UrIII Discussion and Categorization
Aug 13, 2007 16:23:15 GMT -5
Post by us4-he2-gal2 on Aug 13, 2007 16:23:15 GMT -5
Thread Orientation: This thread will attempt examination of the collected Ur III Incantations (see "Ur III Incantations" thread) through predefined categorizations, and specific discussion criteria.
Four principal categories:
Adam Falkenstein in his 1931 "Haupttypen der sumerischen Beschwörungen" was the first to observe and record four principal categories of Sumerian incantation. The category of an incantation derives from its focus, and by extension, the category of an incantation may also indicate at which point in the exorcistic proceedings it was to be used. I have listed these categories/types below together with Falkenstein's original German terminology, Cunninghams wording for the same incantation type, and brief explanation of each. (Due to difficulties of interpretation, some incantations remain ambiguous as to their type.)
Type I. Legitimationstyp (Legitimation type)
Cunningham: "priestly legitimation"
-Incantations in which a priest legitimates himself as a representative of a deity.
Type II. Prophylaktischer
Cunningham: "Prophylactic-type incantation" (Prophylactic = 1. defending or protecting from disease or infection)
- Incantations instructing an evil demon not to approach the person on whose behalf the exorcist works.
Type III. Marduk-Ea typ
Cunningham: "divine dialogues"
- Incantations which contain the transfer of ritual instruction from a senior to a junior god, this transfer in effect re-enforces the corresponding actual ritual of the incantation-specialist.
Type IV. Weihungtyp/Kultmittelbeschworung (roughly Cultic practices of the Incantation specialist)
Cunningham: "consecration/praise of divine purifiers"
- These incantations praise certain cultic items for example the tamarisk or for example the reed, which were seen as pure, and were capable of bestowing purity. As magical items they were seen as mediating between the divine and temporal worlds. This type of incantation might correctly be seen as pre-empting a ritual procedure.
I suggest specific types of information to collect here, with hopes toward rare understandings. For simplicity Ill refer to these informations as 'notes'. Its unlikely that each type of note will be applicable with each collected incantation, however there are five:
- Categorization notes: (outlined above)
- Secondary literature note: It would above all be wise to observe and to keep abreast of what has been said about a given incantation in the scholarly world. In this case, all that need be applied here are words that define the character of the specific incantation in question.
- Item identification note: By times the incantations will mention an item which is not explained by the translator, or, is translated, but not placed with any cultural context. For example in TEXT 57 (collected), reference is made to the "horn of u.-wood." What is that? This type of note may be in practice brief research into the material culture of the Sumerians, as such cultural items may be referenced in analogy, or for ritual purposes by the incantation specialist. Understanding these references may become key.
- Notes on Literary parallels: While incantations fit broadly into the Literary genre, and examinations have been conducted as to the poetics on Mesopotamian spells (Michalowski 1981, Reiner 1985, Copper 1996 and Veldhuis 1999), I am here referring to parallels which might occur between an incantation and a given Myth, Hymn or other Cuneiform source (with particular interest to UrIII sources). Comparisons here will most likely be loose and tentative, but will attempt to position what insight may be obtainable. An example might be the ingestion of the "Honey-plant" by the pregnant women in TEXT 62 before a difficult birth, and Enki's ingestion of the honey plant just before a similar circumstance in etcsl t.1.1.1 (however this is just one of the plants Enki ingested).
- Notes on Incantation parallels: Here Parallels with later, and earlier, incantations can be noted for characteristic similarities in wording, technique etc. in order that development might be marked and that the position of an incantation might be observed within the greater body of Mesopotamian magical texts. Philological remarks would in most cases be drawn from secondary sources.
I will undoubtedly modify the above 'discussion criteria' as the idea is put into practice and these proposals are tested. Though its always unwise to do so, I would estimate 3 months until this thread approaches a form of haphazard completion and the next period is focused on. Notes on ritual instructions, particularly derived from the Marduk/Ea typ incantation, will appear on the "UrIII Ceremony and Ritual" thread.
Editorial process:
New efforts will be made to present content at Enenuru in a systematic and reference-able fashion. To that end I will systematically edit all contributions here into a single Incantation specific entry, with specific and obvious reference to the contributor of each piece. In other words post as you normally would and I will put your information into its own, easily referenced, 'house.'
Categorization of Sumerian Incantations
Four principal categories:
Adam Falkenstein in his 1931 "Haupttypen der sumerischen Beschwörungen" was the first to observe and record four principal categories of Sumerian incantation. The category of an incantation derives from its focus, and by extension, the category of an incantation may also indicate at which point in the exorcistic proceedings it was to be used. I have listed these categories/types below together with Falkenstein's original German terminology, Cunninghams wording for the same incantation type, and brief explanation of each. (Due to difficulties of interpretation, some incantations remain ambiguous as to their type.)
Type I. Legitimationstyp (Legitimation type)
Cunningham: "priestly legitimation"
-Incantations in which a priest legitimates himself as a representative of a deity.
Type II. Prophylaktischer
Cunningham: "Prophylactic-type incantation" (Prophylactic = 1. defending or protecting from disease or infection)
- Incantations instructing an evil demon not to approach the person on whose behalf the exorcist works.
Type III. Marduk-Ea typ
Cunningham: "divine dialogues"
- Incantations which contain the transfer of ritual instruction from a senior to a junior god, this transfer in effect re-enforces the corresponding actual ritual of the incantation-specialist.
Type IV. Weihungtyp/Kultmittelbeschworung (roughly Cultic practices of the Incantation specialist)
Cunningham: "consecration/praise of divine purifiers"
- These incantations praise certain cultic items for example the tamarisk or for example the reed, which were seen as pure, and were capable of bestowing purity. As magical items they were seen as mediating between the divine and temporal worlds. This type of incantation might correctly be seen as pre-empting a ritual procedure.
Discussion criteria
I suggest specific types of information to collect here, with hopes toward rare understandings. For simplicity Ill refer to these informations as 'notes'. Its unlikely that each type of note will be applicable with each collected incantation, however there are five:
- Categorization notes: (outlined above)
- Secondary literature note: It would above all be wise to observe and to keep abreast of what has been said about a given incantation in the scholarly world. In this case, all that need be applied here are words that define the character of the specific incantation in question.
- Item identification note: By times the incantations will mention an item which is not explained by the translator, or, is translated, but not placed with any cultural context. For example in TEXT 57 (collected), reference is made to the "horn of u.-wood." What is that? This type of note may be in practice brief research into the material culture of the Sumerians, as such cultural items may be referenced in analogy, or for ritual purposes by the incantation specialist. Understanding these references may become key.
- Notes on Literary parallels: While incantations fit broadly into the Literary genre, and examinations have been conducted as to the poetics on Mesopotamian spells (Michalowski 1981, Reiner 1985, Copper 1996 and Veldhuis 1999), I am here referring to parallels which might occur between an incantation and a given Myth, Hymn or other Cuneiform source (with particular interest to UrIII sources). Comparisons here will most likely be loose and tentative, but will attempt to position what insight may be obtainable. An example might be the ingestion of the "Honey-plant" by the pregnant women in TEXT 62 before a difficult birth, and Enki's ingestion of the honey plant just before a similar circumstance in etcsl t.1.1.1 (however this is just one of the plants Enki ingested).
- Notes on Incantation parallels: Here Parallels with later, and earlier, incantations can be noted for characteristic similarities in wording, technique etc. in order that development might be marked and that the position of an incantation might be observed within the greater body of Mesopotamian magical texts. Philological remarks would in most cases be drawn from secondary sources.
I will undoubtedly modify the above 'discussion criteria' as the idea is put into practice and these proposals are tested. Though its always unwise to do so, I would estimate 3 months until this thread approaches a form of haphazard completion and the next period is focused on. Notes on ritual instructions, particularly derived from the Marduk/Ea typ incantation, will appear on the "UrIII Ceremony and Ritual" thread.
Editorial process:
New efforts will be made to present content at Enenuru in a systematic and reference-able fashion. To that end I will systematically edit all contributions here into a single Incantation specific entry, with specific and obvious reference to the contributor of each piece. In other words post as you normally would and I will put your information into its own, easily referenced, 'house.'