Revisions on Sisig

[us4-he2-gal2]

Just a Sketch So Far

AN:anum/ePSD

Paraphrasing Al-Rawi and Cavigneaux (2000a), the theological idea that Sisig is the god of dreams would seem to have derived from the An.Anum god list. As in the list spTU 3, 107, Sisig in the An Anum god list - click here - lines 149-150) appears as the offspring of Utu, and is listed directly below Mamu, a dream deity. It seems that for the purposes of the list Sisig and Mamu were divinised and contrasted as male and female, appearing on the list as brother and sister. The Sumerian word ma.mu2 means dream or god dream (Oppenheim) and occurs numerous times in the literature although without a determinative and so not in a divinised form. Its therefore somewhat hard for me to say at which point in history Mamu was considered to be a deity. I also have the same problem interpreting the lack of determinative with Sisig in Sumerian sources, however he is stated to be the son of Utu already in the Death of Gilgamesh.
The entry for Sisig at ePSD reads: (14x: Old Babylonian, unknown) wr. sig-sig; tumusi-si-ig; si-si-ga; sig3-sig3 "ghost?; storm; breeze, wind" Akk. mehû; zīqīqu?; šāru and there are four variants:

1- sig-sig
2- tumusi-si-ig
3- si-si-ga
4- sig3-sig3


Digesting the philology on this one remains beyond me, my guess work leads me to think 2 and 3 are syllabic readings, 4 is a reduplicated sig3 - to flatten I think which makes sense here. 1 just confuse's me completely So its better I say nothing at all about it.

Wind and Ghost:

The understanding of Sisig is that he is an incorporeal deity, being in some capacity wind or wind like and its interesting to note the line between the interpretation of wind and of ghost seems to blue in the ePSD entry - as it does elsewhere. The literature seems to suggest at least loose conceptual similarity between ghost and wind as in "You flatten those mountains and turn them over to ghostly winds" ( (t.2.5.3.3) or "Urim, the shrine, is haunted by the breezes, now how do you exist?" (t.2.2.2) and perhaps as winds are often portrayed as a destructive force which might produce haunted ruin mounds, there may be some explanation there for the ambiguity of Sisig as wind/ghost. In any case this deity has been identified with the Akk. Zaqiqu, Oppenheim wrote a very interesting note on the nature of Zaqiqu in CAD (Z) in a discussion of the same - part of Oppenheims note (quoted elsewhere buit iportant here as well) reads:


“The word zaqiqu does not refer to a stormwind or even a wind. The only passages in which sisig and lil correspond to mehu [violent storm] and saru [wind] are those cited in the lex. Section, and these correspondences are not paralleled in bil. Texts. The only instance in which zaqiqu denotes a metrological phenomenon (mng. La-2’) adds significantly the explanation iltanu; “north wind,” i.e, the only wind that was considered charged with supernatural quality (see istanu and manitu). The mng. Of Sum. Lil points likewise to “phantom,” “ghost,” “haunting spirt” (as in lu.lil.la, ki.sikil.lil.la,, see lilu, lilitu) rather than to “wind.” Note also that zaqiqu is to be considered an irregular diminutive (possibly to be posited as zaqiqu, zaqiqu). It is used as a designation of the dream god and also to denote some kind of divine communication in answer to prayers (see mng. 1a-2’). While in other contexts the translation “soul” seems to fit (see mng. 4).
The Akk.zaqiqu, as well as the Sum. Lil, not only denotes the ghosts, etc., that haunt a place in the desert or a ruined city, but these localities themselves, which are sometimes also called in Sum. Edin.lil.la (not “desert of the wind” Jacobsen, JNES 12 168 n.25). “
[At the bottom of the discussion is the line “Oppenheim, Dream-book 234ff.” so I believe these are his words]"


Also, Veldhuis in an article on the Death of Gilgeames , mentions "Sisig's role in dreaming and dream explanation is very restricted, and may be a consequence of his primary character as an underworld god with ghostly characteristics (see Butler 1998:77-83)." So Sisig may be interesting if not only for dreams, but as an aspect of the Mesopotamian understanding of human nature and afterlife. There is a mention of this deity in An Old Babylonian version of Bīt Rimki (Geller 1995:117:3) currently unaccessible to me), otherwise there are two key literary piece's to consider. The first is:



1. Gilgamesh, Enkidu and the Netherworld:


etcsl t.1.8.1.4
1. Gilgamesh, Enkidu and the Netherworld: Enki tells Utu to bring Enkidu back from the netherworld and Utu (l. 242) "opened a hole in the nether world and brought up his servant with his breeze (?) from the nether world."
(l. 242. si-si-ig-ni-ta cubur-a-ni kur-ta mu-/da\-ra-ab-ed3-de3)

- A. George, 1999, interprets that Utu is here instructed by Enki to bring Enkidu's shade up at dawn, when he exits the netherworld (pg.176)
- D. Katz 2003 interprets line 243 as:
243. As a dream (or: as his spirit⁸⁰) his servant came up from the kur."

Note 80 reads: "In si-si-ga-ni-ta we probably have the possessive
third-person singular and the ablative, which apart from direction
denotes "by means of." Sisig is also the name of the dream-god. That
Enkidu as si-si-ig came out through a hole that was opened by Utu is
strongly reminiscent of DGil 180, about Sisig son of Utu the
dream-god. " [DGil= Death of Gilgamesh]

Later Katz again touches on this and in a note on pg. 213 states: "The description of Enkidu coming up from the netherworld points to necromancy. Presumably, si-si-ig-ni-ta in line 243 means that Enkidu appeared to Gilgamesh in a dream "in his dream form." I compare it to DGil 180-181, where Sisig can only metaphorically bring light to the netherworld, not literally."

So it seems these lines can be variously interpreted that Enkidu rose as ghost, dream or in physical form. As for the possibility of ghost in some type of Necromantic act, Katz has said "points to necromancy" and its might be relevant here that at least one extent Necromantic spell alludes to "Samaš, opener of the darknes." (As mentioned in Scurlocks Magical means of dealing with ghosts in Mesopotamia). This seems similar as well to two lines from the "First elegy of the Pushkin Museum" which read "88. Utu, the great lord of arali, 89. After he turns the dark place into light he will judge your case." Below Sisig is directly cast in the role of lightener of dark places-


2. The Death of Gilgamesh:

etcsl t.1.8.1.3
-The main consideration I have for this deity is his occurrence in this composition. There are two versions extent, a version from Nippur and a version from Me-turan, its from the former that Mark. E. Cohen 1993 translates:

1 "Let..., the child of the sun-god Utu, *
2 light up for him the netherworld, the place of
darkness!
3 Let him set up a threshold there (as bright) as the
moon
4 (for) all mankind whatever their names be,
5 (for) those whose statues were fashioned in days of
yore,
6 (for) the heroes, the young men, and the...!
7 From there the strong and mighty will march out.
8 Without him no light would be there during the month
ne-IZI-gar, during
9 the festival of the gh]osts. (iti ne-IZI-gar e[ze]m-
gi[di]m?-ma-ke4-ne)


* these same lines appear as segment E 1-11 at etcsl; Cohen for whatever reason leaves Sisig's name unrestored in line 1 - elsewhere line 1 appears "Let Sisig...".

- Veldhuis' translation of the equivalent lines in the version from Me-Turan read:

88 The youths and the strong men, on seeing the
lunar crescent, without him they should not
make light!
90 Sisig the son of Utu makes light in the dark
places! "



Translations and interpretations vary on what I understand to be difficult texts, but to try and keep it manageable, Ill just add below Cohens interpretation of segment E 1-11, which Ive found the most interesting for its insight about the mentioned festival of ghosts, and the month ne-IZI-gar. To me there remains plenty of enigma, but since the above translation would seem to have Sisig lighting up the darkness, and providing a 'threshold' or passage for the dead, it seems to provide a very interesting parallel to Enkidu's resurfacing: Cohen relates (pg.100) that the month name ne.IZI.gar originates in pre-Sargonic times and can be read "(the month when) lamps/braziers are lit." He seems to largely rely on his own translation of a passage from The Death of Gilgamesh for knowledge of the existence of the festival of the dead that took place during this month, and it seems to be largely from those lines that he develops the description of the festival on pg.103 - The festival of Ghost was..

"a time when the spirits of the dead followed a special passage of light leading from the darkness of the netherworld back into the world of the living for a brief stay. The setting of fire and lighting of torches by each household would guide the spirits of the dead back to the ancestral home, where a ceremonial meal, presumably the ne-IZI-gar offering, awaited."

[amarsin]

So it seems these lines can be variously interpreted that Enkidu rose as ghost, dream or in physical form. As for the possibility of ghost in some type of Necromantic act, Katz has said "points to necromancy" and its might be relevant here that at least one extent Necromantic spell alludes to "Samaš, opener of the darknes."

Except a superior interpretation has Enkidu not rising as a ghost, but as a living person. After all, as Gilgamesh notes, Enkidu didn't die and was in the Netherworld unjustly! (Well, sort of unjustly-- he did break the rules, but Gilgamesh offers compelling reasons why Enkidu shouldn't be trapped in the Netherworld.) Utu realized this and has his Sisig-wind bring Enkidu back through a hole in the Netherworld. After they embrace, Enkidu tells him all about the people in the Netherworld, and, with thoughts of mortality in mind, Gilgamesh decides to "make a name" for himself and heads off to the Cedar Forest, where the next adventure begins.

This is in Gadotti's dissertation, which I expect will be published shortly...

[us4-he2-gal2]

Various notes in November:

Amarsin-

Thanks for the perspective and head's up regarding the latest interpretational trends here. I didnt know all of what you were saying until I re-read it a few times as its a conceptual shift! Considering Sisig as literally transporting a living body is quite a different angle, especially the thought that Enkidu survived. Or wouldnt that follow if he escaped the Netherworld alive? One might wonder why did he not continue on to the final adventure with his great companion?
But it seems true enough that Enkidu is stated as 'seized by the netherworld' which is not explicitly dead, no one seems to translate what comes through Utu's hole the same way, and their embrace at least to the modern imagination would almost spell corporeality in itself - and so no attestation of Enkidu's literal death seems all that explicit. Another indication that there may be something to this view is on a tablet from Ur featured at ETCSL, A. George (2003) described this piece as "a recension of the Sumerian poem in which the conclusion draws a moral from the preceding story. Shocked by what Enkidu's ghost has imparted, Gilgamesh institutes proper memorial rites for his parents.." The relevant section reads:

(From etcsl t.1.8.1.4)
A third version from Urim (UET 6 60)

1-10. They returned to Unug, they returned to their city. He entered outfitted with tools and armaments, with an axe and a spear, and deposited them in his palace happily.

If one interprets the "They" as Gilgamesh and Enkidu, it seems to lend credence to the idea of his survival. I had thought that perhaps the section in The Death of Gilgamesh text=t.1.8.1.3 , section 14, lines 1-14 which seems to suggest Enkidu is lying in the N.W. waiting for Gilgamesh, may argue for his death - but the version from Meturan states that "your father, your grandfather, your mother, your sisters," etc etc are waiting for him there, which seems to render the above point moot. (In order to comfort Gilgamesh, Enkidu was by no means the only charactor portrayed as dead and waiting.)
So Enkidu's corporal ascent is something to consider for sure, I'll definitely add Gadotti's publication to me Sisig materials list, and hope to discuss it at that point. Of course, I love to consider the other possibilities at the same time.

---

Looking over A. George's Massive 983 page "The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic" (2003) , which seems much more inclusive then my paper back version at home, I notice a citation he give worth noting. In discussing the moment Enkidu (or Enkidu's shade) exits the hole made in the netherworld he explains that Utu "As one who daily makes the journey from the Netherworld to the land of the living, the sun god is uniquely positioned to open such a hole. Enkidu's shade duly escapes through a chink in the wall like a pigeon flying from its nook. ³⁰¹"

Interesting here is note 301 - J. Tropper has cogently argued that the word in question, Sum.ab.làl// Akk. takkapu, signifies a small opening in the city wall of the Netherworld: see his article "Beschworung" des Enkidu? Ammerkungen zur Interpretation von GEN 240-243 // Gilg. XII, 79-84, WO 17 (1986), pp. 19-24. One may add that the imagery is still more allusive. The dead shades were often perceived as bird-like in form (cg. SBVII 189 and parallels); the word ab.làl is most commonly encountered in Sumerian literature as a roosting place of pigeons (see PSD A/2, p.146).

---

On the more General question of the conceptual distinction between ghost and wind, such as noted above, and as I stumble over in the thread "overall incorporeality", Thorkild Jacobsen's description of Enlil in "The Treasures of Darkness" (1976) might provide a brief comparison to being who seem alternatively to embody wind or ghost.

Jacobsen at this time understands Enlil as "Lord Wind" , productive manager and Jacobsen suggests the primary power of these winds is in the moist winds of spring - growing weather. Jacobsen proceeds to outline some of the fertilizing power of the spring winds, their effect on the soil and Enlil's connection with the hoe, the holy mound (Du₆-kug) and various grain/storage deities.
However its notes not all of Enlil's activities are beneficent to mankind.He allows the birth goddess to kill at birth, and his is behind the miscarriages of cows and ewes. This aspect of Enlil as potentially hostile corresponds with the two-sided nature of wind, not only benign zephyr, but also the destructive storm. In the storm a brooding violence and destructiveness in Enlil finds expression."

[amarsin]

admin said:

Various notes in November:

Amarsin-

Thanks for the perspective and head's up regarding the latest interpretational trends here. I didnt know all of what you were saying until I re-read it a few times as its a conceptual shift! Considering Sisig as literally transporting a living body is quite a different angle, especially the thought that Enkidu survived. Or wouldnt that follow if he escaped the Netherworld alive? One might wonder why did he not continue on to the final adventure with his great companion?

Well keep in mind that what Gadotti is saying is that GEN starts a Sumerian Gilgamesh cycle, the next adventure of which is Gilgamesh and Huwawa, and in which both G and E participate.

Looking over A. George's Massive 983 page "The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic" (2003) , which seems much more inclusive then my paper back version at home, I notice a citation he give worth noting. In discussing the moment Enkidu (or Enkidu's shade) exits the hole made in the netherworld he explains that Utu "As one who daily makes the journey from the Netherworld to the land of the living, the sun god is uniquely positioned to open such a hole. Enkidu's shade duly escapes through a chink in the wall like a pigeon flying from its nook. ³⁰¹"

George and Gadotti obviously have different views. (You can see her review of George in BSOAS 68:1 (2005), I think.)

[us4-he2-gal2]

The lil₂ of ^dEnlil₂

[/color][/sub][/center]

-Reviewing Th. Jacobsen 1989 edition from "DUMU-E2-DUB-BA-A. Studies in Honor of AW Sjoberg"-

In this very focused discussion, Jacobsen reviews first the evolution of the names Enlil and Ninlil and the cuneiform signs that made up these names from the earliest writings onward. Secondly, and of particular interest to us here, he examines the form and meaning of the name Enlil, and in a fascinating study, explores individually the varying subtle uses of lil₂ itself . I have summed the latter parts of the paper below.

II. ^dEn-lil₂ FORM AND MEANING

"... The series EA can be convincing;y restored to yield for the reading lil₂ two Akkadian equivalents, šâru which is the general term for wind and takes in winds of all strengths, and zaqīqu which refers mostly to the more gentle breezes. The name Enlil can thus be rendered "Lord Wind." It indicates that the god was seen as a personification of the wind and the numinous power in it much as the name of the god An presents him as the deified sky and the old name of Nin-hursaga, Hursaga presents the deified foothills."
Jacobsen explains that Enlil as "Lord Wind" is seen as responsible for great catastrophes such as the Fall of Ur, yet other times he is also seen as the spring winds that bring nature to life. He is also called ^dUD "(God)Storm" , ^dIm-si-sa₂ "(God)Northwind" and ^dIm-kur-r "(God East wind)". He continues "..an explanatory text explains his and Ninlil's names as:

im- kur-ra ^dEn-lil₂ bêl(EN) ša₂-a-ri (var. gim-ri)
im-si-sa₂ ^dNIN-lil₂ bêlet (GAŠAN, var. EN) za-qi₂-qi₂

"The east wind (is) Enlil, lord of the winds,
the north wind (is) Ninlil, mistress of the breezes."

Distribution of the Word Lil₂

The author next considers lil₂ outside of its usage in then name of Enlil: His comments here are invaluable and give a much need framework to the study of this term and the effort of its conceptualization. Jacobsen: "Looking beyond the name of Enlil and the lexical texts for occurrences of the word lil₂ the impression one gets is that of a semi-archaic term surviving only in set literary tropes characteristic of different literary genres. One may distinguish its use in incantations from the one in laments, and from the on in myths and hymns. All derives, though, from a basic meaning "wind" slightly differently seen and stressed." Henceforth, lil₂ can have a different connotation depending on the genre of text it is featured in."

In Incantations

(lil2 as the "Wind Demon")

"Since exposure to the chilling winter winds of the desert will often have caused illness it is understandable that the ancient exorcists would include them with other agents of illness in their long diagnostic listings. Thus the basic facts about them, that they are winds sweeping along, never resting, that they may be moist, may come from the mountains, and that they may "approach" - that is "affect" - man tend to take on additional sinister hues from the various demons of disease and death with which they are grouped, so that the image of lil₂ in the genre of incantations has a hostile and threatening character absent in other genres such as those of the lamentation and myth."
The author lists some characteristic descriptions of lil₂ beings, demons, from the incantation lore - Ive quoted some below:

CT 16, 15 v. 4-5
sum: lil₂-la₂ bu₂-bu₂-meš
akk: za-qi₂-qu mut-taš-ra-bi-ţu-ti šu₂-nu
Trans: "They are winds sweeping along"


CT 16, 1 36-37
sum: lil₂-la₂ edin-na i₃-bu2-bu-eš-am₃
akk: li-lu-u₂ ša2 ina şe-rim it-ta-na-aš-ra-bi-ţu
trans: "being wind demons who ever sweep along in the desert"
Comment: "Their habitat, the open desert, is mentioned in CT 16 1 36-37"

Old-Babylonian Udug-hul 20:18
sum: lil₂-la₂-dur₂-edin-na i₃-bu-bu-de₃-eš
trans: "the wind-demons, desert dwellers, are ever sweeping along."
comment: "The phrase is so characteristic it even gets a separate listing in Proto-lu2 as lil2-bu-bu."

In other cases, the author notes, the wind demon is sometimes depicted as coming out of the Netherworld, or in Akkadian instances, the grave. See CT 16, 4: 155-156 (sum: lil₂-la₂-e-ne hul-a-meš urugal-la-ta im-ta-e₃-a-meš akk: za-qi₂-qu lem-nu-ti iš-tu qab-rim it-ta-šu-ni.ki-se3-ga a-de₂-am₃ urugal-la-ta a-meš : a-na ka-sa-ap ki-is-pu u na-aq mi-e iš-tu qab-rim MIN "The evil wind demons come out of the Netherworld (Akkadian "the grave"), for funerary offerings and libation of water they come out of the Netherworld (Akkadian "the grave".)

In Laments

(lil2 as "Wind")

Jacobsen: "As one moves from the genre of incantations to that of laments the demonic aspect of lil2 disappears and the word denotes again, as in the lexical texts, just "wind, breeze." The standard trope for which it is used is that of the yearly dismantling of the sheepfolds in the desert when the grazing season is over. Where reed fence and reed
huts provided shelter, the winds now play freely, the fold has been given over to the winds is, to quote a similar English expression, "gone with the wind." The wind, lil2, thus
becomes a symbol of loss, its sweeping along and disappearing stand for the impermanence of things; they are gone as if blown away."

Lament for the destruction of Ur
sum: amaš-a-na lil₂-e ba-ni-in-g̃ar
trans: "in his fold he/she has given it over to the wind."


SBH 31 rev. 20ff
sum: e₂-zi mu-gi nu-me-a lil₂-la₂-am₃ ba-ni-in-kur₄
akk: bitu ki-ni ul [a-pu-um[-ma ana za-qi₂-qu₂ it-tur
trans: "the good house which is no (mere) canebrake turned into wind only."


SBH 33 25-28
sum: ša₃=bi lil₃-la-am bar-bi lil₂-la₂-am₃
akk: lib₃-ba-šu₂ za-qi₂-qu a-ha-tu-šu₂ [(!?)] za-qi₂-qu-u₂-ma/ša3- bi sig₃ (! thus 4R 11 51)-sa₃=ga=ni-gul-gul : a lib₃-ba-šu₂ ina za-qi₂-qu u₂-ta-tab-bit
trans: "its interior is mere wind, its outside is mere wind, its interior has been destroyed into wind."

In Myths and Hymns

(lil2 as Spirit)

Jacobsen: "Winds and dreams seem at one time to have been considered the same thing for the name of the god of dreams Sisig means "the winds" or "the ever blowing one." The point of similarity is apparently the evanescence of the dream world, on awakening it is gone like the wind.
In the dream experience the dreamer moves about and acts independently of his stationary body and this may underlie the notion of separate mode of being, as "spirit" as in evanescent manifestation that would arise and pass on like the wind. One word for it was lil₂, and was sig₃-sig₃, which denoted the god of dreams. Both words mean "wind." The lil₂ can be that of a living person or one dead, of one awake or one asleep, it can occur of its own volition to plead its case or to ask for help or it can be called; and it is, it seems, capable of engendering a child. There is no proper translation for it in English; "spirit" which we have used in the caption for this section does not really come close. (48)"

[note 48 reads: "Dream soul" is too narrow: terms like "phantom" and "apparition" suggest unreality and so do not fit the Mardu of the role of the lil2 as begetter. By pertaining to living persons it is different from "ghost" and "shade" which correspond to gidim."]

Chiera SRT 1 iv 2-6 [hymn to Inana]
ETCSL t.2.5.3.1 lines 112-120
Jacobsen's trans: "She having imposed sweet sleep in the homes, while all the lands, the dark headed ones, the people in their entirety, sleep on the roofs, sleep on city walls, eloquent lil2's step up to her, bring her their cases. Then she recognizes the righteous one, recognizes the wicked one."
comment: The author describes this as an example of how the lil2 of sleeping people bring their requests before Inana as morning star.

The author provides a fascinating instance in which the lil₂ of Gilgamesh makes a request of Inana for jurisdiction of the Eanna in "Gilgamesh and the Bull of heaven. His translation here reads "the lil, the lil she recognized, holy Inana recognized the lil, from the request she recognized the lil (saying): 'You are the shepherd and oxherder, such (i.e jurisdiction of Eanna) I am not relinquishing to you, lord Gilgamesh, you are the shepherd and oxherder, such I am not relinquishing t you.' "
He further adds about Gilgamesh "As a person could plead before a goddess as a lil2, so, apparently, he could woo and win a girl in that form, for the Sumerian Kinglist has a note to its listing of Gilgamesh stating that ab-ba-ni lil2-la2 "his father was a lil."

On the Pre-Sargonic Literary piece Lugalbanda and Ninsuna

Jacobsen: "As the lil₂ could appear when the body lay asleep so, apparently, it could appear even when the sleep was the sleep of death. A very early example furnishes a myth about Lugal-banda and Ninsuna found at Abu-Sala-bikh in which Lugalbanda's weapon (?) Ni₂-ri_x calls back in lil₂ form Lugalbanda's dead mother who is also his personal goddess, amalu(k). The passage reads:"

Ni-ri_x (RU) gu₂-kud/
Ni₂/ri_x(RU) a-nun/
lil₂ šu [ba]-gi₄ [amalu AMA-dInanna)]/
[Lugal-ba₃-da]/
ab-lal₃ im-ta-e₃/
lamma₂ Nin-sun₂/
i₃-ul4 a-gub ki ba-tag/
Lugal-ban-da/
ha-luh/
lil₂ ki ba-tag/
[Ama]li [AMA]-^dINANNa)/
Lugal-ban₃-da/
inim mu-gi4-gi₄
- "Neck-cutting Niri, noble Niri reported it to the lil2 and,
the goddess mother of Lugalbanda came out of the hatch,
cherub Ninsuna was quick, sprinkled holy water on the ground,
Lugalbanda shuddered.
When she had sprinkled water on the ground for the lil₂
she spoke to the goddess mother of Lugalbanda..."

Jacobsen: "In doing so she addressed the lil₂ of her mother-in-law. A double line cutting her request short indicates the copyist left out a section at this point. When the text resumes Niri asks to be appointed to office in the gate to the forecourt. The request is introduced in line Ni2-rix a-nun lil2 mu-za "Noble Niri whispered to the lil."





Conclusions on the use of lil₂ in different literary tropes:


a) In incantations it denotes wind demons
b) In laments it denotes wind as an image for inconstancy and loss
c) "Slightly more free seems only its use for the elusive concept that, for lack of a proper term we have called "Spirit.""

[us4-he2-gal2]

Extract from

Th. Jacobsen JCS 1989, p. 79

"Lugalbanda and Ninsuna"

(comment on lines 39 and 42).

In this article Jacobsen focues on an Early Dynastic literary piece entitled "Lugalbanda and Ninsuna." Relevant to this thread is his translation and commentary on lines 39 and 42:

39. reported it to the spirit,
40. and the goddess mother
41. of Lugalbanda
42. came out of the hatch.


*For the complete edition of this text, one can refer to our "Pre-Sargonic Literary Compositions, reply #7 , available here .*


Line 39. The word Jacobsen translates as "spirit" is lil(-la) . He comment here reads:

"There is not satisfactory term for líl in English. It denotes a manifestation, or one might say materialization, of a person outside the body. It can occur when the person is alive but asleep, or when he or she is dead. Its origin may be in the concept of a dream soul able to leave the body. The translation "spirit" is thus to be considered a very rough approximation only. (We deal with the word líl in greater detail elsewhere.) The term occus here in the dative, in which the final consonant of líl and the r of the dative mark -ra usually coalesce into a single sound written la rather than lá. This assimilation may be the reason why at this stage of writing the dative was not seperarately marked."



on Line 42: [most interesting is Jacobsen's use of the word "synonym."]



" Compare the description of the return of Enkidu in the Gilgamesh Epic XII 83-84: lu-man tak-ka-ap erşe-tim ip-te-e-ma ú-tuk-ku šá ^dEn-ki-dù ki-i za-qi-qi ul-tú erşe-tim it-ta-şa-a, "He (i.e., Nergal) opened as were it a hatch of the Netherworld so that the ghost of Enkidu came out from the earth as a zaqīqu." The word zaqīqu serves regularly as translation of líl; here, though, the Sumerian versoin has its synonym si-si-iq. For takkapu the Sumerian version has ab-lál. Here it presumably refers to the opening in the tomb through which offerings were put in."

[us4-he2-gal2]

AOAT 258

Reviewing: S.A.L. Butler 1998 Mesopotamian Conceptions of Dreams and Dream Rituals. AOAT 258.

I first heard of this article over a year ago while reading through Veldhuis cdli article on the death of Bilgames: as relayed above, the author remarks "Sisig's role in dreaming and dream explanation is very restricted, and may be a consequence of his primary character as an underworld god with ghostly characteristics (see Butler 1998:77-83)" and here he refers to Butler in AOAT 258.

^dSIG.SIG/Za-qi-qu

Sisig: Butler begins her examination of Sisig by noting the presence of Sisig in the An=Anum god list, where he features as son of Utu, and in the later version of this list, SpTu 3/107, which contains a gloss and reads:

137). dSÌG^Zi-qi-quSÌG | DUMU ^dUTU.KE₄

The gloss (Zi-qi-qu) relates again to the connection observed by Oppenheim in CAD Z, zaqīqu, that Sisig = Zaqiqu, the two are identified. In concordance with this, Butler refers to ZI (that is, I believe, the dreambook) line 1 of the Akkadian manuscipt of ZI begins with Zaqiqu; its two Sumerian texts have however SI.SI.IG and SIG.SIG. Butler does not add too much on Sisig directly, stating that these sources, in addition to the Utu incantation convered in ASJ 17, are the only references to Sisig she has found. Her insight on Sisig is mainly indirect and through Zaqiqu.


Zaqiqu: Butler examines the "nuances" of Zaqiqu, the various semantic qualities of the word which would seem to differ on the genre of the text. Butler states that she follows Oppenheim (see CAD Z quoted above) and Jacbosen 1989.


a) As Wind and Nothingness:

The author relays that while the associated verb zâqu means 'to blow' and thus zaqiqu may denote breeze or storm, CAD Z, p.60b prefers "ghost" from the equation with LÍL.LÁ, as in the names of certain demons. "Accordingly, expressions used in lamentations, literary texts, and royal inscriptions to portray the total destruction of a site such as ana zaqīqu manû, "to count as wind", and "ana zaqīqu târu, "to turn into wind" are rendered as "to count as ghosts" and "to turn into a haunted place", respectively [CAD Z, p.59]


b) As Wind Demon or a type of Ghost:

Butler explains the verb zâqu also decribes the swift movements of various demons attacking mankind, and that "the zaqiqu-winds developed into a category of Mesopotamian demons, which was [sic] characterized by forms of našarbutu, "to rush forth" - an example is given as CT 16, pl.15 col. B, l. 37:40

37: ù munus.nu.meš ù nita.nu.meš
38: ul zi-ka-ru šu-nu ul sin-niš-a-ti šú-nu
39: e.ne.ne.ne líl.lá bú.bú.meš
40: šú-nu za-qi-qu mut-taš-rab-bi-tu-ti šú-nu

"They are neither men nor women, they are zaqīqus, who constantly rush along."

The author quotes secondly a section from OrNS 39, pls 54-55 and adds that the passage "reveals that the zaqiqu demons were envisaged as being similiar to ghosts, and dwelling in the Underworld graves." (the translation reads:)

"The evil zaqīqu(-demons) come out from the grave. They come out from the grave for the presentation(s) of funerary offerings and libation(s) of water."


Butler believes that this forms a sort of backdrop for the instance in Gilgamesh, Enkidu and netherworld, in which Enkidu's ghost rises from the netherworld "like a zaqiqu."


c) Human Soul - At last a line from ASJ 17!

Its explained that when zaqīqu is used with amīlaru "mankind", or nišū "people", it appears to mean "human soul" (and Jacobsens 1989 exploration of líl is again referred to here).
An interesting example given is from "The third house of bit Rimki" (JCS 21) l. 13

13. sig.sig.ga nigin.nam.lú.u₁₈.lu.ke₄ šu.min ma.ra.ni.íb.gi₄-gi₄
zi-qí-qa šá nap-har ni-ši ú-šá-an-na-ke


"the zaqīqu(s) of all mankind report to you, (Shamash)."

In referring to Acta Sumerological 17, (which I have been stalking for a year since seeing it cited in the Veldhuis paper), Butler calls the text delt with in that article a "forerunner" to the above bit Rimki ritual, and on the rev line 13 of this forerunner a variant to the above quoted line is given:

13. ^dSi-si-ig-e ad nam-lú<-u₁₈>-lu-k[e₄]
"Sisig, the father of mankind,....."



General Conclusions:

Butler discusses a few further points on Zaqiqu, and its noted that outside the dreambook itself the author finds little to connect Sisig and Zaqiqu with dreams. In her general conclusion focus is returned again to the asociation of wind and ghost (pg. 87). Noting that two of the four Mesopotamian dreams gods have names associated with "wind" she refers to Jacobsens 1989 comment:

"The point of similiarity is apparently the evanescence of the dream world, on awakening it is gone like the wind."

She continues: "We have noted the existance of the zaqīqu(LÍL.LÁ) wind demon. The same logogram appears in the names of the demons lilú (LÍL.LÁ), lilītu (LÍL.LÁ) and ardat lili (KI.SIKIL.LÍL.LÁ)... ardat lili incantations also associate her with the zaqīqu wind demon: e.g., she is called zaqīqu (YOS 11, no. 92 line 23; see W. Farbers collations at ZA 79 [1989], p.16); and she emerges from the bīt zaqīqu. The alú-demon, another candidate for the incubus, is also associated with strong winds (CAD A₁,p.376b).

[us4-he2-gal2]

(Scribbled note: In light of Jacobsen's explanation of Lil₂ as 'spirit' , as a living element, and with its supplication of Inanna during sleep, we should re-examine the occurance in Katz 2003 of Lu-lil₂ translated "Man-spirit", in the funerary ritual he appeals to his sister for release.)

---

[xuchilpaba]

Hey nice work. Lil seems to have alot of spirit connenations eh?

>We have noted the existance of the zaqīqu(LÍL.LÁ) wind demon. The same logogram appears in the names of the demons lilú (LÍL.LÁ), lilītu (LÍL.LÁ) and ardat lili (KI.SIKIL.LÍL.LÁ)... <

On this is she saying that Lilake is Ardat lili rather than Lilitu?


***Admin: This comment I believe states that the same logogram (that for LÍL) appears in all three names.
lilú (LÍL.LÁ) is the malr version, lilītu (LÍL.LÁ) the female and ardat lili (KI.SIKIL.LÍL.LÁ) female, the one most associated with the unmarried/unfulfilled ghost.

[us4-he2-gal2]

Extract from J. Scurlock (1995):

Death and the Afterlife in Ancient Mesopotamian Thought

(I quote below a section from the above mentioned article, which is overhauled throughly in the relevant thread, see here)

Souls and Spirits:

Scurlock: "The ghost (eţemmu) was closely associated with a person's physical remains. In some contexts, it is spoken of as if it were identical with the corpse, as when eţemmus are "sleeping" in their graves or lying about unburied. In fact, it was a constituent element of the corpse proper (pagru), having its origin in the fact that a god was slaughtered and his flesh and blood mixed with mortal clay in order to create mankind.
In addition to having an eţemmu, a living being was possessed not only of what we might refer to as his "life force" (his "breath," or napiš-tu) but also of another windlike emanation, namely the zāqīqu (or zīqīqu). This spirit was imagined as a sexless (and probably birdlike) phantom able to flit about or slip through small apertures, and as such, it became associated with dreaming, because it could safely depart the body when one was asleep. The contrast between zāqīqu and eţemmu thus roughly corresponds to the distinction, found in the folklore of other cultures, between a "free" or "dream" soul on the one hand and a "body spirit" on the other. In short, the zāqīqu is the closest ancient Mesopotamian equivalent to the modern concept of the "soul."
Both the zāqīqu and eţemmu descended to the netherworld after death; apart from descriptions of dreams, however, one hears considerably more in ancient Mesopotamian literature about the eţemmu than about the zāqīqu. This is presumably because the latter was consider relatively harmless; indeed, Assyrian kings went to some trouble to reduce their enemies to zāqīqus by indiscriminately mixing their mutilated bodies together in mass graves or even by crushing their bones in a mortar. To put it another way, when the body ceased to exist, so did the potential harmful eţemmu. leaving only the shadowy zāqīqu to flit about haunted places or to lurk at the entrance to the netherworld until the time came for the cycle of life and death to begin again. The converse of this was, however, that the zāqīqu was not in a position to interfere positively in human affairs, which accounts for the care taken in preserving the bones of familial dead and for the fact that its was eţemmu, not zāqīqus, from whom aid was requested with prayer and funerary offerings."

[us4-he2-gal2]

Jerold S. Cooper on Ghosts

In a volume "Rethinking Ghosts in World Religion" J.S. Cooper has recently (2009) contributed an article entitled "Wind and Smoke: Giving up the Ghost of Enkidu, Comprehending Enkidu's Ghosts". The article is availble for free download here:

neareast.jhu.edu/faculty_bio/cooperpublications.htm

This article lends insight to the occurrence of Enkidu's ghost and discussion with Gilgamesh in "Gilgamesh, Enkidu and the Netherworld" by discussing concepts of the incorporeal as the Mesopotamians held them - because much of Cooper's discussion parallels material reviewed at enenuru already, I will just take a few point form notes where is seems beneficial.

[/color]on Pg. 26, Cooper discusses ghost and etemmu and a footnote which ponders on the etymology of the word gidim - he mentions Katz suggestion of the im (breath/spirit) which on death transforms into gidim. We have seen this idea elsewhere, but Cooper is uncertain remarking "The Ur III documents on which she bases her argument are difficult and require further study."



[/li][li][/color]Cooper rather flatly remarks "the ghosts don't return as living persons of course" after considering that they are able to return as ghosts should they be neglected in the netherworld. This is in keeping with Katz and with the conclusion reached at the bottom of the Shadow Side post here.





[/li][li][/color]Cooper now refers to a crucial point in Gilgamesh, Enkidu and the Netherworld, we have mentioned it before on this thread and many times in our consideration of Sisig - the point in which Enki instructs Utu to open a hole to the Netherworld so that Enkidu may come out. The text, Sumerian and also in the later Akkadian version, says that his ghost/wind will come up, the word used is si-si-ig. I had been informed of the written by Cooper's student Gadotti, but to my knowledge it is not published and I did was not able to get a response from this author - Cooper now refers to this same work:

According to Gadotti's take, Enkidu comes out of the Netherworld alive - she states this given that the Sumerian originals do not state he was killed, but rather he is held there and Gilgamesh's pleas state that he is being held "captive" in the netherworld - the lack of verbiage explicitly stating death coupled with his apparently physical embrace of Gilgamesh (while ghosts are generally intangible) lead Gadotti to assert a physical return. Cooper however observes an apparent contradiction: The late Akkadian translation of this episode explicitly uses death verbiage to the effect of "the ghost of Enkidu emerged from the netherworld as a phantom." Why would the Akkadians make such a presumption? According to Cooper, the reason is that in the original Sumerian, Enkidu was the servant of Gilgamesh, while in the later version he is typically seen as his friend - not knowing how to resolve the discrepancy, the Akkadian scribe translated "ghost" , Cooper suggests. A footnote here states that "similarly, the Sumerian "gust-of-wind" [si-si-ig] becomes "phantom" in Akkadian because of a misapprehension of the Semantic range of the Sumerian word."



Given some of the material above that we have on Sisig/Zaqiqu and lil₂, we may attempt to differ with this conclusion.
[/li][/ul]

[adapa]

Very thorough philological discussion! The scholarship on this site is very impressive. Lil2 has a similar semantic range as the Hebrew word ruah: spirit, breath, wind. Once in class Wolfgang Heimpel told us that Enlil was the personification of the huge dust devils that often sweep through the deserts of Iraq.

[us4-he2-gal2]

Thank you Adapa - Heimpel's material is often great commentary to the myths I think, I should pursue his idea's further. I think he and Jacobsen were in accord so far as Enlil goes, that is that the notion of the deity and the reason for his name not only in wind (which everyone acknowledges) but specifically in the ways wind most effected the Sumerians in dust storms, moist spring breezes or storms. Enlil is the will and essence that drives these intangible but quite invasive phenomena.


I've recently found a new term to better state what this thread has been saying up until now - unseen agents of influence.

Unseen agents of influence seem to be the chief semantic value of the word lil2 - so on a national and cosmological scale that agent is Enlil, delivering destruction on a city (judgment) or possibly the fertile benefits of moist spring winds. More locally, a ruined city or an abandoned sheep fold is haunted by blowing winds (here the unseen agent itself is influence - fear). Demons, termed 'maidens of the wind (lil2)' are unseen bringers of sickness and disease. Other unseen agents are dreams which may have been seen to blow upon the man as an unseen wind (the dream gods are linked closely with the semantic range of lil2 in Mesopotamian lexicons) and finally the unseen actions of the "living" or "dream" soul, carrying requests to the gods during a dream, were linked with the lil2 phenomena. The common denominator in all cases seems to be religious belief in the existence and interference of unseen influential agents.


I'm currently discussing the subject again and considering new sources and texts - I hope to make additions soon Must thank the new members for their interest.

[us4-he2-gal2]

Amendment to Jacobsen 1989

Hey all - I've found a significant reason to amend Jacobsen's discussion of Lil2 distribution in his article "The lil2 of (d)En.lil2" (see above, reply #4). Today I borrowed the book "The Lamentation over the Destruction of Sumer and Ur" by Piotr Michalwski (1989). Line 345 of this lamentation at ETCSL reads:

345. en iri bar-ra en iri šag4-ga lil2-e ḫa-ba-ab-laḫ5-e-eš

Translation:

"The en priests of the countryside and city have been carried off by phantoms."

The ETCSL translators draw from a range of earlier works, including Kramer 1969 and from this book I'm looking at now, Michalowski 1989 - he translates:

"The En-priests of the city and of the countryside were carried of by phantoms."

I would therefore suspect that the ETCSL draws very closely from Michalowski, because Michalowski veered from earlier interpretations of lil2 in this line. As the author says in his comment on line 345: "S.N. Kramer, ANET 617 translated this line as, 'The en's (who lived) outside the city, the en's (who lived) inside the city have been carried off by the wind (of desolation).' He intepreted the verb in the same manner but rendered lil2 as 'wind', as is often done in translations of lamentations. As noted in CAD Z 60, however, lil2 = zaqīqu means 'phantom, ghost, haunted place', never 'wind'."


Despite my long use of CAD Z, I had to double check the entry, seeing as I have become comfortable with Jacobsen's discussion of different connotations based on literary genre (in which he states that lil2 has the connotation of "wind" in lamentations). Sure enough, and as I now remember, the CAD entry gives zaqiqu as follows: 1. phantom, ghost,
nothingness, foolishness 2. haunted place 3. the god of dreams, and 4. soul. It also explicitely states, but "not wind." Jacobsen's key explanation of a lamentation featuring desolate windy places is "The standard trope for which it [lil2 as wind] is used is that of the yearly dismantleing of the sheepfolds in the desert when the grazing season is over. Where the reed fence and reed huts provided shelter, the winds now play freely, the fold has been given over to the winds is, to quote a similar English expression, "gone with the wind". Therefore, in a joint paper by Jacobsen and Kramer 1953 (JNES 12, p.166) they translated a line from Dumuzi's Dream as follows: "The fold has been thrown to the winds". CAD Z, with it's assertion that lil2 should never be interpreted 'wind' *even* in the lamentations, translates the same line instead: "the fold had been turned into a haunted place." Indeed it appears as Oppenheim has set the trend for intrepretation henceforward, as ETCSL gives the same line as "the sheepfold was haunted." Here is a survey of instances of lil2 in the City Lamentations from ETCSL - in each instance it is the ghost/haunting connotation utilized and not the Jacobsen/Kramer "winds":


T.2.2.3

143. keš3ki an-edin-na dili du3-a šu lil2-la2 ba-ab-dug4
143-154. Keš, built all alone on the high open country, was haunted.


T.2.2.2

1. tur3-ra-na muc3 mi-ni-in-ga amac-a-na lil2-e
1-8. He has abandoned his cow-pen and has let the breezes haunt his sheepfold.


T.2.2.4

2. lil2-e a-gin7 ib2-sag3 ki-bi me-na gi4-gi4
how did it become a haunted place?


T.2.2.5

26. hur-saj-ja2 bar im-ma-an-dab5-be2-ec edin-lil2-e ba-ab-[...]
They hid out in the hills and wandered (?) about in the haunted plains




This turning over of the interpretation of winds as an aspect of lil2 semantic range (with respect to lamentations) would make Jacobsen's discussion of distribution somewhat obsolete unfortunately. Yet this of course invites some interesting questions, for example, how should the line from SBH n.46 that Jacobsen once translated "The mighty one cursing the city(?) evilly, the lord, Enlil, made it go in among winds" be read? If Enlil is still safely understood as lord of destructive winds, the lil2 of lamentations seem all about the phantoms that are the answering result. From a people who can unite the meanings "seminal fluid" and "father" under one logogram, this perhaps makes sense in a similar way.

[us4-he2-gal2]

The Eršemma text and lil2

A list of texts for use of the gala functionary:

- balag lamentations
- eršahunga
- šuilla
- širnamšub(ba)
-eršemma

Today, I am sifting through a book by M. Cohen entitled "Sumerian Hymnology: The Eršemma". The eršemma it seems, is not just a hymn or lamentation etc.. it is somewhat complicated, but it is also a genre which the author discusses insightfully, giving the reader the essential context needed to understand this type of text against others. The eršemma texts are preserved on tablets from the Old Babylonian period on down to late periods in Babylonia, the reason for the continuance of interest, the author says, is that the texts were part of a key body of religious texts that were composed in emesal, as opposed to the standard dialect of Sumerian.

Cohen explains that while many texts written in standard Sumerian dialect unfortunately ceased to be copied and continued after the Kassite period, emesal texts actually enjoyed a somewhat steady upkeep - he believes the reason is that they attested to (and facilitated) a core religious tradition, and religion of course is above all resistant to change. Emesal texts, which include the genre of the eršemma, were mainly the perogative of the gala priests (or so evidence from the second millennium and later proves, and it was probably the case in earlier periods as well). The
gala had numerous important functions to include funeral rituals with the balag drum/harp, lamentation composition and recitation (some of the lamentations had important religious functions, pacifying the hearts of angry gods, or gods who may be expected to become angry - or in other words, lamentations were expected to ward of disaster) and the gala even had the role of fending off evil demons by his use of hymn-incantations. All of the substantial body of texts for use of the gala functionary were written in emesal.

In regards the eršsemma, Cohen notes 3 additional characteristics: 1) The compositions concern only deities, none relating to kings 2) the structure of the texts are a single literary unit 3) The opening lines of the eršemma contain a list of epithets, cities or buildings. There are there types of eršemma narrative Cohen has observed a) mythological motifs b) wails over catastrophes c) hymns of praise - although the focus may overlap as when Enlil is praised as he is destroying a city (in order to attempt
to pacify him with praise).


Cohen translates some 30 eršemmas which to my knowledge are not found on ETCSL. They mainly focus on Enlil and Inanna. If anyone would like to see some of the better ones for a particularly deity just mail me and I will send them!




Below, in keeping with the spirit of this thread, I have mined this book for instances of lil2:



Instance A)


p. 114

An Ersemma which pleas with Enlil to recognize the havoc he has brough about with his wrath. The problems are listed, newly wed wife, the mother, the children are all torn from each other, they all go mad, the wolves carry off those who are scattered and:


1.1.34

eshemen-ba lil2 ba-e-su3

"In its dancing places ghosts are spread about."

a varient copy is: 1.2.50 li-li (for lil2)

eshemen lil2-la2-am3 e-si
Akk: me-lul-ta-shu zi-qi2-qam im-ta-la

"The dancing places are filled with ghosts."




Instance B)


Pg. 75

This ersemma, no. 97, is a parallel of the event leading up to Dumuzi's death as typified in "Dumuzi's Dream". In a section detailing the demons first intrusion into the abode of Dumuzi we read:

97: 45b

[... amash lil2-la2 al]-du3

"The sixth demon to enter the sheepfold [...]... and made the sheepfold haunted."




Instance C)

This short ersemma, no. 106, is associated with the Descent of Inanna and Dumuzi's dream, and consists of a small dialogue from Inanna in which she exclaims that her house has been destroyed and that the enemy carried off the good spouse (Dumuzi). The last line reads:

106: 22
e2-zi a mu-gi-ga nam-me-a lil2-am3 ba-ni-in-ku4

"The faithful house which no longer says(?) "Oh hierodule!" It has become haunted."




Instance D)

pg. 147

In this ersemma, no.59, the focus is the pacification of the heart of Inanna. Much of the ersemma is forumulaic praise. Inanna appears to be referred to as "lilliaena" in the following line:

59:7 (from BM 132093 aka CT 42 no .12 obv. 29-40)

7. (d)Lil2-la2-en-na gashan-e2-HUR-sha3-ba-ke4

"Lillaenna, the lady [of the cattle pen and sheepfold]"



*** Note - The epithet (or maybe aspect) of given to Inanna here, Lil2-la2-en-na, is a class of demon - Jacobsen translates the term as "Strong wind demon" noting that en-na means "strong," "indomitable" and is most often associated with enimies. That the exact nature of the demon is to be thought of as wind demon rather then ghost demon may be questionable. We may wonder whether or not the line above is now ironic, calling Inanna the wind/ghost demon, who is the lady of the cattlepen and sheepfold - the same is haunted [lil2] in other Ersemma's as a result of her actions. On the other hand, this ersemma is clearing an attempt to pacify the goddess.

[us4-he2-gal2]

A New Angle For Sisig

Hey Enenuru -



Today I am putting up some notes from C. Woods and P. Steinkeller which I had put under considerations a few months back. On reading them over, I was pleased to experience some shift in perspective about the problem of the elusive dream god and the seemingly related religious concepts of the Mesopotamians which are groups under the word Lil2. As all readers here know, I have been desiring a solid understanding of these principals for a long time, although they are elusive or imaginary in the extreme. Of course to an academic, all religion belongs to the shared mental reality created by language, art and culture..

I thank Mr. Halloran and a few other members for their correspondence concerning this subject matter below and hope my report of the relevent scholarly discussions below will help keep this an interesting and ongoing discussion at enenuru. Before getting on with it, I'll mention an observation of Glassner's (Glassner 2004), who states that in Ancient Mesopotamia, time was considered:




"

a powerful force, governing all things, that could be propitious for some activities but dangerous for others; it was even sometimes considered as a demiurge.

"









Overview:




I have reviewed Christopher Woods' "At the Edge of the World, Cosmological Conception of the Eastern Horizon in Mesopotamia", JANER 2009. A sketch of some of the cosmology discussed in this paper might read as follows:

When Utu emerges from the netherworld, it was to the Mesopotamian like the future itself unfolding and emerging onto the present and onto our plain - dreams in the night were glimpses of the future which arrive before day is made present, yet are still truths from the sun, though the sun in the netherworld.



Woods' paper is a third detailed study of the Sun god made by this scholar and it is, in my opinion, excellent and insightful as well as extremely detailed. I have been pleased to note comments from Woods which dovetail nicely with a perspective of Steinkellers I've recently noticed - below I combine insights from both.






Night as predecessor of day/




My point forms below reflect Woods explanations on pg.26 and after:



- The Netherworld is, in Mesopotamian Cosmology, identical to the nocturnal sky.

- The identity of the night sky with the netherworld stems from an understanding that the celestial sphere steadily rotated from east to west, bringing the stars and other heavenly bodies from the Netherworld to the upperworld [n1]

- This arrangement accounts for why Utu was born in the agrun [n.2] and why stars were thought to originate in the apsu [n.3]. (Night is therefore, on a general level, implicitlyolder than day.)

The sun god emerges everyday from the netherworld/the darkness: ud gi6-ta- e3-a "as the day comes out of the darkness". This is further demonstrated in Enki and the World Order, line 375, where the netherworld is refered to as "The great city, the place from which days come out." (Steinkeller's translation.)




The future from behind/


- The notion future, for the Mesopotamian, follows the circuit of the sun: the future is below the horizon (i.e. in the netherworld) and therefore unknown. It is from where the sun rises. For him, that means that it is behind us, and unseeable. The past is in front of us, because it is in a sense, viewable. Thus the Akkadian expression warkiāt ūmī, which translates literally "the days that are behind" , since the future is behind the Mesopotamian, this has the meaning in our expression "the days which lie in the future (ahead)."
(for more on this, see the Mesopotamian Chronicles thread).


Summing up so far, Woods indicates that night and the netherworld can be implicitely evidenced as older than day; the locus of the future is behind in the unseeable netherworld - on day break, Utu (the one who knows the future) emerges into this plain. Certainly daybreak as the entry point of future might make the fact that the gods are often said to cut the fates "at the place of
sun rise" more understandable.



n.1: see Huxley, Iraq 62, 112, 125
n.2: Hymn to Utu B 9
n.3: Caplice, Or 42 (1973) 299-305, Alster, JCS 28, 118 n.28





Dreams from the future/netherworld/


All Mesopotamians believed that their future lay in the netherworld, we know from the texts at least that exceptions were generally not considered outside of the flood hero.. It may not be to hard to imagine then that dreams coming from the netherworld were thought to carry messages from or about the future. With the perspective that night is older than day, and what is "ahead" is yet to emerge with the coming day, knowledge from the netherworld can be understood to be about more than just death or the deceased, but about the future of the living as well.

On this issue of dreams, and their ability penetrate the future Woods has referred to an important note by Steinkeller:

"As Steinkeller has recently discussed , the coming day - the future - is conceived and festates in the Netherworld at night. " Following Oppenheim (Dream-book 235-236), Steinkeller points out that dreams, as representative of the future, were considered to originate in the Netherworld (as in the Greco-Roman conception) and were therefore under the charge of the Sun-god, who also take the name Anzaqar, the god of dreams. Also note, that in this connection, the Symbolism associated with the auspicious appearance of the chthonic Netherworld deity Ningishzida in Gudea's dream: ud-ki-shar2-ra ma-ra-ta-e3-a dingir-zu (d)Nin-gish-zid-da ud-gim ki-sha-ra ma-ra-da-ra-ta-e3 'the daylight that came out for you from the horizon - that was Ningishzida. He was able to come out for you from the horizon like daylight' (Gudea Cyl. A v 19-20).




Steinkeller on Dreams from the Future, Sisig, and making light in dark places/


I also have seen Steinkeller's note, one from Biblica et Orientalia 48, 34-37. I think that author makes additional which are essential to a developing notion of Sisig. I quote Steinkeller's insight directly, as well as reproduce all of his relevant footnotes below:


"The idea that the future is born in the nether world finds confirmation in the Babylonian understanding of the nature of dreams. As was shown long ago by A. L. Oppenheim (n.51) dreams, that other type of messages about things to come, were also thought to be created in and to emanate from the nether world (n.52). And, like the "coming of days" dreams too are directly linked to the sun god, since all of the divine patrons of dreams (and therefore dreams themselves) - Mamu, Sisig, Anzaqar - are his offspring (n.53). In fact, the sun god himself counts as Anzaqar (n.54). In this way, he not only is the future-in-becoming, but he is also the source of dream apparitions. (n.55) The connection between dreams and the sun god is further underscored by that fact that the Akkadian name of Anzaqar is Zaqiqu (Ziqiqu), that is, "ghost, phantom." This means that dreams are merely a variety of ghosts. As such, they fall under the authority and regulations of the sun god, who transports them from Below to Above, in the same manner as he brings up ghosts in necromantic rites.....Thus, there is a complete analogy between the future and dreams: both of them are created by - and actually are - the sun god. And this is the source of the latter's unique ability to inform about the shape of things to come."



So important is his note 56, I feel, that I will produce it here for discussion as opposed to below. Steinkeller's note 56 : "For the equation: sun god = dreams = future, the following passage is also of considerable interest: Si-si-ig dumu (d)Utu-ke4 (kur-ra) ki-bi ku2-ku2-ga ud-she3 mi-in-in-gar / ki ku10-ku10-ka ud hu-mu-na-an-ga2-ga2, "Sisig, son of Utu, elucidates (in the netherworld) what is obscure/unknown what is obscure/unknown (lit: turns dark places into the light). (Death of Gilgamesh, Me-Turan Version, lines 180-181; N, v 4-5.) Very Tellingly, the power to illuminate darkness - or figuratively to make the unknown accessible - is the prerogative of the sun god...


Apart from being a vehicle through which the sun god tells men about things to come, dreams channel information also in the opposite direction, for it is through them that the sun god learns about the innermost feelings and wishes of mankind: nig3 shag4-ta i3-ga2-ga2 inim shu-du6-(ta al-di-dug4) (d)Si-si-ig-e ad nam-lu2-ulu3-ka? shu-a ma-ra-ni-ib-gi4-gi4 "things that are in the hearts (of men), words that are uttered softly (by them), voices of the (entire) humanity, Sisig reports to you (Utu). (ASJ 17 1995, 125-26 CBS 1529 rev.12-13)."





All of this has redefined Sisig, Zaqiqu, Anzaqar and lil2 in my mind. That he was associated with Utu I never doubted - but the framework Woods and Steinkeller have managed to build up elucidates to me what had seemed to be a vague or undefined relation. To try and assemble an overall mental view of what is very airy religious principal then: Utu in the Netherworld is the pending future each night, and the emerging future each morning, emerging at the place of sun rise where the great gods ratify fates. Dreams are like phantoms or ghosts Steinkeller says, as all dream gods have been equated with lil2 in the lexical texts - but perhaps phantoms and ghosts are the wrong word since lil2 is like no conception we currently conceive of. Each Mesopotamian had a lil2, an invisible agent sometimes called a "dream soul" - Assyrian texts indicate that lil2 resided in the body itself (as kings would grind up the bodies/bones of enemies destroying all but the lil2 form). I wonder if it was by this agent, the lil2, that Sisig is said to impart dreams, and to send collect information for Utu. Or better, if such gods are not the deified representatives of the phenomenon of the lil2 souls that every man possessed. This would in effect make the lil2 Mesopotamian man's permanent connection to the future, his tethering to the wheel of fate, as it were. What lil2 spirits and Utu have in common I believe, is that they are both transferring agents, and what is being transferred is future (or knowledge thereof). Even when the knowledge of a man's inner nature is transferred back to Utu, this seems to be in effect committing the man all the more to his fate, as Utu is also a transporter of the dead to their ultimate abode (they exit through the gate of sunset), and it is perhaps with that information of his inner nature that his soul will be judged.

A major challenge I think would also be to establish any connection lil2 as the man's dream soul and connection to the future, and the way lamentation texts depict the future made manifest: this is always with the haunting (lil2) of the destroyed city, which has usually been condemned or neglected by (d)En-lil2. As of the moment, besides some vague notions of future and future manifesting, or possibly the fates decreed at the place of sun rise (where the future is transferred) I don't know how the two lil2 phenomena may be related - or joined. If such ever proves to be tenable of course.. But worth musing over in my opinion





n.51: The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East, TAPS 46/3 (Philadelphia, 1956), 235-6. Oppenheim reminds us that various classical authors "are quite explicit about the "tribe" or "people" of dreams, locating them in the vicinity of the entrance of the netherworld, where, in the westernmost region of the earth, there is the Gate of the Sun through which the souls of the departed travel to their destination ... Then we know the famous versus describing the Gate of Dreams ... from which, at night, the dreams swarm out, black-winged and swift, to visit mankind (ibid 236).

He notes that "Gilgamesh had to dig a trench to conjure up dreams ..., exactly as Odysseus dug his pit (bothnos) (Odyssey 11:23ff).

n. 52: See Gilgamesh, Enkidu, and the Netherworld line 242-243: "(Gilgamesh) opened a hole to the nether world (and) his servant came out from the nether world in his (i.e., of Gilgamesh) dream." Gilgamesh XII 83

-84: "as soon as? he opened a hole to the nether world, the spirit of Enkidu came out like a dream."


n.53: (d)Ma-mu3 = dumu-SAL (d)Utu-ke4, (d)Si-si-ig = dumu (d)Utu-ke4 (An III 149-150); Cf. (d)Sig3^zi-qi2-qu^sig3 (CT 24 31:85 = SpTU 3, 107:137); An-za3-gar3 = dingir ma-mu2-da-ke4, d-n- Mash-gi6 = SHU (AN III 189-190).


n. 54: An-za^za-ga-ar3^gar3 = (d)Utu ma-mu2-da-ke4 (SpTU 3 107:171) See also (d)Mash2-gi6 = SHU (=(d)Utu ma-mu2-da-ke4) (ibid, 107:172).

n.55 That the sun god is the author of dreams is shown by the difficult incantation CT 23 18:36-43 (edited by Scurlock, Magical Means, 175-77 Prescription 17, who translates it somewhat differently)...

[us4-he2-gal2]

Note: Concerning the Incantation to Utu translated in ASJ 17 by M. Geller (see reply #6 above, section c) ) - I have finaly found a copy of this periodical and reproduced the translation on the Utu thread.

[nininimzue]

I have translations of 'The Death of Bilgames' (Me-Turan version(s)) which we did this semester AND a whole new translation for 'Lugalbanda and Ninsuna' (...."Lamma Ninsuna"...). If liked/wanted/needed, I can post them.

And thanks a lot for the material on LÍL you managed to gather!!!!!

[us4-he2-gal2]

nininimzue:




Yes, this is very much liked wanted and desired Especially a translation of the Lugalbanda and Ninsuna would be awesome, but also the DofGilgamesh come to think of it. Every subtle nuance has potentially a huge sway with this problem, at least when you believe that they must have been a notion with
enough coherence to articulate at some point.


Nice of you to offer - newer translations could certainly make a different

[nininimzue]

Lamma-Ninsuna and Lugalbanda - A Short Sumerian (Faerie-)Tale ((c)N.L. 2011 *wink*)



obv.

i:

01 {d}}lamma-nin-súna agarin5(AMA-ŠIMxGAR)

02 mu-DU.DU

03 [d]lamma-nin-súna gal in-zu

04 igi mu-lib(LUL)

05 ĝìr mu:na nu

ii:

06 lugal-bàn-da gal-zu

07 lamma-nin-ra

08 á mu-ni-dab

09 igi a-sub5(LAK 672)

10 ka /a\(AŠ)-sub

11 UD(-)gal in-ga-mu-zu

iii:

12 [lamma-nin-súna ú a]

13 /mu-de6(DU)\

14 ú-a-za mu-ni-ši-bárag

15 ki ĝiš{hi[.a]}

16 UD en-na-ni

17 URUxAZA(PIRIĜxZA) dúr-è dúr:dúr:AL

iv:

18 [lugal-bàn-da]

19 gal in-zu

20 IM-RU /šu\ im-ti

21 lamma nin-súna lugal-/bàn-da\

22 inim mu-gi4-gi4

v:

23 [en-ra unug-šè]

24 [ga-da-zid]

25 dub mu-/DU-è\

26 lugal-bàn-da

27 en-ra ki mu-na-za

28 en lugal-bàn-/da\

rev.

vi:

29 /inim mu-gi4\-gi4

30 níĝ-kur-ta re6-zu

31 u6(IGI.É) ga-dug4

32 a-nun si mu-sá-sá

33 níĝ-/kur\-[ta re6-zu]

34 [u6 ga-dug4

vii:

35 lugal-bàn-/da\ kisal-bar-šè

36 im-ma-ta-è(UD:DU)

37 [IM]-/RU gú-ku{dr}5

38 IM-RU a-nun

39 /LÍL šu\ [mu\-ni]-/gi4\

40 [AMA-{d}INANNA]

41 [líl AMA-{d}INANNA]

viii:

42 ab-làl im-ta-è

43 lamma-nin-súna

44 ì-ul4(ĜÍR:gunû) a túm(DU) ki ba-taga

45 lugal-bàn-da

46 ha-luh

47 /líl ub-taga\

48 {d}INANNA[:AMA]

ix:

49 lugal-bàn-da-ra

50 imin mu-/gi4-gi4\

51 za dam kur-ta mu-de6

52 dam mu-da-nu

53 ú:ÚR ĝidlam(SAL.NITA)

54 me:/te dumu\-zu

55 dùg-ma uzug-à (DÙG:MA:/KA\:À)

x:

56 50 NITA [...]

///////////

57' IM-RU /a-nun\ líl mu-zágga(ZA)

58' kisal-bar ká-šár ma-lah

59' /ĝarza\([PA.]/AN\) [šu] /ga\-[ab]-ti

60' IM:/RU\ -/nun\

61' [líl inim mu-gi4-gi4]



Translation:
Lamma-Ninsuna - verily she brought the aromatic beer-'matrix'(1); Lamma-Ninsuna - she knew great (things). (Her) eye grew tired, at his feet she lay down to rest.
Lugalbanda, who knew great (things) - (his) arm was touching the Lamma, the lady; on the eyes he kissed her, overwhelmed; on the mouth he kissed her, overwhelmed: The day that she learned great things(2).
Lamma-Ninsuna had brought food: 'Your plant, your water!' She spread it there in front of him. A place (of) various woods ........... they sat down in Uru'aza-
Lugalbanda, who knew great (things) grabbed IM.RU; Lamma-Ninsuna spoke to Lugalbanda: "To the En, to Unug I want to rise with you, to the tablet of deliveries!"
Lugalbanda - he kneeled on the bare floor in front of the En, and the En spoke to Lugalbanda: "You brought things from the mountains - I want to marvel at them! The offspring of the nobles are coming hither in a row - things from the mountains you brought, (and) I want to marvel at them!"
Lugalbanda went out into the outer courtyard; IM.RU the neck-cutter, IM.RU the Anunna - he spoke (to) the LÍL-ghost, to the divine mother. The LÍL-ghost, the divine mother came out of the hatch! Posthaste, Lamma-Ninsuna sprinkled the proper water onto the ground. Lugalbanda shuddered - he touched the LÍL-ghost! The divine mother, she spoke to Lugalbanda: "You - a wife (you) brought from the mountains! The wife, you have lain (down together) with her!" - "(O) mother-in-law (??) - the husband is a fitting regalia (?!), he is your son (and) the temple of (my) heart!" [......] IM.RU, the Anunna, whispered to the LÍL-ghost: "(In) the outer courtyard, (by) the Gate which brings Thousands into for me - I want to partake in the Rites!" (To) IM.RU, the Anunna, the LÍL-ghost spoke: [.....]"




...the main problem is whether the identification of LÍL with AMA-{d}INANNA is correct (I followed Jacobsen with the assumption due to pondering over and over and finally agreeing with him--- sort-of...) and who/what AMA-{d}INANNA designates in this text's context in order to be able to identify the LÍL better and get a better grip on who appeared as what in the afterlife. Bill already quoted the GEN episode during which Utu resp. Nergal open the ab-làl to let Enkidu's spirit escape from the netherworld for an interview; can we assume something similar here? After all, we have the ab-làl and the LÍL. I sooo want to write something more now, including the details on ab-làl and possible consequences, but alas, I have to go and see whether I can get my meds or not.

I'll check in later again and correct the typos I doubtlessly made....

[us4-he2-gal2]

Heya nininimzue -


Thanks very much for the contribution! This is really awesome to see a new translation of such an interesting text It's a daunting prospect trying to discern what sort of abstract spiritual notions are referred to in these text and certainly that prospect is even less likely when one is confined to outdated translations.. Your version here has a number of differences with the Jacobsen I note, for example:

- there is no "melting of frozen grass" as Jacobsen had it in line 14

- your version includes Lugalbanda touching the lil2 around line 45


- your version includes has the divine mother speaking in lines 50-56 whereas Jacobsen interpreted this as the speech of the wife






I thought your comment below the translation was excellent - that is, the connection of ab-lal2 in the two myths, Lugalbanda and Ninsuna and Gilgamesh, Enkidu and the Netherworld. This is the exact line of thinking I had when I wrote to Dina Katz last month and seeing that you say the same thing I think there really must be something to it. Unfortunately Katz took a crap on my ideas because - well I really think Assyriologists are assholes, or alot of them are 0_0 Here is part of what I wrote to her:


"A small note about the way in which the spirit of Enkidu escapes: A. George in his 2003 treatment of Gilgamesh describes Utu’s role in Enkidu’s rise: “as one who daily makes the journey
from the Netherworld to the land of the living, the sun god is uniquely positioned to open such a hole. Enkidu’s shade duly escapes through a chink in the wall like a pigeon flying from its nook.”

Seeing as the word takkaqu or ab-lal2 is the same in rise of the lil2 in Lugalbanda and Ninsuna and in the present myth, George’s note 301 is interesting. He notes: "J. Tropper has cogently argued that the word in question, Sum.ab.làl// Akk. takkapu, signifies a small opening in the city wall of the Netherworld: see his article “Beschworung” des Enkidu? Ammerkungen zur Interpretation von GEN 240-243 // Gilg. XII, 79-84, WO 17 (1986), pp. 19-24. One may add that the imagery is still more allusive. The dead shades were often perceived as bird-like in form (cg. SBVII 189 and parallels); the word ab.làl is most commonly encountered in Sumerian literature as a roosting place of pigeons (see PSD A/2, p.146)." So in both texts might the same phenomenon be occurring with the object being described in the former (lil2-la2) and the means by which the object is transfered being described in the later? (si-si-ga-ni-ta).


Katz had earlier in her book in note 80, as we see above, explained the occurrence of Gilgamesh Enkidu and the Netherworld as follows:
"In si-si-ga-ni-ta we probably have the possessive
third-person singular and the ablative, which apart from direction
denotes "by means of."




Thanks again I'm playing with these ideas and wondering how to arrange them for a paper I'm supposed to have started by now hm.

[us4-he2-gal2]

Lapinkivi on Zaqiqu etc. (Again):

Today I have written some impressions of Pjiro Lapinkivi's 2004 book, "The Sumerian Sacred Marriage: In the Light of Comparative Evidence." Perhaps the title really does say it all in this case - despite fair warning, I found I couldn't agree with much of the content in the book..even after finding that the author likes the subject of zaqiqu almost as much as I do. Therefore the following will be added to the relevant thread as a skeptical qualification of sorts:






The Parpola/Lapinkivi notion of Inanna as Human Soul:


Lapinkivi's view of the significance in the sacred marriage is largely influenced by an interpretation of the symbolism of Inanna in this rite, that she acts as divine mediator and that her descent symbolizes man's salvation. This interpretation is in fact that of her teacher and mentor, Simo Parpola. Parpola in his SAA 2 (1997a) argued that the Descent of Inanna is a "story about man's salvation from the bondage of matter and sin; the first half of the story presents the soul's heavenly origin and the defilement in the material world (= the Netherworld), and the latter half presents her way back to her heavenly home.." If you are wondering how that works, it's actually fairly simple. Lapankivi explains on pg.191: "...therefore, when Inanna/Ishtar looses her clothing at each gate she is also deprived of her powers, that is, the soul on its way to perdition. When, on the other hand, the goddess is given back her clothing, she at the same time is restoring her powers, that is, the soul on its way to salvation."

Parpola/Lapinkivi's view is complimented by what is often conceded to be an erudite grasp of comparative literature - surely, they are able to back up their claims about this outwardly non-mystical story with all sorts of comparisons to the Assyrian tree, to Sophia, to the Song of Songs and so forth. But what support does this interpretation enjoy from the primary cuneiform sources? Nothing in the Sumerian literature outwardly suggests Inanna as metaphor for the human soul. What we have in this scholarship, apparently, is a case of reading the evidence backwards, or projecting later developments in religious thinking backward onto outwardly compatible mythological imagery; as J.S. Cooper put it in his crtical review of Parpola (JAOS 2000, vol. 120 #3) : "a more cautious reader would explain the similarities in the myths as the persistence of in the myths as the persistence of old Near Eastern patterns of myth into the Hellenistic period, and the similiarities Parpola adduces between the figures of Ishtar and Sophia can likewise be understood as the persistence of ancient aspects of the great goddess of the Orient. But there is no reason and certainly no textual basis for reading Gnostic doctrine back into Assyrian and earlier Mesopotamian material."



Lapinkivi on Zaqiqu/lil2:


Central to Lapinkivi's discussion is the subject of the Mesopotamian concept of the soul; scholarship has often concluded that the Mesopotamians didn't have such a concept, yet Lapinkivi says it's right there - the zaqiqu. In fact, while the ePSD gives "wind, breeze, ghost" as translations of zaqiqu/lil2, she gives "soul, ghost, phantom" (at the same time Lapinkivi also stresses the wind like nature of zaqiqu). Lapinkivi's discussion is quite in depth, hitting some of the same points and sources as the enenuru discussion on lil2. Though her conclusions are unique.

This discussion was in fact originally quoted on enenuru by Madness back in 2007 (on the vampire thread, reply #16). I therefore will not quote at length but will mention a few points. First of all, we see that the author is keen to draw a parallel between the human soul zaqiqu and Inanna (who, Parpola would suggest, represents the human soul in some cases). How does she do that? Well, first she points to secondary literature and says (pg. 140): "According to J. Scurlock, zaqiqu is a sexless, wind-like emanation, probably a bird-like phantom..." yet on pg. 141, this idea has been upgraded from "probably" to "the zaqiqu/ziqiqu was also depicted as a bird-like emanation.." and following this, it's quite taken for granted. A.R. George wrote a review of Lapinkivi's work (BSOAS 69/2) and was critical as this junture, writing "Scurlock tossed in the notion that the zaqIqu was ‘probably bird-like’, no doubt because in Babylonia the shades of the dead were envisaged as clad in feathers. Lapinkivi seizes on this detail, because the goddess Ishtar is sometimes portrayed with wings and once equated with the owl-goddess Kilili. Other deities were portrayed with wings, but that is not mentioned and the reasons why wings might be appropriate for some immortals are not explored." So all in all, probably doesn't make for a very solid foundation, and shouldn't be confused with definitely.


George's review makes a few other valuable comments in my opinion - for one, I agree with his statements that lil2 more accurately denotes that which is intangible: "She begins by identifying ‘soul’ as a meaning of the Babylonian zaqiqu. This is a word of wide semantic field that essentially conveys the idea of the intangible." He then adds "The notion that zaqIqu means ‘soul’, with all that that implies, is sufficiently controversial to warrant a proper philological investigation. Lapinkivi instead cites an encyclopedia article by Jo Ann Scurlock (1995), which makes the suggestion only that zaqIqu was the ‘closest ancient Mesopotamian equivalent to the modern concept of “soul” " ; And, in response to Lapinkivi's rather flippant suggestion that the Mesopotamians may have had a notion of the soul and wisdom being feminine in nature (like the Gnostic/Judaic/Finnish notions) George states: "A philological inquiry would have thrown up ab initio the awkward (but not insurmountable) fact that both zaqIqu and its near synonym, etemmu, are masculine in gender.."


In summary, I am grateful for Lapinkivi's perspective and for the resource that the book provides, but now suspect what she has said about zaqiqu and about Inanna often enough - I don't usually assume that the senior Assyriologists are automatically correct per se (Cooper in particular is a famous minimalist), but in this case I think their cautions are worth while.





What is Lapinkivi's core suggestion for the Sacred Marriage?



Heavily influenced by the Parpola view of Inanna as the human soul, and indeed as the Christ like salvation, Lapinkivi's final concluding paragraph (.252) reads "Through identifying Inanna and emulating her redemption, her devotees were enabled to take part in her union with the divine king, which was essential for the well-being of the country but even more crucial for their own personal salvation."

[madness]

A New-New Angle For Sisig

I have just added a text to the 'box which you ought to look at.

Woods' discussion of the sun-god is supplemented by Polonsky's short chapter (p. 297 ff) [see the initial note in Woods' JANER article]. She analyses a text where the relation between Šamaš and birth occurs. Here she reaffirms the idea that the passage of birth is symbolised by the passage of the sun:

These components of the language of recitation within birth incantations suggest that the birth-giving process was conceptualized as a journey of the newborn from a place of darkness and potential death toward a location representing the inception of life - the place of the rising sun god, where destiny is determined.

Any connection to sisig? If inside the womb is "darkness" and "death" (i.e. netherworld) then sisig - the father of mankind! - is surely lurking close by.

[her dissertation would be worth checking out]

[us4-he2-gal2]

Madness:






Thanks for the tip regarding Polonsky's work - it really does fill a gap when it comes to the enenuru investigation into incantation lore and cosmology! I have read the author's article and gave a summary at the following thread, and hopefully will pick up her 1000 page dissertation someday. For now, I quite the conculusion of my summary, the part which ponders Sisig, below:








Possible role of Sisig or other agent of Utu: transmission of fate/



In keeping with a determination to search for elucidation in Mesopotamia's most shadowy theology, I will make some bullet points on why the activity of Sisig, or possibly some other agent of the Sun god, may be suspected as a theological motif in the birth process:



- In an Incantation to Utu (ASJ 17, see reply #6 of the thread), Sisig is mysteriously called "The father or mankind".
- Sisig is the son of Utu, and may be thought of as an aspect of the sun god; he a netherworld god who dwells in darkness, but he is one who makes light in dark places; he is transporter of shades (Enkidu for one, and of the dead in the festival of ghosts - see the Death of Gilgamesh) as well as the transmitter or dream messages.
- There is some evidence that fate was assigned in the womb, a dark place, perhaps ideologically similar to the way dreams are transmitted to the sleeper. At sunrise, both fate and omens are actualized.
- The involvement of other members or Utu's circle, offspring and also aspects of Utu, such as kittu "truth" and mīšaru "justice" is attestable at the decreeing of fate at sunrise. (Polonsky 2006).
- While no textual evidence seems to have surfaced yet, and so the suggestion can't really be made, perhaps with further textual studies Sisig or another aspect of Utu will emerge as the transmitter of fate to the unborn child.

[us4-he2-gal2]

Hey all -



I've just noticed an interesting perspective on lil2 while reading The Mesopotamian Pandemonium: A Provisional Census by F.A.M Wiggermann. This article appeared in a volume on Mesopotamian demonology edited by Lorenzo Verderame. Wiggermann's contribution is a sweeping and insightful overview of the divine and demonic spectrum, full of bold, nuanced perspective which is characteristic of the author's writing. As is often the case, Wiggermann's reasoning is somewhat inscrutable for readers less familiar with the subject matter (which would be almost everyone save a small handful of specialists). As numerous posts at enenuru attest, I have always found Wiggermann's ideas stimulating, but difficult to demonstrate through my own means.


In particular, the author's comments about the following Akkadian period cylinder seal caught my attention:

This seal is from the Akkadian period, first published in Opitz AfO 6 (1930), 61f. pl. III:2 , also: Frankfort Cylinder Seals, 131f. pl XXIIk ; Amiet Glyptique mesopotamienne no. 1485; Muscarella Ladders to Heaven no.44 (discussed in Suter 2000 p.181)

In the above image, Wiggermann has penciled in his own labels: "Enlil" "heaven" "earth" and has indicated to the right that he believes "lil" is to be understood as "space" and "the domain of Enlil and Mankind." This in itself is a conceptual shift of sorts, worth pondering. His description of the scene in question is as follows:

"Enlil, the working gods, and the creation of man.
A late third millennium (Akkadian) seal follows the earlier creation myth in detail. The largest figure, the one in the middle, does nothing but raising his hands up to the heaven; his headdress, a horned crown, identifies him as a god, and, as will appear from the rest of the scene, that god must be Enlil himself, keeping Heaven and Earth separated. To the right gods are busy building a house. Enlil's temple in Nippur no doubt. Since carrying the basket and building houses for the gods was precisely what man was created for, the fact that on the seal gods are doing this work sets the scene firmly and uncontestably in the early days of the cosmos, the time before the creation of man. To the left a great god is executing a smaller one, the rebel leader (Alla) we may assume, and at the foot of the building a further deity is mixing something in a through [sic], clay and Alla's blood for the creation of man we may assume."


Although this interpretation is far from certain and I am not confident that the central figure is in fact Enlil, raised arms or no. Its possible of course.

[us4-he2-gal2]

So, concerning the above post in which I posted in order to consider some proposals of F.A.M. Wiggermann: I also wrote to Jan Lisman who is a scholar from Leiden, and who wrote an excellent and authoritative disseratation on Sumerian cosmology (freely available at the following link). Mr. Lisman's responses were very generous, explaining his view of the issues brought up in Wiggermann's paper. Interestingly, Jan's view often differs from that of Wiggermann (despite that they are two Dutch Assyriologists) as can be noted from Jan's dissertaton. For one thing, he doesn't seem to believe that lil2 can be understood as "space".



In a subsection 'excurses on Enlil and Ninlil', Jan deals with the vexing problem of the name of Enlil. We have struggled with the complexities of EN.E2, EN.KID, NIN.KID and NIN.LIL2 - for the thread dealing with this subject in some detail, see here. Of course we have always assumed that the lil2 in the name Enlil must tie him in with the phenomena of lil2, somehow it must all make sense - but the problem has been that it has never made sense! Therefore, I was very pleased to recently note Jan's theory on this, that lil2 in Enlil's name is a phonetic phenomenon having nothing to do with the god's nature - that is, that the name Enlil is simply an attempt to reconcile the Semitic il-ilī and the Sumerian writing EN-E2, meaning, that the lil2 in the name Enlil has nothing to do with wind or ghosts. Here is the author's discussion from pg. 122 (unfortunately, somewhat dense as it involves the esoteric Sumerian 'dialect' UD.GAL.NUN):

In response both to this theory and to Wiggermann's suggestion of lil2 being space, I wrote back using information from this thread:





"I have had a long interest in lil2 - early on I noted from CAD Z zaqīqu (which draws its discussion from Oppenheim's 'Dreambook') that this scholar, and most subsequent scholars, reject Jacobsen's reading of 'wind' as a principal semantic value for zaqīqu and also lil2. Perhaps beings associated with these phenomenon are indeed windy is some sense, i.e. lil2 demons may blow under doors or window sills or what have you... but I think Oppenheim is right to prefer 'haunted' or 'ghostly' as the principal value, for these beings are not just wind but entities with agency.


For a long time, I was puzzled over the relation of ghosts, and dreams (embodied in the word zaqīqu, but also lil2 and sisig). But Steinkeller seems to have explained at least some of this in an interesting comment in his article "Of Stars and Men..." (Biblica et Orientalia 48, 34-37) wherein he said:

"The idea that the future is born in the nether world finds confirmation in the Babylonian understanding of the nature of dreams. As was shown long ago by A. L. Oppenheim (n.51) dreams, that other type of messages about things to come, were also thought to be created in and to emanate from the nether world (n.52). And, like the "coming of days" dreams too are directly linked to the sun god, since all of the divine patrons of dreams (and therefore dreams themselves) - Mamu, Sisig, Anzaqar - are his offspring (n.53). In fact, the sun god himself counts as Anzaqar (n.54). In this way, he not only is the future-in-becoming, but he is also the source of dream apparitions. (n.55) The connection between dreams and the sun god is further underscored by that fact that the Akkadian name of Anzaqar is Zaqiqu (Ziqiqu), that is, "ghost, phantom." This means that dreams are merely a variety of ghosts. As such, they fall under the authority and regulations of the sun god, who transports them from Below to Above, in the same manner as he brings up ghosts in necromantic rites.....Thus, there is a complete analogy between the future and dreams: both of them are created by - and actually are - the sun god. And this is the source of the latter's unique ability to inform about the shape of things to come."


Ever since I read this, I have followed this thinking, and I imagine one Mesopotamian conceptual continuum wherein ghosts and dreams are related phenomenon, things with agency and portends of the future, to be transported by the sun-god and his offspring, the dream gods. Hence that intriguing sequence in Gilgamesh, Enkidu and the Netherworld when Gilgamesh prevails on Utu to bring up Enkidu from the netherworld by means of his sisig ( si-si-ig-ni-ta , which Prof. Katz takes to be sisig + possesive + ablative, 'by means of his sisig'. She supposes that Enkidu may be appearing to Gilgamesh in a dream form (Katz 2003 p. 243).

So I accept your argument against Wiggermann's idea of lil2 as "space" - because, of course, I believe lil2 has much to do with these ghost and dream aspects and "space" is empty, without agency or consciousness.


.... I really like your suggestion about the name Enlil , that it is simply an attempt to reconcile the Semitic il-ilī and the Sumerian writing EN-E2 (pg. 122) , meaning, that the lil2 in the name Enlil has nothing to do with wind or ghosts (and is simply phonetic, I suppose). I like this because, Enlil seems to have nothing to do with the Utu / Sisig / Anzagar / Zaqīqu sphere or dreams and ghosts, he does not act as psychopomp or in divination or necromancy and so forth. It would explain something if his name had nothing to do with the real values of lil2."

[santakku]

What about Enki, Ninlil, Ningal, etc.? I agree that one can't read too much into the semantic value of lil2, whatever that may be, but calling Enlil "god of gods" seems odd. For a start, /il ili/ sounds a little too like Allah or Haelohiym as supreme god 'suppressed' by a hidden reading - not reason to throw out the idea, but reason to be careful. I don't understand one part of the theory yet: if it's an attempt to reconcile /il ili/ with the writing difir^en-E2, from where was the 'unreconciled' Sumerian derived? A universally used phonetic value /lil2/ seems odd too. Are there any divergent writings (difir^en-li, or the like)? Are there any parallel phonetic orthographies in other names, particularly with a Semitic connection? Does /il ili/ ever appear in an Akkadian text? A positive answer to any of these questions might make things more compelling, but it's definitely an interesting suggestion.

[us4-he2-gal2]

More from Scurlock

Hello all - I thought I word mention a recent article by Joann Scurlock that appears in Religion Compass Vol. 10 Issue 4, April 2016. This article is freely accessible Mortal and Immortal Souls, Ghosts and the (Restless) Dead in Ancient Mesopotamia.


In this article, Scurlock again reviews the concepts of the soul in Mesopotamia. As she wrote her Ph.D. on the incantations relating to hostile ghosts, Scurlock has long been an expert on spectral phenomenon in Mesopotamian literature. In 2008 on this same thread, we discussed Scurlock's 1995 contribution to CANE on Death and the Afterlife. This is the first time she has written about the topic since the publication of Ulrike Steinert’s important book Aspekte des Menschseins im Alten Mesopotamien (2012) which examines Mesopotamian notions of the self, physical and spiritual. So I think this latest article combines insights from Scurlock's long pondering of these subjects with insights from Steinert's important work.



The living soul - First there is the living soul, napištu. Scurlock writes:


“We call this death-surviving part the soul. Ancient Mesopotamians, however, like ancient Greeks, understood this surviving bit as a complex of elements with differing possibilities of survival or, if you will, multiple souls of differing levels of immortality. The life principle itself was imagined as a spiritual entity, napištu, literally ‘breath’ (Steinert 2012, Chapter 10). Despite obvious etymological connections to Hebrew nephesh, this entity apparently did not survive death.”




Aspects of the soul surviving death - Next, Scurlock sketches 3 aspects of the soul which lived on after death, and which seem to have existed concurrently. While we have discussed the eṭemmu and zaqīqu here before, of course, a third element is the bāštu. I was unaware of this bāštu and the subject may have gained in visibility recently due to Steinert’s work. Scurlock writes:


“Leaving this fully mortal spiritual element aside, ancient Mesopotamians recognized three soul substances, the bāštu, the eṭemmu, and the zaqīqu. The bāštu (literally ‘shame’ but also a pun on balṭu: ‘life’ – Steinert 2012, Chapter 13) resembles more than anything Old Norse lito gódha = ‘good looks’, a reference to one's individuating features as a separable spiritual essence. Akkadian usages indicate that bāštu was a spiritual entity specifically associated with a person's health, dignity, and pride. We may probably safely assume that it was connected to the living flesh. If so, given that the dead body was preserved with ointments to allow for a three to seven day wake as part of funerary rites (Scurlock 1995, pp. 1883–1886), it will have survived death but not, in the normal course of things in ancient Mesopotamia, for very long. The eṭemmu and zaqīqu, by contrast, could go on for, as they say, half way to forever and, indeed, even the immortal gods had eøemmu's (Livingstone 1989, no. 39 rev. 11–16).”




I quite like Scurlock’s comment on the zaqīqu here:


“Of these souls, the wind-like zaqÏqu (Scurlock 1995, pp. 1889–1892; Steinert 2012, Chapter 11) was the closest equivalent to our soul. It regularly parted from the body in dreams and its continuing existence was not contingent on the survival of the bones. Left to themselves, zaqÏqu's were gentle breezes that lifted the dust from long abandoned houses and temples. Harmless but also helpless to give assistance to the living, they received no regular cult. Stirred up by ‘Enlil, lord of the zaqÏqu's’ however, they became the terrifying dust storms of the desert. Described by witnesses as a swirling wall of sand stretching from horizon to horizon, these storms can reduce a mudbrick building to dust in a matter of minutes.”




Scurlock next discusses the eṭemmu making some important observations about the nature of this soul concept – it is the closest to our notion of ghost, a spirit that can be destroyed should the body be destroyed: should the body be destroyed, it leaves only the zaqīqu. If the body is burned its smoke ‘goes up to heaven’ but its eṭemmu does no descend to the netherworld. Scurlock discusses the funerary rites wherein an eṭemmu can be moved into a lamp or statue and guided to the tomb, and offerings made to the ghost in order to ensure it would not become restless and hostile.






A highlight of the article, in my opinion, is Scurlock’s suggestion for the understanding of the Biblical term rephaim:



“Having a family tomb under the floor of the house made funerary offerings by the family as a group a simple matter as long as the family survived or new owners of the house continued to use the tomb. What would happen then is that, as the memory of the deceased faded and the bones of the long dead mingled with those of more recent arrivals, the individual eṭemmu's melded into a common eṭem kimti (Scurlock 2013, pp. 151–152). Eventually, this collective ancestor mixed with the wider community of the long dead, the kimtu rapa’åtu, literally ‘widespread relations’. Of interest to Biblical scholars puzzled by the term rephaim is the fact that an old Babylonian commentary (5R 44: 121) uses the term kimtu rapa’åtu to translate Amorite rapi (singular of rephaim). This would seem to indicate that the mysterious Rephaim are the ghosts of persons who have been dead for a very long time.”