Sunteți pe pagina 1din 15

Oleg Lyashenko

28 August 2017

E-engura

Introduction

E-engura is deemed to be a temple built by god Enki at Eridu. According to the Sumerian tradition Eridu
was the most venerated and the oldest city in the world, - actually it was the first city established after
the kingship descended from heaven as described in the famous Sumerian King List:

After the kingship descended from heaven,


the kingship was in Eridug (ETCSL 2.1.1)

Archaeological excavations proved the existence of ancient temple at Eridu (modern Abu Shahrain) dating
back to around 5 500 BC. A small shrine of unbacked brick was erected by the earliest settlers at Eridu
itself, and the spot must have acquired special sanctity, for a series of at least twelve further temples were
subsequently built or rebuilt in prehistoric times on precisely the same site; temples were also built on
the same site within the historic period (Saggs, 1962).

An anthropologist and Assyriologist Gwendolen Leick notes regarding this shrine that the very first
building, kind of a primitive chapel no larger than 3 metres square, contained a pedestal facing the
entrance, and a recessed niche, while the whole building was made of sun-dried brick. The sequence of
temples showed they had been built on the same site for hundreds of years, gradually growing larger
and becoming more sophisticated, finally truly monumental. A reconstruction by the Iraqi architects
demonstrated that the last temple was raised high above the ground level, elevated by the successive
layers of previous buildings. The interior furnishings, the platforms, niches and podia, also show a
remarkable continuity of form and purpose. G. Leick further notes that in the Babylonian narrative, the
platform arising from the Apsu became the first seat of the gods (Leick, 2001).

Fig. 1. Successive construction of Eridu temple between 5000 3000 BC

The temple is known as one of the most important cult centres in Mesopotamian ancient history
dedicated to god Enki, one of the major deities of Sumerian pantheon. The concept of abzu as an
underground ocean of sweet water is closely associated with Eridu and therefore could have originated
on the basis of some specific geographical features of the region (Espak, 2006). According to some scholars
abzu represented an actual lagoon on whose banks Eridu temple was situated, others describe it as a
purely abstract concept represented for ritual purposes by some sort of reservoirs filled with water. For
instance, E. Wasilewska writes that here, at the temple courtyard, a tank of holy water, also known as
abzu, was located. E.engura was visited not only by worshippers but also by the deities themselves. Their
cult statues were transported by a boat or a chariot to Eridu to receive blessings from Enki, the god of
wisdom (Wasilewska, 2000).

However, our interest lies with a different journey, namely a journey of Enki himself from Eridu to Nippur
to receive blessings from Enlil following construction of a temple. For our purposes we will use the English
translation of this composition titled Enki's journey to Nibru and listed under the number 1.1.4 in The
Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (ETCSL) as probably the most authoritative and updated
version which can also be found in the publication The Literature of Ancient Sumer by J. Black, G.
Cunningham, E. Robson, and Gbor Zlyomi (Oxford University Press, 2010). And though the composition
presumably refers to the building of E-engura in Eridu by Enki (Hurowitz, 1992), the narrative describes
and praises the already built E-engura, i.e. the construction process itself is not mentioned.

Time and origin of the composition

Interestingly, the myth is only occasionally mentioned in academic papers dealing with Sumerian history
and religion though it certainly deserves a much closer attention for a number of reasons which will
discussed. The composition is only briefly referred to by Samuel Noah Kramer in The Temple in Sumerian
Literature (1988) who viewed it as a hymn-like myth in which the poet describes E'engurra symbolically
and metaphorically and listed main metaphorical characteristics of the Sea-house. A.R. George posits
that the composition deals with mythical building of Enkis temple (George, 1992). Jean Bottro agrees
that the composition is a bit unusual but believes it is kind of liturgical song which could have been
composed on the occasion of restoration of the sanctuary attributed to King Amar-Sin (2046 2038 BC),
apparently basing the assumption only on the fact that Amar-Sin was known for his attempts to
regenerate the ancient sites and probably worked on a ziggurat at Eridu too which nevertheless remained
unfinished (Bottro, 2004). Therefore it appears very unlikely that the attempted restoration of a ziggurat
by Amar-Sin could be associated with Enki's journey to Nibru. It should be noted also that the narrative
evolves as an account by an unknown witness. But this witness, undoubtedly, is not a deity but a human,
because the narrative attests that the witness is awed and fascinated by the temple and strives to
comprehend, to describe and praise the divine structure. It is not known when most of the Sumerian
mythological compositions have been written and this applies as well to Enki's journey to Nibru but most
probably the texts date to the Early Dynastic period and almost certainly were based on yet much earlier
oral traditions. The events as they are described in the composition presumably took place in very ancient
times, at the very dawn of Sumerian civilization and possibly not very long ago after the kingship
descended from heaven when the first cities were established. This period is described in the following
words (lines 1-8):

In those remote days, when the fates were determined; in a year when An brought
about abundance, and people broke through the earth like green plants

The words when the fates were determined are almost identical to the wording in the beginning of Enki
and Ninma, a composition describing the times when the great gods had to work themselves because
people were not yet created (1.1.2, lines 1-11):

In those days, in the days when heaven and earth were created; in those nights, in
the nights when heaven and earth were created; in those years, in the years when
the fates were determined; when the Anuna gods were born; ...

This phrase suggests that both compositions refer to very ancient times and events, though, of course,
this doesnt allow us to assume that the compositions themselves also originated at that time.
Nevertheless it seems quite plausible that the described events indeed happened or said to have
happened at the very dawn of Sumerian civilization when, according to the Sumerian tradition, the people
were created to work instead of the gods.

Temple built entirely from metal

Curiously, only the last section of the four-part composition deals with the journey itself rendering the
title somewhat misleading, while the first three parts describe the temple which Enki had built for himself,
i.e. E-engura. The first quite striking fact which we learn is that the temple or house of Enki was made
completely from silver and lapis lazuli, which were shining like the daylight (lines 1-8):

King Enki, Enki, the lord who determines the fates, built up his temple entirely from
silver (kug) and lapis lazuli. Its silver and lapis lazuli were the shining daylight.

It is repeatedly asserted throughout the poem that the temple was built of silver or a precious metal (kug),
though in some instances it is stated that lapis lazuli was used only for decorative purposes. Nevertheless
the fact that metal was the main construction material is repeated throughout the composition:

He built the temple from precious metal, decorated it with lapis lazuli, and covered it
abundantly with gold.

Temple, built from precious metal and lapis lazuli; whose foundation pegs are driven
into the abzu;

a temple built with silver and decorated with lapis lazuli

Its is generally assumed that these phrases cannot and should not be understood as literal descriptions
of the temple because they are used only metaphorically in the context of a sacred shrine whose bright
appearance is hyperbolically compared to the bright metal (silver) and the daylight. Even if this is the case,
it does seem highly unusual that the author of the composition imagined a temple built entirely from
metal, thus unwittingly foretelling modern building techniques and materials. Though it is attested that
the Sumerians knew and used some metals, including silver, the metals were mainly imported from
elsewhere and were used on comparatively small scale, especially gold and silver which were used only
for jewellery and small objects of value. Therefore, it can be suggested that perhaps for the first time in
human history a concept of a metal building was introduced. Of course it could be only a product of the
authors imagination but we have to accept that such fantastic idea of a metal temple at a time when the
construction materials were limited to unbaked bricks, clay and reed was highly unusual.

Then, how can we interpret the words that the temple was made of metal AND lapis lazuli (za-gin3)? Why
lapis lazuli and how these two absolutely different materials could be used together to build a temple? As
we noted earlier, on two occasions the lapis lazuli was mentioned as a material used for decoration, not
for building purposes. However if we look into the transliterated text we immediately notice that there
are no words which could be translated as to decorate or in some similar manner. Therefore we might
be justified to assume that the phrases decorated with lapis lazuli or decorated it with lapis lazuli were
only an interpretation of the text by a translator who apparently intended to somehow define the role of
lapis lazuli in the context of building a temple. Elsewhere in the text the temple is explicitly said to be built
of silver and lapis lazuli, i.e. of two materials. As we noted, it is difficult to understand why the author
decided that the temple could be built of silver or metal and lapis lazuli except that these materials were
precious and, as such, fit for a sacred shrine. On the other hand, lapis lazuli was probably used as a
reference to the colour of the metal from which the temple was built rather than as a building material.
Fig. 2. Lapis lazuli

Such assumption could not hold true if in Sumerian language existed a specific word for blue, but it seems
there are none. Therefore, we may be justified in suggestion that whenever the Sumerians wanted to
denote a blue colour they used the word lapis lazuli for this purpose simply due to the blue or greyish
blue colour of the stone. If we search the ETCSL texts for blue we find that, for instance, in reference to
the chariot of god Utu whose colour is translated as blue the author used the same za-gin3, i.e. lapis
lazuli (The building of Ninirsu's temple, 2.1.7, line 183):

He smoothed me wood, split alub wood with an axe and built (?) a blue (za-gin3)
chariot from them for him.

The same word for lapis lazuli is used to describe the colour of the quay and in this case lapis lazuli is
translated as blue in Inanna and Enki (1.3.1, line 125):

Where , she named that place with the name 'Blue (za-gin3) Quay'.

In Nane and the birds (Nane C) we encounter the most illustrative examples when the word lapis lazuli
serves to denote a blue colour while cornelian denotes red colour (4.14.3, lines 49-53):

The peacock spends the day keeping watch. The holy bird, the peacock, spends the
day calling 'aya'. A bird red from cornelian, blue from lapis lazuli (muen na4gug-
ta gug na4za-gin3-ta za-gin3), white (?) from chalcedony (?), with all kinds of gold,
and leather inlaid with gold -- may the coppersmith fashion the peacock for you
thus.

Further, in S. Kramer and Maiers book Myths of Enki the first lines of the same myth provide more
insight into correlation between the silver of the temple and lapis lazuli:

Enki, lord who decrees the fates, built, of silver and lapis lazuli blended as one, his
house: its silver and lapis lazuli, luminous as the day, the shrine sent joy through
the Abzu.

The phrase blended as one implies that what we have here are not two separate materials. It is one
material, a metal whose appearance or colour resembles lapis lazuli. This translation supports our
suggestion that the temple described in this composition was built from some unknown to the Sumerians
metal which resembled both silver and lapis lazuli.

Therefore we might have sufficient arguments to posit that za-gin3 was used in Sumerian language to
denote not only the stone per se but also the blue colour. This justifies and supports our assumption that
in the context of Enkis metal building the word lapis lazuli refers to the colour of the metal, i.e. the
building or structure in question was made from the metal whose colour resembled that of lapis lazuli. If
we are correct in this assumption this means that the composition actually describes a structure made
from some dark blue/greyish metal.

Temple in the water

We have to accept that the concept of a metal building or structure is highly unusual in the given historical
context. Needless to say, such structure cannot be associated with the unbacked brick ruins of an Eridu
temple discovered during excavations at Eridu. Another peculiar attribute of the temple is disclosed
through the repeated assertion that it is situated in abzu, i.e. in the water rather than on the ground.
These words support the assumption that the building couldnt be a temple since its problematic to
imagine a shrine situated in the water. As we noted earlier, S. Kramer actually translated E-engura as a
sea-house. Therefore, it seems that S. Kramer didnt consider the building to be a temple. This makes
the idea of an imagined temple situated for whatever reason in the water still more improbable.

The text further reads that Enki, lord of the abzu, has embellished your foundation pegs with cornelian. It
is again likely, as we saw above, that the word cornelian refers to the colour of the foundation rather
than to the reddish-brown mineral per se. The whole structure therefore seems to be submerged but its
red or dark-red coloured foundation remains visible at or above the water level. In lines 49-61 we further
read that E-engura is situated at the edge of the engur which is then compared to a lion in the midst of
the abzu. Therefore the structure is indeed situated in the water and probably very close to the shore
the edge of the engur.

The temple is towering high above the water

The temple is compared to an intricate bright (kug) crenellation or crown (suh10) towering high above the
abzu. We know that kug is usually translated as silver or precious metal and, therefore, we can assume
that the phrase again refers to the metal it is made of.

Sumerian word kug is commonly translated as a noun as metal/silver while as an adjective it is usually
translated as bright or shining. It would be reasonable to infer that kug can also possess the meaning
metal or metallic as a denominal adjective. And though Sumerian glossaries do not attribute such meaning
to kug as an adjective, kug is indeed in sometimes translated as adjective metal. For instance, in The
building of Ninirsu's temple (2.1.7, line 668) we read: He made the metal (kug) tops of its standards
twinkle as the horns of the holy stags of the abzu. In this sentence the word metal obviously modifies noun
(tops) and is used as an adjective. Also in The death of Ur-Namma (2.4.1.1, Segment C, line 57): golden
and silver toggle-pin with a bison's head. In other instances, though kug is used as a noun modifier and
follows a noun, as adjectives typically do in the Sumerian language, its translation as an adjective is
avoided as in A ir-gida to Ninurta (4.27.01, line 11): He holds in his hand a sceptre of shining
precious metal (Instead of: He holds in his hand a shining metal sceptre). Therefore we can be justified to
suggest that kug, if used as a noun modifier, can be translated as adjective metal or silver (i.e. made of
metal/silver).

In lines 49-61 Eridug itself is actually equated to E-engura:

Enki's beloved Eridug, E-engura whose inside is full of abundance! Abzu, life of the Land,
beloved of Enki! Temple built on the edge, befitting the artful divine powers! Eridug,
your shadow extends over the midst of the sea! Rising sea without a rival; mighty awe-
inspiring river which terrifies the Land! E-engura, high citadel (?) standing firm on the
earth! Temple at the edge of the engur, a lion in the midst of the abzu; lofty temple of
Enki, which bestows wisdom on the Land; your cry, like that of a mighty rising river,
reaches (?) king Enki.
Therefore, E-engura is said to be high (lofty), skilfully made structure rising from abzu, i.e. the structure
situated in the water:

An artfully made bright crenellation rising out from the abzu was erected for lord
Nudimmud.

In lines 71-82 E-engura is again equated to Eridu and is described as a structure that floats on the water:

As it has been built, as it has been built; as Enki has raised Eridug up, it is an artfully
built mountain which floats on the water.

The concept of E-engura floating on the water is repeated in The Lament for Sumer and Urim (2.2.3, line
221): Eridug, floating on great waters, was deprived (?) of drinking water, and in The Lament for Eridug
(2.2.6, A version from Urim, line 1): House of princely powers, standing in mighty water -- the waters have
receded from it.

E-engura is a home to god Enki

As was already noted, Samuel Kramer referred to E-engura as Enkis sea-house or a house (Kramer,
1988). This corroborates our suggestion that this structure is not a temple and never severed as one. In
the composition Enki and Ninma (1.1.2) we find another confirmation that Enki resides under water in
some sort of an enclosure:

At that time, the one of great wisdom, the creator of all the senior gods, Enki lay on his
bed, not waking up from his sleep, in the deep engur, in the subterranean water, the
place the inside of which no other god knows.

That E-engura cannot not be associated neither with the temple ruins of which have been discovered at
Eridu, nor with a mythological temple, is evident on the basis of the following:

E-engura is situated in the water (abzu);


The primary function and purpose of E-engura is to serve as a dwelling or residence to god Enki,
where he resides with his mother Namma and attendants;
Enki doesnt allow anyone to enter E-engura, which means that E-engura is not a public building;
There is not a single evidence in the composition to support the idea that E-engura was a temple.

Abzu was always considered an abode of Enki as is evidenced by a number of cylinder seals depicting Enki
in his underwater abode surrounded by water.
Fig. 3. Akkadian cylinder seal ( 89 771, British Museum)

Fig. 4. Cylinder seal depicting Enki in his watery abode (Baghdad, Iraq Museum)

The glyptic supports the Sumerian tradition that Enki resided under the water in his metal temple which
floated on the water. Enki apparently was able, from time to time, to leave his watery abode and rise to
the surface:

When Enki rises, the fish rise before him like waves.

When Enki rises from the depth of abzu to the surface the frightened fish rise before him like waves which
indeed can happen only when some sizeable object rapidly rises from under the water surface. It is not
clear from the text how exactly Enki went up to surface, but in the text there is a reference to a vessel or
a boat which moves on the water of its own accord (lines 83-92):

The ship departs of its own accord, with tow rope held (?) by itself. As he leaves the
temple of Eridug, the river gurgles (?) to its lord: its sound is a calf's mooing, the mooing
of a good cow.

And, as the boat departs, the Euphrates rises before him as it does before the fierce south wind (storm).
The manner in which the boat moves, seemingly unassisted, at some speed, very much reminds the
description of a self-propelled vessel which of course could not have been known to or imagined by the
Sumerians. It is not known whether the ship was somehow used to bring Enki to the surface but its rather
obvious that the ship was closely associated with the structure and in all probability was used to take Enki
to the shore.

Other attributes of the temple

Lines 26-43 supply further puzzling attributes of Enkis temple. The author himself seems to be bewildered
and puzzled by very unusual features or parts of the temple which can only be compared to fierce beasts:

Your lock has no rival. Your bolt is a fearsome lion. Your roof beams are the bull of
heaven, an artfully made bright headgear. Your reed-mats are like lapis lazuli,
decorating the roof-beams. Your vault is a {bull} {(some mss. have instead:) wild bull}
raising its horns. Your door is a lion who {seizes a man} {(1 ms. has instead:) is awe-
inspiring}. Your staircase is a lion coming down on a man.

Abzu, pure place which fulfils its purpose! E-engura! Your lord has directed his steps
towards you. Enki, lord of the abzu, has embellished your foundation pegs with
cornelian. He has adorned you with and (?) lapis lazuli. The temple of Enki is
provisioned with holy wax (?); it is a bull obedient to its master, roaring by itself and
giving advice at the same time. E-engura, which Enki has surrounded with a holy reed
fence! In your midst a lofty throne is erected, your door-jamb is the holy locking bar of
heaven.

E-engura is said to be surrounded by a holy reed fence. From transliteration it follows that holy is a
translation of a logogram kug which, as we noted earlier, is commonly translated as precious metal/silver
if used as a noun or shining/bright or pure if used as an adjective. Therefore it appears that shining, bright
or metal would be a more adequate and appropriate translation of logogram kug in this context rather
than holy. It seems the word holy was chosen only to avoid a dubious phrase shining/bright/metal reed
fence, which can be suggestive of some sort of metal railings. Indeed, it seems quite reasonable to assume
that if the Sumerians saw something like metal railings they could well describe them as metal/bright reed
fence since it was the closest analogy known to them.

Temple gives advice and makes utterances

The temple appears to manifest even more puzzling and ambiguous attributes. In lines 9-17 it is said that:

Its brickwork makes utterances and gives advice. Its eaves roar like a bull; the temple
of Enki bellows. During the night the temple praises its lord and offers its best for him.

Lines 33-43 read:

The temple of Enki is provisioned with holy wax (?); it is a bull obedient to its master,
roaring by itself and giving advice at the same time.

How can we possibly understand and interpret these words? How could possibly a brickwork utter
anything or give advice? The phrases seemingly contradict the common sense because no brickwork or a
wall certainly could be capable of such endeavours. The words that the temple makes utterances and
gives advice imply that the temple produced or appeared to produce some meaningful phrases, possibly
addressed to those standing outside. This ability of the temple is stressed by the fact that apart from
producing utterances the temple bellows or roars by itself which shows that the author distinguishes a
loud noise (roar) produced by the temple from meaningful utterances.

Moreover, Enkis minister Isimud actually speaks to the temple, praising his master (lines 18-25):

Before Lord Enki, Isimud the minister praises the temple; he goes to the temple and
speaks to it. He goes to the brick building and addresses it

Scholars tend to dismiss such narratives as purely metaphorical which should not be understood literally.
However we know that a metaphor is a figure of speech, mostly used in poetry, which implies a hidden
comparison between two concepts or things, which are usually unrelated but share similiar or common
characteristics. In the same composition typical metaphors are found, for example, in lines 26-32:

Your bolt is a fearsome lion. Your roof beams are the bull of heaven, an artfully made
bright headgear. Your vault is a {bull} {(some mss. have instead:) wild bull} raising its
horns. Your door is a lion who {seizes a man} {(1 ms. has instead:) is awe-inspiring}.
Your stairway is a lion coming down on a man.

Heres another typical metaphor: The temple of Enki is a bull obedient to its master. However, the
phrases noted earlier (e.g. Its brickwork makes utterances and gives advice) cannot be considered
metaphorical because they do not involve any comparison, nor do they seem to present any symbolic
meaning. In the form these are statements of facts. The question therefore is whether they refer to an
imaginary or real facts.
If we assume that we deal only with fictional attributes of an imagined temple we may want to know what
could have prompted the ancient writer to come up with such highly extraordinary attributes of Enkis
temple. It seems we have no credible answer to this question. The author lists the attributes of and
describes the temple in a rather matter-of-fact manner without any further clarifications which is quite
unusual if it was a purely fictional narrative. Not only the author doesnt explain the purpose or nature of
advices or utterances pronounced by the temple something which should be reasonably expected if
such extraordinary features of a temple were a product of the authors imagination. On the contrary,
there is a strong feeling that the author is equally amazed and bewildered with the speaking temple.

What is even more puzzling - how could ancient Sumerians imagine such strange attributes and, most
importantly, for which purpose? How could possibly a temple roar by itself or how could it be obedient or
disobidient? That the temple is obedient to its master implies that the temple, though an inanimate object,
could somehow respond to commands of Enki, while the ability of the temple to roar by itself means that
the structure produced loud noise or sounds. Again, if these very unusual features of the temple were
only made up for whatever purposes, the author would be expected to somehow elaborate on the
purpose or role of the features in functioning of the imagined shrine. Instead, there is a strong impression
that the author only attempts to describe extraordinary features and attributes of the temple which the
author himself is unable to fully understand.

Interior of the temple

The composition makes only a brief reference to the interior of the temple specifying that a tall throne
stood inside (lines 33-43):

In your midst a lofty throne is erected, your door-jamb is the holy locking bar of heaven.

However, in Enki and the World Order (ETCSL 1.1.3) there are lines (285-298) which reveal more details of
the enigmatic E-Engura and its interior:

The lord established a shrine, a holy shrine, whose interior is elaborately constructed.
He established a shrine in the sea, a holy shrine, whose interior is elaborately
constructed. The shrine, whose interior is a tangled thread, is beyond understanding.
The shrine's emplacement is situated by the constellation the Field, the holy upper
shrine's emplacement faces towards the Chariot constellation. Its terrifying sea is a
rising wave, its splendour is fearsome. The Anuna gods dare not approach it. to
refresh their hearts, the palace rejoices. The Anuna stand by with prayers and
supplications. They set up a great altar for Enki in the E-engura, for the lord . The
great prince . the pelican of the sea.

So, the temple interior is said to be elaborately constructed, it is a tangled thread, while the temple itself
is beyond understanding. Needless to say, these are highly odd and inappropriate characteristics for a
temple, but quite appropriate if the author describes an actual structure whose complexity and functions
were incomprehensible to the Sumerians. It follows from the narrative that the author himself was unable
to understand what he was describing: The shrine is beyond understanding. The simile The interior is
a tangled thread implies that the interior is highly complicated and confusing. The language again suggests
that the author attempts to give the best possible account of what he saw rather than making up the
whole story. The author himself is clearly bewildered and perplexed by the temple, unable to
understand it, which could hardly be the case if the author was only using his imagination. It would be
contrary to logic and common sense to assume that the author was incapable of understanding the
product of his own imagination.
Interpretation

It seems we have convincingly shown that E-engura is not a temple and theare no viable arguments
supporting the opposite view. Sumerian logogram e which is translated as a temple actually means any
eclosure or a house, building. Therefore, given the nature of the structure, its features and attributes,
there is no evidence which allows to translate the logogram e as a temple. According to the extant texts
E-engura served as an abode of god Enki, who was prohibiting anyone from entering his place of
residence. The fact that E-engura belongs to Enki does not mean that it is a temple and S. Kramer
appropriately translated it as Enkis house rather than a temple. Still, even as a house E-engura exhibits
a whole array of highly unusual attributes and features:

E-engura is built entirely from a bright gray-blue metal (entirely from silver and lapis lazuli)
E-engura is situated in the water (rises out from abzu, floats on the water)
E-engura is a complex structure towering high above the surface (an artfully made bright
crenellation; high citadel; its shadow extends over the midst of the sea; an artfully built mountain)
E-engura is equipped with a lock, roof beams, a staircase
E-engura is surrounded with railings (holy reed fence)
E-engura produces loud noise (bellows, roars by itself)
E-engura is able to respond with meaningful phrases (makes utterances and gives advice)
E-engura responds to Enkis commands (obedient to its master)
Interior of E-engura is highly complicated and intricately designed (elaborately constructed; a
tangled thread; beyond understanding)
Enkis abode is situated underwater and he can to rise to the surface (when Enki rises, the fish rise
before him like waves)
Enki possesses a vessel which moves by itself (departs of its own accord)

As was already noted that scholars tend to consider the narrative as a symbolic and metaphoric depiction
of Enkis temple at Eridu. This concept, if justified, implies that the above attributes and descriptions
possess certain symbolic meaning or serve as a metaphorical representations of certain religious
traditions or rituals. However it seems there is little to support this concept which leaves us with too many
questions and no answers. What is the symbolic meaning of the temple made entirely from metal? Whats
the purpose of placing the temple in the water or abzu? What does the author allude to when he or she
states that the temple roars or that it gives advice and produces utterances? How can we understand the
words that the temple is obedient to is master, i.e. to Enki. Absence of answers to these questions
undermines the credibility of the concept of symbolic or metaphoric nature of the narrative.

On the other hand, the above listed attributes and chracteristics of E-engura do appear to be highly
unusual and inconsistent with the historical and cultural framework of Sumrian civilization. It is quite
improbable that such features and attributes could be invented by the author or a scribe who had seen
nothing more complex than primitive reed or sun-dried brick buildings. At the same time these attributes
and features of E-engura bear striking resemblance to realities of our contemporary world:

The temple attributes and features Present day equivalents and/or associations
Temple built entirely from silver and lapis lazuli Any metal structure, enclosure, plant, vessel, etc.
An artfully made bright crenellation, high citadel, An engineering structure: cf. oil platform, sea
artfully built mountain vessel
holy reed fence Metal railings
Temple bellows, roars by itself Operation of mechanisms or machinery
Temple makes utterances and gives advice Access control device, warning system
Interior is a tangled thread, beyond understanding Pipework, tubings, cables, etc
Ship departs of its own accord A motor vessel
The nature and the lexics of the narrative suggests that the author was equally puzzled and bewildered
with the object of his praise. This view is corroborated by the authors statements that the temple is
beyond understanding, which indicates that the author himself was unable to understand the temple in
all its complexity. Likening of the temple vault to a bull, or of its staircase to a lion probably betrays the
authors inability to provide a more comprehensible and adequate description of these elements of the
temple. These facts suggest that the narrative is likely to be a witness account rather than a product of
someones imagination.

In search of an image

The Sumerian cuneiform signs are known to have developed from the pictograms which had been used
before writing was eventually invented. The pictograms in their original form evidently closely resembled
the objects they denoted. The cuneiform sign denoting engur is this:

The sign seems to depict something resembling an enclosure or a closed area with a star inside. The star
sign is known to denote the sky, a star, or a deity. It can be suggested that in this case the star sign is likely
to denote god Enki in his underwater abode.

If E-engura indeed was some kind of a real structure it could be highly revealing to try and find some
imagery or pictorial evidence associated with E-engura or abzu and which could probably provide a new
insight into the nature of E-engura. Although there are no known imagery or glyptic which could be firmly
associated with E-engura itself, it was already noted that in Sumerian texts E-engura and Eridu were often
used synonymously. Indeed, scholars agree that the name of Eridu usually designates the temple of Enki
or the city of Eridu, and abzu and engur are often viewed as synonyms (Espak, 2010). We know that the
role of Eridu in Sumerian history can be hardly overestimated since it was the most sacred and the first
city built after kingship descended from heaven. On the other hand, E-engura, as it is depicted in various
texts, must have been the most prominent feature of Eridu landscape. Therefore we can assume that any
imagery purportedly depicting or related to Eridu may actually feature E-engura as its major landmark.

During Leonard Woolleys excavations at Ur the archaeologists discovered, on tablets or jar lids,
impressions of the so-called city seals presumably used to seal containers and doors of storehouses. The
city seals impressions belonged to the Early Dynastic period and were thoroughly examined and described
along with other archaic seal impressions by Dr L. Legrain (Legrain, 1936). The analysis of these city seal
impressions, as well as those found later in Jemdet Nasr period, allowed to identify and associate most of
the symbols with specific geographic sites and cities.

According to L. Legrain, the symbols on the seal impression no. 398 shown below represent the Sumerian
cities Larsa, Der, Uruk and Eridu. Eridu is represented by the so-called great pole with four cross-bars in
the upper part of the seal impression.
Fig 5. City seals from L. Legrain book Archaic Seal-Impressions, Ur Excavations, Volume III.

On the seal impression no. 431 the post with three cross-bars (NUN), a pictogram of Eridu, is represented
twice - in the upper right-hand rectangle and in the lower middle field, while on no. 430 it is located in the
upper register. On the seal impression no. 441 a pictograph of Eridu is in the upper register.

Fig. 6. An artfully made bright crenellation rising out from the abzu

It is evident that the pictograms of Eridu are identical they depict a high pole divided or split at the base
and three or sometimes four parallel cross-bars of equal length. It would be reasonable to suggest that
Eridu pictogram (as well as pictograms of other Sumerian cities) represents some very specific feature of
the city a feature which can be readily recognized by the Mesopotamians as specific to and closely
associated with this particular location. In case of Eridu there is little doubt that E-engura was such a
prominent landmark. And the above pictogram remarkably well fits the descriptions of E-engura in the
extant texts and closely resembles an engineering structure, a pole or antenna:

- a high citadel
- an artfully made bright crenellation rising out from the abzu
- your roof beams are the bull of heaven, an artfully made bright headgear
- Eridug, your shadow extends over the midst of the sea!
- it is an artfully built mountain which floats on the water
- your great house is founded in the Abzu, the great mooring-post of heaven and earth

In Uruk III period (3200-3000) the pictogram of Eridu takes a more schematic appearance (Englund, 1998,
2006) and later evolves into a cuneiform sign transliterated as NUN (Figure 7):

Fig. 7. Transformation of Eridu pictogram into a cuneiform sign NUN.

In cuneiform Eridu is written as NUN.KI:


= NUN.KI
According to the Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary (ePSD) KI means place; ground, earth, land, while
logogram NUN has two meanings: a metal object and/or prince. Therefore it may be reasonable to
translate NUN.KI as a place of a metal object (referring to the above structure) or a place of a prince
(referring to god Enki). At the same time, though the etymology of the word eridu remains unknown, ePSD
suggests that the word possibly means guidance which also can be quite meaningful in the context of an
engineering structure or an aerial used for air or space navigation.

Further, in Enki and the world order (ETCSL 1.1.3, line 10) Enkis house is referred to as the great post or
a bond of heaven and earth (dim gal an ki):

Your great house is founded in the Abzu,


the great mooring-post of heaven and earth.

Sumerian logogram dim has the following meanings according to ePSD: 1) post, pillar, pole; 2) binding,
knot, bond. ETCSL translates dim as a (cosmic) post. Therefore, a phrase dim gal an ki in all probability
implies a tall structure which somehow connects heaven and earth or is used as a connection link between
heaven and earth. This concept perfectly fits the imagery and textual evidence shown above and supports
our suggestion that E-engura represented an advanced technological structure which possibly
incorporated some sort of a beacon or an aerial and which could be possibly used for air/space navigation
and/or communication purposes.

The imagery shown above supports the textual evidence that E-engura was a highly unusual and most
probably a highly advanced engineering structure or construction. On the basis of present investigation
we can draw the following conclusions:

E-engura was not and could not be a temple neither actual, nor imaginary

E-engura was situated in water (abzu) presumably not far from the shore

E-engura was made of dark blue or grey metal whose colour resembles that of lapis lazuli

E-engura exhibited multiple characteristics and attributes of a highly advanced engineering


structure

E-engura was an abode of god Enki and his immediate entourage

E-engura possibly functioned as a communication and/or navigation link (between heaven and
earth)

If our suggestions are justified and correct we have another evidence of highly advanced beings, probably
aliens, present in the Ancient Mesopotamia who most probably initiated the sudden origin of a Sumerian
civilization and were the main driving force of its unusually fast progress and amazing achievements.
Probably the time has come to re-assess and revise other extant texts of Sumerian literature from this
perspective.
REFERENCES:

Algaze, Guillermo, 2013, The end of prehistory and the Uruk period, The Sumerian World, Routledge,
New York.

Ascalone, Enrico, 2005, Mesopotamia, Dictionaries of Civilization, University of California Press.

Black, Jeremy, et al, 2010 The Literature of Ancient Sumer, Oxford University Press.

Black, Jeremy and Green, Anthony, 2004, Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia, An
Illustrated Dictionary, The British Museum Press, London.

Bottro, Jean, 2004 Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia, The University of Chicago Press.

Civil, Miguel, 1995, Ancient Mesopotamian Lexicography, in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, New
York, Scribners.

Crawford, Harriet, 2013, The Sumerian World, Routledge, New York.

Dalley, Stephanie, 2008, Myths from Mesopotamia, Oxford University Press.

ECTSL (Oxford Electronic Corpus of the Texts of Sumerian Literature): http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk

ePSD: http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/index.html

Englund, Robert K., 1998, Texts from the Late Uruk Period.

Englund, Robert K., 2006, An Examination of the Textual Witnesses to Late Uruk World Systems.

Espak, Peeter, 2006, Ancient Near Eastern Gods Enki and Ea: Diachronical analysis of texts and images
from the earliest sources to the Neo-Sumerian period, Tartu University.

Espak, Peeter, 2010, The God Enki in Sumerian Royal Ideology and Mythology, Tartu University Press.

Fox, Michael V., Temple in Society, Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake.

Frankfort, Henri, Kingship and the Gods a study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the integration of
Society and Nature, 1978, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.

George, A.R., 2004, House Most High: The Temples of Ancient Mesopotamia, Eisenbrauns.

George, A.R., 1992, Babylonian Topographical Texts, Peeters Press.

Green, M.W., 1978, The Eridu Lament, Journal of Cuneiform Studies Vol. 30, No. 3 (Jul., 1978).

Hallo W., 1971, Antediluvian Cities, Journal of Cuneiform Studies Vol. 23, No. 3 (1971).

Halloran, John A., Sumerian Lexicon, Version 3.0


Hurowitz, Viktor, 1992, I Have Built you an Exalted House: Temple Building in the Bible in the Light of
Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic Writings, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement
Series 115, Sheffield Academic Press.

Jacobsen, T., 1973, The Sumerian King List, The University of Chicago Press.

Jacobsen, T., 1984, The Harab Myth, Sources from the Ancient Near East.

Jacobsen, T., 1987, The Harps That Once. Sumerian Poetry in Translation, Yale University Press.

Kramer, Samuel Noah, 1988, Sumerian Mythology, University of Pennsylvania Press, West Port,
Connecticut.

Kramer, Samuel Noah, 1988, The Temple in Sumerian Literature (in Temple in Society, Eisenbrauns,
Winona Lake).

Lambert, W. G., 2016, Ancient Mesopotamian Religion and Mythology, Mohr Siebeck, Germany.

Legrain, L., 1936 Archaic Seal-Impressions, Ur Excavations, Volume III.

Leick, Gwendolen, 2001, Mesopotamia. The Invention of the City, Penguin Books.

Miller, Patrick D., 1985, Eridu, Dunnu, and Babel: A Study in Comparative Mythology, Hebrew Annual Review:
Vol. 9

Nissen, Hans J., Damerow, Peter, Englund, Robert K., 1993, Archaic Bookkeeping, The University of
Chicago Press

Oates, Joan, 1960, Ur and Eridu, The Prehistory, Vol. 22, Ur in Retrospect. In Memory of Sir C. Leonard
Woolley, pp. 32-50

Roux, George, 1992, Ancient Iraq, Penguin Books.

Saggs, H.W.F., The Divine in History (in Essential Papers on Israel and the Ancient Near East, New York
University 1991, Greenspahn E. Frederick, editor).

Saggs, H.W.F., 1962, The Greatness that was Babylon, Hawthorn Books.

Van De Mieroop, Marc, 2016, A History of the Ancient Near East ca.3000-323 BC, Wiley Blackwell.

Ward, William Hayes, 1910, The Seal Cylinders of Western Asia, Carnegie Institution of Washington,
Philadelphia

Wasilewska, Ewa, 2000, Creation Stories of the Middle East, Jessica Kingsley Publishers Ltd, London.

Westenholz, Aage, The Sumerian City-State, in A Comparative Study of Six City-state Cultures: An
Investigation, Volume 27, Copenhagen 2002

Wilson, E. Jan, Inside a Sumerian Temple, (in The Temple in Time and Eternity)

S-ar putea să vă placă și