincke

its representative. 74 Examples include “the high water in the spring(s) will be diminished, and the country will experience famine” (mīlu ina nagbi imaṭṭi-ma mātu ḫušaḫḫa immar) 75 or “the king will die” (šarru imât). → The formulation of omen sentences was well established and needed no change.

Not only literary and religious features, but also the content of celestial and meteorological phenomena described in EAE are different from pure astronomical descriptions (see fig. 4). 5.  The compilers apparently included in the series any omen they found, regardless of whether or not the phenomenon ever did or even could happen. We have already noted that constellations were first considered to be gods moving at will across the sky. From time to time, they approached each other, as planets do, and such situations are described as significant: e.g., “[If] the constellation šu.pa (i.e., Boötes) approaches the ‘Bull of Heaven’ (i.e., Taurus)” 76 or “If the ‘Stars’ (i.e., the Pleiades) come near the ‘Yoke’ (i.e., Boötes).” 77 But similar omens in the second tablet of the commentary series šumma sîn ina tāmartī-šu are given a different interpretation: 78 “If the ‘Bow’ comes near the ‘Eagle’, the sesame (in the field) will not be good. (This means): Mars comes near the ‘Stars’ (i.e., the Plejades) and [. . .]” and “If the ‘She-Goat’ (i.e., Lyra ?) comes near the ‘Wolf ’ (i.e., α Trianguli), in that year (there will be) epidemic among livestock. (This means) Venus comes near Mars and . . .” → The impossibility of any free movement of constellations was already acknowledged by Neo-Assyrian scholars, so in their commentaries they glossed the data in the text to make it credible, in this case by taking the name of a constellations as a synonym for a planet.

6.  Similar impossibilities can be seen in the more-or-less fixed sequence of colors, white – black – red – yellow/green, given to phenomena observed in more than one color. Such impossibilities can be seen in the description of the sun (van Soldt, Solar Omens, 72 omens I 18–23) and of clouds (van Soldt, Solar Omens, 84 Cb 4–8). → The given sequence of colors was based on divinatory conventions, and some in fact can never occur in a given context, requiring some reinterpretation in commentaries.

7.  Other impossible phenomena recorded in EAE include 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 sun discs rising at the same time (van Soldt, Solar Omens, 30–32 omens III 33–44, 45–50) were recorded in EAE. 79 → Some unrealistic phenomena were ignored in the text commentaries.

74.  S. M. Maul, “Omina und Orakel,” 49–50. 75.  K. 6243+ (Fincke, JCS 66, 139, 142) i 23: . . . illu ina idim lá-ma kur su.gu7 igi-ma[r]. 76.  K. 2329 obv. 2 (AAT 91 = ACh Ishtar 30): [diš m]ul.šu.pa a-na mul.gu4.an.na te. 77.  K. 3780 (ACh 2 Suppl. 78) ii 12: diš mul.mul mul.šudun kur-ud. 78.  LB 1321 rev. 12′: diš mul.ban ana mul.á.mušen kur-ud še.giš.ì nu sig5 : mul.ṣal-bat-a-nu mul.zaap-pa kur-ma [. . .], and rev. 16′: diš mul.úz mul.ur.bar.ra kur-ud ina mu bi šub-tì bu-lim | mul.dil-bat mul. ṣa-bat-a-nu kur-ma, see Borger, in Symbolae biblicae et mesopotamicae, 41. 79.  See also the same sequence given for the number of thunders that Adad throws; see Gehlken, Weather Omens, 18–19 omens 21–27.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

123

Actual Events in the Series EAE Notwithstanding the religious and literary features that undoubtedly shaped the series EAE, the core of the phenomena described comes from real observations. This can be illustrated from observations of the sun and the moon. [šumma šamaš ippuḫ-m]a ṣētu kaṣât, 80 “[If the sun rises a]nd its light is cold.” [šumma šamaš ippuḫ-m]a ṣēt-su arqat, 81 “[If the sun rises a]nd its light is yellow.” šumma nipiḫ šamši kīma išāti sā[m], 82 “If the sunrise is as re[d] as fire.”

The intensities of sunlight at sunrise vary by the seasons. šumma šamšatu ša ginâ pānū-ša qab[la katmū], 83 “If the face of a normal solar disk is covered in the middle.”

This refers to an annular solar eclipse. From earth, the moon obscures the center of the sun disc, so that it looks like a very bright yellowish-red ring around the dark moon. šumma ina araḫ simāni ud.14.kam antalû iškun-ma ilu ina nandurī-šu idi šadê eliš adir-ma [idi amurri šapliš izku], 84 “If a lunar eclipse occurs on the 14th of month simānu, and the god, in his eclipse, becomes dark on the side east above, and [clears toward (lit., on) the west side below].”

During a lunar eclipse, the shadow of the earth moves across the moon because of its rotation approximately from east to west. The movement varies from northeast to southwest and southeast to northwest, depending on the angle of earth’s axis. This omen specifies the direction. Scientific observations seem to underlie this omen series, and later conjectural phenomena based on intellectual speculations were added to conform with religious and literary conventions (see above and fig. 4). The belief in the reliability of traditional omens encouraged scholarly attempts to supplement the series with imaginable variations and so produce as complete a sequence as possible. Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish real events from invented ones because the omen series EAE uses astronomical scientific terminology. The meaning of many of the protases remains unclear. In the past, these were supposed to be fictional, but more and more now turn out to be descriptions of real events. We have, for example, a sequence of altogether 80 omens, including the phrase “a star changes into . . .” (diš mul ina . . . gur). It may change into some animal or object. 85 These omens have long been thought to describe dreams, but they are now seen as descriptions of meteorites. What we know as “falling stars” change shape as they head toward the earth and 80.  EAE 27 (28) II 1: [diš 20 kur-m]a ud.da ka-ṣa-át; see Fincke, KASKAL 11, 123. 81.  EAE 27 (28) II 3: [diš 20 kur-m]a ⸢ud.da⸣-su sig7; see van Soldt, Solar Omens, 86, and Fincke, KASKAL 11, 124. 82.  EAE 26 (27) I 44: diš kur man gim izi s[a5]; see van Soldt, Solar Omens, 74. 83.  EAE 24 (25) I 1a: diš ⸢aš.me šá⸣ gi-na-a igi.meš-šá mur[ub4 katmū. . .], see also omen 1; see Fincke, KASKAL 11, 10, 111. 84.  EAE 20 III rec. B 1–2: diš ina itu.sig4 ud.14.kam an.ge6 gar-ma dingir ina ka×mi-šú á im.kur.ra an.ta ka×mi-ma (2) [á im.mar.tu ki.ta iz-ku] ; see Rochberg-Halton, AfO Beih. 22, 191. 85.  Jeanette C. Fincke, “ ‘If a star changes into ashes . . .’ A sequence of unusual celestial omens,” Iraq 75 (2013) 171–96.

124

Jeanette C. Fincke

impact the ground. This becomes clear by comparing some of the omen descriptions with the images of actual meteorites. 86 Other omens not understood at present may well turn out to be descriptions of actual events after more texts describing celestial and meteorological phenomena are published. There are far less fictional omens than was previously thought, meaning that we may take the series EAE not only to be a handbook for divination, but also a catalogue of celestial and meteorological observations.

The Rationale behind and Limitations of EAE and Other Omen Series The series EAE was an attempt to understand particular phenomena as processes of the natural world and to describe them as comprehensively as possible. Like all the other Ancient Near Eastern omen series, it marks the end of a long process that began much, much earlier. The Early Dynastic lexical lists from Uruk, Fāra, and Tell Abū Ṣalābīḫ 87 from the fourth millennium b.c.e. aimed to establish a universal writing system that could be used even in far distant regions of Mesopotamia. Their encyclopaedic character displays the concept of defining physical objects and day-to-day activities by fixing names for them. This concept was then developed by adding lexemes not only for the items and processes of every-day-life but also for more abstract phenomena and ideas. This we see in the list ḪAR-ra : ḫubullu, 88 which itemizes diseases 89 among many other items. The various omen series such as the lexical lists develop a theme more or less systematically, despite the different ways in which the data is presented. 90 These texts aim to provide a comprehensive description of items of a specific genre to be a tool to be used like a dictionary or concise encyclopaedia. As with other ancient Near Eastern literature, a proper understanding of the texts assumes knowledge that is not given on the tablet itself but could be found elsewhere or had been transmitted orally. 91 The reader is given the most obvious aspects of the texts to grasp, but the overall context and specific terminology is taken for granted. Scholars of the first millennium b.c.e. tried to overcome the lexical obstacles by producing commentaries on the texts. 92 But more was 86.  See the examples pictured in Fincke, Iraq 75. 87.  See, e.g., the overview given by Manfred Krebernik, “Die Texte aus Fāra und Tell Abū Ṣalābīḫ,” in Mesopotamien: Späturuk-Zeit und Frühdynastische Zeit, Annährungen 1 (ed. J. Bauer, R. K. Englund, and M. Krebernik; Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 160/1; Freiburg: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1998) 315–17. 88.  See the edition in various volumes of the series MSL. 89.  See, e.g., the first edition by Benno Landsberger in MSL IX, 77–109. 90.  I disagree with the characterization of lexical lists and omen series as Listenwissenschaft. The presentation of the data does not follow the type of a list or roster but tries to use an arrangement as clear as possible by beginning each new entry in a new line. The marker of each new entry with a vertical wedge in lexical lists and with various logograms, among which also a vertical wedge can be found, in omen texts (for these see Fincke, JEOL 40, 131–39) cannot be interpreted as indication of a list. 91.  That tablets of various kinds that do not seem to belong to the same ritual at first sight in fact are part of the same ceremony but simply show various aspects of the procedure has been shown by Stefan M. Maul for the ritual nam.érim.búr.ru.da; see S. M. Maul, “Die ‘Lösung vom Bann’: Überlegungen zu altorientalischen Konzeptionen von Krankheit und Heilkunst,” in Magic and Rationality in Ancient Near Eastern and Graeco-Roman Medicine (ed. H. F. J. Horstmanshoff and M. Stol; Leiden: Brill, 2004) 79–95. See also Fincke, BiOr 66, 546–47. 92.  See Frahm, Commentaries.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

125

conveyed orally, as shown by a colophons such as “an initiate may show it to another initiate; the uninitiated may not see it!” (mūdû mūdâ likallim lā mūdû ay īmur).

From Celestial and Meteorological Omens to Astronomical Texts during the Neo-Assyrian Period In the Neo-Assyrian period, from the beginning of the first millennium until 612 there were three comprehensive scholarly compositions about omens derived from observation of the stars apart from celestial and meteorological omen texts and the series EAE: The Astrolabes (I), MUL.APIN (II) and the Great Star-List (III). We find quotations from most of these series in the so-called Astrological Reports (IV) of the Neo-Assyrian period. A brief description of these texts is given below, an overview in fig. 5 at the end of this section. I.  There are two formats for the so-called Astrolabes. 93 The older types are written on library tablets and can be called List-Astrolabes. Since no canonical version was established for this type of astrolabe, I will outline the content of Astrolabe B (KAV 218), the oldest version attested. This famous Middle Assyrian version from Assur was written in the 12th century b.c.e. by the Babylonian scholar Marduk-balāssu-ēreš in Assur. It consists of five parts. The first part is a bilingual (Sumerian–Akkadian) menology, in which for every month, including an intercalary month, the associated star(s), rituals, god(s), and agricultural and pastoral activities associated with it are named. 94 Of the following three parts, one lists the stars to be seen in the conventional sections of the night sky as well as some specific stars for each month. 95 The second identifies the three “paths” (kaskal, Akkadian: ḫarrānu) or bands into which the visible sky is divided from east to west (the names from north to south are: Enlil – Anu – Ea) 96 by describing the exact location of the 12 most important stars and constellations of each of the “paths” in relation to each other. 97 The third part gives a list of 36 stars, one for each of the three heavenly b.c.e.,

93. See Wayne Horowitz, “The Astrolabes: Astronomy, Theology, and Chronology,” in Calendars and Years: Astronomy and Time Keeping in the Ancient Near East (ed. J. M. Steele; Oxford: Oxbow, 2007) 101–13. For the Astrolabe B see Maria C. Casaburi, Tre-stelle-per-ciscum(-mese): L’Astrolabio B: edizione filologica (Annali 93; Napoli: Università degli studi Napoli “L’Orientale,” 2003). See also the new edition this series by W. Horowitz, The Three Stars Each: The Astrolabes and Related Texts (Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 33; Vienna: Institut für Orientalistik der Universität Wien, 2014). 94.  See the transliteration of this part given by Erica Reiner and David Pingree, Babylonian Planetary Omens Part Two: enūma anu enlil, Tablets 50–51 (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 2/2. Malibu: Undena, 1981) 81–82. 95.  See Ernst F. Weidner, Handbuch der babylonischen Astronomie (Leipzig: Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1915) 67–84 (part two), 66–68 (part three). 96. First identified by Johann Schaumberger, Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel: Assyriologische, astronomische und astralmythologische Untersuchungen, 3. Ergänzungsheft zum ersten und zweiten Buch (Münster: Aschendorffsche, 1935) 321–22: he calculated the path of Anu as altogether 33° spreading equally north and south of the celestial equator. This means 17° declination north and south of the equator is the border between the paths; see Christopher B. F. Walker and Hermann Hunger, “Zwölfmaldrei,” MDOG 109 (1977) 33. See also Johannes Koch, Neue Untersuchungen zur Topographie des babylonischen Fixsternhimmels (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1989) 14–22. For calculated declinations of stars in Astrolabe B, see Reiner and Pingree, BPO Part 2, 4–5, and Koch, Fixsternhimmel, 14–15. 97.  See Weidner, Handbuch, 67–84.

126

Jeanette C. Fincke

paths for each month. 98 This list is the core of the Astrolabe text; it is called “three stars each” (mul.meš 3.ta.àm) in Assyrian sources; there is also a circular format of this list to be discussed below. 99 The fourth part gives the stars that rise and set in each month, a list of 24 stars. A Kassite tablet contains one of these star lists, and the Kassite period possibly is when that list originated, some time during the second half of the second millennium b.c.e. The second format is known as Circular Astrolabes. The two we have are NeoAssyrian copies, both in a very fragmentary state of preservation. 100 The older version was produced in the late eighth or very early seventh century b.c.e. by Nabûzuqup-kēnu, the famous scholar from Kalḫu. 101 These Circular Astrolabes present the data of the star lists that give the heliacal rising of stars in each of the three heavenly paths for each of the twelve months. The circle is divided into 12 sections, each representing one month. 102 The Astrolabes mirror the concept of the sky on Tablet V of the creation myth enūma eliš, with its references to three heavenly “paths” of Anu, Enlil, and Ea, the positions of the constellations, three heliacal rising stars for each month, and the phases of the moon in relation to the sun. It is generally believed that the text of enūma eliš was established around 1100 b.c.e., and it is likely that EAE was composed around the same time. This corresponds with a 12th-century date for Astrolabe B, the version from Assur mentioned (see above). The latest copy of an Astrolabe (BM 55502) was written in Babylon in Late Babylonian 103 or, more precisely, Hellenistic ductus 104 and therefore is to be dated between 331 and 309 b.c.e. II. The series MUL.APIN 105 has sections for different features of the sky at different times of the year. It lists the stars of the three heavenly paths, the days for heliacal risings and settings of stars for each month, and the stars that rise and culminate at the meridian simultaneously in the morning. It also provides intercalation schemes and gives a shadow-table of the days and nights for the first of each month. Omens appear only toward the end of the second tablet (about two-thirds of column iii and column iv). It is an objective, scientific description of the stars 98.  See Franz X. Kugler, Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel: Assyriologische, astronomische und astralmythologische Untersuchungen (Münster: Aschendorffsche, 1907) 228–58; Weidner, Handbuch, 66–68. 99.  See the report written by Ištar-šumu-ēreš to king Esarhaddon or Ashurbanipal, asking him to inspect the tablets of the series EAE that they had copied. Then he asked the king for a prototype of the “three stars each” for copying them for the royal libraries, 83-1-18, 223 (Hunger, Astrological Reports [SAA 8], 13 no. 19) rev. 4–7: ù giš.le-ʾu ak-ka-du-u (5) ša lugal lid-di-nu-na-ši (6) mul.meš 3-ta.àm ina pu-u-ti (7) ina šà-bi le-ṣi-ru, “And let them give us the Akkadian tablet of the king; the ‘Stars, three each’ should be drawn according (to its prototype) onto it.” See already Albrecht Schott, “Das Werden der babylonisch-assyrischen Positions-Astronomie und einige seiner Bedingungen,” ZDMG 88 (1934) 311 with n. 2; see also Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, Part II (AOAT 5/2; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1983) 333–34, commentary to rev. 6 of text 319. 100. K. 14943+81-7-27, 94 (CT 33 pl. 12) and 83-1-18, 608 (CT 33 pl. 12) are fragments of the younger version. 101.  Sm. 162 (CT 33 pl. 11). For the colophons, see Hunger, Kolophone, 95 no. 308. 102.  See the first detailed study by Weidner, Handbuch, 69–76. 103.  Joachim Oelsner and Wayne Horowitz, “The 30-Star-Catalogue HS 1897 and The Late Parallel BM 55502,” AfO 44/45 (1998) 176–85. 104.  Horowitz in Calendars and Years, 103. 105.  See the edition of this series by Hermann Hunger and David Pingree, MUL.APIN: An Astronomical Compendium in Cuneiform (AfO Beiheft 24; Horn: Ferdinand Berger & Söhne, 1989).

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

127

to be seen in the sky, and the intercalation scheme and the lengths of days and nights during the year allow it commonly to be considered as an “astronomical compendium.” According to the data provided, the series must have been established around 1000 b.c.e. in Assyria. 106 The latest copy of this composition has been dated by its scribe, a descendant of Mušēzib, to one of the kings called Seleucus, which means after 312 b.c.e. 107 III.  The so-called Great Star List (K. 250+ and duplicates) 108 lists the names of stars and their synonyms or divine equivalents, with explanations of other astronomical terms and even some omens. None of the copies known to date have a colophon to give us the ancient name of this composition. From what is preserved, however, the Great Star List can be classified as a kind of commentary in list form on astronomical texts of various kinds. In outline, it corresponds to ṣâtucommentaries. 109 Since the astronomer Munabbitu seems to have quoted data from this list in his report to King Esarhaddon on the lunar eclipse on the 22nd of May 678 b.c.e., 110 the Great Star list was probably compiled earlier, unless Munabbitu quoted from a text that was a forerunner. Certainly it was copied during the Late Babylonian period. 111 IV.  Another group of texts describing celestial and meteorological phenomena is closely related to EAE inasmuch as it consists of extracts from this series together with quotations from MUL.APIN and the Great Star List. What are known as the Astrological Reports were sent from various scholars and astronomers to the kings Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal 112 as part of their duties of “keeping the king’s watch” (maṣṣartu ša šarri naṣāru) 113. Contemporary texts refer to them as “landscape shaped tablets of the ṭupšar EAE” or “reports of the scribes of EAE” (uʾilāti 106.  Hunger and Pingree, MUL.APIN, 10–2. 107. BM 32311, see Hunger and Pingree, MUL.APIN, 5, 9, plate IV. Seleucus I (312–292 b.c.e.) established the Seleucid Empire. The other kings with this name were Seleucus II (245–225 b.c.e.), III (224–223 b.c.e.), and IV (187–176 b.c.e.). 108.  See Weidner, Handbuch, 5–18; idem, “Ein astrologischer Sammeltext aus der Sargonidenzeit,” AfO 19 (1959–60) 105–13; Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 187–205. A new edition of this text is being prepared by Wayne Horrowitz and me. 109.  For this kind of commentary, see Frahm, Commetaries, 133–55. 110.  The lines in K. 2085 (Hunger, Astrological Reports [SAA 8], 178–79 no. 316) obv. 11–12: . . . 15 d30 kur.uri.ki 150 d30 (12) kur.nim.ma.ki e-la-a-ti d[30 kur.mar.t]u.ki šap-la-a-ti d30 kur.su.bir4.ki, “the right side of the moon (means) Akkad; the left side of the moon (means) Elam; the upper part of the [moon (means) Amu]rru; the lower part of the moon (means) Subaru” correspond with K. 250+ (for the joins see http://www.fincke-cuneiform.com/nineveh/joins/index.htm [text A in the editions of Weidner and Koch-Westenholz]) iv 23′–26′ and AO 8196 (Weidner, AfO 19, pl. xxxi–xxxiv [text H]) iii 45–45. These lines, however, could also have been part of a commentary unrelated to the Great Star List and Munabbitu had used this other source for his report. 111.  The tablet BM 34874 (= Sp. II 381) from Babylonia [text F in the editions of Weidner and KochWestenholz] cannot be dated other than by its ductus to the Late Babylonian period. 112.  First published by Reginald Campbell Thompson, The Reports of the Magicians and Astrologers of Nineveh and Babylon in the British Museum vol.s. 1–2 (Luzac’s Semitic text and translation series 6–7; London: Luzac, 1900), then reedited by Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, Parts I and II (AOAT 5/1–2; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1970 and 1983), and by Hunger, Astrological Reports (SAA 8). 113.  See, e.g., K. 590 (Parpola, Letters [SAA 10], 269 no. 334) rev. 11–12: . . . ki-i ša ma-ṣar-tú (12) ša lugal be-lí-ía la a-na-ṣar-u-ni, “as if I did not keep the watch of the king, my lord.” See also Rm. 280 (Parpola, Letters, 98–99 no. 118) rev. 8–9; Bu 89-4-26, 9 (Letters, 111 no. 143 rev. 4–5); 83-2-4, 91 (Letters, 125–26 no. 163) obv. 5–6; 83-1-18, 132 (Letters, 126 no. 164) obv. 7–8; 83-1-18, 6 (Letters, 136 no. 173) obv. 20–rev. 4.

128

Jeanette C. Fincke

ša ṭupšar enūma anu enlil). 114 Because of their significance for predictions concerning the king and the country, celestial and meteorological phenomena needed to be constantly observed all over the country, and the phenomena had to be reported to the monarch. The more reports he received about the same phenomenon, the more reliable the observations and the observers. To facilitate an instant analysis of the situation and point to any immediate action deemed necessary, the scholars not only gave their description but also quoted relevant omens from the series EAE. Occasionally, they thought that explanations were necessary and added quotations from MUL.APIN or the Great Star List. Of all these texts, the omen series EAE is the only one that describes all kinds of celestial phenomena systematically. Of the other texts, IV comprises excerpts of EAE, III focuses primarily on stars, and I and II focus more specifically on the rising and setting and individual cycles of planets and constellations for each month. Nonetheless, all of them include references to divination or mythological matter. The other texts from the Neo-Assyrian period lack such a religious aspect completely and may be considered the first astronomical texts by modern thinking. 115 Two such compositions that were less frequently copied than those with divinatory features 116 were the ziqpu-Star Lists (V) and the dal.ba.an.na -Text (VI). Another ostensibly purely “astronomical” text from the Neo-Assyrian period 117 is the Nineveh Planisphere (VII). Then there is a group of texts, well-known from the Late Babylonian period but with its beginning in the earlier Neo-Assyrian period, known as the Astronomical Diaries (VIII). These are the main features of these other texts: V. The ziqpu-Star Lists 118 give the distances of the ziqpu stars (stars that culminate at the meridian) as a measure of (a) weight, the ma.na, “mina”; in (b) distance, 114.  81-2-4, 98 (Parpola, Letters [SAA 10], 76–7) rev. 12–13: . . . ú-ìl-a-ti ša lú.a.ba ud-an-d+en-líl; this is a letter from Nabû-aḫḫe-erība to king Ashurbanipal written in 667 b.c.e. 115.  The distinction between astrological and astronomical is entirely a modern concept. See for this also Gerd Grasshof, “Babylonian Meteorological Observations and the Empirical Basis of Ancient Science,” in The Empirical Dimension of Ancient Near Eastern Studies (ed. by G. J. Selz; Wiener Offene Orientalistik 6; Vienna: LIT, 2011) 33–48, esp. 33–35. 116.  The series i.NAM.giš.ḫur.an.ki (see Alasdair Livingstone, Mystical and Mythological Explanatory Works of Babylonian Scholars [Oxford: Clarendon, 1986], 17–49; see also the references given in Hermann Hunger and David Pingree, Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia [Handbuch der Orientalistik I/44. Leiden: Brill, 1999], 83–84) is not dealing purely with the sky and is therefore excluded from the overview on Neo-Assyrian astronomical works: this series gives artificial mathematical calculations based on the volume of granaries and the temple Ekur on one tablet and on the moon and its cycle, including the time of the rising and setting of the moon, on the first and the fifteenth day of each month on fragments of another one. Frequently, explanations for individual terms and numbers are added to the calculations, which gives the series the character of a commentary to a certain extent. The fragments dealing with the moon have been written by the aforementioned scholar Nabû-zuqup-kēnu from Kalḫu in the early seventh century b.c.e. (he wrote K. 2670 [IIIR 2 no. xxii], the third pirsu of the series, in 684 b.c.e.; the date of the other two fragments written by him is lost), while the tablet with reference to granaries and the Ekur was written by Bēl-nādin-apli in the 33rd year of Darius (487 b.c.e.). 117.  The two time-keeping texts from Nineveh, the Ivory Prism (BM 123340) and the Report on Seasonal Hours (K. 2077+3771+11044+BM 54619), are excluded from his overview; see for both Hunger and Pingree, Astral Sciences, 112–16, with further bibliography. 118.  See John M. Steele, “Late Babylonian ziqpu-Star Lists: Written or Remembered Tradition of Knowledge?” in Tradition of Written Knowledge in Egypt and Mesopotamia (ed. by D. Bawanipeck and A. Imhausen; AOAT 403; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2015) 123–51; Hunger and Pingree, Astral Sciences, 84–90, and Christopher B. F. Walker, “Astronomical Texts,” Literary and Scholastic Texts of the First

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

129

the danna, uš or uš ina qaqqari, “league” or “uš on the ground,” or in a smaller unit of length, the ammatu, “lit.: forearm,” or (c), the danna or danna ina šamê “league in the sky.” A weight in ma.na amounts to a unit of time, for it corresponds to the weight of water in the water-clock. The danna, uš, or ammatu units refer to the degrees of a circle, where 1 uš = 1° and 1 danna = 30°. When based on the assumption that a star moves 1° each day (MUL.APIN I iii 49–50), the aggregated data covers a year. The sum of 364 days (according to AO 6478 119) refers to the astronomical year, whereas the usual number of days for a year is reckoned as 360, 12 months of 30 days supplemented by intercalary days as needed. The danna ina šamê unit refers to the circle of ziqpu-stars, calculated assuming 1 uš = 1800 = 30.0 danna, producing a circle with a circumference that should be 684,000 danna, but is in fact 655,200 danna (according to AO 6478). 120 The earliest copies of the ziqpu-Star Lists are written in Middle Assyrian ductus and are therefore either from the late second or the early first millennium b.c.e. 121 Later, we have one from Nineveh with Neo-Assyrian ductus (K. 9794 [CT 26, 50]). All the other copies known at present are Late Babylonian, with some showing a distinctly Seleucid ductus (e.g., AO 6578). VI.  Nearly all the fragments of our dal.ba.an.na-Texts 122 are copies from Nineveh written in Neo-Assyrian ductus, but one is in Neo-Babylonian ductus. Nearly all are also annotated with scribes’ comments, ḫe-pí, “break,” or ḫe-pí eš-šú, “new break.” This means that the earlier tablets they were copying were damaged exemplars. Since no fragment gives a title of the text, modern scholars refer to it with the term that is written in most of its lines, dal.ba.an.na, “distance” or “time interval.” The dal.ba.an.na-text lists three stars or constellations, all with distance expressed relatively: the distance between stars A and B can be equal to, double, triple, or quadruple the distance between B and C. VII.  The Nineveh Planisphere (K. 8538 [CT 33, 10]) 123 is a Neo-Assyrian circular tablet, with a plane obverse and a convex, uninscribed reverse. There are line drawings of constellations and inscriptions on the obverse, which is divided into eight more-or-less equal radial segments. Some of the images have dot-lines: where the starting point of a line and where it changes direction are marked with dots. Occasionally, small triangular arrows mark the endpoints of lines. In each segment, an inscription identifies by name the constellation with some supplementary information. Certain cuneiform signs, such as AN, MUL, and ME, are repeated, inMillennium B.C. (CTMMA II; ed. by I. Spar and W. G. Lambert; New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2005) 317–18 no. 78 and Plate 101 (MMA 86.11.337), a Late Babylonian copy, possibly from the Seleucid period. 119.  François Thureau-Dangin, “Distances entre étoiles fixes d’après une tablette de l’epoque des Séleucides,” RA 10 (1915) 215–25. 120.  So according to Hunger and Pingree, Astral Sciences, 88. 121.  The two fragments of ziqpu-Star Lists written in Middle Assyrian ductus from Assur (VAT 11284 and VAT 11288) will be published in the series Keilschrifttexte aus Assur literarischen Inhalts, edited by Stefan M. Maul. 122.  See Christopher B. F. Walker, “The Dalbanna Text: A Mesopotamian Star-List,” Die Welt des Orients 26 (1995) 27–42; Johannes Koch, “Der Dalbanna-Sternenkatalog,” Die Welt des Orients 26 (1995) 43–85; Hunger and Pingree, Astral Sciences, 100–11. 123.  This planisphere is discussed by Weidner, Handbuch, 107–12 and more detailed by Koch, Fixsternhimmel, 56–113, chapters VII–XVI; see also the reviews of Koch’s book, such as by Peter Huber, Centaurus 34.2 (1991) 172–73; David Pingree, WdO 23 (1992) 168–70; Kristian P. Moesgaard, Isis 81 (1992) 474–75; Heinz Neumann, AfO 38–39 (1991–92) 110–124, as well as Koch’s response to this review in the same volume, pp. 125–130; Walter Farber, OLZ 88 (1993) 385–89.

130

Jeanette C. Fincke

(Purely) Astronomical works

Mainly omens

Astronomical phenomena with divinatory or mythological interpretations

Omens

(Kind of) Text

Type / Content

Date of attestation

Celestial and meteorological omens

Omens; forerunners to EAE

ca. 18th century b.c.e. until 1st century b.c.e. (OB – LB-Arsacid)

enūma anu enlil (EAE)

Omen series

(before) late 8th until 1st century b.c.e. (NA – LB-Arsacid)

‘Astrolabes’ (I)

Bilingual menology, three star lists

(before) 12th century until 4th century b.c.e. (MA – LB-Hellenistic)

MUL.APIN (II)

Star lists, intercalation schemes, lengths of days and nights; omens

after 1000 until 2nd (?) century b.c.e. (NA – LB-Seleucid)

‘Great Star List’ (III)

Astronomical and mythological data on planets and constellations

678 (?) until 6th century b.c.e.–1st (?) century b.c.e. (NA – LB-unclear)

‘Astrological Reports’ (IV)

Astronomical phenomena 7th century b.c.e. interpreted with EAE, MUL. (NB) APIN and the Great Star List

ziqpu-Star Lists (V)

Distances of the ziqpu-stars measured in various units

late 2nd Millennium until 3rd–1st century b.c.e. (MA – LB-Seleucid)

dal.ba.an.na-Text

(VI)

Distances between constellations

8th until 7th century b.c.e. (NA)

Nineveh Planisphere (VII)

Circular tablet with drawings 8th or 7th century b.c.e. of constellations with names; (NA) magical use

‘Astronomical Diaries’ (VIII)

Observations (and computations) of moon, sun, planets, and constellations, river levels etc., with records of the Greek-letter phenomena of planets

(746) 651 until 60/59 b.c.e. (NA – LB-Arsacid)

Figure 5. Celestial and meteorological omen texts as well as astronomical works attested before 612 b.c.e., the end of the Neo-Assyrian period.

dicating that the planisphere was primarily used for magic. The tablet was severely damaged by fire in 612 b.c.e. and it now has partly vitrified surface, so that not all the signs remain legible. This makes interpretations uncertain and opens the way to speculation. VIII. The Astronomical Diaries 124 record observations, and also provide computations for the moon, the sun, the planets, and constellations, the atmosphere, 124.  (Re-)Published in Abraham Sachs and Hermann Hunger, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, vols. I–III (Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1988, 1989, 1996); see also Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 139–59. For the historical aspect of these Diaries and references to studies on other types of information to be extracted from them, see, e.g., Rein­ hard Pirngruber, “The Historical Sections of the Astronomical Diaries in Context: Developments in a Late Babylonian Scientific Text Corpus,” Iraq 75 (2013) 197–210.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

131

river levels, and other data affecting the economy for every day of the year. They contain data for the planets now known by Greek-letters and commonly referred to as Greek-letter phenomena (G first visibility in East, F station, [S first invisibility in East], Q acronychal rising or X first visibility in West, Y second station or first station in West, W first invisibility in West). 125 The aim of the Astronomical Diaries is succinctly expressed by the phrase “to observe what is to be observed” (ša naṣār inaṣṣar). 126 Originally, astronomers recorded settings for a few nights on small tablets. Later, their notes were copied onto tablets covering longer periods, from four months up to a year. They are descriptive astronomical texts, mostly written by scribes from Babylon, though just a few seem to come from Uruk and Borsippa. The earliest clearly dated diary describes the situation in 651 b.c.e., before Babylonia came under Neo-Assyrian dominion, and the latest one is from 60/59 b.c.e. 127 An analysis of the data given in the Diaries shows that these recordings began in 746 b.c.e. 128

Late Babylonian Celestial Omens, Astral Divination and Magic and Astronomical Texts Scholars of the Late Babylonian period (612 b.c.e.–1st century c.e.) studied and copied tablets from the series EAE and other texts on astronomical phenomena with divinatory background (see above, I–III), but they also copied what we nowadays would define as astronomical works from the Neo-Assyrian period, such as the ziqpu-Star Lists (V) and Astronomical Diaries (VIII). As well as a few apparently isolated texts or compendia about astronomical events having divinatory implications, 129 Late Babylonian scholars seem to have developed horoscopes (IX) as a new genre, and two complete new series that Assyriologists refer to as Kalendertexte (X) and Gestirndarstellungen (XI): IX.  The Horoscopes 130 list astronomical phenomena observable at the date or time of a birth. They give the positions of the Moon and the Sun and the planets in the sequence Jupiter, Venus, Mercury, Saturn, and Mars. This is followed by other astronomical data, such as the length of the month, the time between the rising of the sun and the setting of the moon, eclipses, equinoxes, and solstices. Most of these data were computed rather than observed at the time of the birth. Unlike modern horoscopes, only a few of these Babylonian forerunners take them as ominous signs predicting a child’s future. Horoscopes are attested from 405–68 b.c.e. 125.  See Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, xiv. 126.  CT 49, 144 rev. 23–24; see also n. 165. 127. BM 32312, published Sachs and Hunger, Astronomical Diaries I, 42–46, pls. 1–2, and Rm. 705+BM 34215+34458+41932, published by Sachs and Hunger, Astronomical Diaries III, 514–16, pl. 297. 128.  See Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 139, 144. 129.  See, e.g., Hermann Hunger, “Stars, Cities, and Predictions,” in Studies in the History of the Exact Science in Honour of David Pingree (Islamic Philosophy Theology and Science, Texts and Studies LIV; ed. by C. Burnett et al.; Leiden: Brill, 2004) 16–32; John M. Steele, “A Babylonian Compendium of Calendrical and Stellar Astrology,” JCS 67 (2015) 187–215. 130.  Francesca Rochberg, Babylonian Horoscopes (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series vol. 88.1; Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1998). See also Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 26–28.

132

Jeanette C. Fincke

Figure 6.  The drawing on the obverse of VAT 7847 illustrating (from left to right) Jupiter (dsag.me.gar) as a single star, a long dragon-like animal facing left for the constellation Hydra (mul.muš), over which is a lion for the constellation Leo (mul.ur.gu.la), facing left toward Jupiter (drawn by the author from the photograph in Weidner, Gestirn-Darstellungen, Tafel 5).

X. The Kalendertexte (calendar texts) 131 link each day of a month to a zodiacal sign, thus forming a micro-zodiacal system. They associate them with certain trees, plants, stones, or cities, or even with various ointments made from parts of the bodies of animals, make a general evaluation of the day, and provide predictions and advice for certain behavior and actions. Tablets of this kind are known from Uruk, dating to the Seleucid period. Two were written around 320 b.c.e. (SpTU III 104 and 105), and two others in the second century b.c.e., one of which is dated 192/191 b.c.e. (VAT 7815). 132 XI. The Gestirndarstellungen (representations of constellations) 133 appears only very late in cuneiform. These texts first give a detailed description of a lunar eclipse and its ominous implication, much more detailed than such data in EAE. Some texts include drawings of constellations (see fig. 6) followed by columns of micro-zodiacal signs (for these see p. 133) associated with various cities, temples, stones, plants, religious events, and predictions. Tablets of this kind are known from Late Babylonian tablets from Babylonia, specifically from Uruk, dating to the Seleucid period—that is, the third and second century b.c.e. 134 In the Late Babylonian period, the number of astronomical works increased and exhibit progress in understanding and computing of celestial phenomena. It 131. Ernst F. Weidner, Gestirn-Darstellungen auf babylonischen Tontafeln (Vienna: Herman Böhlaus, 1967), 41–52, Tafel 13–16 (VAT 7815 and VAT 7816); SpTU III 104 and 105; see also Hunger and Pingree, Astral Sciences, 29–30. See also Erica Reiner, Astral Magic in Babylonia (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series vol. 85.4; Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1995) 114–18, with further references at p. 114 n. 520. 132.  VAT 7815 is written by Anu-aba-utēr; VAT 7816 belonged to Anu-bēlšunu, son of Nidintu-Anu from the family of Sîn-leqe-uninni from Uruk and was written by the owner’s son Anu-aba-utēr, a ṭupšar enūma anu enlil in Uruk, in the 120th year of Antiochus. 133.  VAT 7851 and VAT 7847+AO 6448; see Weidner, Gestirn-Darstellungen, 12–40, Tafel 1–10; see also Hunger and Pingree, Astral Sciences, 28–29. Parts of these texts are the subject of two dissertations that are being written these days in Berlin (Marvin Schreiber) and Providence, RI (M. Willis Monroe). 134.  One of the two tablets published so far belongs to Anu-aḫa-iddinu and was written by Anumukīn-apli (VAT 7851), while the other one belonged to Anu-bēlšunu, son of Nidintu-Anu from the family of Sîn-leqe-uninni from Uruk and was written by the owner’s son, Anu-aba-utēr, a ṭupšar enūma anu enlil in Uruk, during the reign of Antiochus (VAT 7847+AO 6448).

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

133

followed centuries of meticulous observations empirically related to other events and showed influence from scholars from other cultures. From the late fifth century b.c.e. on, 135 the zodiacal signs—that is, units of 30° of celestial longitude on an imaginary belt centered on the ecliptic along which the sun and the moon and the planets move—replaced the Babylonian months. This allowed more precise designations of time and, by association, also the positions of occurring phenomena. The twelve schematic months of 30 days each were based on the lunar year, which is slightly shorter than the solar year on which the zodiac is based (see p. 110). 136 The principle of the zodiacal belt as well as the naming of the units was deeply rooted in Mesopotamia, 137 and it was developed into its final modified form, with the definition of the ecliptic in the center of this belt and the equal units of 30°, by the Greeks. The further subdivision into the micro-zodiac, where each zodiacal sign was given 12 equal units, all named according to the zodiac, allowed further precision of the data. These improvements facilitated the recording of mathematical calculations of recurring celestial phenomena with a considerable degree of accuracy. 138 New genres of texts that were introduced that can be classified today as either theoretical or descriptive. 139 Leaving the isolated texts on various celestial topics aside, Abraham Sachs 140 divided these texts into two main groups. The “tabular texts” or “computed tables” (tersītu) have columns of numbers, such as Planetary Tables (XII), Lunar and Solar Tables (XIII), or mathematical texts of the ACT Type like Ephemerides (XIVa) and procedure texts (XIVb), even though the latter are not in fact arranged in tables. The second group are the “non-tabular texts,” such as Almanacs (XV), Normal Star Almanacs (XVI), and Goal-Year Texts (XVII). The main features of these texts can now be given in outline. XII. Planetary Tables 141 give the dates and zodiacal signs for the so-called Greek-letter phenomena (for these, see above, VIII) of individual planets distinguishing the sequence of data for superior and inferior ones. The earliest compilations run from 679/678–561/560 b.c.e. (HSM 1490), 142 but the earliest tablet (BM 135.  The first attestation for defining and using the zodiacal signs can be found in the Astronomical Diary VAT 4924 for the year 419 b.c.e.; see Bartel L. van der Waerden, “The History of the Zodiac,” AfO 16 (1952–53) 220, Plate XVIII (copy by E. F. Weidner); for the Diary see Sachs and Hunger, Astronomical Diaries I, 60–65. 136. For the definition of the starting point of a new zodiacal sign, see Lis Brack-Bernsen and Hermann Hunger, “The Babylonian Zodiac: Speculations on its Invention and Significance,” Centaurs 41 (2000) 280–92. 137.  See the recent overview on the background of the zodiac with further bibliography by Lorenzo Verderame, “The Primeval Zodiac: Its Social, Religious, and Mythological Background,” in Cosmology across Cultures (Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series 409; ed. by J. A. Rubiño et al.; San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 2009) 151–56. 138.  For an analysis of the observed (or calculated) lunar and solar eclipses extracted from various types of texts, see Peter J. Huber and Salvo de Meis, Babylonian Eclipse Observations from 750 BC to 1 BC (Milan: Mimesis, 2014). 139.  So, according to Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, viii, 2–3. For the role of Babylonian observations for the theoretical works, see Francesca Rochberg-Halton, “Between Observation and Theory in Babylonian Astronomical Texts,” JNES 50 (1991) 107–20. 140. “Classification of the Babylonian Astronomical Texts of the Seleucid Period,” JCS 2 (1948) 277–80 (Almanacs), 271–90. In this article, Sachs’s overview has been completed by some of the texts described by Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 159–270. 141.  See Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 173–81. 142. John P. Britton, “An Early Observation Text for Mars: HSM 1899.2.112 (= HSM 1490),” in Studies in the History of the Exact Science in Honour of David Pingree (ed. by C. Burnett et al.; Leiden: Brill, 2004) 33–55.

134

Jeanette C. Fincke

76738+76813) compiles data from 646/645 until 633/632 b.c.e. and so must have been written earlier. The latest one (LBAT 1477) gives the data for year 7 of Cambyses, 522/521 b.c.e. XIII.  The most famous Lunar and Solar Tables calculate for the so-called “Saros” cycle, 143 the period of time between solar and lunar eclipses. One full “Saros” cycle amounts to 18 years, 11 days, and 8 hours, which Babylonian astronomers referred to by the number 18. The cuneiform texts list eclipses by the year and month of their occurrence, at intervals of six or, sometimes, only five months, referring to the possibility of actually observing a lunar eclipse. The earliest text (LBAT 1422+1423+1424) was copied after 374/373 b.c.e. and covers data from 490/489 until 374/373 b.c.e. The latest text (LBAT 1428) is dated to 257/256 b.c.e. and covers data from 400/399 until 271/270 b.c.e. XIVa, b.  The Mathematical texts of the ACT type 144 can be distinguished thus: Ephemerides, called tērsītu, “computed table” (XIVa), which consist of up to thirteen columns with numbers; and procedure texts, called epūšu, “procedure” (XIVb), 145 which give very briefly the rules for calculating the numbers in a non-tabular format. The data provided in the columns of the Ephemerides refer to various stations of the planets and the moon and give the arithmetic functions to compute synodic arc and synodic time. 146 The astronomers used two methods of computing the synodic cycle from the minimum and maximum of its arc: System A uses step functions and System B a linear zigzag function. 147 Some of the tablets with Ephemerides come from astronomers from Babylon, who seem to have preferred System A, while others from Uruk have a preference for System B tablets. 148 The tablets from Babylon are attested over a wider period. They date from 262/261 to 42/41 b.c.e. (System A) and 257/256 to 68/67 b.c.e. (System B). While the earliest mathematical astronomical texts were written in the mid 5th century b.c.e. (450/449 b.c.e.), the datable procedure texts range from 320/319 to 110/109 b.c.e. 149 XV. Almanacs 150 belong to what are called descriptive astronomical texts. They have 12 or 13 sections with predictions of the relative position of the moon to the sun for each month of the year and contain information about the length of the pre143. See Lis Brack-Bernsen, Zur Entstehung der babylonischen Mondtheorie: Beobachtung und theoretische Berechnung von Mondphasen (Boethius 40; Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1997) 17–19, Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 183–202. 144.  Otto Neugebauer, Astronomical Cuneiform Texts. Babylonian Ephemerides of the Seleucid Period for the Motion of the Sun, the Moon, and the Planets vols. I–III (London: Lund Humphries, 1955). See also Brack-Bernsen, Babylonische Mondtheorie, 20–21, 35–40; Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 212–70. 145. Mathieu Ossendrijver, Babylonian Mathematical Astronomy: Procedure Texts (Heidelberg: Springer, 2012). 146.  See Noel M. Swerdloff, The Babylonian Theory of the Planets (Princton, NJ: University Press, 1998) 64–5: “. . . the numerical difference between the synodic arc in degrees and the synodic time in tithis is a constant, specific to each planet. This relation . . . rests upon two more fundamental principles. The first is that . . . the sun is taken to move uniformly. . . The second . . . is that each phenomenon takes place at a fixed, characteristic elongations from the sun, although strictly the elongations are taken from the mean, not the true, sun.” 147.  Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, xv. 148.  Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 220–21. 149. Ossendrijver, Babylonian Mathematical Astronomy, 6. 150.  See Sachs, JCS 2, 277–80; Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 162–67. A new edition has just been published by Hermann Hunger, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia volume VII: Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs (Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2014); for a description of the Almanacs see p. X.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

135

vious month (29 or 30 days), the “Lunar Three” (i.e., three lunar phenomena), “the Greek-letter phenomena” [see above, VIII] “of the planets, the dates of the planets’ entrances into zodiacal signs, the positions of the planets at the beginning of the months, the dates of solstices, equinoxes, and Sirius phenomena, and reports of solar and lunar eclipses.” 151 The colophons identify them as “mešḫu of the reachings of the planets” (meš-ḫu šá kur-ád šá dudu.idim.meš). The clearly datable Almanacs are attested from 220/219 b.c.e. (LBAT 1118+19 = Hunger, Almanacs, no. 153) to 79/80 c.e. 152 XVI.  Normal Star Almanacs 153 differ from the Almanacs (XV) in that they use either the “Lunar Three” or the “Lunar Six”—that is, the “Lunar Three” extended by three more lunar phenomena—and add data for the planets and the Moon passing the Normal Stars—that is, 32 stars near the ecliptic. The Normal Star Almanacs are called according to their colophons “mešḫu of a certain year” (meš-ḫi šá YEAR). They date from 300/299 (BM 65156 = Hunger, Almanacs, no. 1) to 78/77 b.c.e. (BM 32247+ = Hunger, Almanacs, no. 103). 154 XVII.  The Babylonian scholars call the Goal-Year Texts 155 “first days, appearances, passings, and eclipses which are established for year x” (ud.1.kam igi.duḫ.​a.meš dib-qa u an.ku .meš šá ana mu.x.kam . . . kun-nu-uʾ). These texts provide planetary 10 data for a single given year, with synodic periods for planets (dates for the Greekletter phenomena [see above, VIII] and the passage of the Normal Stars) that were derived partly from observations and partly from computations. According to their layout, most of these tablets have columns of numbers for the five planets on their obverse and data for the moon on their reverse. Goal-Year Texts are attested for the years 235/234 b.c.e. until 40/39 c.e. Almanacs (XV) and Normal Star Almanacs (XVI) are considered predictive in character, while the Astronomical Diaries (VIII) are basically descriptive, based on real observations but also draw on a number of predictive data. 156 While Almanacs (XV and XVI) draw on the data known from the Goal-Year Texts and Astronomical Diaries, the ACT texts (XIVa and b) seem to be based on Astronomical Diaries (VIII). 157 In the end, all of these astronomical texts are interlinked with each other, one way or the other.

The Significance of the Series EAE among Other Texts and Compositions with Astronomical Concern At first sight, we are dealing with two categories of texts: the series EAE and other divinatory interpretations of celestial phenomena on the one hand are as different as one can imagine from “astronomical” texts, such as the mathematical 151.  Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 162. 152.  Hermann Hunger and Teje de Jong, “Almanac W22340a from Uruk: The Latest Datable Cuneiform Tablet,” ZA 104 (2014) 182–94. 153. Sachs, JCS 2, 281–82; Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 159–62; Hunger, Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs, X–XII. 154.  Hunger and Pingree, Astral Science, 161. 155.  Hermann Hunger, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, Volume VI: Goal Year Texts (Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2006). See also Lis Brack-Bernsen, “Goal-Year Tablets: Lunar Data and Predictions,” in Ancient Astronomy and Celestial Divination (ed. by N. M. Swerdloff; Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1999) 149–77. 156. Sachs, JCS 2, 287. 157. Sachs, JCS 2, 287–88; Hunger, Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs, XVII–VII.

nontabular Descriptive texts (non-tabular arrangement)

Astronomical works

tabular arrangement

Lunar eclipse omens and zodiacal signs associated with data for magical use

Divinatory use of astronomical data

Jeanette C. Fincke

Theoretical texts

Divinatory and magical use

136 (Kind of) Text

Type / Content

Date of attestation

Horoscopes (IX)

Astronomical phenomena at the date or time of birth; a few give omens to predict the child’s future

405 – 68 b.c.e. (LB-Achaemenid – LB-Arsacid)

The days of months are correlated with zodiacal signs and their associated body parts of animals

around 320 and 2nd century b.c.e. (LB-Hellenistic and LB-Seleucid)

Gestirndarstellungen (XI)

Lunar eclipse omens, microzodiacal signs and their associated cities, temples, stones and plants

3rd and 2nd century b.c.e. (LB-Seleucid)

Planetary Tables (XII)

Dates and zodiacal signs for the Greek-letter phenomena of planets

after 633/2 until 522/1 b.c.e. (NB – LB-Achaemenid)

Lunar and Solar Tables (XIII)

Data for eclipses – observed and computed (Saros-cycle)

after 374/3 until 257/256 b.c.e. (LB-Achaemenid – LB-Seleucid)

Ephemerides (ACT texts) (XIVa)

Numbers for various stations (up to 13) of planets and the moon for computing synodic cycles

System A: 262 until 42 b.c.e. System B: 257 until 68 b.c.e. (LB-Seleucid – LB-Arsacid)

Procedure Texts (ACT texts) (XIVb)

Rules for calculating the numbers given in the Ephemerides

320/19 until 110/109 b.c.e. (LB-Hellenistic – LB-Arsacid)

Almanacs (XV)

Relative position of the 200/199 b.c.e. until moon to the sun for each 79/80 c.e. day of year with the “Lunar (LB-Seleucid – LB-Arsacid) Three,” Greek-letter phenomena, solstices, equinoxes and Sirius phenomena

Normal Star Almanacs (XVI)

Data from the Almanacs but 300/299 until 78/77 b.c.e. with “Lunar Six” instead of (LB-Seleucid – LB-Arsacid) “Lunar Three” plus data for planets and the moon passing by the Normal Stars, i.e., 32 stars near the ecliptic

Goal-Year texts (XVII)

Data for a single year with synodic periods for planets (Greek-letter phenomena, passing by of the Normal Stars) based on observed and computed data

235/234 b.c.e. until 40/39 c.e. (LB-Seleucid – LB-Arsacid)

Figure 7.  Divinatory and astronomical cuneiform sources introduced in the Late Babylonian Period.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

137

calculations and the descriptive observational texts on the other. Ancient Near Eastern scholarship perceived things differently, as can be seen, for example, from the title ṭupšar enūma anu enlil, “scribe of enūma anu enlil,” 158 found on the omen series EAE. This title is only attested for five periods: the Neo-Assyrian (roughly 1st millennium–612 b.c.e.), 159 the Achaemenid (6th century – 330 b.c.e.), 160 the Hellenistic (331–310 b.c.e.), the Seleucid (late 4th–2nd century b.c.e.), and the Arsacid period (roughly 170 b.c.e.–80 c.e.). The colophons show that scribes with this title wrote Astrological Reports to Neo-Assyrian kings that basically quote celestial omens (IV), 161 and also the so-called Kalendertexte (LB-Hellenistic) (X) and Gestirndarstellungen texts (LB–Seleucid) (XI) that have divinatory and magical aspects, as well as astronomical Procedure Texts (LB–Seleucid period) 162 (XIVb) and Ephemerides (LB– Arsacid period) 163 (XIVa). This title seems to be Babylonian, since it is used in the Neo-Assyrian period by a Babylonian scribe and is later attested only for Babylon (LB–Achaemenid and Arsacid periods) and Uruk (LB–Seleucid period). 164 An administrative tablet dating to 127/126 b.c.e. (SE 185) outlines the duties of such a scribe of the Esagila temple in Babylon (CT 49, 144): 165 he was to “observe what is to be observed” (ša naṣār inaṣṣar)—that is, to record Astronomical Diaries (VIII) and similar texts, and to produce both “computed tables” (im.tersītu), which are all tabular astronomical texts (XII–XIVa), and “measurements” (mešḫi.meš). Nowadays, we think this refers to Almanacs (XV) and Normal Star Almanacs (XVI). Upon positive 158.  Francesca Rochberg, “Scribes and Scholars: The ṭupšar enūma Anu Enlil,” in Assyriologica et Semitica: Festschrift für Joachim Oelsner (ed. J. Marzahn and H. Neumann; AOAT 252, Münster: UgaritVerlag, 2000) 359–75, and “The Scribes and Scholars of Mesopotamian Celestial Science,” in The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004) 209–36. 159.  An administrative list on palace personnel dating to the reign of Esarhaddon or Ashurbanipal begins with seven men classified as “[ṭupšar] EAE” (ADD 851); see Frederick M. Fales and John N. Postgate, Imperial Administrative Records (SAA 7; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1992) 4 no. 1 obv. 8: [pap 7 a.ba] ud an bad). In his letter to king Ashurbanipal, written in 667 b.c.e., Nabû-aḫḫe-erība describes how the king’s predecessor used to read the “reports of the ṭupšar EAE” by which he referred to the Astrological Reports (IV); see 81-2-4, 98 (Parpola, Letters [SAA 10] 76–7) rev. 12–13: . . . ú-ìl-a-ti ša lú.a.ba du an d+en-líl. 160.  See Paul-Alain Beaulieu, “The Astronomers of the Esagil Temple in the Fourth Century BC,” in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty (ed. A.  K. Guinan et al.; 2006) 5–22. 161.  Šumāya, the Babylonian sender of an astrological report is “ṭupšar EAE of the new team”; see 80-7-19, 61 (Hunger, Astrological Reports [SAA 8], 274 no. 499) rev. 5–6: lú.dub.sar ud an den-líl šá! ki-iṣ-ri eš-šú. 162.  See Ossendrijver, Babylonian Mathematical Astronomy, 8: among the scribes that wrote astronomical procedure texts next to individuals (Marduk-zēra-ibni son of Ea-balssu-iqbi, Ossendrijver no. 35) two clans can be detected in Babylon: the family of Egibi (Ossendrijver no. 7 and Neugebauer, ACT 122) and the family of Mušēzib (predominantly early Seleucid period; Ossendrijver nos. 5, 9, 21, 44, 47, 52); still only one of each clan calls himself “scribe of EAE” (no. 7 and Neugebauer, ACT 122). 163.  See ACT 420 (see Neugebauer, ACT, 21 type Zld), computing data for SE 180–242 (132/131– 70/69 b.c.e.), and ACT 122 (Neugebauer, ACT 22 type Zo) dating to 103/102 b.c.e. 164.  Keeping in mind that most of the relevant tablets are preserved in a very fragmentary state and colophons are only occasionally preserved, this title may well have been used at other places as well. 165.  CT 49, 144 rev. 23–24: šá na-ṣar (24) i-na-ṣar im.ter-se-e-ti u meš-ḫe.meš i-nam-din; see also BOR 4, 142 l. 24–25: šá na-ṣar i-na-aṣ-ṣa-ru-ú u ter-si-e-tú (25) šá mu-us-su i-nam-di-nu-ú. See Gilbert J. P. McEwan, Priests and Temple in Hellenistic Babylonia (Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 4; Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1981) 15–21.

138

Jeanette C. Fincke

evaluation of the performance of his duty and competence by the assembly of the temple, he was entitled to an income from prebends in land and silver. The ṭupšar enūma anu enlil were not only proficient in writing tablets about celestial events and computing astronomical data but also in other disciplines. The Urukean scribe Anu-aba-utēr (LB–Seleucid period) son of Anu-bēlšunu from the clan of Sîn-leqe-uninnī identified himself as ṭupšar enūma anu enlil when he wrote a Kalendertext (X), 166 a Gestirndarstellungen tablet (XI), 167 a mathematical text of the ACT type (ACT 171) and a planetary text with Greek-letter phenomena, 168 but as a “specialist in lamentation of (the gods) Anu and Antu” (lú.gala d60 u an-tu4) when he wrote two other mathematical texts of the ACT type (ACT 600 and 601). 169 As the owner of another tablet of the ACT type, Anu-aba-utēr uses both titles, with ṭupšar enūma anu enlil preceding the other one (ACT 194). 170 Another owner of a tablet of the same type from Uruk written by Anu-aba-utēr uses three titles: Šamašēṭir son of Ina-qibit-Anu son of Šipqat-Anu descendant of Ekur-zākir, “exorcist of Anu and Antu, urigallu-priest of the Rēš temple, ṭupšar enūma anu enlil” (ACT 163). 171 As is indicated by the variety of these titles, scholars that wrote tablets referring to the interpretation of celestial phenomena or astronomical texts were also occupied in studying other religious texts. The scribe Iqīšâ son of Ištar-šumaēriš descendant of Ekur-zakir, 172 who lived around 320 b.c.e. in Uruk and identified himself as “exorcist from Uruk, temple enterer of Anu and Antu” (SpTU I 94), 173 wrote texts focused predominantly on the divinatory aspects of astronomy, such as instructions for using celestial phenomena for predicting grain prices (SpTU I 94), descriptions of zodiacal signs and stars (SpTU I 96), mathematical data referring to and predictions for zodiacal signs (SpTU II 43), and two Kalendertexte (SpTU III 104 and 105; see X). But he also wrote other texts with mainly magical and divinatory content, such as unilingual (SpTU II 25) and bilingual incantations (SpTU I 14; SpTU III 65), rituals using magical stones (SpTU III 85), rituals with incantations to avert evil (SpTU II 18) and scorcery practiced on the night of a new moon (SpTU IV 140), rituals of the kalû-priest (SpTU IV 141), liver omens (SpTU I 80), terrestrial omens from the series šumma ālu (SpTU II 32, 43; SpTU III 97), commentaries on the series šumma izbu (SpTU II 38) and on liver omens (SpTU IV 158), and lexical lists (SpTU IV 188). 166.  See n. 132. 167.  See n. 134. 168.  Hermann Hunger, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, Volume V: Lunar and Planetary Texts (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Denkschriften 299. Band; Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2001) 310–17 no. 74. 169.  For the colophons of the ACT texts from Uruk, see Neugebauer, ACT, 17–18 types F, L an M. 170.  See Neugebauer, ACT, 20 type Zc. 171.  See Neugebauer, ACT, 17 type H lines 3–4: lú.maš.m[aš ddiš u an-tu4] (4) [lú ùri.g]al-i šá é.sag lú umbisag diš ud ddiš den.l[íl.lá]. 172.  For the texts he wrote using his title “scribe,” see the overviews by Hunger, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 1, 12–13, and Egbert von Weiher, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 2 (Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka 10; Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1983) 1 with nn. 1–3 and the texts in both volumes. His tablets have also been published in Egbert von Weiher, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 3 (Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in UrukWarka 12; Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1988); and in von Weiher, Uruk. Spätbabylonische Texte aus dem Planquadrat U 18 Teil 4 (Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka, Endberichte 12; Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 1993). 173.  See Hunger, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 1, 97 no. 94 rev. 56: lú.maš.maš unug.ki-ú lú.ku4 é dan-u u an-tu4.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

139

Additionally, he owned more bilingual incantations (SpTU II 5, 6), tablets from the diagnostic omen series SA.GIG (SpTU II 44), physiognomic omens from the series alamdimmû (SpTU IV 150), terrestrial omens from the series šumma ālu (SpTU II 35), as well as commentaries on the omen series šumma izbu (SpTU II 37) and EAE (SpTU I 90; SpTU IV 162), a text correlating areas inspected in the course of extispicy with months and stars (SpTU IV 159), which were written for him by someone else. All this information indicates that all professional activity in astronomy in the first millennium b.c.e. was deeply embedded in a temple environment. Scribes used the title ṭupšar enūma anu enlil, commonly translated “astronomer,” to sign texts related to celestial observations and phenomena, regardless of any divinatory or mathematical calculation attributes. The title itself represents an additional qualification of a priest, independent from his first career. Some if not all astronomers not only concentrated on astronomical observations and calculations but were also proficient in other literary genres with various religious backgrounds in conjunction with their regular occupations at the temple.

The Meaning and Use of the Series EAE for Astronomy during the Late Babylonian Period It is obvious that the omen series EAE, which was established in the late second millennium b.c.e. and copied continuously until the first century b.c.e., remained a basic tool for all astronomers of the first millennium b.c.e. Even experts in mathematical calculations rather than divination apparently appreciated the omen series for what it was—a handbook, the only available one, for a systematic description of all celestial and meteorological phenomena, and thus an indispensable tool for any astronomer. According to our sources, the astronomical observations of the Neo-Assyrian period were basically commissioned by the royal palaces in Kalḫu and Nineveh and conducted by astronomers at various observation points in Assyria and Babylonia. Some of them may have been observing privately. The Late Babylonian astronomers, on the other hand, seem to have been associated with temples. In Babylon, astronomers worked at the Esagila temple of Marduk and in Uruk at the Anu temple, which had a ziggurat suitable for observations. Despite their very specialized qualifications, which involved strong familiarity with mathematical computations, astronomers acted at the same time as priests for various purposes, such as exorcism or lamentation. In their professional life, the ṭupšar enūma anu enlil, “scribes of (the series) EAE”—that is, the astronomers—were occupied with both celestial omens and astronomical calculations, which demonstrates the significance of divination for astronomy. Thus, although celestial divination is deeply rooted in religious belief, and the omen series still considered phenomena that were based entirely on intellectual abstractions rather than actual observations, which were later reinterpreted to correspond with actual occurrences, the series EAE can without doubt be regarded as the oldest astronomical treatise from Mesopotamia. It is most likely that the scholars that compiled this omen series intended it to be essentially astronomical, but they masked their approach by embedding in it divination conventions.

140

Jeanette C. Fincke

Bibliography Alster, Bendt. “Sumerian Literary Tradition.” JCS 28 (1976) 116–20. _________. Proverbs of Ancient Sumer: The World’s Earliest Proverb Collections. Bethesda, MD: CDL, 1997. Archi, Alfonso. “Divination at Ebla.” Pp. 45–56 in Festschrift für Gernot Wilhelm anläßlich seines 65. Geburtstages am 28. Januar 2010. Edited by J. C. Fincke. Dresden: Islet, 2010. Beaulieu, Paul-Alain. “The Astronomers of the Esagil Temple in the Fourth Century BC.” Pp. 5–22 in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Hornor of Erle Verdun Leichty. Edited by A. K. Guinan et al. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Benito, Carlos A. “Enki and Ninmaḫ” and “Enki and the World Order.” Ph.D. dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, 1969. Böck, Barbara. Die babylonisch-assyrische Morphoskopie. Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 27. Vienna: Institut für Orientalistik der Universität Wien, 2000. Böhmer, Rainer M. Die Entwicklung der Glyptik während der Akkad-Zeit. Untersuchungen zur Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 4. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1965. Borger, Rykle. “Keilschrifttexte verschiedenen Inhalts. I Der astrologische Text LB 1321.” Pp. 36–43 in Symbolae biblicae et mesopotamicae Francisco Mario Theodoro de Liagre Böhl dedicatae. Edited by A. Beek et al. Leiden: Brill, 1973. Bottéro, Jean. “Deux curiosités assyriologiques 1. Jou graphique ou talisman?” Syria 33 (1956) 17–25, 30–5. Brack-Bernsen, Lis. Zur Entstehung der babylonischen Mondtheorie. Beobachtung und theoretische Berechnung von Mondphasen. Boethius 40. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1997. _________. “Goal-Year Tablets: Lunar Data and Predictions.” Pp. 149–77 in Ancient Astronomy and Celestial Divination. Edited by by N. M. Swerdloff. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1999. Brack-Bernsen, Lis, and Hermann Hunger. “The Babylonian Zodiac: Speculations on its Invention and Significance.” Centaurs 41 (2000) 280–92. Britton, John P. “An Early Observation Text for Mars: HSM 1899.2.112 (= HSM 1490).” Pp. 33–55 in Studies in the History of the Exact Science in Honour of David Pingree. Edited by C. Burnett et al. Leiden: Brill, 2004. _________. “Calendars. Intercalations and Year-Length in Mesopotamian Astronomy.” Pp.  115–32 in Calendars and Years: Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near East. Edited by J. M. Steele. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2007. Brown, David, and Gábor Zólyomi “ ‘Daylight Converts to Night-Time’: An AstrologicalAstronomical Reference in Sumerian Literary Context.” Iraq 63 (2001) 149–54. Casaburi, Maria C. Tre-stelle-per-ciscum(-mese): L’Astrolabio B: edizione filologica. Annali 93. Naples: Università degli studi Napoli “L’Orientale,” 2003. Clay, Albert T. Documents from the Temple Archives of Nippur Dated in the Reigns of Cassite Rulers. PBS 2/2. Philadelphia: The University Museum, 1912. Cohen, Yoram. The Scribes and Scholars of the City of Emar in the Late Bronze Age. Harvard Semitic Studies 59. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009. Dietrich, Manfried. “Altbabylonische Omina zur Sonnenfinsternis.” Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 86 (1996) 99–111. Fales, Frederick M., and John N. Postgate. Imperial Administrative Records. State Archives of Assyria 7. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1992. Farber, Walter. “Review of Johannes Koch, Neue Untersuchungen zur Topographie des babylonischen Fixsternhimmels.” OLZ 88 (1993) 385–89. Fincke, Jeanette C. “Omina, die göttlichen “Gesetzte” der Divination.” Jaarbericht van het vooraziatisch-egyptisch Genootschap Ex Oriente Lux 40 (2006) 131–47.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

141

_________. “Ist die mesopotamische Opferschau ein nächtliches Ritual?” BiOr 66.5–6 (2009) 519–58. _________. “The Solar Eclipse Omen Texts from enūma anu enlil.” BiOr 70.5–6 (2013) 582–608. _________. “ ‘If a star changes into ashes . . .’ A sequence of unusual celestial omens.” Iraq 75 (2013) 171–96. _________. “The Seventh Tablet of the rikis gerri series of enūma anu enlil.” JCS 66 (2014) 129–48. Finkel, Irving L. “A New Piece of Libanomancy.” AfO 29/30 (1983–84) 50–5. _________. “Adad-apla-iddina, Esagil-kīn-apli, and the Series SA.GIG.” Pp. 143–59 in A Scientific Humanist: Studies in Memory of Abraham Sachs. Edited by E. Leichty et al. Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 9. Philadelphia: Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 1988. _________. “In Black and White: Remarks on the Assur Psephomancy Ritual.” ZA 85 (1995) 271–76. Frahm, Eckart. Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries. Origins of Interpretation. Guides to the Mesopotamian Textual Record 5. Münster: Ugarit Verlag, 2011. Freedman, Sally M. If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian Series Šumma alu ina mēlê šakin, Volume 1: Tablets 1–21. Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 17. Philadelphia: Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 1998. _________. If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian Series Šumma alu ina mēlê šakin, Volume 2: Tablets 22– 40. Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 19. Philadelphia: Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 2006. Fronzaroli, Pelio. “Divinazione a Ebla.” Pp. 1–22 in Miscellanea Eblaitica 4. Quaderni di Semitistica 19. Edited by P. Fronzaroli. Florence: Dipartimento di linguistica, Università di Firenze, 1997. Gehlken, Erlend. “Die Serie DIŠ Sîn ina tāmartīšu im Überblick.” N.A.B.U. 2007, 3–5 no. 4. _________. Weather Omens of Enūma Anu Enlil: Thunderstorms, Wind and Rain (Tablets 44– 49). Cuneiform Monographs 43. Leiden: Brill, 2012. George, Andrew R. Babylonian Divinatory Texts Chiefly in the Schøyen Collection. Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology Vol. 18. Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2013. Grasshof, Gerd. “Babylonian Meteorological Observations and the Empirical Basis of Ancient Science.” Pp. 33–48 in The Empirical Dimension of Ancient Near Eastern Studies. Edited by G. J. Selz. Wiener Offene Orientalistik 6. Vienna: LIT, 2011. Guinen, Ann Kessler. “A Severed Head Laughed: Stories of Divinatory Interpretation.” Pp. 7–40 in Magic and Divination in the Ancient World. Ancient Magic and Divination 2. Edited by L. Ciraolo and J. Seidel. Leiden: Brill-Styx, 2002. Hall, Mark G. A Study of the Sumerian Moon-God, NANNA/Suen. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, 1985. Heeßel, Nils P. Babylonisch-assyrische Diagnostik. AOAT 43. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2000. Horowitz, Wayne. “Astral Tablets in The Hermitage, Saint Petersburg.” ZA 90 (2000) 194–206. _________. “The Astrolabes: Astronomy, Theology, and Chronology.” Pp. 101–13 in Calendars and Years. Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near East. Edited by John M. Steele. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2007. _________. The Three Stars Each: The Astrolabes and Related Texts. Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 33. Vienna: Institut für Orientalistik der Universität Wien, 2014. Huber, Peter. “Review of Johannes Koch, Neue Untersuchungen zur Topographie des babylonischen Fixsternhimmels.” Centaurus 34.2 (1991) 172–73. Huber, Peter, and Salvo de Meis. Babylonian Eclipse Observations from 750 BC to 1 BC. Milan: Mimesis, 2014. Hunger, Hermann. Babylonische und assyrische Kolophone. AOAT 2. Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1968.

142

Jeanette C. Fincke

_________. Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 1. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka Band 9. Berlin: Gebrüder Mann, 1976. _________. “Kalender.” Pp. 297–303 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 5. Edited by D. O. Edzard. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1976–1980. _________. Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings. State Archives of Assyria 8. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1992. _________. Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia volume V: Lunar and Planetary Texts. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophischhistorische Klasse, Denkschriften 299. Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2001. _________. “Stars, Cities, and Predictions.” Pp. 16–32 in Studies in the History of the Exact Science in Honour of David Pingree. Edited by C. Burnett et al. Islamic Philosophy Theology and Science, Texts and Studies LIV. Leiden: Brill, 2004. _________. Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, volume VI: Goal Year Texts. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Denkschriften 346. Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2006. _________. Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia volume VII: Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophischhistorische Klasse, Denkschriften 466. Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2014. Hunger, Hermann, and David Pingree. MUL.APIN. An Astronomical Compendium in Cuneiform. Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 24. Horn: Ferdinand Berger & Söhne, 1989. _________. Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia. Handbuch der Orientalistik, erste Abteilung 44. Leiden: Brill, 1999. Hunger, Hermann, and Teje de Jong. “Almanac W22340a from Uruk: The Latest Datable Cuneiform Tablet.” ZA 104 (2014) 182–94. Jeyes, Ulla. Old Babylonian Extispicy: Omen Texts in the British Museum. PIHANS 64. Istanbul / Leiden: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut, 1989. _________. “Assurbanipal’s bārûtu.” Pp. 61–65 in Assyrien im Wandel der Zeiten. XXXIX e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Heidelberg 6.–10. Juli 1992. Edited by H. Waetzoldt and H. Hauptmann. Heidelberger Studien zum Alten Orient Band 6. Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag, 1997. Kämmerer, Thomas R., and Kai A. Metzler. Das babylonische Weltschöpfungsepos Enūma eliš. AOAT 375. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2012. Klein, Jacob, and Yitschak Sefati. “The “Stars (of) Heaven” and Cuneiform Writing.” Pp. 85– 102 in He Has Opened Nisaba’s House of Learning: Studies in Honor of Åke Waldemar Sjöberg on the Occasion of His 89th Birthday on August 1st 2013. Edited by L. Sassmannshausen. Cuneiform Monographs 46. Leiden: Brill, 2014. Koch, Johannes. Neue Untersuchungen zur Topographie des babylonischen Fixsternhimmels. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1989. _________. “Irrungen und Wirrungen einer Rezension.” AfO 38–39 (1991–92) 125–30. _________. “Der Dalbanna-Sternenkatalog.” Die Welt des Orients 26 (1995) 43–85. Koch-Westenholz, Ulla. Mesopotamian Astrology. An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination. Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications 19. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 1995. _________. “The Astrological Commentary šumma sîn ina tāmartīšu Tablet 1.” Res Orientales 12 (1999) 149–65. _________. Babylonian Liver Omens: The Chapters manzāzu, padānu and pān tākalti of the Babylonian Extispicy Series Mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library. Carsten Niebuhr Publications 25. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 2000. Kramer, Samuel N., and John Maier. Myths of Enki, the Crafty God. New York: Oxford University, 1989.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

143

Krebernik, Manfred. “Die Texte aus Fāra und Tell Abū Ṣalābīḫ.” Pp. 237–427 in Mesopotamien: Späturuk-Zeit und Frühdynastische Zeit, Annährungen 1. Edited by J. Bauer, R. K. Englund, and M. Krebernik. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 160/1. Freiburg: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1998. Kugler, Franz X. Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel. Assyriologische, astronomische und astralmythologische Untersuchungen. Münster: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1907. Labat, René. Un calendrier babylonien des travaux des signes et des mois (séries iqqur īpuš). Paris: Champion, 1965. Lambert, Wilfred G. “Ancestors, Authors, and Canonicity.” JCS 11 (1957) 1–14. _________. “A Catalogue of Texts and Authors.” JCS 16 (1962) 59–77. _________. Babylonian Creation Myths. Mesopotamian Civilizations 16. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2013. Leichty, Erle. The Omen Series Šumma Izbu. Texts from Cuneiform Sources volume 4. Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Augustin, 1970. _________. “Literary Notes. Smoke Omens.” Pp. 143–44 in Essays in the Ancient Near East in Memory of Jacob Joel Finkelstein. Edited by M. deJong Ellis. Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1977. Lieberman, Stephen J. “A Mesopotamian Background for the So-Called Aggadic ‘Measures’ of Biblical Hermeneutics ?” The Hebrew Union College Annual 58 (1987) 157–225. _________. “Canonical and Official Cuneiform Texts: Toward an Understanding of Assurbanipal’s Personal Tablet Collection.” Pp. 305–36 in: Lingering over Words: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of William L. Moran. Edited by T. Abush, J. Huehnergard, and P. Steinkeller. Harvard Semitic Studies 37. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1990. Livingstone, Alasdair. Mystical and Mythological Explanatory Works of Babylonian Scholars. Oxford: Clarendon, 1986. Maul, Stefan M. Zukunftsbewältigung: Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Löserituale (Namburbi). Baghdader Forschungen 18. Mainz am Rhein: Von Zabern, 1994. _________. “Omina und Orakel. A. Mesopotamien.” Pp. 45–88 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 10. Edited by D. O. Edzard and M. P. Streck. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2003. _________. “Die ‘Lösung vom Bann’: Überlegungen zu altorientalischen Konzeptionen von Krankheit und Heilkunst.” Pp. 79–95 in Magic and Rationality in Ancient Near Eastern and Graeco-Roman Medicine. Edited by H. F. J. Horstmanshoff and M. Stol. Leiden: Brill, 2004. _________. “Aleuromantie. Von der altorientalischen Kunst, mit Hilfe von Opfermehl das Maß göttlichen Wohlwollens zu ermitteln.” Pp. 115–30 in Von Göttern und Menschen: Beiträge zu Literatur und Geschichte des Alten Orients für Brigitte Groneberg. Edited by D. Shehata, F. Weihershäuser, and K. Zand. Cuneiform Monographs 41. Leiden: Brill, 2010. _________. “Die Wissenschaft von der Zukunft: Überlegungen zur Bedeutung der Divination im Alten Orient.” Pp. 135–51 in Babylon: Wissenskultur in Orient und Okzident. Edited by E. Cancik-Kirschbaum, M. von Ess, und J. Marzahn. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011. McEwan, Gilbert J. P. Priests and Temple in Hellenistic Babylonia. Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 4. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1981. Millard, Alan. The Eponyms of the Assyrian Empire. State Archives of Assyria Studies 2. Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1994. Moesgaard, Kristian P. “Review of Johannes Koch. Neue Untersuchungen zur Topographie des babylonischen Fixsternhimmels.” Isis 81 (1992) 474–75. Moren, Sally. “šumma izbu XIX: New Light on the Animal Omens.” AfO 27 (1980) 53–70.

144

Jeanette C. Fincke

Neugebauer, Otto. Astronomical Cuneiform Texts. Babylonian Ephemerides of the Seleucid Period for the Motion of the Sun, the Moon, and the Planets, vols. I–III. London: Lund Humphries, 1955. Neumann, Heinz. “Anmerkungen zu Johannes Koch, Neue Untersuchungen zur Topographie des babylonischen Fixsternhimmels.” AfO 38–39 (1991–92) 100–124. Nissen, Hans J., Peter Damerow, and Robert K. Englund. Frühe Schrift und Techniken der Wirtschaftsverwaltung im alten Vorderen Orient: Informationsspeicherung und -verarbeitung vor 5000 Jahren. Bad Salzdetfurth: Franzbecker, 1990. Nougayrol, Jean. “Aleuromancie babylonienne.” OrNS 32 (1963) 381–86. Oelsner, Joachim, and Wayne Horowitz. “The 30-Star-Catalogue HS 1897 and The Late Parallel BM 55502.” AfO 44/45 (1998) 176–85. Oppenheim, A. Leo. The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East : with Translation of an Assyrian Dream-Book. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1956. Ossendrijver, Mathieu. Babylonian Mathematical Astronomy: Procedure Texts. New York: Springer, 2012. Parker, Richard A., and Waldo H. Dubberstein. Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C. – A.D. 75. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 24. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956. Parpola, Simo. Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, Parts I–II. AOAT 5/1–2. Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1970 and 1983. _________. Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars. State Archives of Assyria 10. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993. Pedersén, Olof. Archives and Libraries in the City of Assur: A Survey of the Material from the German Excavations Part II. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Semitica Upsaliensia 8. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksel, 1986. _________. Archives and Libraries in the Ancient Near East 1500–300 b.c. Bethesda, MD: CDL, 1989. _________. Archive und Bibliotheken in Babylon. Die Tontafeln der Grabung Robert Kolde­ weys 1899–1917. Abhandlungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 25. Saarbrücken: Saarländische Druckerei und Verlag, 2005. Pettinato, Giovanni. Die Ölwahrsagung bei den Babyloniern. Studi Semitici 21–22. Rome: Instituto di Studi del Vicino Oriente, Università di Roma, 1966. Pingree, David. “Review of ‘Johannes Koch, Neue Untersuchungen zur Topographie des baby­lonischen Fixsternhimmels’.” WdO 23 (1992) 168–70. Pirngruber, Reinhard. “The Historical Sections of the Astronomical Diaries in Context: Developments in a Late Babylonian Scientific Text Corpus.” Iraq 75 (2013) 197–210. Polonski, Janice. The Rise of the Sun God and the Determination of Destiny in Ancient Mesopotamia. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, 2002. Reiner, Erica. Astral Magic in Babylonia. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 85.4; Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1995. Reiner, Erica, and David Pingree. Babylonian Planetary Omens, Part One: enūma anu enlil Tablet 63: The Venus Tablet of Ammiṣaduqa. Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 2.1. Malibu: Undena, 1975. _________. Babylonian Planetary Omens Part Two: enūma anu enlil, Tablets 50–51. Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 2.2. Malibu: Undena, 1981. Riemschneider, Kaspar K. Die akkadischen und hethitischen Omentexte aus Boǧazköy. Dresdner Beiträge zur Hethitologie 12. Dresden: Technische Universität Dresden, 2004 [reedition of his Habilitationsschrift from around 1973]. Rochberg, Francesca. Babylonian Horoscopes. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 88.1. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1998. _________. “Continuity and Change in Omen Literature.” Pp. 415–25 in Munuscula Mesopotamica: Festschrift für Johannes Renger. Edited by B. Böck, E. Cancik-Kirschbaum, and T. Richter. AOAT 267. Münster: Ugarit Verlag, 1999.

The Oldest Mesopotamian Astronomical Treatise

145

_________. “Scribes and Scholars: The ṭupšar enūma Anu Enlil.” Pp. 359–75 in Assyriologica et Semitica: Festschrift für Joachim Oelsner. Edited by J. Marzahn and H. Neumann. AOAT 252. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2000. _________. The Heavenly Writing. Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. _________. In the Path of the Moon: Babylonian Celestial Divination and Its Legacy. Studies in Ancient Magic and Divination 6. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Rochberg-Halton, Francesca. “Canonicity in Cuneiform Texts.” JCS 36 (1984) 127–44. _________. Aspects of Babylonian Celestial Divination: The Lunar Eclipse Tablets of Enūma Anu Enlil. Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 22. Horn: Ferdinand Berger & Söhne, 1988. _________. “Between Observation and Theory in Babylonian Astronomical Texts.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 50 (1991) 107–20. Römer, Willem H. P. Die Zylinderinschriften von Gudea. AOAT 376. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag 2010. Rutz, Matthew T. “Textual Transmission between Babylonia and Susa: A New Solar Omen Compendium.” JCS 58 (2006) 63–96. _________. Bodies of Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia: The Diviners of Late Bronze Age Emar and their Tablet Collection. Ancient Magic and Divination 9. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Sachs, Abraham. “Classification of the Babylonian Astronomical Texts of the Seleucid Period.” JCS 2 (1948) 271–290. Sachs, Abraham, and Hermann Hunger. Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, vols. I–III. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophischhistorische Klasse, Denkschriften 195., 210., 247. Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1988, 1989, 1996. Sallaberger, Walther. “Das Erscheinen Marduks als Vorzeichen: Kultstatue und Neujahrsfest in der Omenserie šumma ālu.” ZA 90 (2000) 227–62. _________. “Nachrichten an den Palast von Ebla. Eine Deutung von níg-mul-(an).” Pp. 600–25 in Semitic and Assyriological Studies Presented to Pelio Fronzaroli by Pupils and Colleagues. Edited by Giovanni Conti et al. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2003. Schaumberger, Johann. Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel: Assyriologische, astronomische und astralmythologische Untersuchungen. 3. Ergänzungsheft zum ersten und zweiten Buch. Münster: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1935. Scheil, Victor. “IV. La déesse Nisaba.” Orientalische Literatur-Zeitung 7 (1904) 252–55. Schott, Albrecht. “Das Werden der babylonisch-assyrischen Positions-Astronomie und einige seiner Bedingungen.” ZDMG 88 (1934) 302–37. Selz, Gebhard. “Nissaba(k), “Die Herrin der Getreidezuteilung”.” Pp. 491–97 in DUMU-E2DUB-BA. Studies in Honor of Åke W. Sjöberg. Edited by H. Behrens. Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 11. Philadelphia: The Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 1989. _________. “The Tablet with ‘Heavenly Writing’ or How to Become a Star.” Pp. 51–67 in Non licet stare caelestibus: Studies on Astronomy and Its History offered to Salvo de Meis. Edited by A. Panaino. Indo-Iranica et Orientalia 13. Milan: Mimesis, 2014. Šileiko, Victor K. “Mondlaufprognosen aus der Zeit der ersten babylonischen Dynastie.” Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Sciences de l’Union des Républiques Soviétiques Socialistes B (1927) 125–28. Sjöberg, Åke. Der Mondgott Nanna-Suen in der sumerischen Überlieferung. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1960. Sjöberg, Åke W., and Eugen Bergmann. The Collection of Sumerian Temple Hymns. Texts from Cuneiform Sources 3. Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Augustin, 1969. Steele, John M. “The Length of the Month in Mesopotamian Calendars of the First Millennium b.c.e.” Pp. 133–48 in Calendars and Years: Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near East. Edited by J. M. Steele. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2007.

146

Jeanette C. Fincke

_________. “Late Babylonian ziqpu-Star Lists. Written or Remembered Tradition of Knowledge?” Pp. 123–51 in Tradition of Written Knowledge in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamima. Edited by D. Bawanipeck and A. Imhausen. AOAT 403. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2015. _________. “A Babylonian Compendium of Calendrical and Stellar Astrology.” JCS 67 (2015) 187–215 Steible, Horst. Rīmsîn, mein König: Drei kultische Texte aus Ur mit der Schlußdoxologie driim-dsîn lugal-mu Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 1. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1975. Stol, Marten. Studies in Old Babylonian History. PIHANS 40. Leiden: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1976. Swerdloff, Noel M. The Babylonian Theory of the Planets. Princton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998. Theuer, Gabriele. Der Mondgott in den Religionen Syrien-Palästinas unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von KTU 1.24. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 173. Freiburg: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000. Thompson, Reginald Campbell. The Reports of the Magicians and Astrologers of Nineveh and Babylon in the British Museum vol.s. 1–2. Luzac’s Semitic text and translation series 6–7. London: Luzac, 1900. Thureau-Dangin, François. “Distances entre étoiles fixes d’après une tablette de l’epoque des Séleucides.” RA 10 (1915) 215–25. van der Waerden, Bartel L. “The History of the Zodiac.” AfO 16 (1952–53) 216–30, Plate XVIII. Veldhuis, Niek. “Divination: Theory and Use.” Pp. 487–97 in If a Man Builds a Joyful House: Assyriological Studies in Honor of Erle Verdun Leichty. Edited by A. K. Guinan et al. Cuneiform Monographs 31. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Verderame, Lorenzo. “The Primeval Zodiac: Its Social, Religious, and Mythological Background.” Pp 151–56 in Cosmology across Cultures: Proceedings of a Workshop Held at Parque de las Ciencias, Granade, Spain, 8–12 September 2008. Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series 409. Edited by J. A. Rubiño et al. San Francisco, CA: Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 2009. Von Weiher, Egbert. Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 2. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka 10. Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1983. _________. Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil 3. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsbemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka 12. Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1988. _________. Uruk. Spätbabylonische Texte aus dem Planquadrat U 18 Teil 4. Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka, Endberichte 12. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 1993. Walker, Christopher B. F. “The Dalbanna Text: A Mesopotamian Star-List.” Die Welt des Orients 26 (1995) 27–42. _________. “Nos. 78–88. Astronomical Texts.” Pp. 315–45 in Literary and Scholastic Texts of the First Millennium B.C. Edited by I. Spar and W. G. Lambert. Cuneiform Texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art 2. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2005. Walker, Christopher B. F. and Hermann Hunger, “Zwölfmaldrei.” MDOG 109 (1977) 27–34. Weidner, Ernst F. Handbuch der babylonischen Astronomie. Leipzig: Hinrichs’sche Buchhand­ lung, 1915. _________. “Die astrologische Serie Enûma Anu Enlil.” AfO 14 (1942–44) 175–84. _________. “Ein astrologischer Sammeltext aus der Sargonidenzeit.” AfO 19 (1959–60) 105–13. _________. “Ein Losbuch in Keilschrift der Seleukidischen Zeit.” Syria 33 (1956) 175–83. _________. Gestirn-Darstellungen auf babylonischen Tontafeln. Vienna: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf., 1967. Yoshida, Daisuke. Untersuchungen zu den Sonnengottheiten bei den Hethitern: Schwurgötterliste, helfende Gottheit, Feste. Texte der Hethiter 22. Heidelberg: Winter, 1996.

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System Paul Delnero

The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore In standard narratives of the history of science, Mesopotamia is rarely accorded a place beyond being a merely imperfect precursor to the so-called “Greek Miracle,” which is supposed to have given rise to modern Western science in nearly all its forms. While it is generally acknowledged that scientific practices, including mathematics, astronomy, and medicine, developed in Mesopotamia long before they were allegedly discovered in ancient Greece, it is also frequently assumed that what had been achieved in these domains lacked the rigor and sophistication to qualify as science in the true sense of the word. At most, certain Mesopotamian scientific accomplishments, such as an awareness of the mathematical principles behind what was later to become the Pythagorean theorem or the ability to predict celestial phenomena with mathematical accuracy, are given their rightful place in History of Science textbooks, but with the qualification that since this knowledge was never formulated abstractly into all-encompassing theories, and was applied only to solve practical problems on a case-by-case basis, it should not be considered real science. Although this depiction of the dismissal of the Mesopotamian contribution to the historical development of science is caricatured to a certain extent and reflects a view that is more common in treatments of topics in the history of science from the Scientific Revolution until the present, a more nuanced, but nonetheless representative, characterization of the pre-scientific character of Mesopotamian scientific knowledge can be found in David Lindberg’s textbook survey of pre-modern science. 1 After acknowledging the Mesopotamian and Egyptian contribution to science by beginning his book with a chapter on “Science before the Greeks,” and noting, in particular, the substantial Mesopotamian achievements in mathematics and astronomy, Lindberg devotes no more than eight pages to the subject, before proceeding, only five pages later to describe how “a fresh wind was about to blow in a different direction” and “Greek culture experienced a burst of a radically new kind of discourse—speculation unprecedented in its rationality (nous in Greek), its concern for evidence, and its acknowledgement that claims were open to dispute and needed to be defended,” leaving little doubt that Mesopotamian science must have been comparatively less rational and “concerned with evidence.” 2 1.  David C. Lindberg, The Beginnings of Western Science: The European Scientific Tradition in Philosophical, Religious, and Institutional Context, Prehistory to a.d. 1450 (2nd edition; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007). 2. Lindberg, Beginnings of Western Science, 25.

147

148

Paul Delnero

Within the field of Assyriology, the relegation of Mesopotamian scientific practices to the realm of proto-science at best, and to non-existence, at worst, has been countered by numerous well-grounded attempts to argue that many forms of inquiry in ancient Mesopotamia that are typically dismissed as non-scientific should in fact be regarded as science. 3 One Mesopotamian practice whose status as science has been considered with particular frequency is divination. 4 The arguments that Mesopotamian divination is a science tend to proceed along two lines. One is by identifying the minimum criteria a practice must fulfill to be considered scientific and then demonstrating how divination meets these criteria. The other is to challenge current conceptions of what qualifies as science, and to redefine science more broadly so that divination can be classified as scientific under the new definition. As an example of the first approach, Jean Bottéro in a now classic study on the subject argued that because Mesopotamian divination appears to have been rooted in empirical observation, and to rely on principles that are rational and systematic, it is comparable, in every significant respect, to any other scientific practice, and should thus be considered a science. 5 Bottéro locates the empirical aspects of Mesopotamian divination in the earliest stages in its development, when he argues that divinatory omens were derived from observing the co-occurrence of an anomalous occurrence in the natural world and another equally striking event pertaining to the people in the land and inferring that that there was a causal relationship between the two. 6 Although his case for the empirical origins of divination has since been disputed, particularly with respect to his identification of the evidence for this in the so-called historical omens, in which ominous signs are correlated with events affecting rulers from the Old Akkadian and Ur III Periods, an empirical interest in the natural world is nonetheless evident in the wide range of natural phenomena from which omens are derived in numerous omen compendia, including the large body of celestial omens in the series Enūma Anu Enlil, and the extensive corpora of terrestial omens collected in the series Šumma ālu. 7 In addition to the possible role 3.  Exemplary in this respect is the large body of work on Mesopotamian astronomy by Fran­cesca Rochberg, including The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004); Eleanor Robson’s magisterial Mathematics in Ancient Iraq: A Social History (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008); and many others, building on the pioneering work of Otto Neugebauer from the first half of the 20th century, including The Exact Sciences in Antiquity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952). 4.  For a comprehensive treatment of Mesopotamian divination, which examines nearly all aspects of the subject from a detailed and rigorous historical and analytic perspective, see Stefan M. Maul, Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient: Zeichen des Himmels und der Erde (Munich: Beck, 2013), as well as the condensed treatment of the subject by the same author, “Omina und Orakel. A. Mesopotamien,” in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie, Vol. 10 (ed. D. O. Edzard and M. P. Streck; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2003) 45–88, both of which contain extensive references to previous literature. Additionally, the articles collected in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (ed. A. Annus; Oriental Institute Seminars 6; Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010), treat divination in Mesopotamia (as well as in Egypt and Rome) from multiple perspectives, and substantially enlarge what is known about the social and political contexts, as well as the theoretical underpinning of Mesopotamian divinatory practice. 5.  Jean Bottéro, “Symptômes, signes, écritures en Mésopotamie ancienne,” in Divination et rationalité (ed. J. Vernant, L. Vandermeersch, and J.-P. Vernant; Paris: Seuil, 1974) 70–196. 6.  Bottéro, “Symptômes, signes, écritures,” 149–50. 7. The case against an empirical origin for Mesopotamian divination has been made the most forcefully by Ulla Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology: An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination (CNI Publications 19; Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 1995) 15–19,

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

149

of empirical observation in Mesopotamian divinatory practice, Bottéro also argues, largely on the basis of the structure and content of the existing omen compendia, that the large body of technical and scholarly texts used by diviners possesses all of the features he identifies as being characteristic of any “true science.” In his view, the primary features of omen compendia that are consistent with scientific practice, as it is generally understood, are the systematic means by which omens of different types are collected, and later extended, to take into account every conceivable possible ominous sign, and the apparent logic that seems to underlie, in many instances, the correlations that are made between the observed ominous signs in the protases and the events they prognosticate in the apodoses. To illustrate the systematic nature of Mesopotamian omen compendia and the logic that informs divinatory interpretation, Bottéro cites as an example a collection of Old Babylonian omens (YOS 10, 54) pertaining to the umṣatu, an ominous mark identifiable as a type of mole. 8 In this collection, omens pertaining to the umṣatu are listed not only for nearly every part of the body, from head to toe, including the forehead, the cheek, the tongue, the hand, and the testicles, but also at almost every conceivable position on each of these body parts, including the right, left, top, and bottom, revealing that this compendium was intended to be comprehensive, taking into account all possible occurrences of the umṣatu as an ominous sign. 9 The systematic nature of the collection is suggested not only by the comprehensiveness of the occurrences cited, however, but also by the logic by which the occurrences of the umṣatu are interpreted. As observed by Bottéro, the consistency with which the occurrence of the mark on the right side of a bodily location is interpreted as a positive sign, while being interpreted negatively on the left, as well as the frequency with which a negative sign appearing in a positively charged area like the right side of a feature reverses the polarity of the sign, bear witness to a divinatory “logic” that is inherently rational. 10 Bottéro concludes from the systematic means by which omens are listed and the logical principles applied to interpret the ominous signs in this and many other omen compendia that Mesopotamian divinatory practice was “unified and coherent,” and developed over time to become objective and systematic in a way that is comparable to any other scientific practice. 11 The second approach is exemplified in the work of Francesca Rochberg, who opposes the commonly held view that science is a static and monolithic entity that transcends time and space, and thus that the term science should only be applied to practices that meet all of the criteria that are associated with science today, by arguing that science should be considered instead from a cultural perspective, as a set of practices that are defined by, and inseparable from, the cultures in which they who, in addition to noting the occurrence of omens that are “impossible” in the natural world, and the improbability that the so-called historical omens are historical in the modern sense of the term, calls attention to the cross-cultural observation that knowledge about the natural world is almost never entirely empirical. See Maul, Wahrsagekunst, 262–65 for a recent overview of Enūma Anu Enlil with references to editions and further literature, and more extensively, Maul, “Omina und Orakel,” 51–57. For an overview of Šumma ālu with references to further literature, see Maul, “Omina und Orakel,” 58–62. 8.  Bottéro, “Symptômes, signes, écritures,” 171–78. 9.  For a list of all of the places on the body where the umṣatu appears in the omens collected in YOS 10, 54, and the ominous events associated with them, see Bottéro, “Symptômes, signes, écritures,” 174–76. 10.  Ibid., 178. 11.  Ibid., 183.

150

Paul Delnero

developed. One of the most substantial limitations of many definitions of science in Rochberg’s view is that in presupposing that the goal of science is to understand the natural world, conventional definitions of science fail to take into account cultures like Mesopotamia, where nature was not considered to be a discrete entity, and no distinction was made between the natural, the supernatural, and the preternatural. 12 Furthermore, Rochberg argues that there was no science, in the strict sense of the term, in Mesopotamia, but instead an interest in the phenomenal world, that was motivated less by a desire to account for the causes of natural phenomena, than by a need to explain their significance as ominous signs. 13 Noting that both science and nature are pluralistic, in so far as not all science has the goal of understanding how nature operates, and that in Mesopotamia nature was not conceived as “an independent objective reality,” she concludes that in place of reifying science as an absolute and transcendent entity and looking for evidence for it in Mesopotamia, science should be understood instead as distinct “historical and cultural way(s) of knowing.” 14 For this reason, she argues, in place of looking for evidence for science in a form in which it never existed, historians of Mesopotamian science should instead examine the way knowledge was defined in Mesopotamia, and the set of cultural practices in which it was embedded. One of the main reasons why divination is often dismissed as unscientific is because it was firmly rooted in religion, and science and religion are typically thought to be distinct, and to a large extent, mutually exclusive means of understanding the world. By uncovering the scientific underpinnings of Mesopotamian divination, on the one hand, and allowing for the inclusion of supernatural elements in scientific practices, on the other, Bottéro and Rochberg both provide persuasive arguments for why divination cannot be rejected as a science simply because it was inseparable from religion. While Mesopotamian practices like divination clearly deserve a rightful place in histories of ancient science, and should certainly not be devalued as pre- or proto-scientific, the only limitation to focusing on the question of whether divination is science masked by religion, is that it draws attention away from the cultural function of divination, which is equally important. In examining divination as a self-contained, theoretical system, its relation to other practices, including ritual, scholarship, and statecraft, with which it is inextricably linked, can easily be overlooked. One practice that is almost never considered in connection with divination is lamenting. Since Sumerian laments were performed to appease angry deities so that their anger would not be turned against the city and population, lamenting shares with divination the essential goal of protecting people from foreseeable catastrophes. As practices with similar objectives, divination and lamenting can therefore be viewed as complementary components of a single cultural system, in which divination is used to identify signs of future misfortune, and lamenting is performed to prevent future misfortune from occurring. In the remainder of this article, the relationship between divination and lamenting will be examined in more detail, focusing, in particular, on the content and structure of the Sumerian lament Uru­ amairabi to argue that lamenting, like divination, belonged to a common set of prac12.  Francesca Rochberg, “The History of Science and Ancient Mesopotamia,” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History 1 (2014) 52–3. 13.  Ibid., 43–44. 14.  Ibid., 47–51.

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

151

tices which mobilized science and religion to ensure the wellbeing of the populace. In reframing the question of whether divination is a science or purely religious, by emphasizing instead its cultural function, it is hoped to show that the scientific and religious aspects of divination were equally present in lamenting, which was performed both as a rational response to the threat of catastrophe and as a religious practice intended to reaffirm and rectify the relationship between humanity and the gods. In a frequently cited letter from the Neo-Assyrian Period, the scholar Mardukšāpik-zēri writes to the ruler Assurbanipal, boasting: I fully master my father’s profession, the discipline of lamentation; I have studied and chanted the Series. I am competent in . . . “mouth-washing” and purification of the palace. . . . I have examined healthy and sick flesh. I have read (the astrological omen series) Enūma Anu Enlil . . . and made astronomical observations. I have read the (anomaly series) Šumma izbu, the (physiognomical works) [Kataduqqû], Alandimmû and Nigdimdimmû . . . [and the] (terrestrial omen series) Šumma ālu. 15

As this letter reveals, lamenting (ka-lu-u2-tu) was considered to belong to the same body of knowledge as different types of divination, which Marduk-šāpik-zēri claims to have mastered along with medicine and the art of purification to demonstrate his scholarly credentials to Assurbanipal. While it should not be assumed that scholarship in the Old Babylonian Period encompassed exactly the same set of ideals and practices that it did in the Neo-Assyrian Period, over a millennium later, by bringing to light one Mesopotamian context in which divination and lamentation were considered to be related skills, the letter at least raises the possibility that the same practices could have also been connected at an even earlier date. Divination, which was performed by examining animal livers or different aspects of the natural world, including the celestial bodies in the sky or the behavior of animals and people on earth, was used to identify and interpret ominous signs to determine the outcome of future events. Since divination could be carried out to avert potential catastrophes and to ensure that intended actions would be met with divine approval, it was also a powerful form of social control, and belonged to an entire set of cultural practices that were employed by the state to legitimate political decisions. 16 The use of divination for political purposes is illustrated with particular clarity in Old Babylonian letters from Mari which document the activities of diviners working in the service of the rulers of the city, Zimri-lim and Yasmah-Addu. 17 In these letters, divination is reported being used to authorize or predict a wide variety 15.  dul-la ša2 ad-ia2 ka-lu-u2-tu ug-dam-[mir-ma] iš-ka-ru un-der-ri-ir az-za-mur ina ša3-bi [.  .  .] mi-is pi-i tak-pir-ti e2.kur a-le-eʾ-[e-e] [. . .] uzu di gig un-der-ri-ir Iud-an-den.lil2 [. . .] [al]-ta-si mul.meš an-e uṣ-ṣab!-bi be-iz!-bu! [. . .] [Ialam].dim2-mu-u2 Inig2.dim2.dim2-mu-u2 [. . .] [Iuru] ina sukud-gar al‑ta‑si. Transliteration and translation adopted from Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars (SAA 10; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993) 122, no. 160, lines 36–42. 16.  For recent treatments of the political appropriation of divination in ancient Mesopotamia, see Maul, Wahrsagekunst, 187–91 and 297–313, and for the Old Babylonian Period more extensively, Seth F. C. Richardson, “On Seeing and Believing: Liver Divination and the Era of Warring States (II),” in Divination and the Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (ed. A. Annus; Oriental Institute Seminars 6; Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010) 225–66. 17. For editions, translations, commentaries, and a discussion of the letters from Mari pertaining to divination see Jean-Marie Durand, Archives épistolaires de Mari I/1 (Archives Royales de Mari 26/1; Paris: Éditions recherche sur les civilisations, 1988) 71–373. Many of these letters have also been

152

Paul Delnero

of actions and events of direct interest to the state, including whether Zimri-lim should cede the city Hit to Hammurabi (ARM 16/1, 160), whether a town in the area of the Balikh should be conquered in battle (ARM 16/1, 117), whether Shubat-Enlil would be seized by the enemy (ARM 26/1, 102), and whether the Babylonian troops would cause rebellion when they entered Mari (ARM 26/1, 155). During the Neo-Assyrian Period one of the most common strategies for counteracting an ominous event which had been identified through divination was to perform a namburbi-ritual, or ritual of undoing. 18 In an article entitled, “How the Babylonians Protected Themselves against Calamities Announced by Omens,” Stefan Maul identified a sequence of six steps which had to be performed to successfully complete a namburbi-ritual. 19 These steps comprised placating the angry gods who sent the omen, causing the gods to reverse their decision, removing all impurity from the victim, purifying everything that had come into contact with the impure person, returning the person to normal life, and lastly, providing the victim with permanent protection against the renewed threat of the omen. 20 If the ritual was executed completely and correctly, the victim of the identified omen would have been freed from the harm that had been destined for that person, and the effects of the calamity averted. Although laments were not performed for the same reason as namburbi-incantations, in being sung to appease the hearts of angry gods, they fulfilled the similar function of protecting people from impending catastrophe, with the difference that instead of individuals, they were intended for the benefit of entire communities. 21 Cultic laments, which are written in the Emesal dialect of Sumerian, begin to appear in the textual record during the Old Babylonian Period, and comprise two main types of compositions: Balags and Ershemmas. 22 Balags generally have as a theme the destruction and abandonment of cities and temples, and are distinct translated in Wolfgang Heimpel, Letters to the Kings of Mari: A New Translation with Historical Introduction, Notes, and Commentary (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2003) 173–283. 18.  For editions, translations, and a comprehensive discussion of the corpus of Akkadian namburbi-texts, see Stefan M. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung: Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Löserituale (Namburbi) (Baghdader Forschungen 18; Mainz am Rhein: von Zabern, 1994). 19.  Stefan M. Maul, “How the Babylonians Protected Themselves against Calamities Announced by Omens,” in Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretative Perspectives (ed. T. Abusch and K. van der Toorn; Ancient Magic and Divination 1; Groningen: Styx Publications, 1999) 123–29. 20.  Maul, “How the Babylonians Protected Themselves,” 124. 21.  When lamenting is understood more broadly to include personal prayers containing laments to deities, then a distinction would need to be made between private laments, on the one hand, and communal laments, on the other. For this reason, Anne Löhnert, ‘Wie die Sonne tritt heraus!’: Eine Klage zum Auszug Enlils mit einer Untersuchung zu Komposition und Tradition sumerischer Klagelieder in altbabylonischer Zeit (AOAT 365; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2009) 3–4, distinguishes between “persön­ liche Klagen,” to which the texts known as Eršahungas (‘lament for appeasing the heart’) belong, and the remaining types of laments (city laments, Balags, Ershemmas, and Širnamšubs), which she classifies as “Klagen zum Wohle der Gemeinschaft.” For the purposes of this study, however, only laments belonging to the latter category, and in particular the Balags, will be considered. 22.  For editions, translations, and overview of many of the known Balags, see Mark Cohen, The Canonical Lamentations of Ancient Mesopotamia (Potomac, MD: Capital Decisions Limited, 1988); and, more recently, Löhnert, ‘Wie die Sonne tritt heraus!,’ which contains a more detailed overview of Balaglaments. Many of the known Ershemmas are edited and translated in Mark Cohen, Sumerian Hymnology: The Eršemma (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1981), and more recently in Uri Gabbay, Pacifying the Hearts of the Gods: Sumerian Emesal Prayers of the First Millennium BC (Heidelberger Emesal-

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

153

from Ershemmas in having multiple sections identified as Kirugus, which mark points in the text when specific cultic actions were to be performed. The Sumerian term b a l a ĝ , which occurs in rubrics and in lists of individual Balags to identify texts of this type, possibly refers to a harp, but more likely to a drum that was used to accompany these texts in performance. 23 The term k i - r u - g u 2 means literally ‘place of encountering,’ from the verb r u - g u 2 , ‘to face or oppose,’ and may refer to specific stations in a procession where different cultic actions were performed. Similarly, Balags often conclude with the rubric k i - š u 2 , a term that seems to mean ‘place of covering,’ which has been argued by Claus Wilcke to refer to the place when or where the b a l a ĝ -instrument is covered at the end of the performance of the composition. 24 The association of the term b a l a ĝ with an instrument used in performance, together with the occurrence of the rubrics k i - r u - g u 2 and k i - š u 2 , which have distinct performative connotations, are clear indications that Balags were actively performed. Examining the references to the performance of rituals involving laments in Ur III administrative texts, Anne Löhnert summarizes the cultic functions of Balags at the end of the third millennium b.c.e. as follows: Contexts for the performance of lamentations include instances of the gods’ leaving their temples during agricultural ceremonies and royal visits, the gods’ bathing rites, mourning rituals on the occasion of the death of rulers, priests, priestesses, and other respected individuals, and ceremonies at the time of the new moon. All these occasions bore an inherent risk that the gods would leave and not return—for instance, because a divine statue might become lost or damaged during a procession or the sun or moon might not become visible again after an eclipse—and thereby endanger or upset the existing world order. 25

Studien 1; Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 2014), which includes a comprehensive and detailed overview of Ershemmas and their ritual use. 23. There seems to be an emerging consensus in recent literature on the subject to identify the Balag-instrument with a drum; see, among others, Dahlia Shehata, Musiker und ihr vokales Repertoire: Untersuchungen zu Inhalt und Organisation von Musikerberufen und Liedgattungen in altbabylonischer Zeit (Göttinger Beiträge zum Alten Orient 3; Göttingen: Universitätsverlag, 2009) 72–4 and Piotr Michalowski, “Learning Music: Schooling, Apprenticeship, and Gender in Early Mesopotamia,” in Musiker und Tradierung: Studien zur Rolle von Musikern bei der Verschriftlichung und Tradierung von literarischen Werken (ed. R. Pruzsinszky and D. Shehata; Wiener Offene Orientalistik 8; Münster: LIT, 2009) 221. However, it has also been argued, particularly by Henrike Hartmann, Die Musik der Sumerischen Kultur (Dissertation: Frankfurt, 1960) 55, that the term balaĝ originally referred to a stringed instrument like the harp, but by the Ur III Period it was used to refer to a large drum. For additional references to the interpretation of this instrument, see Löhnert, ‘Wie die Sonne tritt heraus!,’ 5 n. 21. For a similar view, see now Uri Gabbay, “The Balaĝ Instrument and its Role in the Cult of Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Music in Antiquity: The Near East and the Mediterranean (ed. J. Westenholz, Y. Maurey, and E. Seroussi; Yuval 8; Oldenbourg: Walter de Gruyter, 2014) 128–47 who argues that the Balag-instrument was a stringed instrument throughout the third millennium, but that in the second millennium the use of this instrument during the performance of Balags was replaced by the lilissu kettledrum. 24.  Claus Wilcke, “Formale Gesichtspunkte in der sumerischen Literatur,” in Sumerological Studies in Honor of Thorkild Jacobsen (ed. Stephen Lieberman; Assyriological Studies 20; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975) 261. 25. Anne Löhnert, “Manipulating the Gods: Lamenting in Context,” in The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture (ed. K. Radner and E. Robson; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011) 413–14.

154

Paul Delnero

The conclusion that follows logically from this list of uses—namely that laments were performed to appease deities to ensure that the cosmic order was kept in balance—has been stated explicitly (among others) by Mark Cohen, who notes: Serving not only to placate divine anger over specific activities, the balag-lamentation was one vehicle by which the priests maintained an ever-constant vigil against the capriciousness of the gods. The regular recitation of lamentations on fixed days of each month and on festivals hopefully insured tranquility for a nation ever afraid it might unknowingly commit an offense against the divine powers. 26

Although, as Cohen and other authors have noted, the function of Balags was undoubtedly complex (as well as subject to change over time) and by no means limited to divine appeasement, the unambiguous references to the usage of Balags (in many, if not all instances) in contexts directly associated with grieving or threats to the cosmic order, together with the frequent appeals to deities in Balags and other laments to turn back their anger, leave little doubt that at least one of the functions of these texts was divine appeasement. As shown by Löhnert, at least four Old Babylonian sources containing Balags have colophons which identify the ritual function of the compositions. In each instance, the colophon contains some variant of the formula: š u d 3 - b i š e - e b Temple Name- a ( - t a ) k i - n a d i n g i r g i 4 - g i 4 - r a , which can be interpreted to mean: ‘This prayer is for the one who returns the god from the brickwork of the temple to its place,’ where the temples named include the Egal of Kesh, the Ebabbar of Sippar, and the Ekur of Nippur. 27 It would appear then on the basis of these colophons, that one of the ritual functions of Balags was to be performed when statues of deities which had been removed for cultic processions and other purposes were returned to their temples. Since a deity could only protect the city when it was physically present in its temple, periods in which the statue of the deity was absent were fraught with danger. The moment when the statue was to reenter the temple would have been an especially critical period when ritual measures had to be taken to ensure that the god successfully returned to its residence and did not abandon it permanently. Performing a lament to appease the gods by evoking the full extent of the devastation that would surely ensue were the deity not to return to the temple would have served as an effective means of preventing such a catastrophic event from occurring. While lamenting was clearly a religious practice, it also employed a rigidly systematic set of techniques to perform a distinct and immanently practical cultural function. Though none of the techniques used in lamenting were directly empirical or deductive, they were rigorously rational in their reliance on a unified and coher26.  Mark Cohen, Balag-compositions: Sumerian Lamentation Liturgies of the Second and First Millennium b.c. (Sources from the Ancient Near East 1/2; Malibu: Undena Publications, 1974) 15. Cf. also, Joachim Krecher, Sumerische Kultlyrik (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 166) 41: “In diesen Kulthandlungen [referring to various rites involving lamenting] dürften unsere Emesallieder, bzw. deren uns unbekannte Vorläufer ursprünglich verwendet worden sein. Je stärker im Laufe der Zeit die zugrunde liegenden Mythen oder vielleicht geschichtlichen Erinnerungen verblassten, desto mehr konnten die Lieder nur noch als Flehen um Gnade angesichts des immer drohenden göttlichen Zornes empfunden und damit praktisch an jeder Stelle im Kult verwendet warden,” while nonetheless noting: “Doch bleiben das nur Vermutungen.” 27. Löhnert, ‘Wie die Sonne tritt heraus!,’ 24–9.

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

155

ent body of principles to effect a change in the physical world. To the extent that lamenting, like divination, was embedded in religion, but comparable to science in its methods and goals, it can be considered a cultural practice with both scientific and religious elements. The rationality of the means by which lamenting achieved its effect is most notably evident in the structure and content of the individual laments that were performed during lamentation rituals. One such lament, a Balag known as Uruamairabi, provides a particularly clear example of how Sumerian laments were structured and composed to fulfill their purpose. The Balag Uruamairabi, which is named from the first phrase in the text, u r u 2 a m 3 - m a - i - r a - b i , which means ‘That city which has been plundered,’ is attested for the first time in copies dating to the Old Babylonian Period, and like many Sumerian laments, continued to be copied and performed in modified and extended form throughout the first millennium. 28 The ritual use of Uruamairabi specifically is encountered in two Old Babylonian texts from Mari which contain descriptions of rituals to the goddess Ishtar in which individual sections or Kirugus from the composition were sung, recited, and performed to the accompaniment of a choir and music played on the deified Balag-instrument, Ninigizibara, at different stages in the ritual, together with an Ershemma to the god Enlil. 29 During this ritual, which was performed in the evening and on the morning of the first day of the ninth month, a drum (or harp), which was personified as a divinity and given the name Ninigizibara (written d n i n - g i - z i - i p - p a - r a in the ritual), was installed in Ishtar’s temple in front of an image of the goddess. A group of musicians was seated to the right of the instrument and to the left were gala-priests (Akkadian kalû), the cultic officials known to have been solely responsible for the performance of Balags and Ershemmas during this period. The text then describes how at different points during the ritual the gala-priests sung different sections, or Kirugus, of the Balag Uruamairabi. The different sections of the composition are identified in the text by the beginning of the first line, or incipit, of each section of the composition along with the time during the ritual when they were performed. Three of the four incipits that are identified in the ritual correspond directly to the incipits of different sections of Uruamairabi in the preserved Old Babylonian sources for the composition. 30 The section identified in the text with the incipit ĝ a 2 - e u 2 - r e - m e n 2 (= m e - e u r e - m e n 3 ), which according to the ritual was sung at the moment the musicians set 28.  A complete edition of the Old Babylonian and first-millennium versions of Uruamairabi based on a preliminarly list of sources was published by Cohen, Canonical Lamentations, 536–603, with important corrections and additions by Antoine Cavigneaux, Review of Cohen 1988, Journal of the American Oriental Society 113 (1993) 254–57. A revised list of sources for both versions of the text was published by Konrad Volk, Die Balaĝ-Komposition Uru2 am3-ma-ir-ra-bi: Rekonstruktion und Bearbeitung der Tafeln 18 (19′ff.), 19, 20 und 21 der späten, kanonischen Version (FAOS 18; Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1989) 5–8 together with a new edition of tablets 18–21 of the first-millennium version of the composition, and the sections of the Old Babylonian source H2, which correspond to these tablets. A new edition of the first five Kirugus of Uruamairabi is being prepared by the author. 29.  For the original edition of this text, see Jean-Marie Durand and Michel Guichard, “Les rituals de Mari,” in Recueil d’études à la mémoire de Marie-Thérèse Barrelet (ed. D. Charpin and J.-M. Durand; FM 3 and Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 4; Paris: SÉPOA, 1997) 19–78 and Nele Ziegler, Les Musiciens et la musique d’après les archives de Mari (FM 9 and Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 10; Paris: SÉPOA, 2007) 55–64 for a more recent interpretation. The use of Uruamairabi in the Mari Ishtar ritual is also discussed by Löhnert, “Wie die Sonne tritt heraus!,’ 63–67. 30.  For the first identification of these incipits see Antoine Cavigneaux, “Sur le balag Uruammai’irabi et le Rituel de Mari,” N.A.B.U. (1998) n. 43: 46–47.

156

Paul Delnero

out on a procession (Akkadian lismu), corresponds to the incipit for the fifth section of Uruamairabi. 31 Similarly, the incipits of the sections identified as g i - n i g i - n i (= g i 4 - i n - e g i 4 - i n - e ) and m u - g i - i m m u - g i - i m (= m u - g i 1 7 - i b m u - g i 1 7 - i b ), which were performed at the moments before the assembly is purified and before the high priest (Akkadian šangûm = Sumerian s a n g a ) made libations to Ishtar, are identical to the incipits of later sections of the composition. 32 Furthermore, between the performance of two of the sections of Uruamairabi an Ershemma to the god Enlil with the incipit AN-nu-wa-še was sung by a single gala-priest to the accompaniment of a large halhallu-drum, confirming that the practice of pairing Balags and Ershemmas as it is known from the first millennium was also already being done as early as the Old Babylonian Period. 33 The widespread ritual use of Uruamairabi during the Old Babylonian Period is reflected even more prominently, however, in the number and distribution of sources containing the lament. The first part of Uruamairabi, which according to at least one source from the period contained no fewer than 29, and as many as 33 Kirugus, is the most extensively preserved in NCBT 688, a tablet containing the first five Kirugus of the composition. 34 Some or all of the same Kirugus are also preserved in nine additional Old Babylonian sources. These sources, which are listed and described in more detail in Figure 1, comprise four sources from Kish, the most well preserved of which is written phonetically; two sources from Ur, one of which contains an Akkadian translation of a passage from the second Kirugu; an early Old Babylonian phonetic source from Girsu; an exercise tablet from Susa; and one source from an unknown proveniences, which is written in a micro-script and contains Akkadian glosses.

Figure 1.  Old Babylonian Sources for Uruamairabi, Kirugus 1–5: Main Source: 1.  NCBT 688: Long, single-column tablet, 21 cm in height, 7.7 cm in width; the main source for the beginning of the composition, containing Kirugus 1–5 and the catch-line to Kirugu 6. Obv.: 1–61 (single dividing line) [kirugu 1 notation broken]; Bottom edge: 62–66

31.  This incipit is preserved in Sb 12436, a source from Susa, where it occurs as a catch-line following the end of the fifth section of Uruamairabi, indicating that this incipit corresponds to the beginning of the sixth kirugu of the composition. 32. As noted by Cavigneaux, “Sur le balag Uruammai’irabi,” the incipit g i4- i n - e g i4- i n - e corresponds to the beginning of the 23rd kirugu of the text as it is preserved in H 2 and mu -g i17- i b mu - g i17ib corresponds to the beginning of the 33rd kirugu in the same source. 33.  Cavigneaux, “Sur le balag Uruammai’irabi,” suggests that this incipit is to be interpreted as am nu2-a-še3, the beginning of an otherwise unknown Ershemma to Enlil. In support of this interpretation it can be noted that the image of Enlil as a bull who lies down occurs frequently in Sumerian laments and would be an appropriate beginning to a lament to Enlil. For this image, compare in particular the beginning of the 12th kirugu of the Balag to Enlil, Oh Angry Sea, as it is preserved in YBC 4659, obv. lines 67–68, which read: a m n u2- de­3 de3- e n- zi- zi // dm u- u l - l i l2 n u2- d e3 d e3- e n - z i - zi, “May the bull who is lying down rise up! // May Enlil who is lying down rise up!” 34. This estimate is based on the numbering of the preserved kirugus in H 2, an Old Babylonian source from Meturan (Tell Haddad) containing sections from Uruamairabi. See Volk, Die BalaĝKomposition Uru2 am3-ma-ir-ra-bi, 16–45 for a partial edition and discussion of this source and its relation to the 1st millennium version of the composition.

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

157

Rev.: 67–94 (sdl, k.2), 95–97 (sdl, k.3), 98–122 (sdl, k.4), 123; Top edge: 124–126 (sdl, k.5) Left edge: catch-line k. 6 + total line count

Sources from Kish: 2.  K1 = AO 10672 (PRAK C 52) + AO 10737 (PRAK C 121) (+) Ki 1033 (PRAK B 442): Multi-column tablet (2 columns per side) from Kish, written in a highly phonetic orthography, containing lines from Kirugus 1–2, 4, and an alternate version of Kirugu 5 (similar to the alternate version of Kirugu 5 in source X1); the omission of Kirugu 3 is noted with a double-line on the tablet at the end of col. ii of the obverse. Obv. col. i: lines 1, 4, 5a–7, 9–22, 24–26[. . . , . . .]28–30, 33–41, 46–50 col. ii: [. . .]59–61 (sdl) 62–63, 64a–69, 71–75[. . . , . . .]83–85, 88–91, 93–94 (ddl) Rev. col. iii (left half of the tablet): 98–106 ([. . .])?, 107?–107a?, 108?–109?, 110a– d, 111?–114? col. iv (right half of the tablet): 115–116, 118–119?[. . . , . . .]122–123a–c [. . .] = altern. Kirugu 5

3.  K2 = Ki 976 (PRAK B 396) + Ki 1035 (PRAK B 444): The top edge of a single column tablet from Kish containing the beginning and end of the extract. The tablet in its entirety would have originally contained all of Kirugu 1. Obv. 1–2, 4–5, 9–11[. . .] Rev. [. . .]60–61

4.  K3 = PRAK B 389 (identified by Joshua Bowen): A fragment from what appears to be from the top of the obverse(?) of a single column tablet, with five preserved lines of text followed by blank space, where the scribe seems to have stopped writing and did not complete the tablet. Obv. [. . .]2, 3a, 4, 6–7 Rev. uninscribed

5.  K4 = PRAK B 348: Very small fragment from the middle of the left edge of what could be either a single or multi-column tablet, which contains lines 26– 35 on the obverse and traces of signs from unidentified lines on the reverse. Obv./col. i? [. . .]26–28, 30[. . .] Rev. traces of signs from unidentified lines

Sources from Ur: 6.  Ur1 = U.16861 (UET 6/2, 140). 35 A single column tablet containing lines that correspond to passages from the first and fourth Kirugus of the composition. 35.  Published in UET 6/2 and recopied with notes in Marie-Christine Ludwig, Literarische Texte aus Ur: Kollationen und Kommentare zu UET 6/1–2 (UAVA 9; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009) 139–42. Cohen, Canonical Lamentations, 537 attributes the sources to the first millennium, but Cavigneuax, Review of Cohen 1988, 255–56, argues that the tablet is in fact Old Babylonian in date. Ludwig is a little less certain of the date, and presents the evidence for and against dating the tablet to the Old Babylonian Period, before deciding that the tablet is probably Old Babylonian. Reasons for dating it to the Old Babylonian Period include its physically similarity to UET 6/2, 188, which is an Old Babylonian school tablet (unfortunately without exact provenience at Ur), as well as other aspects of its ductus and

158

Paul Delnero Obv. 1, 3, 9–12, 12a, 21, 23–28, 30, 30a–g Rev. 30h–o, 98–102, 104–5, 103, 103a–d

7.  Ur2 = UET 6/2, 403 (Wasserman and Gabbay, “Literatures in Contact,” 69–84): A single-column, extract tablet from Ur, purportedly from the private house No. 1 Broad St., with an Akkadian translation of lines from Kirugu 2. Obv. [. . .]69, 71, 74–79, 83 Rev. [. . .] 91, 94, incipit of Kirugu 2 (line 62)

Source from Girsu: 8.  G1 = AO 4327 (NFT p. 203): A multi-column tablet, 15.5+ cm in height, 11+ cm in width, and 2.4 cm in thickness, which has cases instead of lines, and contains a composition written in a highly phonetic orthography with lines from Kirugu 2 of Uruamairabi in columns v′ and vi′ of the reverse, but lines from an entirely different composition in the remaining parts of the tablet. Obv. col. i′–iii′: different composition; Rev. col. iv′: different composition col. v′: 62–63, 67–76[. . .] col. vi′: [. . .]83–85, 85a, 88[. . .]

Source from Susa: 9.  Su1 = Sb 12436: small landscaped-shaped school exercise tablet, 4.7 cm in height and 6cm in width. The tablet contains the 5th Kirugu (as it appears in NCBT 688) and the catch-line to the 6th Kirugu. Obv. 123–26; Bottom edge: Kirugu notation for Kirugu 5 Rev. catch-line for Kirugu 6

Source from Unknown Provenience: 10.  X1 = AO 6905b (TCL 16, 68): bottom half of a single-column tablet, 5.4+ cm in height, 5.3cm in width, with lines from Kirugus 2–4 and the same alternative version of Kirugu 5 found in K1; written in a tiny, micro-script with Akkadian glosses. Obv. [. . .]85, [86?], 87–88, 90–91, 93–94 (sdl, k.2), 95–97 (sdl, k.3), 98–109 Bottom edge: 110–11 Rev. 112–22 (sdl, k.4), 123a–c = alternate k.5 (sdl, k.5), 124a–h[. . .] = alt. k.6

NCBT 688, the main Old Babylonian source for the first five sections of the composition, is a long, single column tablet, approximately 21 cm in height and 7.7 cm in width, containing a total of 126 lines from Kirugus 1–5 of the composition and the catch-line to the sixth Kirugu. With over 60 lines of text per side, the script is small format; reasons against include unusual writings like tu2-kul(UD.HI), which is a reading that would only be expected in a later text, and the likelihood, that although the tablet was allegedly found at No. 1, Broad St., it could very well be from the Neo-Babylonian levels of the house. Nathan Wasserman and Uri Gabbay, “Literatures in Contact: The Balaĝ Uru2 Am3-ma-ir-ra-bi and its Akkadian Translation UET 6/2, 403,” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 37 (2005) 76–77, consider it likely that this tablet was found in close proximity to UET 6/2, 403, a tablet containing the Akkadian translation of a number of lines from the 2nd and possibly 3rd kirugu of Uruamairabi, which was also found in No. 1, Broad St. They even suggest the possibility that the two tablets were copied as school exercises in the same house.

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

159

and the lines continue on to the top and bottom edges so that the entire content of all five Kirugus could be written in the space provided by the tablet. Since the tablet is also unruled, the signs in the individual lines do not always run in an even, horizontal direction, giving the source the appearance of having been compiled hastily for the pragmatic purpose of performance, as opposed to for display, or as a library copy. The content of the first five Kirugus of Uruamairabi, as it is preserved in NCBT 688, has a clear and discernible structure, which is entirely consistent with and inseparable from the main purpose of lamenting, which was to appease angry deities to prevent the catastrophes described in the laments from occurring. The thematic structure of the composition, which is outlined in Figure 2, was conceived to present the consequences of the cataclysmic destruction of the city from the shifting perspectives of the people and agents who would be the most affected by it.

Figure 2.  Structure of Uruamairabi, Kirugus 1–5 (as preserved in NCBT 688): I. Kirugu 1 (Lines 1–61): Effects of the destruction of the city narrated anonymously 1. (Lines 1–3): Invocation of woe for the city and its inhabitants 2. (4–8): Standard epithets of Inana (repeated in K.2, lines 63–66 and in condensed form in K.4, line 99) 3. (9–60): Specific consequences of the destruction a. (9–11): Effect on the young and old (great and small ones) b. (12–19): Effects on the city and the temple, by divine decree (14–15) c. (20–26): City cursed and turned against by multiple gods d. (27–30): City destroyed in war e. (31–45): Consequences for the inhabitants of the city i. (31–37): For young women and able-bodied young men, house and property owners ii. (38–39): Animals feeding on corpses of dead citizens iii. (40–41): For mothers and heads of households iv. (42–45): For foreigners and captives, shepherd and farmers f. (46–60): Consequences for people (and animals) fleeing the city i. (46–50): People fleeing by river (46), road (47), trail (48), canal (49), and bank (50) ii. (51): unclear iii. (52–57): People and birds fleeing for their lives into the rushes and sedges iv. (58–60): Pursuit without rest by watchmen and robbers 4. (61): Destruction of city by divine decree, announced in lines 14–15, attributed to Enlil. II. Kirugu 2 (Lines 62–94): Inana’s lament for the destruction of the city 1. (62): Invocation of woe for the city and its inhabitants 2. (63–66): Standard epithets of Inana (repeated in K.1, lines 4–8 and in condensed form in K.4, line 99) 3. (67–94): Specific consequences of the destruction experienced by Inana a. (67–76): Effects on the temple and city, spouse and son, by consent of the Anunna gods (76). i. (69–71): Places where Inana stands, sits, and walks ii. (72): For Dumuzi (Inana’s spouse) iii. (73–75): City and temple destroyed, army captured iv. (76): Anunna gods consent to destruction

160

Paul Delnero b. (77–87): Inana’s animals and people abandoned and carried off c. (88–94): Consequences for people (and animals) leaving the city i. (88–90): For people going to the field (88), water (89), and edge of the mountain (90) ii. (91–92): For warriors iii. (93–94): Birds in unfamiliar places III. Kirugu 3 (Lines 95–97): Short lament for the Edimbabbar temple IV. Kirugu 4 (Lines 98–122): Lamenter’s lament for the destruction of the city 1. (98): Invocation of woe for the city 2. (99): Condensed standard epithets of Inana (repeated in K.1, lines 4–8 and K.2, lines 63–66) 3. (100–107): Inana’s reaction to consequences of the destruction described by lamenter 4. (108–22): Specific consequences of the destruction experienced by the lamenter a. (108–13): Effects on the temple and city with Inana invoked (113) b. (114–18): Consequences for places within and outside the city i. (114–15): Lamenting in square where the potter works ii. (116–18): Danger at the river (116), the road (117), and from watchmen and robbers c. (119–22): Lamenter laments for house, city, spouse, son, storehouse, and Inana V. Kirugu 5 (Lines 123–26): Short lament in unified voice of Inana and the lamenter

In Kirugu 1, the longest of the five Kirugus, the effects of the destruction are described from the outside looking in, in an anonymous, collective voice, representing the entire population of the city and the land. The composition begins in the first three lines by invoking the city and its inhabitants: 36 1: uru2 am3-i-ra-bi a di4-di4-la2-[bi] 2: ama mu-gig uru2 am3-i-ra-bi a di4-di4-la2-⟨bi⟩ 3: kul-aba4ki uru2 am3-i-ra-bi a di4-di4-la2-⟨bi⟩ 1: That city which has been plundered! Woe, its little ones! 2: (Oh) mother, mistress, that city which has been plundered! Woe, its little ones! 3: (Oh) Kullab, that city which has been plundered! Woe, its little ones!

In this passage the city that has been destroyed is identified in the third line as Uruk. It may also be noteworthy that the line in which Uruk is invoked is omitted in the three sources from Kish with the passage, suggesting that Uruk may have been replaced by Kish in these sources to adapt the lament for performance in that city. The composition continues with a sequence of four epithets of Inana, the patron deity of Uruk, who has already been named in line 3, with her title n u - g i g , which is used in contexts in which Inana’s capacity as a ruler and warrior is being emphasized. 37 The sequence of epithets reads: 36.  Unless otherwise indicated, the transliterations of the passages cited in this section are from NCBT 688, the main source for the text. This source was collated by the author from the original tablet in the Yale Babylonian Collection and from photos made of the tablet; as was source K1, which is housed in the cuneiform tablet collection of the Louvre. 37.  For a detailed discussion of the meaning of n u - g i g and the contexts in which it occurs see Annette Zgoll, “Inana als nugig,” Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 87 (1997) 181–95, who argues that the term, when used as an epithet of Inana, is “ein herrschlicher Hoheitstitel.”

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

161

4: mu-gig an-na ga-ša-an-an-na-⟨ke4⟩ K1 obv. col. i, 2: nu-gi-a-na ga-ša-an-⟨na⟩-⟨na⟩? [. . .] 5: kur [gul]-gul ga-ša-an e2-an-na-⟨ke4⟩ K1 obv. col. i, 3: kur gul-ul ga-ša!-an hur-saĝ-⟨kalam⟩ [. . .] 6: an dub2-ba ga-ša-an ĝi6-par3-ra-⟨ke4⟩ K1 obv. col. i, 4: an tu-pa ama gal ⟨ama⟩ ki!(DI) ⟨sig3⟩ [. . .] 7: ⟨lil2 ⟩-⟨la2 ⟩ en-⟨na⟩ ga-ša-an tur3 amaš-⟨ke4⟩ K1 obv. col. i, 5: e2-lil2 ga-ša-an ⟨tur3⟩ ⟨ama⟩-sa [. . .] 4: The mistress of heaven, Inana! 5: The destroyer of the lands, the lady of the Eanna! 6: The one who makes the heavens tremble, the lady of the Gipar! 7: Lilla’enna, the lady of the cattlepen and sheepfold!

Here again, in keeping with the local character of the Kish sources, the Eanna, one of the main temples at Uruk, is replaced in the source K1 from Kish by Hursagkalama, one of the main temples at Kish. The same four epithets occur in identical content and sequence near the beginnings of Kirugus 2 and 4, where they also follow a general invocation of the destruction of the city and its temple, and precede, as they do in this passage, litanies in which the specific consequences of the catastrophe are described in more detail. The repetition of these same epithets multiple times in similar contexts at critical points in the composition (in Kirugu 2 lines 63–66 and in Kirugu 4 line 99, in which the epithets are abbreviated to a single line 38) has the effect of personalizing the lament, by ensuring that its entire content is addressed to the goddess Inana, in whose hands the fate of the city resides, and who could both cause the destruction of the city by abandoning it, or save it by being moved by the plea and remaining or coming back. After reinvoking the people of the city by depicting them being carried away by force, and announcing that the destruction is the direct result of a divine decree, which is identified in the last line of the Kirugu as resulting from the word of Enlil, the Kirugu continues with a lengthy description of how the city will be destroyed and the devastating effects this will have on its inhabitants. The litany of consequences that follows moves from the annihilation of the city and temple by fire, flood, and warfare in lines 17–30, to the dissolution of social order as wives and sons, and young women and men are abandoned, people lose their possessions, dogs and ravens devour the corpses of dead citizens, travelers are attacked on the road, and people and birds are pursued and slaughtered as they flee: Destruction of the city by fire and flood ­— 17: uru2 e4(A) du11-ga e4 ⟨gi4⟩-a-bi 18: kul-aba4ki a du11-ga a? ⟨traces?⟩ ba-ra-e3-a-bi 19: uru2 izi-a ki! us2-sa-bi 17: That city which has been destroyed by water, which has been washed away, 18: That city Kullab which has been destroyed by water, which does not emerge     from the water, 19: That city which has been leveled with fire.

38.  NCBT 688, line 99 reads: mu-gig an-na kur gul-gul dli-⟨el⟩-lil2 en-na, bringing the beginnings of the first, second, and fourth lines of this group of epithets together in a single line, by omitting the second halves of all of these lines, and omitting the third epithet in the sequence entirely.

162

Paul Delnero Abandonment of young women and able-bodied men — 31: uru2 dam šub-ba dumu šub-ba-bi 32: uru2 ki-sikil šub-ba ĝuruš šub-ba-bi 31: That city where the wife is abandoned and the son is abandoned, 32: That city where the young women are abandoned and the able-bodied men      are abandoned. Devouring of corpses by dogs and ravens — 38: ur-bi ad6-a i-im-da-nu2 K1 obv. col. i, 32′: ur-bi a-ta im-da-e-nu-um 39: uga(U2.NAGA.GA)⟨mušen⟩-a-bi ad6 im-da-ku2!(KA)-e K1 obv. col. i, 33′: u4-ga-bi at-ti!(BALA)-im-da-gu2-e 38: Its dogs lie down on the corpses, 39: And its ravens together (with the dogs) devour corpses. 39

In Kirugu 2, the perspective shifts to Inana, who observes the scenes described in the first Kirugu in nearly the same order, crying out for her city, temple, and spouse Dumuzi, before likening the abandonment of the population to the abandoning of animals by the shepherd and herdsmen who are supposed to protect them, in one of the more poignant passages in the text, a passage which was also translated into Akkadian in an Old Babylonian exercise tablet found at Ur: 40 77: u8-ĝu10 ki kur2-ta gu3 im-me 78: sila4-ĝu10 ki kur2-ta še am3-ša4 79: u8-ĝu10 sila4-bi-ta ba-⟨da⟩?-de6 80: ⟨ud5⟩-ĝu10 maš2!(BI)-bi-ta ba-⟨da⟩?-de6 81: e-ze2 gi4-a-ĝu10 sipa-bi ba-⟨da⟩-de6 39. Cohen, Canonical Lamentations, 542 reads these two lines: teš2-bi uh-a i-im-da-gig // u2ugaga-dala-bi lu2 im-da-ab-mar, a reading that is difficult to justify on epigraphic and contextual grounds. First, epigraphically the sign at the end of line 38 is almost certainly nu2, a reading which finds support in the phonetic writing nu-um, a phonetic variant of nu2, in K1, while the second to last sign in the verbal form in line 39 looks like “KA” and is definitely not “ab.” Furthermore, the last sign is graphically just as close to “mar” as it is to “e,” so that the reading -ku2-e would bring this verb closer into line with K1, which seems to have -gu2-e for -ku2-e. Cf. also Cavigneaux, Review of Cohen 1988, 255, who has a similar interpretation of these two lines, based on his own collations of NCBT 688 and K1; note, however, that the sign Cavigneaux reads as “LU2” in NCBT 688 line 39 is very squeezed on the tablet, and could very plausibly contain an inscribed “BAD” sign. Since the corresponding form in K1, at-ti- (interpreted as a sandhi writing for ad6 i-), supports reading ad6 and simplified writings of inscribed signs (like ku2[KAxNIG2] written as KA) are not uncommon in Old Babylonian literary sources, reading ad6 seems preferable. Contextually, dogs and ravens are attested together in at least two other passages in Ershemmas involving Dumuzi. One of them is BM 15821 (CT 15, pl. 18) = Cohen, Sumerian Hymnology, Ershemma no. 60, with a phonetic parallel in CBS 145 + 170 (unpublished), rev. 6′–7′; and the other is BM 100046 (CT 58, 42) = The Death of Dumuzi rev. 39–42 = l. 84–87. The latter provides the closest parallel to these lines: 84: ad6-da-ni-a ur ba-e-nu2 85: rig7-ga-na ugamušen ⟨x⟩ [. . .] 86: ur mu-un-da-ab-ku2 me-ri-ni-še3 [. . .] 87: ugamušen mu-un-da-ab-ku2 an-na ba-e-e11 [. . .] The dog lies at the the side of his (Dumuzi’s) corpse. The raven (is dwelling) in his shepherd’s hut. The dog (with the raven) is eating the corpse (while lying) at his feet. The raven (with the dog) is eating the corpse while hovering above it. 40.  Source Ur2, obv. 1′–11′. For an edition and translation of these lines see Wasserman and Gabbay, “Literatures in Contact,” 70–74.

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

163

82: ab2 e-ze2 du11-ga-ĝu10 mu-nu10(KU)-bi ba-da-de6 83: u8 i7-da bala-ĝa2 sila4 peš10(KI.A) bi2-in-šub 84: ud5 i7-da bala-ĝa2 maš2 peš10 bi2-in-šub 85: ama-gan zi i7-da bala-ĝa2 dumu peš10 bi2-in-šub 77: My ewe cries out from hostile territory. 78: My lamb bleats from hostile territory. 79: My ewe has been carried away from its lamb. 80: My goat has been carried away from its kid. 81: When my sheep returns, their shepherd has been carried away. 82: As my calf and sheep call out, their herder has been carried away. 83: My ewe, in crossing over to the other side of the river, abandons its lamb on      the bank. 84: My goat, in crossing over to the other side of the river, abandons its kid on      the bank. 85: The true, birth-giving mother, in crossing over to the other side of the river,      abandons her child on the bank.

Thematically, the litany of consequences continues to mirror the sequence of themes in Kirugu 1 as Inana concludes the section with a description of people, and lastly birds, being carried away, killed, and relocated to places with which they are unfamiliar. After a brief three-line Kirugu, in which the abandonment of a specificallynamed temple is lamented, 41 the composition shifts perspective again, this time to the lamenter, who addresses Inana directly in the 2nd person, appealing for her mercy by describing what she has already seen. The litany of consequences mirrors once again the general thematic structure and sequence of the similar litanies in Kirugus 1 and 3, implicating Inana directly in a causal chain that begins with the destruction of the city seen from the outside in Kirugu 1 and concludes in Kirugu 4 with the plea of the lamenter, appealing to Inana on behalf of the population to spare it from the catastrophe depicted in each of the three Kirugus: 103: e2 ku3-ga-ni-a a-gin7 mu-un-til-le-na nu-nuz ⟨ku3⟩? e2 ku3 e2-šen-na ta     im-gu-ul-lu-bi 104: šir3 saĝ-e a-gin7 ma-al-ma-al-e mu-gig-an-na men3 im-me gibil4-la2-bi 105: aratta(LAM.KUR.RU)-ta a-gin7 ba-ra-gi4-a ga-ša-an-e2-an-na men3 ir2     mi-in-še8-še8 106: ir2 im-me ir2-bi gig-ga ad im-ša4 ad-bi mar-a 107: ir2-ra ki-di-bi ga-nam mu-un-zu-a-ta ad-ša4 ki-di-bi ga-nam mu-un-zu-e 103: How is she able to live like this in her holy house? (Pure lady) Why is it     that the holy house, her pure house is being destroyed? 41.  This three-line Kirugu, which occurs as lines 95–98 in NCBT 688, is only attested in one other source for the composition (X1 obv. 5′–7′), and is omitted entirely in K1, where the presence of the omitted Kirugu is indicated by the presence of a double dividing-line between Kirugus 2 and 4 at the bottom of the second column of the obverse of the tablet. Since the Edimbabbar, the temple that is named in this Kirugu in NCBT 688, is not otherwise attested, and the name of the temple in the corresponding section of X1 is not preserved, it is possible, if not likely that this temple name refers to the shrine or temple in the city where this version of Uruamairabi was performed in the city (Uruk?) where NCBT 688 was compiled. If this is the case, then it is probable that this section of the text was always intended to refer to the specific shrine or temple where the text was performed in any particular instance, and that the break in the corresponding lines in X1 would have contained the name of a different temple. This would also account for the omission of the entire Kirugu in K1, since the scribe may have omitted the Kirugu because the name of the temple varied with each performance of the text.

164

Paul Delnero 104: How is it that laments are performed? You, the lady of heaven, do not cease     crying out. 105: Returning thusly from Aratta, you, the lady of the Eanna shed tears. 106: When she cries, those tears are sickly. When she wails, that wail is bitter. 107: That place where tears are cried, indeed she knows it! That place where     wails are wailed, indeed she knows it!

In the fifth and final Kirugu in NCBT 688, and presumably also the Kirugu that follows, the laments of Inana and the lamenter fuse into a single voice, concluding with the lines: 123: me-e e2 zi-ke4 gu3 ga-am3-de2 a-ba-a ba-ra-⟨UD⟩ [. . .] 124: [. . .] ⟨x⟩ ke4 gu3 ga-am3-de2 ⟨⟨blank space⟩⟩ [. . .] 125: [. . .] ⟨x⟩ e2 ub-imin-e gu3 ga-am3-de2 ⟨⟨blank space⟩⟩ 126: [. . .] ⟨in⟩-bi gub-ba gi4-in-bi nu-gub la-bar-bi gub-ba ⟨la⟩-bar-bi [. . .] 123: I, I want to pour out my voice to my temple: “Who has escaped?” 124: I, I want to pour out my voice to the storehouse of heaven: “Who has     escaped?” 125: I, I want to pour out my voice to the house with seven corners: “Who has     escaped?” 126: Its standing maidservant–that maidservant is not standing there! Its     standing servant—that servant is not standing there!

As the content and structure of Uruamairabi reveals, Sumerian laments provided a systematic and coherent means of averting future catastrophe for entire communities in a method analogous to how namburbi-incantations achieved the same purpose for individuals. With the goal of preventing impending catastrophe, laments, whose primary aim was to appease the hearts of angry deities who could bring about the feared catastrophe if their anger was not calmed, fulfilled this aim by mimetically evoking the apocalyptic annihilation of the city and placing the full responsibility for the destruction at the feet of the only deity who could prevent it. That the intention of the performance of Balags was to bring the full catastrophe described in the texts to life and to draw the audience for the performance into the mimetically evoked apocalyptic scenario, is revealed by both the imagery and the rigorous structural logic of Uruamairabi and other Balags like it. By enacting the catastrophe from shifting perspectives, in which the perspective on the same disastrous event is shifted sequentially from the omniscient narrator of Kirugu 1, to Inana in Kirugu 2, to the temple in which the text is being performed in Kirugu 3, toward the gala-priest, who pleads for mercy on behalf of the inhabitants of the city in Kirugu 4, before culminating in the fusion of the gala’s voice with that of Inana in Kirugu 5, the catastrophe is brought progressively closer to the audience, until ultimately immersing it completely in the realities of the impending destruction. Where in namburbi-incantations, a mimetic substitute takes on the full effect of the omen for the intended victim, laments utilize mimesis to appeal to the pity and compassion of the gods to reverse their decision by conjuring in vivid and horrendous detail a vision of what would be lost were they to carry through with their intention to abandon the city. In their reliance on religious rituals that employ a rational set of principles to bring about a change in the world, lamenting and divination can therefore be seen as complementary sets of practices in a common cultural system with both religious and scientific elements, a distinction which is potentially ob-

Divination and Religion as a Cultural System

165

scured when the analysis is focused instead on whether the two practices should be classified as science or religion.

Bibliography Annus, Amar (ed.). Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Oriental Institute Seminars 6. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010. Bottéro, Jean. “Symptômes, signes, écritures en Mésopotamie ancienne.” Pp. 70–196 in Divination et rationalité. Edited by J. Vernant, L. Vandermeersch, and J-P. Vernant. Paris: Seuil, 1974. Cavigneaux, Antoine. Review of Cohen 1988. Journal of the American Oriental Society 113 (1993) 254–57. _________. Sur le balag Uruammai’irabi et le Rituel de Mari. N.A.B.U. 1998 n. 43: 46–47. Cohen, Mark. Balag-compositions: Sumerian Lamentation Liturgies of the Second and First Millennium b.c. Sources from the Ancient Near East 1/2. Malibu: Undena Publications, 1974. _________. Sumerian Hymnology: The Eršemma. Hebrew Union College Annual Supplements 2. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1981. _________. The Canonical Lamentations of Ancient Mesopotamia. Potomac, MD: Capital Decisions Limited, 1988. Durand, Jean-Marie. Archives épistolaires de Mari I/1. Archives Royales de Mari 26/1. Paris: Éditions recherche sur les civilisations, 1988. Durand, Jean-Marie, and Michel Guichard. “Les rituals de Mari.” Pp.  19–78 in Recueil d’études à la mémoire de Marie-Thérèse Barrelet. Edited by D. Charpin and J.-M. Durand. FM 3 and Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 4. Paris: SÉPOA, 1997. Gabbay, Uri. Pacifying the Hearts of the Gods: Sumerian Emesal Prayers of the First Millennium BC. Heidelberger Emesal-Studien 1. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2014. _________. “The Balaĝ Instrument and its Role in the Cult of Ancient Mesopotamia.” Pp. 128– 47 in Music in Antiquity: The Near East and the Mediterranean. Edited by J. G. Westenholz, Y. Maurey, and E. Seroussi. Yuval 8. Oldenbourg: Walter de Gruyter, 2014. Hartmann, Henrike. Die Musik der Sumerischen Kultur. Dissertation: Frankfurt am Main, 1960. Heimpel, Wolfgang. Letters to the Kings of Mari: A New Translation with Historical Introduction, Notes, and Commentary. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2003. Koch-Westenholz, Ulla. Mesopotamian Astrology: An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination. CNI Publications 19. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 1995. Krecher, Joachim. Sumerische Kultlyrik. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1966. Lindberg, David C. The Beginnings of Western Science: The European Scientific Tradition in Philosophical, Religious, and Institutional Context, Prehistory to a.d. 1450. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007. Löhnert, Anne. ‘Wie die Sonne tritt heraus!’: Eine Klage zum Auszug Enlils mit einer Untersuchung zu Komposition und Tradition sumerischer Klagelieder in altbabylonischer Zeit. AOAT 365. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2009. _________. “Manipulating the Gods: Lamenting in Context.” Pp. 402–17 in The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture. Edited by K. Radner and E. Robson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Ludwig, Marie-Christine. Literarische Texte aus Ur: Kollationen und Kommentare zu UET 6/1–2. Untersuchungen zur Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 9. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009.

166

Paul Delnero

Maul, Stefan M. Zukunftsbewältigung: Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Löserituale (Namburbi). Baghdader Forschungen 18. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern, 1994. _________. “How the Babylonians Protected Themselves against Calamities Announced by Omens.” Pp.  123–29 in Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretative Perspectives. Edited by T. Abusch and K van der Toorn. Ancient Magic and Divination 1. Groningen: Styx, 1999. _________. “Omina und Orakel. A. Mesopotamien.” Pp. 45–88 in vol. 10 of Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie. Edited by D. O. Edzard and M. P. Streck. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003. _________. Die Wahrsagekunst im Alten Orient: Zeichen des Himmels und der Erde. Munich: C. H. Beck, 2013. Michalowski, Piotr. “Learning Music: Schooling, Apprenticeship, and Gender in Early Mesopotamia.” Pp. 199–239 in Musiker und Tradierung: Studien zur Rolle von Musikern bei der Verschriftlichung und Tradierung von literarischen Werken. Edited by R. Pruzsinszky and D. Shehata. Wiener Offene Orientalistik 8. Münster: LIT, 2009. Neugebauer, Otto. The Exact Sciences in Antiquity. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952. Parpola, Simo. Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars. State Archives of Assyria 10. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993. Richardson, Seth F. C. “On Seeing and Believing: Liver Divination and the Era of Warring States (II).” Pp.  225–66 in Divination and the Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Edited by A. Annus. Oriental Institute Seminars 6. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2010. Robson, Eleanor. Mathematics in Ancient Iraq: A Social History. Princeton: Princeton University, 2008. Rochberg, Francesca. The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. _________. “The History of Science and Ancient Mesopotamia.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History 1 (2014) 37–60. Shehata. Dahlia. Musiker und ihr vokales Repertoire: Untersuchungen zu Inhalt und Organisation von Musikerberufen und Liedgattungen in altbabylonischer Zeit. Göttinger Beiträge zum Alten Orient 3. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag, 2009. Volk, Konrad. Die Balaĝ-Komposition Uru2 am3-ma-ir-ra-bi: Rekonstruktion und Bearbeitung der Tafeln 18 (19′ff.), 19, 20 und 21 der späten, kanonischen Version. Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 18. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1989. Wasserman, Nathan, and Uri Gabbay. “Literatures in Contact: The Balag Uru2 Am3-ma-irra-bi and its Akkadian Translation UET 6/2, 302.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 57 (2005) 69–84. Wilcke, Claus. “Formale Gesichtspunkte in der sumerischen Literatur.” Pp. 205–316 in Sumerological Studies in Honor of Thorkild Jacobsen. Edited by S. Lieberman. Assyriological Studies 20. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975. Zgoll, Annette. “Inana als nugig.” Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 87 (1997) 181–95. Ziegler, Nele. Les Musiciens et la musique d’après les archives de Mari. FM 9 and Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 10. Paris: SÉPOA, 2007.

Indexes

General Index Achaemenid  136, 137 ACT texts  135–136, 138 ACT type  133–134, 138 Adad  55–57, 60–61, 63–67, 89, 101, 111, 120–122 aleuromancy   94, 99, 100, 109 Almanacs 133–137 apodosis, apodoses  20, 52, 79, 81–82, 84, 85, 90, 99, 100, 114, 118, 119, 121, 149 Arsacid  116, 119, 130, 136, 137 Ashur  49, 54, 63 Ashurbanipal  49, 62, 67, 72, 109, 126–128, 137 Assur  (town)  63, 79, 88, 90, 109, 115, 117, 118, 125, 126, 129 Assurbanipal  23, 26, 54, 70, 151 Aššurbanipal 6–7 Assyria  5, 8, 49, 67–70, 115–119, 127, 139 Assyrian  48–49, 54, 55, 58, 63, 67, 69, 70, 108, 117–119, 126 astrological  5, 17–21, 28 astrological report(s)  17, 19, 28–38, 70, 125, 127, 130, 137 Astrolabe(s)  125–126, 130 astrology  18, 20, 54 astronomer  117, 127, 131, 134, 139 astronomical  18, 54, 107, 110, 114, 120, 122, 123, 125, 127–132, 134–139, 151 Astronomical Diaries  128, 130–131, 135, 137 astronomy  138, 139, 147, 148 Babylonia  93, 96, 115–119, 127, 131, 132, 139 Babylonian   8, 18, 49, 51, 52, 57, 59, 60, 64, 66, 72, 91, 99, 100, 108, 109, 116, 118, 120, 125, 131, 133–135, 137, 152 Balag instrument  153, 155 lament  152–156, 164

bārû(m) (‘seer’)  16, 50, 53, 55, 56, 59, 70–72, 95, 98–101 bārûtu (series)  26, 52, 55, 80, 86, 88–91, 119, bēl ṭēmi (‘reporter’)  16 bias  11, 15, 17–22, 26, 28 Big Bang Theory  6 blood 81–82 blood sacrifice  100 bone  80, 82–91 bone divination (scapulimancy)  82, 87 calendar texts  132 catastrophe  150–152, 161, 163 prediction and prevention  154, 159, 164 cedar  55, 98, 99 celestial  15, 18, 19, 21, 54, 114, 115, 119, 120, 125, 130, 131, 133, 137–139, 148, 151 phenomena  18, 94, 108, 111, 112, 114, 118, 122, 124, 127, 128, 132, 133, 135, 138, 139, 147 observations  16, 19, 28–38, 124, 139 Cicero 14 cognitive illusion  12–13 dal.ba.an.na-Texts 128–130

deity  15, 100, 101, 154, 160, 164 Diagnostic and Prognostic Series  4 diagnostic omen series SA.GIG  119, 139 Dialogue of Pessimism  14–15 divination  5, 7, 8–9 , 11–19, 23, 26, 28, 47, 49–51, 54–57, 59, 63, 70, 72–73, 82, 87–89, 81, 94, 95, 96–98, 101, 102, 107–109, 112–114, 121, 124, 128, 139, 147, 148, 150–152, 155, 164 astral 131 bone divination (scapulimancy)  82, 87 celestial  18, 139 empiromancy 99

167

168

Indexes

divination (cont.) empirical aspects of  12–13, 16, 133, 148 extispicy  11, 16–19, 21–23, 25–26, 28, 39–43, 49–51, 55, 72 hermeneutics of  17, 18, 23, 28 Mesopotamian  7, 9, 11, 12, 18, 93, 95, 99, 148 pertaining to the umṣatu 149 political use  151–152 reports 49 diviner(s)  8, 13–18, 22–23, 26, 28, 47, 50–51, 53, 55–60, 63–64, 71–72, 80, 82, 85–91, 94, 95, 99, 100, 114, 149, 151 EAE  (omen series)  70, 114, 116–128, 130–132, 135, 137, 139 Elijah 4 Emar  52, 60, 79, 87, 90, 115 empirically  2, 8, 13, 133 empirical  16, 148, 149, 154 empirical rationality  2, 8 empiromancy 99 enūma anu enlil (series)  17, 19–20, 72, 94, 107, 116, 117, 119–121, 130, 137, 148, 149, 151 enūma eliš  120, 126 Ephemerides  133, 134, 136, 137 Ershemma  152, 153, 155, 156, 162 Esagila   137, 139 Esagil-kīn-apli 116 Esarhaddon  5–7, 49, 64, 67–69, 72 , 109, 118, 126, 127, 137 extispicy  11, 16–19, 21–23, 25–26, 28, 39–43, 49–54, 56, 58–59, 63, 69–72, 80, 91, 94, 96, 98–101, 113, 114, 119, 139 extispicy reports  16–17, 22–27, 39–43, 80, 100 ezib (formula)  16 flour  94, 98–100, 108, 109 gala-priest  138, 155–156, 164 germ theory  8 Gestirndarstellungen  131, 132, 136–138 Goal-Year Texts  133, 135, 136 Great Star List  125, 127–128, 130 handbook(s)  94–96, 101, 108, 124, 139 haruspex  54, 70–71 Hebrew bible  4 Heisenberg uncertainty principle  2

Hellenistic  20, 126, 130, 136, 137 hepatoscopy 54 Hippocratic  3, 4 Hippocratic medicine  2, 3, 9 Hittite 4 Horoscopes  131, 136 illness  3, 5, 7–8 Inana  110, 159–164 incense  72, 93, 95, 97, 99–101 intelligent design  1–2 intercalary days 129 month(s)  110–111, 125 intercalation  111, 126–127, 130 Isaiah  5, 100 Ishtar  48, 58, 62, 63, 66, 155, 156 Ishtar ritual  155–156 isru (body-part)  80, 88–91 Ištar  62, 101, 112, 120, 121 juniper  98, 99 Kalendertexte  131, 132, 137, 138 Kalḫu  116, 117, 126, 128, 139 Kirugu  153, 155–164 lamentation  138, 139, 151, 153–155 lamenting  150–152, 154–155, 160 as cultural practice  151, 154–155, 164 for the purpose of divine appeasement  150, 159 in ritual  155 lapis lazuli tablet  112 Late Babylonian  79, 95, 114, 119, 126–132, 136, 139 libanomancy  93–101, 108 liver  5, 18, 21–23, 25, 27, 28, 50–52, 55, 56, 64, 89, 90, 108, 138, 151 Lunar and Solar Tables  133, 134, 136 lunar eclipse(s)  17–21, 31, 54, 115–116, 119, 123, 127, 132, 134–136 Lunar Six  135, 136 Lunar Three  135, 136 lunar year  110, 133 Marduk  6, 56, 65–66, 121, 139 Marduk prophecy  6 Mari  5, 23, 48, 51, 54, 56, 58–60, 62–64, 89, 115, 151, 152, 155 Mari Ishtar ritual  155 medicine  2–3, 6–9, 15, 147, 151

General Index Mesopotamia  1, 4–5, 12, 14, 16, 50, 51, 55, 72, 82, 87, 93–95, 98, 108, 110, 115, 124, 133, 139, 147, 148, 150, 151 Mesopotamian  4, 8, 14, 16, 19, 47–48, 50, 72, 88, 93, 99, 102, 107, 108, 111, 147–151 divination  7, 9, 11–12, 18–19, 54, 87, 88, 93, 95, 99, 119, 148–150 medicine 7–9 Mesopotamians  4, 6, 8, 47, 73 micro-zodiac(al)  132, 133 Middle Assyrian  48, 115, 125, 129 Middle Babylonian  22, 25–27, 41–42, 79, 88, 90, 91, 115, 118 MUL.APIN 125–130 Nabû-zuqup-kēnu  116–118, 128 Nahum 5 namburbi incantations  152, 164 rituals 152 texts  99, 100, 152 Naram-Sin  53, 57–58, 60, 73 Neo-Assyrian  14, 16, 19, 22, 25–38, 42, 43, 48, 54–56, 62–63, 70, 79, 90, 94, 100, 101, 109, 110, 115, 116, 118, 119, 121, 122, 125, 126, 128–131, 137, 139, 151, 152 Neo-Babylonian  28–38, 118, 119, 129, 158 Nergal  48, 56, 61, 63, 73 Nineveh  5, 79, 101, 116–118, 128–129, 139 Nineveh Planisphere  129–130 Nisaba 111–112 Normal Star Almanacs  133, 135–137 offering  4, 7, 18, 22, 93, 94, 97–101 oil  5, 55, 94, 97–101, 108, 109 Old Babylonian  17–19, 22, 24–27, 39–40, 51, 58, 60, 63–64, 67, 79, 80, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 93–101, 110, 111, 113–115, 118, 149, 151, 152, 154–158, 162 omen(s)  18, 51–59, 61, 63, 70–73, 79–83, 85–91, 93–97, 99–102, 108, 109, 114– 128, 136, 148, 149, 152, 164 astronomical 54 celestial  19, 54, 94, 114, 115, 119, 125, 130, 131, 137, 139, 148 compendia  19, 23, 26, 28, 88, 91, 114, 148, 149 extispicy  26, 52 libanomancy  96, 99 liver  5, 23, 138

169

omen(s) (cont.) meteorological  115, 125, 130 provoked  94, 95, 114 solicited  5–6, 55 šumma immeru  79, 80, 86–87, 89–91 terrestrial  138, 139, 151 unprovoked  109, 114 unsolicited 5–7 omen series  17, 19, 26, 72, 79, 80, 91, 108, 116, 119, 123, 124, 128, 130, 137, 139, 151 omina impetrativa  94, 95 omina oblativa 94–95 paths  117, 125–126 philosophical rationality  1–3, 8 Planetary Tables  133–134, 136 Plato’s Timaeus  2 post-Old Babylonian  79, 86, 90, 120 prophecy  5–6, 9, 59 prophetic 63 procedure texts  133, 134, 136, 137 prostitute (ḫarimtu)  83, 84, 88 protasis / protases  20, 26, 52, 79, 81, 85, 88, 90, 98, 114, 118–119, 121, 123, 149 purification 151 query  16, 51, 64 religion  1–6, 8–9, 107, 147, 150, 151 religious  1, 3, 6, 15, 49, 99, 101, 118, 119, 120–123, 128, 132 , 138, 139, 151, 154, 155, 164 report(s)  16, 19–20, 23–27, 50, 61, 67, 70, 89, 95, 109, 126–128, 135, 137 astrological  17–20, 21, 28–38, 70, 125, 127, 130, 137 divination 49 extispicy  16–17, 22–27, 39–43, 80, 100 Ritual of the Diviner  80, 85–87, 89–91 ritual(s)  4, 6, 7, 15–17, 20, 22, 38, 48, 51, 54, 93, 95, 98–101, 109, 118, 124, 125, 138, 150, 152–156, 164 apotropaic  20–21, 107 divination 57 divinatory 108 extispicy  51, 53, 100, 109 ritual prayer  95, 100 sacrifice  6, 14, 16, 48, 52, 53, 55, 99, 100, 101

Indexes

170

sacrificial animal(s)  50, 55, 70–71, 79, 80, 82, 88–89, 100 lamb  50, 88 sheep  80, 88, 91 Saros cycle  134, 136 scapula  82, 86, 87 scapulimancy 82 science  1–2, 5–9, 15, 17, 28, 91, 107, 147, 148, 151, 155, 165 definition of  11, 15, 147–150 history of  147, 150 scientific  1, 3, 6–8, 20–21, 28, 49, 101, 102, 123, 126, 147–151, 155, 164 Scientific Revolution  1, 147 scribe of enūma anu enlil  72, 127–128, 132, 137–139 seer  16, 18, 21, 50, 55–56, 60, 65, 95 Seleucid  119, 127, 129, 130, 132, 136–138 Shamash / Šamaš  16, 47–48, 51, 55–58, 63–67, 70, 73, 89, 98, 101, 111, 113, 120, 121, 123 Sîn  73, 111, 120–121 singaggarītu(m) (bone part)  80, 83–85, 87–88 solar eclipse(s)  19, 21, 37, 107, 115, 123, 133–135, solar year  110, 133 solicited omens  5–6, 55 smoke  5, 93, 94, 97, 98, 108 substitute king ritual (šar puḫi) 20 succession treaty of Esarhaddon  7 šumma immeru compendium / series  79, 80, 86–87, 90–91

šumma immeru recension  80, 86, 87, 89, 90–91 Sumerian laments  150, 152, 155, 156, 164 Balags  152–156, 164 Ershemmas  152, 153, 155, 156, 162 Uruamairabi  150, 155–164 sasqû-flour 98 System A  134, 136 System B  134, 136 tamītu (‘query’)  51, 63–67 terrestrial signs  94, 101, 114 terrestrial phenomena  108 Tigunānum omens  88 “truthiness” 5 Tyndale 8 unsolicited omens  5–7 Ur III period  110, 148, 153 Uruamairabi  150, 155–164 Kirugu 1  156–160, 163, 164, Kirugu 2  158–164 Kirugu 3  157, 160, 164 Kirugu 4  160, 161, 163, 164 Kirugu 5  157, 158, 160, 164 Uruk  58, 79, 82, 90, 109, 114, 119, 120, 124, 131, 132, 134, 137–139, 160, 161, 163 war  47–52, 54, 57, 59–60, 63, 66–73, 91, 112, 113, 159 ziqpu-Star Lists  128–131 zodiacal sign  132–133, 135, 136, 138

Akkadian / Sumerian /Logograms ad6 162 assinnu 81 balaĝ 153 bārû 16 eṣemṣēru 86 ga-gu-ri-tu 83–84 -gaggurītu 84–85 *ganurītu/ganurrītu 84 gi.kéš.da 83–84 giskim 113–114 giš.šim 97 ḫarimtu 84 ikkibu 8 isru   80, 88–90

isu  80–81 kaskasu  85, 88–90 ki-ru-gu2 153 ki-šu2 153 ku2 (KAxNIG2) 162 kunukku  86, 88–90 kunuk eṣenṣēri  86, 87, 88, 90 larsinnu  85, 89–90 naglabu  82, 86, 87 na 97 na.ne 97 nig2.na 97 nu-gig 160 nu2 162

Texts qan-i/urriti  83, 84 qutrēnu  93–95, 97–101 ru-gu2 153 rīqu 97 sa-dúr 82 sin 84 singaggarītum  80, 83–85, 87–88

171

sudurru 82

šim 97

ṭupšar enūma anu enlil  127–128, 132, 137–139 umṣatu  149 uzu-maš-sìla 82 zi.in 84

Texts A. Museum Numbers 83-1-18, 223 rev. 4–7  126 AO 4327  158 AO 6905b  158 AO 10672+10737 (+) Ki 1033  157 BM 45715 rev. 16′–18′  119 BM 100046 lines 84–87  162 CBS 14089 § 1, 2  101 IM 67692 1–25, 49–85  65–66 K. 722 obv. 5–10  109 K. 2258+3271 13′, 20′  53 K. 2329 obv. 2  122 K. 3561 (+) 6141b rev. 58  116 K. 3780 ii 12  122 K. 3978+ i 8  89 K. 5281 rev. 3′–7′  117 K. 6243+ i 23  122 K. 9991 6′  53 Ki 976+1035  157 LB 1321 rev. 12′, 16′  122 NCBT 688  156–164 NCBT 688 lines 1–3  160 NCBT 688 lines 4–7  161 NCBT 688 lines 17–19  161 NCBT 688 lines 31–32  162 NCBT 688 lines 38–39  162 NCBT 688 lines 103–107  163–164 NCBT 688 lines 123–126  164 ND 5492 1–25, 49–85  65–66 Sb 12436  158 Sm. 1368 obv. 8–12  118 U. 16861  157–158 UCBC 755 § 1, 11, 13, 22  98 UCBC 755 § 26, 27  101 VAT 10536 13′, rev. 6′, 8′  53 YBC 4659 obv. 67–68  156

B. Publication Numbers AAT 91 obv. 2  122 ACh Ishtar 30 obv. 2  122 ACh 2 Suppl. 78 ii 12  122

AEM 1/1, 1 1–10  56 AEM 1/1, 193 16–18  62 AEM 1/1, 194 24–30  61 AEM 1/1, 199 11–14  63 AEM 1/1, 199 49–50  63 AEM 1/1 205 7–8  63 AEM 1/1, 207 1–34  61 AEM 1/1, 214 1–14  62 AEM 1/1, 225 6–19  63 AEM 1/1, 229 32–39  61 AEM 1/1, 233 11′–17′  60 AEM 1/1, 237 22–25  60 ARM X 8 1–14  62 ARM X 50 22–25  60 ARM XIII 114+AEM 1/1 210 10–14  62 ARMT II, 22 23–31  59 ARMT XXV, 816 7–8  63 Arnaud, Recherches, no. 698, line 13  91 Cicero, De Divinatione 1.38.82–83  14 CT 58, 42 lines 84–87  162 EAE 20 III rec. B 1–2  123 EAE 27 (28) I 1a  123 EAE 27 (28) I 44  123 EAE 27 (28) II 1  123 EAE 27 (28) II 3  123 Emar VI 670 4–6, 9  52 Emar VI 670 12, 16–17, 19, 24, 25, 27–33 53 Enmeduranki text 19–29  55 Heeßel, Divinatorische Texte II, no. 83, lines 7–8 91 Heimpel, Letters, text 26 96, 97–100′  59 Heimpel, Letters, text 100′  59 Hh XV lines 43/46  83–84 KAR 423 obv. 10  90 KAR 456 7′–9′  52 KAR 456 13′, rev. 6′, 8′  53 Lambert, Oracle Questions, no. 1 1–25, 49–85 65–66 Lambert, Oracle Questions, no. 5 1–39 66–67 MSL 9, pp. 35, 37 lines 43/46  83–84

172 Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes 14–17 57 Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes 24–27 58 Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes 72–75 57 Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes 79–81 58 Naram-Sin and the Enemy Hordes 164–166 60 NTF p. 203  158 PBS 1/2 99 § 1, 2  101 PRAK B 348  157 PRAK B 396+444  157 PRAK B 389  157 PRAK C 52+121 (+) PRAK B 442  157 RIMA 2, 213 iii 16–20  71 Ritual of the Diviner, 31, line 29  85 Ritual of the Diviner, 36, line 136  89 SAA 4, 18 10–11, rev. 9  67–68 SAA 4, 20 4–9  68 SAA 4, 23 6–10  68 SAA 4, 29 2–8  68 SAA 4, 30 2–12  68 SAA 4, 32 2–3  68

Indexes SAA 4, 33 5–6  68 SAA 4, 41 2–8  69 SAA 4, 43 2–13  69 SAA 4, 57 2–7  69 SAA 4, 62 2–6, 9–12  69 SAA 8  19–21, 28–38 SAA 8, 13 no. 19 rev. 4–7  126 SAA 8, 254  54–55 SAA 10, 95 no. 114 obv. 5–10  109 SAA 10, 122 no. 160, lines 36–42  151 SAA 10, 163–64 no. 202 obv. 8–12  118 TCL 16, 68  158 Timaeus, 30b  2 UET 6/2, 140  158–159 UET 6/2, 403  158 UET 6/2, 403 lines 77–85  162–163 YOS 10 47, 1  80 YOS 10 47, 13  81 YOS 10 47, 20  81 YOS 10 47, 34  82 YOS 10 47, 49  82 YOS 10 47, 69  83, 88 YOS 10 47, 74–75  85 YOS 10 49, 5  85