United States or Madagascar ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
But their waters were gathered together in a mass. No field was marked off, no marsh was seen. When none of the gods was as yet produced, No name mentioned, no fate determined, Then were created the gods in their totality. Lakhmu and Lakhamu, were created. Days went by ... Anshar and Kishar were created. At this point the fragment breaks off.
To each of the great gods, Anshar, Anu, Bel, and Ea, some part in the contest is assigned, but the greatest rôle belongs to Marduk. The second tablet closes with Anshar's decision to send his son Marduk against Tiâmat: Marduk heard the word of his father. His heart rejoiced and to his father he spoke.
That such tendencies to glorify Ashur may justly be sought for in part of the religious literature is proved by a version of one of the series of tablets giving an account of the creation, and which assigns to Anshar the work of building Esharra, i.e., the earth, that, according to another version, belongs to Marduk.
In connection with the etymology and original form of the chief of the Assyrian pantheon, the suggestion was made that the introduction of Anshar into the creation epic is a concession made to the prominence that Ashur acquired in the north. We are now able to put this suggestion in a more definite form. The pantheon of the north, as we have seen, was derived from the south.
The bold act of Zu causes consternation among the gods. Anu calls upon some one to pursue Zu and capture him. The bird dwells in an inaccessible recess in the mountains, and the gods are afraid to approach his nest. The scene that ensues reminds us of the episode of the creation epic, where Anshar calls upon Anu, Bel, and Ea in turn to subdue Tiâmat.
In the great fight of the gods against the monster Tiâmat, it would appear that, according to one version at least, Anshar sends Anu, Ea, and finally Bel-Marduk, in turn to destroy the monster. He appears, therefore, to have exercised a kind of supremacy over the gods.
The introduction of Anshar and Kishar as intermediate between the monsters and the triad of gods appears to be due entirely to the attempt at theological systematization that clearly stamps the creation epic as the conscious work of schoolmen, though shaped, as must always be borne in mind, out of the material furnished by popular tradition.
On the other hand, Anshar could not be set aside, for he survived in popular tradition. The result is a compromise. Marduk gains the victory over Tiâmat, but is commissioned to do so by the assembly of the gods, including Anshar. As for the older Bel, he voluntarily transfers to Marduk his name. In this way, the god Bel of the triad becomes one with Marduk.
The part played by Anshar in the most important episode of the creation epic will be found to further strengthen this view. Kishar, at all events, forms no part of either the Babylonian or of the active Assyrian pantheon. She does not occur in historical or religious texts. Her existence is purely theoretical a creation of the schools without any warrant in popular tradition, so far as we can see.
Tiâmat is determined upon destroying the gods, or at least upon keeping from them the 'decision of fates. Anshar, it will be seen, stands at the head of the pantheon, and it seems natural that he, and not one of his offspring, should be the final victor. This indeed appears to have been the original form of the myth or at least one form of it.
Word Of The Day