This note considers Marduk’s use of the net in Enūma eliš. This weapon is usually assumed to be a net for catching birds inherited from Marduk’s relationship to Ninurta mythology, since Ninurta’s opponent in battle was the demonic bird Anzû. Here it is suggested that the net can also be used as a fishing net and portrays Marduk as a fisherman. This coheres with the nature of Marduk’s opponent, Ti’āmtu, whose name means sea, and also fits (...) into the depiction of Marduk taking over from Enlil as chief god in Enūma eliš, since Enlil is also described as both fisher and fowler in Sumerian texts. Thus an image that is sometimes thought to be awkwardly borrowed is shown to be coherently integrated after all, adding another dimension to the depiction of Marduk in battle. (shrink)

Heracles carece de un programa estructurado que incluya muchas de sus aventuras. Este patrón podría originarse en el hecho de que hasta 21 de sus enemigos son descendientes del agua de mar en todas sus manifestaciones mitológicas: Poseidón, Ponto, Forcis, Ceto. Esta revisión se puede comparar con el papel cosmológico de Ninurta y Marduk en la mitología mesopotámica que lucha contra Tiamat y algunos de sus actos y escenarios. Se puede comprobar que Heracles realiza gran parte de sus trabajos: (...) controla montañas y manantiales de agua dulce, organiza cursos de ríos abriendo gargantas o construyendo canales, limpia las desembocaduras y la costa. Heracles sería un buen hijo del dios de la lluvia. (shrink)

In the final tablet of Ludlul bēl nēmeqi lines 42–53 Šubši-mešrê-Šakkan passes through twelve gates in or near the precincts of Marduk’s Esagila in Babylon. As the protagonist passes through these twelve gates he is symbolically rehabilitated and reintegrated into society, marking the end of his trials and the beginning of his Marduk-renewed life. One gate is named in each of the twelve lines. At each gate, identified in the first half of the line, the protagonist is granted (...) something positive, which is described in the second half of the line. In the present study I argue that the author of Ludlul derived the substance of what the sufferer received at each gate—and therefore the textual substance of the second half of each of these poetic lines—from the names of the gates themselves via the same kinds of learned scribal interpretive methods used in commentary and explanatory texts. That is, the author of Ludlul connected the names of the gates and the descriptions of what the sufferer received at each by way of applied translations of the Sumerian gate names, sound plays on the words and syllables comprising the names of the gates, graphic plays on the cuneiform signs with which the names are written, and in at least one case a mythological interpretation based on the gate’s name. (shrink)

Inquiries about existence in Mesopotamia started with the Sumerians. They set an example for the civilizations established in this geography and affected them deeply. According to Sumerian mythology, they are cosmic forces identified with fresh water, salt water and mist that are eternal. With the combination of these cosmic elements, the sky and the earth, which are symbolized by the gods, were formed. The whole they formed was separated from each other by Enlil, who was identified with air, and celestial (...) bodies were formed with the expansion of air. The Semites continued this understanding with its main lines. In the Babylonian Epic of Creation, the beginning of the cosmic process is based on the generational conflict between the gods and is explained with the sacrifice of Tiamat, one of the first cosmic forces. The Chief God Marduk shattered Tiamat and created the universe from her remains, and man from the remains of Kingsu. According to the Mesopotamian mythological tradition, gods were derived from the first cosmic elements, which were eternal, and then they created the universe and man from these cosmic remains. According to Egyptian mythology, the eternal is the ocean. The primary gods, who existed in the eternal ocean, created the universe and humans with their natural secretions. According to many mythological narratives, the dominant god has performed the act of creation by expressing his thoughts or the imagination of the heart. As in Mesopotamian mythology, gods and natural beings were identified with a symbolic language in Egyptian mythology. Greek mythological approaches are gathered in outlines in the works of Homer and Hesiod, who are considered to be the founders of religion. Homer stated that the eternal, the divine ocean, is the source of everything. According to Hesiod, in the beginning, chaos (emptiness) occurred, and then the universe, gods and human beings emerged from this chaos, respectively. These understandings of existence also contain a significant amount of philosophical content. There is a parallelism between the understanding of being in myths and those of philosophers. (shrink)

Mesopotamian works are usually anonymous; at best the names of some copyists are known. Some significant exceptions, such as Saggil-kênam-ubbib, the author of Théodicée babylonienne, Kabti-ilî-Marduk, author of the ‘myth of Erra’, and Shamash-muballit, the son of Warad-Sîn, who may have been the author of a hymn to the goddess Inanna, do not make up for this lacuna.

Enūma eliš and Erra and Išum are richly intertextual poems that both make sophisticated allusions to Anzû. Both do so in competitive ways: Enūma eliš reshapes earlier motifs towards its goal of elevating Marduk and Babylon over the gods and cities that came before them, while Erra and Išum uses allusions to undermine the image of Marduk that Enūma eliš creates. Tiʼāmtu’s blood carried on the wind to announce Marduk’s victory and the tablet of destinies which Tiʼāmtu (...) fastens to Qingu’s chest are two well-known examples of borrowings from Anzû in Enūma eliš. This article traces them through all three poems and shows how they are transformed in each. In the case of Enūma eliš the way that the poem deploys these allusions has previously been called clumsy because they stand out and do not appear to fit seamlessly into the narrative. Yet a closer analysis reveals that they have been much better integrated than is usually recognized, and that their subtleties make important contributions to the program of Marduk supplanting Ninurta. In Erra and Išum the chain becomes ever more complex: the motifs refer back both to their original contexts in Anzû and to their occurrences in Enūma eliš, implying a self-conscious awareness and exploitation of techniques used by earlier poets. (shrink)

Often seen as a typical Chaoskampf, the cosmic struggle between Marduk and Tiamat in the Babylonian epic of creation, Enuma Elish, looked at closely belies this reading that has been dominating scholarship since the nineteenth century. Through a close-reading of the epic’s narrative against its modern/colonial reception, the article argues that Enuma Elish provides a rich and complex narrative in which motherhood and monstrosity do not oppose each other, nor do they run together with each other. The textual, historical (...) and philological analyses, as well as reception-critiques, ultimately serve to theorize from within the ancient cosmology an immanent and decolonial logic that is beyond ‘either/or’. (shrink)