Maskim Hul

[asakku]

Hello!

I buyed a book, and wanted to know, if the information in it, are authentical. Enenuru looked like the best place to ask:

"Maskim Hul is a complete grimoire of Tiamat-centered magick, pre-luciferian sorcery developed from authentic Mesopotamian clay tablets. Tiamat, Kingu and the 11 Chaos-Monsters created by Tiamat are explored, their functions, manifestations and how they survived and existed in the pantheon of Marduk, Ea and the other gods. The gods, demons and evil spirits of Mesopotamia are presented along with Cuneiform sigils and documentation of their use in sorcery. The extensive Invocations of the Gods, Hymns and the entire foundation of authentic Kassapu-practice of ancient Babylon is offered in a concise manner. The grimoire is founded and dedicated to the Seven Sebitti or Maskim, the "Seven Evil Gods" or rebels along with Lamashtu, Lilith are presented in a plethora of rituals and their names of calling. The Serpent Gods of fertility, Ishtar revealed as a form of Tiamat (from pantheon sources) and the rites of necromancy and the Black Flame (Melammu) is presented. "

Does anyone have this book and can recommend it?

[enkur]

What I will say here is just my opinion, so, please, do not feel engaged therewith. I haven't read this book yet but I'm much on the Left-handed path and personally have no trust in Michael Ford's occult study and experience. He is too young for the enormous quantity of books he has written on the different branches of sorcery - all superficial and plagiarizing, interesting for a young and still unexperienced audience only. For me he has a talent in making money only - a very nice quality for a young sorcerer, so that's where Michael Ford's real competence lies - not in the contents of his many books

I'm fed up with occult speculations on the Mesopotamian theme and that's why I'm also in Enenuru - to combine my subjective approach and experience with the objective facts from the ANE students's scholar approach.

[asakku]

I know Ford is a really controversal author. I myself think, he is suspect when i look at his music and lyrics (because of this vampire shit). A friend of mine has that book, and he said its very good. Of course its not a history book, but i have enough of that sort books about mesopotamia. He said that the collection of pictures and informations about aspects related to mesopotamian "tiamatizism" (i created now that word, don't rage ) are simply amazing.

Anyway, in fact that i buyed that book, will give a feedback in this thread, if the book is nice or thumbs down.

(Sorry my bad english)

[madness]

Removed for now.

[asakku]

This Ford Dude is also making Videos on youtube about those topics: www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmqcGQj3Npw

I don't know..

[us4-he2-gal2]

Hello Asakku:



Yes, thank you for asking your question here as this is really what enenuru is made for.


I have not heard of Michael W. Ford before now, but I am always interested to learn what the public is doing with Mesopotamian Magic - however I haven't yet answered the question of can his material be trusted or not? I don't know for sure yet, not having the book in my hands..

However, Enkur has submitted an answer which I think is very valuable, because he knows more about occult than anyone else here and also has a huge appreciation for Mesopotamian scholarship. When Madness weighs in on something he is usually right for that matter.


My answer about the book, given the little I know about it, is this: We can't follow the data from cuneiform tablets that we don't have. Or - we can't suppose they exist if we haven't found them, just because we want them.


The trouble is this - the book aims to "re-define modern magical practice and the theology of the spiritual-rebel."
Well, my suspicion is that this "theology of the spiritual-rebel" is something of a modern phenomena, call it post-modern or a-religious or whatever term really fits - but I really don't believe it's ancient. In those times a religious worldview prevailed and we don't know of any 'spiritual rebels'. The question was how to soothe the heart of the gods and win their favor - again and again Mesopotamian literature demonstrates this subservient path to salvation. Order is found only in that attitude, and the order of the gods is what separates Sumer from the barbaric and chaotic lands.

Let's say that hypothetically there were some Mesopotamian's who were 'spiritual rebels' or who were inclined to worship chaotic beings. The issue here is that we are totally screwed if we ever hope to find the writings of those people - cuneiform tablets were written by scribes in the employ of the palace or the temple.. or, by students who copied tablets produced by scribes from the palace or temple - and so on. The point is, scribes wrote the doctrine of those following and spreading the authority of the major religion of Mesopotamia - the theology impressed itself on the people again and again because of it's promise of order, and that means crushing agents of chaos in order to show off. Weakening fear of chaos, not spreading awe of chaos. There is no way we will find magic instructions from anyone who *may* have followed a chaos being. Such an idea would have been stamped into oblivion because they couldn't write and nobody would write for them. A similar problem exists in our wishes to know Mesopotamian witches - if they actually existed and weren't a fabricated enemy of the exorcists. We do have hints of black magic - in that the exorcists worked against it - but again no writing of black magic users survive really and there is nothing to say that they didn't work their magic by appealing to major gods, not gods of chaos. If they existed.


I don't know if Ford is attempting to present magic spells of the Mashkim, like for summoning them or something, however I should say that the only literature I am aware of that mentions these demons is the exorcistic incantations. Markham J. Geller has probably translated more incantations featuring these demons then anyone - in his "Forerunners to Udug-hul: Sumerian Exorcistic Incantations" he translates Mashkim as "bailiff" as the demon apparently is a demonic mirror of a official from earlier periods. Possibly the analogy may be while a bailiff grabs a person and throws them in jail, a bailiff demon drags them off to the netherworld. In anycase here are some typical examples:

lines 148-150
Evil Udug, evil Ala-demon, evil ghost, evil bailiff [mashkim]
do not approach my body,
do not pass before me..

lines 220, 221 and 225

the evil Udug, evil Ala demon, evil ghost,
evil Galla, evil Bailiff, Dimme..
may they not approach me.

lines 642, 644
From the pleasent house (?) ..
Evil Udug, evil Ala, evil ghost, evil baliff demon(?)
be adjured by heaven, be adjured by earth.



So from the texts that we actually *do* have, we are looking at a demon and what happens in the texts is that the demon is asked to leave by the exorcist. It's all exorcism. That's about it. If that's what Ford say we have than, yes that's what we have.

[asakku]

Thank you for your answer, i also thought so.
I know, that the sources of religios clay tablets are created in honor of the gods and or practicing in writing schools, because this was it all about in mesopotamia. To have the favor of the gods. I'am personaly not a fan of seeing anything "evil" worshippers in ancient spiritualitys because it would not make sense for the people in that time.

Maybe you heard of the "dark germanic heathenism" ? Its a modern occult belief, where people try to reactive a chaos worship in the old norse mythology. They praise the Hrimthurs and all that... I think this is really near to that spiritual thinking of fords books, but just on mesopotamia. (just speculation i haven't read the book yet.)

Anyway, the speculation WHAT Chaos is, is a real wide topic. Some see Demons in it, some other gods. I personaly have created my own Spirituality. I don't follow a dualistic system. Not bad, not good, and my spiritual aim is to become pure freedom. I believe, that we can reach this, if our soul (i would call it better atman) reach a chaos-state. The reason for that is, because i think, that creation is unnatural. Thats my personal views. Its really metaphysic, and the chaos stand for me oustide of existence.

So, i'am always willing to learn and evolve my spirituality. As you can see, in my view, Tiamat has a special position because she is chaos, she is the natural.

But otherwise, i'am historican and archeologican, and for me its very important, that sources are authentical. Stuff will not fit in my views, if there are no real sources. So i'am really sceptic about this modern books too.

Can i just ask a simple question? Is there any proof that Tiamat was worshipped in ancient Mesopotamia?

[madness]

> can his material be trusted or not? I don't know for sure yet <

Ford wrote another book called Akhkharu: Vampyre Magick. That should tell you all you need to know. Heh heh heheh .....


> Is there any proof that Tiamat was worshipped in ancient Mesopotamia? <

There is indirect proof. In Assyrian ritual texts, deities can be found to be syncretised with Tiamat. E.g. SAA 3 39

Ištar of Durna (= Nineveh) is Tiamat; she is the wet nurse of Bel.
She has [four eyes] and four ears.
Her upper parts are Bel, and her lower parts are Mullissu.


Usually in ritual texts Tiamat is explained as something to be "vanquished." However there exists at least one incantation, from the Seleucid era, which seems to portray Tiamat in a respectable light. SpTU 2, 025

Whom should I send to the merciful lord, Marduk?
May he send me the tamarisk, creation of Tiamat!
Ditto (may he send me) the maštakal-plant, offspring of Tiamat!
Ditto (may he send me) the burāšu-juniper, offering for Tiamat!

Being a ritual to make river water flow correctly and remove curse, or something like that. Here, Tiamat is able to help Marduk? This is the first text that I am aware of that actually provides an "offering" for Tiamat. This could be interpreted as worship.

[enkur]

I'm interested mostly in Sumer and as far as I know it's Namma, Enki's mother, who is supposed to be the Sumerian archetype of the Babylonian Tiamat.

I assume also there was a definite enmity between the older Sumero-Akkadian priesthood and the new Amorite priesthood which made the latter to invent the new Babylonian cosmogony of Enuma Elish. Enmity between the priesthoods of the different cults wasn't so rare a phenomenon in the antiquity especially when a new ethnic culture was established over the remnants of the older one. In Egypt it was the imported vegetable cult of Osiris which demonized the older god Seth to the extent that Seth who once guarded the boat of Ra from the serpent Apep was later identified with Apep itself! I don't believe that the priesthood of such an overthrown cult would stay passive, so there were for sure some traditions which went underground and acted subversively against the imposed official cult. Here, I think, the rebel traditions start. Such traditions were secret and transmitted orally. If there are no evidences of such activities in Mesopotamia it doesn't mean there was no such a phenomenon. There are a lot of evidences about enmity between the different pagan cults in the other civilizations. Not to speak about the pagan cults which went underground during the establishment of the monotheist Abrahamic cults. People not so easily forgot their old deities. The celebration of the sacred marriage between Lucifer and Astarte on the May's Eve by the medieval European witches wasn't an invention of the Church but a real underground cult. The folklores are abundant of demonic forces which once were worshiped as deities.

(Of course, there is almost no supposed or real underground tradition Mr. Ford hasn't made money of )

While I find for ridiculous many of the present occult speculations about the ancient history as well as most of the conspiracy theories, I also tend to suspect certain scientific circles in deliberately ignoring, distorting, or hiding evidences which would shed different light upon the human history, and as we all know, the history is written by the winners, and the winners may prove not better than the defeated as was the case after the WW2. Very often the science serves not the human progress but the agenda of the status quo.

And at last a word to say about my own subjective experience: My true "Necronomicon" is the ETCSL project combined with my former occult study and experience. I do not claim any present objectivity of the deities once known in Sumer as Anunna gods, or today as Anunnaki, but this is the form my channeling has presently chosen to take in exploring the dark regions of my own psyche, which, of course, is connected with the collective human psyche. Well it's quite natural to feel that being the former lords of the world they are now rebellious against the present world order. They will claim the world again - most probably not by neo-paganism and reconstructionalism but according to the present development of humanity. I do realize I may say nothing different in essence than what the Necronomicon's and Sitchin's bad-tasting traditions say, but the mass belief in these modern mythologies is also a medium which serves to attune the human collective psyche to that weird wave of transmission coming from the very DNA.

Most simply said, too much has the human affectiveness been suppressed, so a general world change is near at hand. It was the human affectiveness which once connected humanity with the rest of the world - now that magical link doesn't work and we may not even hear Enki's warning of what Enlil has prepared in the near future. And Enlil is as angry as he never has been before, and he will hardly forgive those who have rejected him as "The Lord of Flies"

[asakku]

Ah btw: When i read the "thanking" site of the book, Ford said ": I would like to thank all of Enenuru forum who provided
ideas for cuneiform, especially to all the students of
Mesopotamian archeology and religion. "

Looks like Ford was posting here, and nobody knows it.

[enkur]

I haven't said Mr. Ford isn't a sorcerer A sorcerer should lurk. Yet I wouldn't pay him to tell me what to think about sorcery, were it European, or Mesopotamian etc. I prefer to pay the scholars' labor and the rest is left to my intuition. I do recommend this approach to all genuine occultists. If I am to feed on the general public's cheap taste, I would occupy with politics, instead of writing books ;D

[us4-he2-gal2]

What??



Can I get the url to this "thanking" site?

[asakku]

Jun 16, 2011 14:36:06 GMT -5 us4-he2-gal2 said:

What??



Can I get the url to this "thanking" site?

Its a site in the Book. Site 10, the last sentence:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank Hope Marie who has put up with my
endless workings, obsessive research and most of all, the
dissertations and commentary on all questions Babylonian when
a simple question is asked of me. Marchozelos, and The Order of
Phosphorus for my extended solitude and understanding why.
Luciferians and those who seek to extend beyond the defined
theology of the day and especially all those who support the
works. Thanks to Josh Abbott for Hubris and Serpentis, who
have fit in perfectly with the other snakes, P. Watson for the
support and advice. In addition, to Christos Beest who so long
ago in the 1990's encouraged the continual struggle of the
darkness, when Algol was first illuminated before me. Stephen
Sennitt, for his paitence in Vampyri and all those I have contact
with. I would like to thank all of Enenuru forum who providedideas for cuneiform, especially to all the students of
Mesopotamian archeology and religion.

[madness]

Hahahah how ironic

Now this shouldn't be too difficult to work out.

www.luciferianwitchcraft.com/mford.htm

Do you know anyone who lives in Houston, and goes by the email/nick of akhtya75@ . . . ?

[asakku]

I don't know any person from houston.

Btw: Does that makes this book now more authentical that he has his informations from enenuru?

[enkur]

I know neither Mr. Ford in person, nor Christos Beest (also mentioned in the thanksgiving) but judging on their works only, I tend to suppose the latter would be hardly charmed by this thanksgiving

Anyway, everybody can get information from everywhere but what makes one authentic is the way one makes use of this information. Having read other books written by Mr. Ford, for me he isn't authentic and his only celebrity as a sorcerer is the way he makes money of ill-used information. That's the opinion of many other serious practitioners of the occult who regard Mr. Ford's real "mission" as commercializing and profaning the authentic underground currents and thus working for the status quo to extinguish the really rebel subculture.

[asakku]

Thats a word!
Whats this all about with Akhkaru ? He wrote a book about Vampires ?! never knew that in Ancient Mesopotamia people believe in Vampires

[enkur]

See this thread:

enenuru.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=expel&action=display&thread=85

[us4-he2-gal2]

Greetz.






First of all I should say that I don't see any sign of Ford on the board here presently. It's true that I don't pay much attention to members who don't even post once - 90% of such people who sign up and don't participate drop off within a few months at the longest. It's only the valued few who post and participate and in doing so give themselves better reasons to come back. In anycase he may have used alternative names and information - the book actually came out 6 months ago so he won't be monitering this discussion I'm sure. Further, no one is logging in now that I don't know.


Well I must clear up some confusion from the posts above - first of all Asakku your English is better than my German by far, but one word you've used is confusing, that is, "site". We do say web page, and also web site - either one. However when it comes to a book you can't say 'site of the book" as in the German Seite, only "page of the book". So when you said site I was sure you meant website hehe Also thanksgiving is only a holiday in which one eats turkey But I know what you mean.


Anyway, I've noticed the book is available for reading at:

www.scribd.com/doc/51893897/Babylonian-Magick



The Question of Authenticity/


Unfortunately this site only allows some sections, but I'm able to see alot of content. On browsing through, the page thanking the enenuru forum is page 10, as Asakku explained. I am reviewing the book to assess what the author has really put in to it.


About the Question of whether the book is more authentic for having used *in some way* enenuru? Well, in a word, no. From what I can see the author must only have used enenuru for perhaps a) links, such as to ePSD and so on - ePSD cuneiform is seen throughout the book. And b) other ideas about cuneiform, as the author also seems to use the basic Neo-assyrian signs we, as beginners, work with here most often. Notice that's what he thanks the board for anyway.

Oddly enough, given that this is a forum on Mesopotamian magic to a large extent, he seems not to use the information on magic here. Why? Well first of all the author seems confused on just how authentic the information on magic is supposed to be. On p.291 he states:

""This grimoire is a different avenue of luciferianism with painstaking authenticity of the olds gods, demons, spirits presented in a modern, realistic context...."

And yet, one paragraph down we read:

"Understand that this grimire is indeed a modern interretation of the ancient stream of knowledge, thus it is not a "historically accurate" thesis." While my work has been strongly focused on keeping consistent with known tradition, it has been developed from my own initiatory perspective."


Certainly the incantations and offering texts he presents are a mixture of occult/necronomicon inspired material carefully wrapped in a rough Mesopotamianish vocabulary; yet there are certainly give aways such as the line in the "offering to Marduk" which reads "I seek the balance and wisdom of ancient times." (p. 329). We can assume this is not a Mesopotamian speaking at this point..



Ford on Necromancy/


Ford's treatment of Mesopotamian Necromancy has an incredible irony to it: Instead of encouraging his readers to use Necromancy as a means of divination, as this is what Necromancy is in Mesopotamia according to the field of Assyriology (see here), Ford gets confused about the whole thing and then goes vampire. For example, seepg 421 where he states:

"The purpose of necromancy will be to obtain dreams and visions based on what you wish to know. What will be difference [sic] is how will you "know" it is a "spirit" and not the subconcious "making it up"?

and yet on page 422 under the heading divination:

"I can suggest that you should not "believe" any direct advice given to you by the shades, it will mislead you."

So what IS the purpose of Necromancy (according to Ford)? On page 422 again, under the heading "vampire workings" Ford suggests:

"Some Black Adaepts of the vamiric tradition may seek to feed or utilize these Ekimmu to haunt and drain another sleeping person.."



Akhkharu and Vampires/




So the real irony here is that there are no vampires in all of Mesopotamian incantations and literature as far as I can tell 0_0 For this board's best effort as weighing such claims, and all vampire claims turned out to be poorly informed and misleading when it comes to Mesopotamian demons, or in a word: wrong, see this thread . Thank you Enkur for mentioning this above.

As for the famous Sumerian vampire, Akhkharu, this was one of the first investigations I did before making enenuru, hence forth the information I found is not on this board. To sum it up, Akhkharu is a word for vampire that appears in the Necronomicon; I was totally surprised to notice that Akhkharu is a word that appears in the work of early Assyriologists from around 1890, an example is in the work of A. Sayce I believe. It is the name of a demon and they, the Assyriologists, called him a vampire. Here is the importent part: the early Assyriologists were dead wrong. More recent translations of the same incantation mentioning the Akhkharu read the name like this: Ahharu. Not only that, better understanding of the texts allow us to understand that this is not a blood drinker, but the demon assigned to the -somewhat less sexy? and totally unpopular - position of bringer of jaundice... In other words, Akhkharu is a typo - an error in the reading, a nothing, corrected and removed from academic record probably close to a hundred years ago now but not soon enough for H.P. Lovecraft, who apparently liked to read old work (old even in his time!). And that will probably tell you what to think about "Akhkharu Magic" I would think.

If you want my notes from that investigation I could dig them up somewhere.





Cheers.

[madness]

> Akhkharu is a word that appears in the work of early Assyriologists from around 1890 <

Even earlier. Francois Lenormant was already calling Akhkharu a vampire in his La Magie chez les Chaldéens (1874), page 35. It would not be too surprising to discover if he got it from Assyriologists before him.

Lenormant lists it in the triad of Dim-me demons that we are all familiar with:

Labartu - an out of date rendering of Lamaštu
Labassu - more accurately read Labāṣu
Akhkharu - an out of date rendering of Ahhazu

[madness]

> position of bringer of jaundice <

This is disputable, and in my opinion incorrect.


CAD lists ahhāzu as jaundice, and then ties the demon to it purely because it shares the same name (which is not a foolproof method of determining the nature of a demon). But, it subsequently admits that the demon has no reference to jaundice.

The Assyrian-English-Assyrian Dictionary (from Helsinki) offers a more accurate translation:

ahhāzu n. seizer (a demon); jaundice

It doesn't say why (the Helsinki dictionary just lists entries, it does not supply textual evidence as CAD does), but the reason is likely because the Semitic root ʾhz means "seize." Compare also the Akkadian word ahāzu, also meaning "seize."


A grand list of Akkadian roots is at:
oracc.museum.upenn.edu/doc/builder/linganno/AKK/akk-roots/

[asakku]

@us4-he2-gal2

Thats an awesome informative post, thank you.
Yeah i did a mistake with site/page...in german there#s only the word site for a bookpage also for a internetsite.

It seems like Ford did a lot of antagonism comments in his books. I'am really sad about that still people orient oneself on the Necronomicon. I mean, how can a book about authentical cults and magic from old times be serious if its based on the necronomicon?

I guess it would be better, if people from the enenuru forum write a book about this topic.

[nininimzue]

Unfortunately, I am aware of Mr. Ford (if you're reading this, please do log in to the VVC and answer my damned PM about your sources) and his many, many works incorporating cuneiform as far as his limited understanding allows. In my opinion, he is slightly retarded but running high on the list of "how to make money with as little knowledge as possible, impressing the dumb hordes of rebellious pseudo-satanists with pseudo-intellectual drivel about Mesopotamia which he wouldn't know if asked to point at a map".

Is it obvious I dislike him?

[asakku]

I got another questions: I read the chapter about Assyria in this book, and it said, that Ashurbanipal often call the name of Bel in his inscriptions. I really wonder about this because i thought Bel was a god of the ugarits and not of the assyrians. So, did the assyrians also praise the god Bel ?

Also he said in the book, that Lamashtu rebels against Anu, so she was damned from the spheres where Anu reigns.

This sounds really christian-concept like. Is this true? I never heard about, that Lamashtu rebels against anything.

[muska]

Bel (Lord) was the title of Marduk or Enlil and Baal (Lord) was the title of several Semitic deities.
I wonder on the origins on Lamashtu-story presented on some popular resources (about her rebellion and exile). As I know, Babylonian texts never mentioned it.

[asakku]

What i really dislike is, that Ford apparently has no clue whats the difference between assyrians, babylonians and akkadians. He always mix it up.

[asakku]

Jun 19, 2011 7:11:54 GMT -5 muska said:

I wonder on the origins on Lamashtu-story presented on some popular resources (about her rebellion and exile). As I know, Babylonian texts never mentioned it.

Ford wrote in his Book : "Anu, her father, cast her (lamashtu) down from heaven earthward " - BIN 4 126:10-13

he got this from the book " mesopotamian Cosmic Geography page 224 "

[muska]

Oh, thank you. Horowitz s Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography is reliable academic work.

[asakku]

The book of Horowitz looks serious, yeah. Also expensiv, but i guess its worth the money for study.

Anway, the Ford book is not that bad, i think.
of course here and there there are some stuff where i think " thats crap", like the vampire-thing...he give so much "demons" a "vampiric " aspect of blood sucking and all that stuff. Even Lamashtu. And sometimes he mixed up the ethnics in mesopotamia.

I also looking forward if he just want to be rebel-like with his ideology. Well, he often mention, that this is no dual concept, what he describes in his book, and also there should be a balance, so i can't proof that ford just want to be a rebel against light in a modern religion in this book. he also describes invocations to the " good " gods.

But in other way he often mention words like darkness, demons, evil spirits and all that stuff...that really get on my nerves after a time, because it looks like a paradoxon...using christian-minted words that has a clear dual concept.

The illustrations in this book are also kinda awkward: One of his friends drawed the pictures, and well..this guy is not a profi. it looks really amateurish, like i can do it better.

He uses akkadian cuneiform-names for deitys, and on the next page he uses a sumerian cuneform, without explanation why hes doing that, or even mention it.

Sometimes he uses real photos of reliefs, thats good.

In fact i have to say: i think its worth to read that book - its more worth as a general book about mesopotamian mythology than a spiritual work. Normal mesopotamia interrested people will know anway all what is written in this book and "of quality". I guess we are all old enough to make a difference what we want to believe and what not in books.

[madness]

BIN = Babylonian lnscriptions in the Collection of J. B. Nies

Does anyone have access to this?


BIN 4 126 actually looks like an interesting text. It is an Old Akkadian incantation. If you want a complete description of Lamastu, then you would need to look at:

Wiggermann, "Lamastu, Daughter of Anu: A Profile," in M. Stol, Birth in Babylonia and the Bible


On p. 225 Wiggermann describes the demon, citing BIN 4 and other relevant texts:

It is against this general cosmic background that the evidence for Lamaštu's position must be judged. Lamaštu is a daughter of Anu, the god of heaven, and the sister of Inanna/Ištar and as such a high-ranking goddess. The incantations repeatedly stress her divinity, which is exceptional for demons. She is "singular" among the gods, however, and more like an evil spirit; then, on account of her "bad disposition" and her "disrespectful/insubordinate proposal", Anu expels her from heaven. The occasion for this irreversable measure was her request to have human flesh (babies) for dinner.


So it seems the reason for her expulsion is due to the harm she causes.

Wiggermann also cites YOS 11 20. Here we find another interesting description (Akkadian incantation):

("she" refers to Lamaštu)

1. she is fierce, she is terrible,
2. she is a goddess, she is an Amorite
3. and she is a she-wolf,
4. the daughter of heaven.
5. Her . . . is the nest . . .
6. . . .
7. [ . . . of] the threshold is [her] place.
8. . . . she drinks blood,
9. her . . .
10. She strangles
11. the babes, the weak(?) ones
12. she gives water of . . . to drink.


Take the descriptions of blood drinking and flesh devouring as you will.