-
THE THEME OF DIVINE WRATH IN ANCIENT EAST MEDITERRANEAN
LITERATURE 1
by PATRICK CONSIDINE
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to examine the treatment of the
theme of divine wrath in Ugaritic, Greek and early Hebrew
literature, with reference also to illuminating parallels in
Mesopotamian and Hittite texts. The method followed is to isolate
passages in which the gods are presented as angry, with men or with
each other; to classify these passages and to compare those which
seem to invite comparison; and to ask whether any noteworthy
similarities of treatment are present and, if so, whether they can
be taken as evidence for relationship between the literatures
concerned.
The present article was inspired by a remark made by C.H. Gordon
in his Homer and the Bible 154: «A book, many times the size of
this monograph, could and should be written about the Bible theme
of the wrath of God against the background of East Mediterranean
epic. » (It is not meant to implement his suggestion: a thorough
study of the theme of divine wrath in the Old Testament against the
Ancient Near Eastern background still
1 This article consists of cc. 3-5 and c. 7 (with minor
corrections, additions and alterations) of my London Ph.D. thesis
The Concept of Divine Wrath in Ancient East Mediterranean
Literature (1967). Further extracts are published in my article
Some Homeric Terms for Anger Acta Classica 1966 and in Moses and
Odysseus Proceedings of the Mrican Classical Associations 1967.
Neither the thesis nor this article could have been completed
had it not been for the great kindness shown by Professor T.B.L.
Webster in reading and commenting on drafts at very short notice. I
am very grateful to him for his advice and suggestions and for
pointing out a number of errors. The responsibility for the
blemishes which remain is of course entirely my own.
-
86 P. Considine
could and should be made). The pioneering work of Gordon and
others 2 has brQught to light a wealth of parallels between the
literatures of the Andent Near East and has es~ablished beyond
reasonable doubt that there was an East Mediterranean epic
tradition with its roots in the third millennium B.C. and still
flourishing and developing in the first half of the first
millen-nium. But while Gordon may reasonably claim that it is not
his business to point out obvious differences between the various
literary traditions, it is nevertheless essential, if the
comparative studies for which he has done so much are not to remain
a stunted growth, that a large number of well defined subjects
should be investigated in reasonable detail in such a way as to put
any similarities which may be observed in perspective, neither
ignoring parallels nor concentrating exclusively upon them.
Resemblances cannot be understood apart from differences nor
differences apart from res'emblances .
The characteristic relationship here envisaged is that which is
observed when a similarity in subject matter is matched by a
similarity in story pattern. If two literatures present a reflex of
the Diomedes/ Aphrodite motif (see below, pp. 90-91, 147), the
diffusion of a story pattern may be deduced; if the same
literatures reflect a belief that when the crQPS fail the gods are
angry, the fact has great intrinsic interest but is not in itself
evidence for literary relationship 3.
It is better to err on the side of caution in identifying
simiJ.ar passages as specifically Ancient East Mediterranean
parallels. I have tried tQ observe this principle throughout by
maintaining a distinction between what Gordon calls 'general' and
'specific' parallels. By a 'gener.al' parallel I mean a common
feature which is of interest for one reason or another but which
does not of
2 Some of the most stimulating contributions are: G. Germain
Genese de l'Odys-see; M.C. Astour Hellenosemitica; C.H. Gordon
Homer and the Bible, Before the Bible and Ugarit and Minoan Crete;
H. Haag Homer, Ugarit und das alte Testament; A. Lesky A History of
Greek Literature; L.A. Stella Il Poema di Ulisse; T.B.L. Webster
From Mycenae to Homer; P. Walcot Hesiod and the Near East. S.N.
Kramer's The Sumerians, History begins at Sum er and Sumerian
Mythology are indispensable for the study of origins. A salutarily
cautious, if not sceptical, attitude to the whole subject (at least
as far as Homer is concerned) is to be found in G.S. Kirk's The
Songs of Homer. C.S. Starr The Origins of Greek Civilisation is an
example of a more hostile approach.
References to other work, including the extensive periodical
literature, can be found in the above. I have not given detailed
references to the secondary literature when presenting well known
material.
3 If certain features can be identified as specifically Ancient
East Mediterranean, they may be so either by parallel development
from a common source or by dependence of one on the other. These
questions of the transmission of the tradition are of great
importance, but are not discussed in the present article, which is
intended to present the evidence for the study of one theme and to
isolate possible parallels. Some com-ments on certain aspects of
the transmission were included in my thesis in c. 6 Aspects of
Transmission and c. 1 Literary and Religious Background.
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 87
itself suggest direct contact between the two literatures in
which it occurs: in other words, a feature which common sense would
be willing to ascribe to coincidence. By a 'specific' parallel I
mean a common feature which does suggest direct contact, because of
some striking similarity in content, expression or arrangement and
which therefore common sense would think unlikely to be the result
of coincidence. The appeal to common sense ds of course far from
fool proof, but it is at least a constant encouragement to be as
objective as possible 4.
The references to Hittite and Mesopotamian literature are mainly
to ANET; other sources are noted ad. lac. The Egyptian records are
not discussed, because the theme of divine wrath is rarely if ever
found in them. (Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods 209 goes so far as
to say: «Egyptian religion ignored the theme of the wrath of God.
The state felt secure under the guidance of the living Horus, the
Son of Re. ») Quotations are in English. The translations from
Greek and Hebrew 'are my own: they have been made from the OCT of
Homer 4a and from Kittel's Biblia Hebraica. The Ugari-tic
translations are from Gordon's Ugarit and Minoan Crete (UMC), the
Sumerian, Akkadian and Hittite from ANET, except where otherwise
stated. In one or two cases where no English version is available I
have cited the translation of the scholar whose edition has been
used. For Ugaritic Driver's Canaanite Myths and Legends (CML) has
been invaluable.
I should perhaps add a word about the arrangement of the
material. The arrangement under the headings Causes, Manifestation,
Results and Remedy is obvious for a religious study but has some
disadvantages for a literary one. The most serious objection to it
is that, in order to judge whether parallel incidents featuring
divine wrath are specific Ancient East Mediterranean parallels, the
incidents often need to be considered complete, and not in terms of
the stages of development of a theme. But this disadvantage is in
fact a much less serious one than results from operating from the
outset with episodes. It can be greatly reduced by the admission of
a certain amount of repetition and by a drawing together of threads
at the end; whereas, if the procedure of comparing similar episodes
is followed, it is very difficult not to give greater prominence to
similarities than to differences and so to be in danger of
pre-judging the question.
4 See further below, pp. 145-158. The introductory chapter of my
thesis is also rele-vant, esp. pp. 7-11 (Assessing the significance
of parallels) and pp. 38-50 on the 'myth and ritual' debate. «The
'specific' parallels which this study seeks to identify are so
termed because of common circumstantial detail for which direct
borrowing is on any hypothesis the only reasonable explanation ».
(lb. pp. 46-7).
4a I, Il, III etc. and i, ii, iii etc. are sometimes used alone
to refer to the Iliad and Odyssey respectively.
-
88 P. Considine
Chapter One THE CAUSES OF DIVINE WRATH
In the most general terms there is only one cause of divine
wrath, and it is opposition to the divine will. There is a variety
of specific causes, but opposition is usually regarded as an
element, even in those cases in which a man unwittingly and even
unwillingly incurs the divine wrath. The following survey of
representative texts from the various literatures will show what
elements in the narratives are likely to be significant for the
question of literary relationship.
1. Refusal to accede to a god's request or command
In the Ugaritic legend of Aqhat, the goddess Anath asks the hero
Aqhat to give her the bow and arrows obtained for him by his father
Danel from the divine craftsman Kothar-and-Hasis; in return she
promises him the gift of immortality. Aqhat refuses with a spirited
and mocking speech which rouses Anath's wrath.
Do not beguile me, 0 Virgin For to a hero thy lies are
loathsome!
As for man, what does he get as his des1;iny? What does a man
get as his tate? ...
[And] I'll die the death of everyone Yea I shall surely die!
[Also anoth]er thing I shall tell: The bow [is a weapon of
h]eroes
Could a female really hunt [therewith]? (2 Aqhat: VI 34 ff.; UMC
127)
Anath laughs and replies:
[Recon]sider, 0 Hero Aqhat, ... [Other] wise shall I not meet
thee on the path of sin [Nor] fell thee on the path of pride
Under [my feet], 0 Good One, strongest of men? (lb. 43 f.)
Anath now goes to El and threatens him with physical violence if
he does not allow her to punish Aqhat as she thinks fit. He replies
mildly that she may do as she wishes.
I shall make [thy gray hair] flow [with blood The gray of] thy
[beard] with gore,
And [then] will Aqhat save thee Or will Danel's son rescue
thee
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath
From the hand of the Virgin [Anath]? And Lutpan, God of Me[rcy],
replies: -I know thee, my daughter, that thou art impetuous
And there is no forbearance among goddesses. So depart, my
daughter -The joy that there is in thy liver
Thou shalt put in the midst of thy breast. (3 Aqhat: «rev.» 10
ff.; UMC 128)
89
Anath now enlists the help of Yatpan, the god 'ready in battle'
and gives him the form of an eagle, under which he kills Aqhat.
Aqhat's reply to the proposition made by the goddess could
hardly have been more offensive. He refuses Anath's request;
contemptuously rejects her offer of immortality; and mocks her
pretensions to use a warrior's weapons.
The theme of a mortal refusing a god's request for a weapon is
not paralleled elsewhere, though it is common enough in epic for a
god to give weapons to a mortal; cf. BB p. 160.
The refusal of the offer of immortality is of greater interest.
The same theme occurs in Homer, where it receives
characteristically more delicate treatment. In v 203 ff., Calyps.o
graciously tells Odysseus that he is free to leave her, but hints
that he would be wiser to remain and enjoy immortal life with her;
Odysseus courteously declines the offer, but acknowledges that his
doing so could be thought adequate reason for an outbreak of divine
anger:
But if you really knew all that you will have to suffer before
you reach your own country, you would stay here and share my home
with me and be immortal, in spite of your longing to see your wife
- yes, I know you are pining for her the whole time. I'm quite sure
I have just as good a figure as hers, and that I'm just as good
looking -it wouldn't be right for a mortal woman to have a better
figure or better looks than an immortal.
The diplomatic Odysseus replied: .« Lady goddess, don't be angry
with me ».
A similar incident, without the explicit mention of immortality,
occurs in the Gilgamesh Epic VI, 1 ff. (ANET 83-4) where Gilgamesh
refuses Ishtar's offer of marriage and mocks her for her
insincerity:
When Gilgamesh had put on his tiara, Glorious Ishtar raised an
eye at the beaury of Gilgamesh: Come Gilgamesh, be thou (my) lover!
Do but grant me of thy fruit. Thou shalt be my husband and I will
be thy wife.
Gilgamesh mockingly reminds her of her treachery to other
lovers:
Which lover didst thou love for ever? ... If thou shouldst love
me thou wouldst [treat me] like them.
(VI, 42, 78)
-
90 P. Considine
Ishtar goes to Anu and threatens him with the consequences of
her wrath if he does not help her to get her revenge on Gilgamesh
for insulting her:
When Ishtar heard this, Ishtar was enraged and [mounted] to
heaven ... Ishtar opened her mouth to speak, Saying to [Anu, her
father]:
My father, make me the Bull of Heaven [that he smite Gilgamesh],
[And] fill Gil [gamesh ... ]! If thou [dost not make] me [the Bull
of Heaven], I will smash [the doors of the nether world], I will [
... ], I will [raise up the dead eating (and) alive], So that the
dead shall outnumber the living!
(VI, 79-80; 92-100)
Ishtar and Anath are both angered by the way in which a mortal
hero contemptuously exposes a specious offer of glory; each assures
the father of the gods that he will feel the effects of her anger
if he does not co-operate in avenging her by the destruction of the
offending mortal; and in both cases an animal is the instrument of
vengeance, and is specially fashioned for the purpose.
A rough parallel to both the Ugaritic and Mesopotamian stories
is found in the Hittite Myth 0/ Illuyankas (ANET 125). The goddess
Inaras asks for the help of Hupasiyas, a mortal, in capturing the
dragon Illuyankas. Hupasiyas agrees on condition that Inaras lets
him sleep with her. His request is granted, Illuyankas is
overthrown and killed, and Inaras builds Hupasiyas a house 1:0 live
in. He begins to pine for his wife and children, and Inaras
quarrels with him and kills him.
Thus in the Greek, Hittite and Mesopotamian stories appears the
concept that a goddess may be angry because ·a mortal does not
value her favours; in the Greek and Hittite, the man has to choose
between the goddess and his own wife. In the Greek story there is
an accompanying offer of immortality which is the whole extent of
the f.avour in the Ugaritic. In the Ugaritk, Mesopotamian and
Hittite, a violent end is planned for the recal-citrant mortal; but
Anath shows remorse over Aqhat's fate and possibly did not intend
his death and it is not quite certain that Inaras intended to kill
Hupasiyas in the quarrel.
It may be noted that in both the Mesopotamian and the Ugaritic
stories a seven year drought is the sequel to the hero's death. Cf.
2 Sam. 1: 21, and see below, pp. 117-8. Cf. also p. 125, where
Ishtar's threat to descend to the underworld is compared with that
of Helius in Od. xii.
The theme of a mortal hero mocking a goddess who aspires to use
the weapons of a warrior and huntsman, appears in the Iliad, though
with no
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 91
specific mention of divine wrath. In v 330 H., the hero Diomedes
wounds the goddess Aphrodite in the wrist, and mocks her for her
military ambitions:
Then Diomedes of the loud war cry roared at her: «Get back,
daughter of Zeus; leave war and fighting alone. Haven't you enough
to do in getting defenceless women into trouble? If you carry on
trying to be a soldier, I don't think it will be long before you
tremble at the slightest hint of a battle».
Aphrodite £lees to Olympus, where she is comforted by Dione with
the assurance that Diomedes will perish if he presumes to oppose
the immortals, and gently addressed by Zeus. Apollo is himself
opposed by Diomedes and enlists the support of the war god Ares to
deal with him. Cf. 2 Aqhat VI:15 H. with Iliad V, 311-459.
The Homeric story is a good deal more complex and sophisticated
than the Ugaritic, but in both the pattern of events is the same; a
human being mockingly warns a female goddess to leave fighting to
men, the goddess is comforted by the father of the gods,
destruction is promised for the man who has set himself against the
immortals, and the war god is engaged to deal with him. Of the two
possible explanations that the similarities are no more than might
be expected in stories told against a background of a pantheon of
gods having dealings with men, and that the basic theme of the
Ugaritic story has been elaborated in a related tradition at a
later stage, the latter seems preferable. If this explanation is
correct, it is not at all surprising that the wrath of Anath is not
matched by a wrath of Aphrodite, whose reaction of fear, distress
and flight represents a re-working of the original tradition by
Homer in the interests both of novelty and of the place of the
incident in the story of Diomedes.
Thus the Ugaritic story included the two distinct themes of a
hero rejecting a goddess's oHer of immortality and of a hero
mocking a goddess's aspirations to use a warrior's weapons. The
themes both appear in Homer, the first in the Odyssey, the second
in the Iliad; only the first occurs in the other literatures
mentioned. For two further comparisons see Moses and Odysseus, sup.
cit., and see Table III below.
When a god is angry with a whole community of human beings, it
sometimes happens that he wishes to destroy the entire community.
If for any reason this wish is not fulfilled, the factor which
prevents its fulfilment becomes a new cause of wrath.
Thus in 1 Sam 28: 18 Yahweh is angry with Saul for not
destroying all the Amalekites; as a punishment he abandons him to
his enemies and gives his kingdom to David:
It is because you did not carry out Yahweh's instructions,
because you did not make the Amalekites feel the fury of his anger,
that Yahweh has done this to you today.
-
92 P. Considine
In Gilgamesh XI 170 H. (ANET 95) Enlil is angry because not all
men were destroyed in the flood:
When at length as Enlil arrived, And saw the ship, Enlil was
wroth, He was filled with wrath over the Igigi gods:
'Has some living soul escaped? No man was to survive the
destruction!'
Similarly in Il. IV:20 H., Zeas says in reproach to Hera that
her wrath would only be satisfied if she devoured Priam and all the
Trojans:
If you could get inside the gates and the high walls, and eat to
the last mouthful the raw flesh of Priam and Priam's sons and the
other Trojans, that might be enough to put an end to your anger.
(34-6)
Zeus suggests that he might himself be equally destructive if
roused to wrath against a community of men:.
When I set my heart on destroying a city, and choose one where
there are people you are fond of, don't try to put me off being
angry; just leave me to get on with it. ( 40-2)
There ,are no noteworthy similarities in the patterns of the
stories in which this feature occurs; but the prominence given in
each to the concept that divine wrath may demand the total
destruction of ,a human community and that its not being destroyed
is a cause of renewed wrath, seems worth mentioning; though it
should be added that in the Iliad, strictly speaking, the
frustration of the desire to destroy the entire community is a
cause of continued rather than renewed wrath.
2. Challenge to a god's power by a human being
It is not surprising that in the Iliad this theme is most
clearly and most frequently illustrated by examples of men
attempting to engage gods in physical combat. In V:40 H., Diomedes
attacks the wounded Aeneas four times, although he knows that
Apollo is guarding him. On the fourth attack Apollo sternly warns
him not to imagine himself an equal of the gods; « When he heard
this warning, the son of Tydeus gave ground a little, to avoid the
wrath of Apollo the far-shooter.» In XVI 710 H. Patroclus features
in an exactly similar incident. V:443-4 = XVI 710 H., except that
Patroclus retreats farther than Diomedes. In VI:128 H. Glaucus
tells Diome-des that Lycurgus roused the anger of the gods by
fighting them, and paid the penalty of his arrogance.
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 93
Then the gods who live at their ease were angry with Lycurgus,
and the son of Kronos made him blind; he didn't last long, with all
the immortals against him.
A similar passage in the Odyssey is xi:305, where Zeus slays
Otus and Ephialtes for . waging war on the gods. There is no
explicit wrath term, but it is dear that divine wrath has in fact
been aroused.
Other instances of men taking arms against the gods are given by
Dione in the speech in which she comforts her daughter Aphrodite,
who has been wounded by Diomedes: Otus and Ephialtes bound Ares in
a jar, and Herades wounded Hera and Ares. These three examples
hardly amount to 'a cat.alogue of the deities bested in battle'
(Gordon, BB 261), although Dione does say that many gods have
suffered in battle at the hands of men. A much more serious
misrepresentation comes later on the same page: «Odyssey (4:397)
states ,that « hard is a god for a mortal man to master », but the
outstanding heroes were in many cases equal to it ».
Diomedes-Aphrodite and Anath-Aqhat are quoted as examples. The
point need not- be laboured that such observations are at best
superficial. It is a fundamental datum of divine-human
relationships in Homer that no man can attack or oppose a god with
impunity, unless indeed he has the encouragement and protection of
another god in doing so: and even then he is taking a serious risk
(cf. Iliad XX: 293 H.). This fact is so obvious that it is not
worth while to review the evidence, except to comment on Gordon's
examples. It is true that Diomedes apparently gets the better of
Aphrodite; but much of the dramatic purpose of the incident is to
show the development of hubris in Diomedes, a hubris which must
inevitably result in disaster for him s. It is in fact a triumph of
the Homeric art that an incident so entertaining in itself, and
apparently making fun of a deity in a most irreverent way, is also
part of a solemn demonstration of the dangers of man opposing the
immortals. While enjoying the amusing anecdote of the goddess of
love being worsted in battle by the hero, the listener must have
been half consciously waiting for the assurance given by Dione when
her daughter comes to her for comfort:
And now the grey-eyed goddess Athene has set this poor fool on
to you. What the son of Tydeus does not realise, is that no-one
lasts long who fights with the im-mortals; his children don't sit
on his knee and call him 'Daddy' when he gets home exhausted from
the grim struggle on the battlefield. (V: 406-9)
And more in the same vein. For the reference to Athene's
encouragement of Diomedes, cf. 130 H.
Don't be so foolish as to fight any of the immortal gods, with
one exception; if
5 I do not however know of any classical tradition in which
Diomedes is in fact overtaken by nemesis.
-
94 P. Considine
Aphrodite, the daughter of Zeus, comes on to the battlefield,
you can wound her with your sharp bronze sword.
So not only was Diomedes virtually indemnified by Athene in his
attack on Aphrodite; but literally in the same breath his patroness
warned him not to try condusions with any other god. He takes this
counsel very much to heart, 'and later warns his comrades not to
fight against the gods (V:601 H.) and tells Athene that it was
because of her warning that he did net venture to oppose Ares in
battle. It is only when she has emphatically assured him of her
protection against Ares er any other of the immortals, thus
withdraw-ing her previous prohibition, that he does wound Ares, and
even then Athene guides the weapon. (V:814 H.) As for the passages
which Gordon quotes 'as evidence for the concept that a hero, again
Diomedes, could be 'fit to fight with Zeus' (V:362, 457: 'the son
of Tydeus, who apparently would fight father Zeus himself'), the
logic of these lines is precisely that of the English vulgarism:
«Who does he think he is - God Almighty? »
It will be seen that the evidence adduced by Goroon in support
of his contention that « the heroic age indulged itself in the
conceit that its famed warr10rs were a match for the gods », proves
semething very like the opposite, at least for Greece.
Examples of individual heroes challenging gods in battle and so
incurring divine wrath ar'e not paralleled in the other
literatures, probably because no poem of the length of the Iliad
and with the same background of battle, has come down to us - it is
frem the Iliad that most of the Homeric examples naturally come.
These passages of Homer should be seen against the back-ground of
the common Ancient Near Eastern theme that gods may take sides in
battles between mortal armies. It is dear enough in the Iliad
itself, not only in cases of individual gods taking part on behalf
of an individual favourite or to subdue an enemy, but in passages
where it is dear that the gods are for or against a particular
side, and may be expected to range themselves in hostile groups
upon the battlefield. See e.g. IV: 20 H., where the conflict
between cities is linked with the conflict between their protecting
deities, and XX: 19 H., where Zeus says that he will not take part
in the battle himself, «but the rest of you can make your way to
the Trojan and Achaean lines, and start supporting whichever side
you symp~thise with. » (23-5 )
A doser relationship between a human army and its protecting
deities is seen in a Hittite Ritual before Battle (ANET 354 ii (5)
H.):
The gods of the Hatti land have done nothing against you, the
gods of the Kashkean country. They have not put you under
constraint. But ye, the gods of the Kashkean country, began war. Ye
drove the gods of the Hatti land out of their realms and took over
their realm for your selves. The Kashkean people also began war.
From the Hittites ye took away their cities and ye drove them out
of their field (and) fallow
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 95
and out of their vineyards. The gods of the Hatti land and the
(Hittite) people call for bloody vengeance.
It is clear enough that the Hittite gods are angry at the
unprovoked attack. But the identifying of the fortunes of the gods
with those of the people they protect is much closer than any such
identification found in Homer, with the result that no concept of
'man fights god' is present, at least in a form which would he
meaningful for the present investigation. Much the same applies to
the Akkadian texts, where the identity of interest between the gods
and their people is so close that when a city is captured its gods
are regarded as captured with it (a oonception which is the more
natural in the light of the significance attached to the images of
the gods in Mesopo-tamian religion, and of its basic concept that
man was created for the service of the gods in the most crudely
physical sense - i.e. that the raison d'etre of the human race was
to provide for the gods essential services of the kind performed by
human servants for human masters) Sa. A typical statement is that
of Sargon II (721-705 B.c.; ANET 286):
I declared the gods residing therein (se. in Ashdod), himself,
as well as the inhabi· tants of his country, the gold, silver (and)
his personal possessions as booty.
Similarly Tiglath Pileser I (744-727 B.c.; ANET 283) replaced
the gods of Gaza, which he captured, with his own gods, 'and
declared them to be thenceforward the gods of their country'.
A number of passages in the Old Testament show the theme of a
deity fighting battles in anger against human opponents, combined
with a close identity of interests between the deity and a human
king and community; and in certain cases the anger of the god seems
to have been caused by men taking the initiative in engaging him in
battle. See Exodus 15:3-12; Judges 5: 4-5, 13, 23; Psalm 110: 5
ff., etc.
In the Ugaritic legend of Keret, the triumph of Keret's military
venture is guaranteed by the god El, who does not himself take
part.
It is probable that an attack by 'a mortal on a deity featured
in the lost ending to the Ugaritic Aqhat. Danel and Pughat are
informed by two messengers that Aqhat has been killed by Anath.
They vow vengeance. Pughat is furiously angry, arms herself, and
sets forth 'to smite the smiter of my brother'. Although the ending
of the story is lost, it is generally agreed that Pughat killed
Yatpan and that Aqhat was restored to life by Anath. (Similarly Mot
kills Baal and is killed in revenge by Anath, after which Baal is
restored.) For the concept that it is possible for a deity to
perish in
Sa Cf. my thesis, pp. 51·60. The theme of capturing the images
of gods is paralleled by the well known stories of the Greek
Palladion and the Hebrew Teraphim.
-
96 P. Considine
battle, cf. the Akkadian Creation Epic (ANET 62) in which Apsu
and Tiamat are killed by Ea and Marduk respectively; and see also
Iliad V: 385~91.
The well known battle of the gods in the Akkadian Creation Epic
is paralleled by the battle of gods and Titans in Hesiod's
Theogony; it is noteworthy that divine wrath is a very prominent
feature of both narratives. See Tables VI-IX below.
Against this background it would not be surprising to find
incidents of divine wrath being provoked as a result of a man
opposing a god in battle, but none exist which can be compared with
the Homeric examples. However, gods are often directly or
indirectly associated with human combatants in battle, and are
sometimes said to be acting in anger; in some of these cases the
cause may be military provocation by the human enemy, but in view
of the uncertainty which exists on this point, and the imprecision
necessarily introduced by the identification of divine and human
fortunes discussed above, further comment is left for chapter two
(pp. 122-4).
Two further forms of challenge to divine power, with resulting
anger on the part of the deity challenged, may be briefly
mentioned.
In the Old Testament challenges to the power of Yahweh are
generally in the form of preferring to worship another god, with
obvious implications. This theme is of course found passim in the
Old Testament and is best considered in terms of covenant breaking,
in connection with which it is discussed below. (When an Old
Testament writer speaks of the worship of other gods, he mayor may
not believe that the gods worshipped actually exist. In the thought
world of the early records, they probably do; in that of the later
ones, they do not: in either case, the object of worship, whether
deity or image of imaginary deity, is regarded as having no power
whatever. To desert Jahweh for such worship is therefore not only
treachery, but also supreme folly: it is the surest and most
frequent cause of divine wrath in the Old Testament). 6
In Homer divine wrath may be roused by a human being usurping a
god's prerogative. In viii:.564 H. Poseidon is angry with the
Phaeadans for giving safe sea journeys to all men: ib. 226-8 Apollo
is angry with Eurytus for challenging him to a contest with the
bow: In II:.594-600 the Muses are angry with Thamyris for boasting
that he could sing better than they, and they take his skill from
him; in iv:495 Poseidon kills Ajax for boasting that it was in
spite of the gods that he had escaped death at sea.
The material considered in this section produces no positive
result for the main enquiry in terms of strikingly similar
descriptions of a human challenge to a god's power and consequent
outbreak of divine wrath.
6 A clear summary discussion, with bibliography, is provided by
n.M.G. St~er in Peake's Commentary (Revd. Edn.) pp. 227-8. Further
discussion and bibliography in Jacob, Theology of the OT pp. 44 ff.
See also Eichrodt, Theology of the OT 220 ff.
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 97
3. A god's representative is slighted, or his favourite
suffers
A widespread form of this theme is that in which the
representative or favourite is the king. (The important question of
the relationship between king and gods in Greece and the Ancient
Near East cannot be investigated here in any detail but see below,
fn.16.). The divine wrath often follows an appeal by or on behalf
of the person wronged.
The best Canaanite example is UT 127:55 (UMC 120): Keret's son
Yassib suggests that Keret's illness makes it impossible for him to
continue to rule, and that he should abdicate in favour of Yassib.
Keret indignantly replies:
May Horon break, 0 my son, May Horon break thy head
Astarte-Name-of-Baal, thy pate! May there fall in Byblos
Thy years in thy - --And mayest thou see [ ] .
Although there is no term for anger in the passage, it is dear
that Keret envisages Horon acting in 'anger to punish Yassib's
impiety, which very probably consists in the slight to the god's
representative, with the additional element of failure to show due
filial respect.
There is no direct appeal to the deity; Keret's words may be
interpreted as a statement of the assured consequences of Yassib's
impiety (so Driver: 'Horon will break'), or as a wish, 'May Horon
break' 7.
Two interesting passages in Homer show the concept of Zeas as
protector of the kingship, Athene -as personal protector of the
king and his family. See further below pp. 111-3, esp. fn. 16. In
XX: 273 H. Achilles and Aeneas fight and are in danger of killing
each other. Poseidon is disturbed at the prospect of Aeneas' death,
laments the fact that he has been so foolish as to put his trust in
Apollo, and addresses the other gods as follows:
But come along, let us rescue him from death ourselves, in case
the son of Kronos should be angry if Achilles kills him: it is
fated that he should escape, so that the family of Dardanus shall
not be left with no one to propagate it, and vanish without trace;
of all the children whom the son of Kronos has had by mortal women,
Dardanus was his favourite. For now the son of Kronos has come to
hate the family of Priam, and instead the mighty Aeneas and his
children's children after him shall rule over the Trojans. (XX 300
ff.)
7 Depending upon whether ytbr is taken as indic. or as jussive.
Cf. UT p. 71.
7
-
98 P. Considine
This short passage contains a number of features of great
interest; the one that is relevant here is that Aeneas is the
destined means of the conti-nuation of the kingship, and that
therefore Zeus would be angry if he were killed. There is no
suggestion that the person of Aeneas is of particular value to
Zeus; he is to be protected because he is to be king, and divine
wrath is likely to be roused if his position is threatened, and not
because he is dear to the gods for any other reason.
The Hittite texts do not seem to include the theme of divine
wrath directed against a human who threatens the position of the
king; the nearest approa
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 99
The phrase to 'make quiet the heart of a god' is a technical
term for bringing the god's anger to an end.
Also of interest is the Oracular Dream concerning Ashurbanipal
(ANET 451):
To the conquest of [your] enemies [she (sc. Ishtar) will march
forth] at (your) side. Against Teumann, king of Elam, with whom she
is wroth, she has set her face.
These and similar passages are of little significance for
present compa-rative purposes: except that the career of Esarhaddon
recalls that of David, also a younger son and preferred by Yahweh
to his brothers for the kingship. The interest of this feature is
however lessened by the fact that David was not of the royal house;
see 1 Sam. 16. In 2 Sam. 22 :7 ff. David, the anointed king and
Yahweh's protege, celebrates the fact that he appealed to Yahweh
for justice and deliverance from his enemies, and that Yahweh
responded with wrath against David's enemies, and established him
in his rightful position of authority. Cf. vv. 7-8, 18:
In my distress I cried to Yahweh, To my God I cried. From his
temple he heard me; My cry for help reached him. Then the earth
quivered and shook, The foundations of heaven quaked and trembled:
Smoke went up from his nostrils, A devouring fire from his mouth
... (7-8) He rescues me from my powerful enemy, From those who hate
me and are too strong for me (18).
The similarities between the stories of David and Esarhaddon are
clear; in each case a youngest son is chosen by the god to be king,
has a great deal of difficulty in overcoming his opponents, but is
rescued and made to triumph over them by the god, who is angry with
those who have attempted to keep his chosen one from his lawful
position as king. However, this parallel has no significance for
literary contacts; the incidents have quite different historical
backgrounds, and the patterns of events, though similar, are
commonplace, apart from the feature of the choosing of the youngest
son. This feature is paralleled also in Ugaritic. El tells Keret
that his wife will bear him many sons and daughters:
The wife thou takest to thy house ... Will bear thee seven sons
And an eighth (daughter): Octavia. To thee she will bear the lad
Ya~~ib
One who sucks the milk of Asherah I shall make the youngest of
them the first-born . (UT 128:II:20ff.; UMC 110£.)
-
100 P. Considine
The Ugaritic passage is compared with the Old Testament story of
David by Gordon in wor pp. 159, 297; Esarhaddon is not mentioned.
Gordon writes: «No-one will question David's historicity, but
neither will any open-minded orientalist fail to see that the
manner of recounting his anointment in I Sam. 16 reflects dramatic
epic form.» The common interest in the feature of the elevation of
the eighth son (or daughter) is certainly noteworthy, and gains
interest from comparison with the story of Esarhaddon; but its
interest for the theme of divine wrath is peripheral, and it is not
discussed in any further detail here.
In the Iliad and Gilgamesh occurs the theme of a god seeking to
save a mortal favourite from death and being rebuked by another
god, who may be angry at the suggestion. In XVI:440 ff., Hera warns
Zeus of the conse-quences if he rescues Sarpedon from
Patroclus:
This is a mortal man, whose fate was decided long ago: are you
really thinking of saving him from the pangs of death? Save him
then; but the rest of us won't all approve - and we are gods too~
And here is something else for you to think about: if you bring
Sarpedon home alive, take care that some other god does not wish to
bring his own son away from the dangers of the war. Many of the
immortals have sons fight-ing around the great city of Priam, and
you only put them in a rage.
There is a similar dialogue in Gilgamesh VII: 11 ff. Anu has
decreed that Enkidu must die:
Then heavenly Shamash answered valiant Enlil: 'Was it not at my
command That they slew the Bull of Heaven and Huwawa?
Should now innocent Enkidu die?' But Enlil turned In anger to
heavenly Shamash: 'Because much like One of their comrades, thou
didst daily go down to them'.
This parallel is perhaps one of the more interesting of the
general class; the correspondences in detail are insufficient to
justify its being labelled 'specific' .
A clear Canaanite reference to a deity being roused to wrath by
the misfortunes of a favourite is in ur Cnt V (UMC 56). Anath is
furious because «Baal has no house like the gods / Nor a court like
the sons of Asherah». She threatens El in almost exactly the same
words as she used when she was angry about Aqhat's treatment of
her, and on this occasion also receives a conciliatory reply:
I know thee, my daughter, that thou art impetuous That there is
no forbearance among goddessess.
What dost thou wish, 0 Virgin Anath? ('nt V 36 f.; UMC 57)
The same theme appears in Odyssey i, where Athene reproaches
Zeus
-
· .
The Theme of Divine Wrath 101
for making no attempt to restore her protege Odysseus to his
rightful home, from which he is being kept by the goddess Calypso.
Cf. i:57 ff.
· Odysseus is longing to see even the smoke from a fire in his
own country. He wishes he were dead, and you don't give him as much
as a thought ... What has made you so angry with him, Zeus?
A characteristic Homeric refinement is the much more subtle
approach of Athene to Zeus, in comparison with Anath's attitude to
El. Zeus is never treated in Homer with the disrespect which El
sometimes receives; instead of raging at him, Athene suggests that
he must be angry with Odysseus since he does not show the least
sympathy for him. In both stories a goddess approaches the father
of the gods and complains bitterly that her protege is being kept
from his lawful home and lawful kingship; both suggest that the
head of the pantheon is responsible, should know better, and should
take immediate action to right the wrong. Both receive a mild
answer designed to pacify them, and a promise that action will be
taken, and in both stories there is a 'happy ending'.
For the same theme without the wrath element, cf. 2 Aqhat 1:20
(UMC 122) where Baal approaches El on behalf of Danel, who «has no
son like his brothers / Nor a root like his kinsmen! ».
Although the settings of the incidents are of course quite
different, the story patterns are strikingly similar, and it is at
least possible that the dramatic possibilities of the Ugaritic
st'Ory appealed to a pre-Homeric bard, who made use 'Of it for his
own purposes.
This parallel is of particular interest in comparison with that
of 1) above where a goddess also approaches the head of the
pantheon in connection with human affairs, there opposition by the
human to the goddess.
The feature of rejection of the divinely instructed leader and
consequent divine wrath occurs in the Old Testament in Nu. 6, and
in Odyssey xii. See Moses and Odysseus and Table III below.
Some miscellaneous passages may be mentioned, mainly from the
Iliad, in which approaches to Zeus by gods wh'O are angry on behalf
of m'Ortals are quite common. In 1:9 ff., Apollo is angry because
of the insult offered to Chryses; similarly in i:372 Athene is
angered by the insult offered to Cassandra; cf. iii: 132 ff.
Apollo's anger only becomes effective in response to Chryses'
prayer; Athene's is spontaneous. In IV:507 Apollo is angry when
Odysseus forces the Trojan,s to retreat; in V:755 ff. Heraasks Zeus
if he is not angry with Ares for killing so many Achaeans. In XV:
13 Zeus is very angry - although no wrath word in used - when he
sees the Trojans struggling after he has been tricked by Hera.
-
102 P. Considine
4. The human moral code is infringed
a) The theme of social responsibility towards widow and orphan
is found in all the literatures studied: but only in Hebrew and
Greek are there explicit references to failure in such
responsibilities provoking divine wrath. The omission of this theme
in Ugaritic literature is probably accidental. Concern for the
widow and orphan is expressed in UT 127:49-50 (UMC 119) and in 2
Aqhat V:8 (UMC 125). Both passages are concerned with the king's
responsibility to protect the weak. Danel« judges the case of the
widow / Adjudicates the cause of the fatherless ».
The Hittite Daily Prayer of the King contains the following
(ANET 397):
Whatever thou sayest, 0 Telepinus, the gods bow down to thee. Of
the oppressed, the orphan and the widow thou art father (and)
mother; the cause of the orphan, the oppressed, thou, Telepinus,
dost take to heart.
. The theme is particularly frequent in Sumerian. Urukagina,
isshaku of Lagash in the 24th century B.c. « made a special
convenant with Ningirsu, the god of Lagash, that he would not
permit widows and orphans to be victimised by the «men of power».
(Kramer HBS 93-4). Compare the prologue to Ur Nammu's law code
(21st. century B.C.): «He put down injustice: the orphan might no
longer be the prey of the rich, or the widow the prey of the
powerful, or the man who had one shekel the prey of him who
possessed a mina ». (Atlas of Mesopotamia 51). A hymn to the
goddess Nanshe contains the lines:
Who knows the orphan, who knows the widow, Knows the oppression
of man over man, is the orphan's mother, Nanshe who cares for the
widow ... Finds shelter for the weak. (Kramer Sumerians 124-5)
Similarly in Akkadian literature the Epilogue to the Code of
Hammurabi reads (ANET 178):
I sheltered them in my wisdom In order that the strong might not
oppress the weak That justice might be dealt the orphan and the
widow.
A striking Old Testament passage is Ex. 22:21-3:
You will not ill-treat any widow or orphan: if you do ill-treat
them and they cry out to me, I shall certainly hear their cry; and
my anger will blaze out, and I will kill you with the sword, and it
will be your wives who are widows and your children who are
orphans.
There is fine irony in these lines, where the penalty for
ill-treating the
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 103
widow / orphan is to leave your own family widowed/orphaned.
These two aspects of the widow's lot, its helplessness and divine
care for it, and conse-quent wrath if advantage is taken of its
helplessness, are well represented in the Iliad and Od)'ssey
respectively. Andromache gives a poignant account of the lot of the
widow and orphan (VI: 431 ff. - cf. 407 ff.; XXII 477 H.; XXIV 725
ff.). The fact that the Iliad does not dwell on divine protection
of widow and orphan is to be expected for artistic reasons. In the
Odyssey however, concerned with the homecoming and trimph of
Odysseus, the theme frequently occurs: the suitors are warned that
their taking advantage of the widow Penelope and her son Telemachus
will bring upon them the wrath of the gods. In ii:40 ff. Telemachus
adddresses them at some length on the situation, and says:
You should feel a proper respect for the anger of the gods; they
may be offended by your criminal behaviour, and make you pay for
it. (66 f.)
In answer to Antinous' complaints about Penelope's refusal to
rpake her choice, and to his suggestion that Telemachus should
force h~r hand by dismissing her from the house, Telemachus
re-emphasizes the impiety of any such action and its certain
punishment by wrathful deities:
For her father will make me suffer for it and so will the gods -
they will see to it that as my mother leaves the house she will
call down those hateful creatures the Erinyes; and on top of all
that, I shall become a social outcast.
Cf. xxi:413; xxiii:63-4; xiv:83-6 (the emphasis in this passage
is rather on the wrong done to Odysseus, and this thought is of
course also present in other passages).
Thus the Odyssey shares with the Old Testament the concept that
taking advantage of the position of widow and orphan incurs divine
wrath, which may result in the death of the offenders. The
similarity may be fortuitous or may be significant in terms of
other similarities between the Odyssey and the story of Moses; see
Table III below.
b) The importance of impartial administration of ;ustice is
stressed in all three literatures: again, only the Ugaritic does
not explicitly associate failures in this sphere with divine wrath.
But it is significant that the two human rulers who have prominent
positions in the Canaanite legends, Keret and Danel, are renowned
for their love of justice. Keret is « the munificent », « the
gracious one, servant of El »; and Yassib's taunt at the end of the
legend that Keret can no longer administer justice efficiently,
shows how important this activity was. Danel's characteristic
activity is also the admi-nistration of justice: cf. 2 Aqhat:V:6 H.
(UMC 124-5).
Both kings enjoy divine protection and favour - Keret of El,
Danel of Baal; and although this favour was not explicitly
connected with their
-
104 P. Considine
righteousness 8, we are clearly in a thought world where the
gods favour just kings and are likely to be angry with the
unjust.
This theme is given forcible expression in the Epilogue to
Hammurabi's law code: after a wish for a long reign for any king
who honours the code, Hammurabi prays at great length (nearly three
full columns of ANET) that the gods will punish anyone « whether
king or lord or governor or person of any rank» who does not honour
it. Enlil, Ninlil, Enki, Shamash, Sin, Adad, Zabaka, Inanna,
Nergal, Nintu, Ninkarrak and the «Annunaki in their totality» are
invoked in turn and asked to destroy the guilty one. Clearly it is
thought that the gods should be angry at such behaviour; and the
matter is left in no doubt in the prayer to Inanna:
May Inanna ... curse his rule with her great fury in her
wrathful heart. (ANET 179)
The theme frequently occurs in the Old Testament, where social
justice is a dominant motif. Compare Nu. 15:15-16, Ex. 18:13-26;
20-24, etc. The great importance attached to justice is emphasized
by the name of the Torah, the title Shophet, the recurrent pattern
of the Book of Judges, and the basic position of the law in the
Covenant 9. It is breaking the Covenant that is the stock reason
for the wrath of Yahweh in the Old Testament; e.g. Joshuah 23:16.
This is sometimes to be interpreted as idolatry, serving other
gods, sometimes implies specific breaking of moral commandments and
perversion of justice. The singling out of the latter element is
most clear and frequent in the Prophets, e.g. Isaiah 1:16-17,26;
10:1-4; Amos 8:4-14 (there is no wrath word but Yahweh is obviously
very angry).
A clear statement that dishonesty in litigation incurs the wrath
of Yahweh is 2 Chron. 19:10 OB):
Whatever dispute comes before you from your brothers living in
their towns: a question of blood-vengeance, of the Law, of some
commandment, of statute, or of ordinance you are to clarify these
matters for them so that they do not incur guilt before Yahweh.
The thought that maladministration of justice incurs divine
wrath is close to the surface in Deut. 16: 19-20 OB):
You must not pervert the law; you must be impartial... Strict
justice must be your ideal, so that you may live in rightful
possession of the land that Yahweh your God is giving you.
8 But the fact that Keret is 'the gracious one, servitor of El',
and that El is 'kindly' and 'merciful' is suggestive.
9 See De Vaux Ancient Israel pp. 143 ff. «The Law, Torah, means
in the first place a teaching, a doctrine, a decision for each
particular case. Collectively, the word means the whole body of
rules governing men's relations with God and with each
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 105
In It. XVI 384 ff. the wrath of Zeus is presented as being
commonly provoked by perversions of justice. Zeus sends storms and
floods when « his wrath is roused by men who make a mockery of
justice, and hand down blatantly unjust judgements in the courts,
without a thought for what the gods may do to them ».
This passage is part of a long simile and is therefore - at
least rela-tively - late. The comparison with Hesiod WD 221, 250 f.
is interesting and raises a question of transmission which is not
discussed here. (But Leaf does no more than cut the Gordian knot
with his comment: «The simile, however, seems to have suffered from
the insertion of two lines from Hesiod, 387-8 ».)
The whole passage WD 212-85 is relevant to this theme; see esp.
217-27, 249-51, 263-4. The tone is doser to that of the Old
Testament than is anything in Homer.
c) Social injustice of any kind may incur divine wrath. Social
justice is one of the dominant themes of the Old Testament. Widows
and orphans are very often singled out for mention (see above) as
are strangers, with whom they are often associated.
Ex. 22:20-7 makes it clear that the wrath of Yahweh may be
expected by anyone guilty of social injustice. Compare v. 23 with
v. 27.
In It. XIII 620 ff. Menelaus reproaches the Trojans for abusing
the laws of hospitality 10 and so neglecting the wrath of Zeus:
You did not feel the slightest fear of the wrath of
loud-thundering Zeus, who protects the guest and who one day will
destroy your city on its steep hill. (623 ff.)
Compare xiii 213-4, where Odysseus thinks he has been deceived
by his Phaeacian hosts and invokes the wrath of Zeus.
other» (p. 143). The relationship between Law and Covenant is
discussed in G.E. Men-denhall's illuminating monograph Law and
Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Pp. 4-5 are
particularly relevant here. «To sum up, the stipulations of the
co-venant have to do with the future, while law has to do with a
specific action which is in the past. The Decalogue describes the
interests of the deity which are protected by the deity, but law
protects the interests of the community by averting from itself the
punitive action of God» (p. 5). «Religious obligations tend then to
become legal obligations, for the community will feel compelled to
punish in order to protect itself from the divine wrath which does
not single out the culprit alone for punishement » (p. 4). For the
theme of communal responsibility, see my thesis pp. 83 ff. It is
not here consi-dered necessary to discuss the dates of different
parts of the Pentateuch; it is assumed that much of the material
was in circulation by the second half of the eighth century B.c.
-i.e. by the time of Homer.
10 On hospitality as a theme in the three literatures see Gordon
HB pars. 59-68. Some basic Old Testament references are: Gen. 18:
1-8; 24: 15-33. Ex. 2: 15-22; 22: 21 (cf. 23: 9). Lev. 24: 22,35.
Nu. 15: 15-16. Deut. 10: 18-19 (an important passage: Yahweh cares
for the fatherless, the widow and the stranger); cf. 24: 17.
-
106 P. Considine
The breaking of a truce is seen as a likely cause for divine
wrath in IV 164-8, where Agamemnon tells Menelaus, wounded by
Pandarus, that Zeus in his wrath will one day avenge this
treacherous breaking of the truce.
In the Hittite Plague Prayer of Mursilis (ANET 395) one cause of
the Storm God's anger against the Hittites was that some of their
people had broken an oath made jointly with the Egyptians. In
general, Hittite treaties are sealed by an oath, and the gods are
invoked and asked to bless those who keep the treaty but fiercely
to punish those who do not; e.g. ANET 205, 206. (See Mendenhall,
sup. cit., for the relevance of Hittite procedure to an
understanding of the covenant of the Old Testament).
Similarly in Joshua 9:20, where the Gibeonites have tricked
Joshua and the leaders of Israel into making a treaty with
them:
This is what we will do with them: we will spare their lives, to
save ourselves from the wrath which would follow if we broke the
oath we swore to them.
d) Neglect of the obligation to bury the dead may cause divine
wrath. The gods are angry with Achilles for refusing to allow
Hector to be buried. Zeus instructs Thetis in XXIV 113 H. (compare
134 H.):
Tell him that the gods are displeased with him, and that I am by
far the most angry of all the immortals ... to see if he will fear
me and give Hector back.
In xi 72-3 Elpenor tells Odysseus to bury him properly lest he
incur divine wrath: !J.T) (J..OL 'tL eEWV !J.T)VL!J.tl.
yEVW!J.tl.L. The same phrase is used by Hector to Achilles in
rebuking him for his disregard of all convention in refusing to
permit him to be buried. (XXII 355-60) This theme of taking too
vindictive a revenge on a defeated enemy occurs in UT 68:29 f. (UMC
48) where Astarte rebukes Baal for being too vindictive to the
defeated Yam: « Shame, 0 Aliyan Baal, / Shame, 0 Rider of Clouds! /
For Prince Sea was our captive / For Judge River was our captive.
»
In the Sumerian Gilgamesh and the Land of the Living Huwawa
rebukes Enkidu for warning Gilgamesh against sparing his life:
~hen he had thus spoken, Enkidu, in his anger, cut off his neck,
threw it into an arm-sack, they brought it before Enlil ... Enlil
looked at the head of Huwawa, was angered by the words of
Gilgamesh. (Kramer Sumerians 197)
The:: importance of proper burial was often stressed in the Old
Testa-ment (e.g. 2 Sam. 2:4-6; 2 Ki. 9:10), and the lack of such
burial was a great misfortune. Psalm 79:3 pleads that since
Israel's enemies have slaughtered Yahweh's people, and caused to
them to « be given as food to the birds ... and there was no-one to
bury them », therefore Yahweh should
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 107
« pour out your wrath upon the gentiles who do not recognise you
». Thus refusal to allow proper burial is singled out as deserving
of divine wrath 11.
In Il. VIII 379-80 Athene says that many Trojans will be eaten
by dogs and birds if she and Hera help the Achaeans. Both goddesses
are angry with Zeus for helping the Trojans. Compare ANET 288 sup.
cit. where Ashurbanipal fed corpses of enemies to dogs and birds,
in appeasement of divine anger.
This topic presents a number of interesting general parallels,
and indeed of striking similarities in culture amongst the nations
of the Ancient Near East; but there is no clear evidence of
literary borrowing.
5. Siding with a god's enemy
A deity may be roused to wrath if another deity sides with his
enemy. In the Iliad and in Ugaritic literature there are several
cases of deities being angry, or threatening to be angry, if the
father of the gods sides with their human or divine enemy.
In 3 Aqhat: «rev. » 11 Anath declares to El that if he takes
Aqhat's side in the dispute ,about the bow, «I shall make [thy gray
hair] flow [with blood] ». She adds with fierce sarcasm that he can
then get Aqhat to help him. In Il. IV 22 H. and VIII 457 H. Hera
and Athene are angry with Zeus for siding with the Trojans. Athene
keeps quiet but Hera's wrath breaks out. «Now Athene kept quiet and
said nothing, although she was furious with father Zeus, and in
fact almost beside herself with rage. But Hera could not control
her anger, and said what she thought ». In IV the goddesses are
responding to Zeus' tentative suggestion that peace should be made
and Troy spared: in VIII to Zeus' restraining them from going to
help the Achaeans. To Anath's crude threat should El help the human
enemy corresponds a much more subtle warning from Hera (IV 29) 12.
« Spare him then, but the rest of us won't all approve ». This is
clearly meiosis: « We shall not all approve» = « Some of us will be
furious ». Zeus is himself made very angry by the anger of the
goddesses; he yields, but warns Hera not to attempt to frustrate
his future anger against men should he ever wish to destroy a city
dear to her. In XI 217 Poseidon says that if Zeus prevents the
destruction of Troy there will be implacable wrath between them;
Poseidon is already angry with Zeus for preventing him from helping
the Achaeans and he yields with a very bad grace. An important
11 It is interesting that the same passage interprets lack of
proper burial for the Israelites as being itself evidence of divine
wrath.
12 Athene is given the same line in XXII 181; see below.
-
108 P. Considine
element in Poseidon's anger is that his dignity is affronted by
the overbearing manner of his equal Zeus.
The sea-god's resentment that his enemy should be favoured by
the head of the pantheon is a motif of both Iliad and Odyssey and
of the Ugaritic Baal, but no similarities in story pattern can be
adduced, except that in each case initial successes are followed by
final defeat. However, this apparently very general parallel may be
more significant than it looks, if a view advanced by M.H. Jameson
(Mythology of Ancient Greece in Myths. Anc. World, 262) is correct.
Referring to the sky/sea/underworld: Zeus/Poseidon/Hades:
Baal/Yam/Mot parallel, he writes: «This tripartite division does
not really work in Greek cult and belief: instead of Hades we
sometimes find « Zeus of the underworld» and, as we have said,
Poseidon is often a god of agri-culture rather than the sea.
Consequently a comparable three fold division in Canaanite myth may
be more than just a parallel ». One could go farther, and say that
originally Poseidon may not have been a sea god at all; but such
considerations do not help very much, because there is every reason
to suppose that his development as a sea god started as soon as the
Greeks settled in Greece. Jameson's reference to «Greek cult and
belief» is similarly inconclusive, and fails to see the wood for
the trees. Secondary and ancillary functions of deities are
commonplate and Poseidon's speech to Iris in XV 184 ff. shows the
tripartite division firmly established in Greek tradition; it could
be the result of purely internal development. The inte-resting
possibility of relationship remains, but is better examined in the
light of such facts as that the tripartite arrangement is not
prominent outside Greece and Canaan, and that relations between
Zeus and Poseidon show similarities to those between Baal and Yam:
there is no intrinsic unsuitability about the division in Greek
religion.
Traces of the tripartite division can be detected in the Old
Testament. See U. Cassuto Baal and Mot in the Ugaritic Texts.
Cassuto argues (a) that Mot was «king of the netherworld » and that
« dominion over Sheol was the essence of Mot's nature» (p. 81) and
(b) that « like Mot, the biblical ' Mawe! is depicted as an
insatiable and gluttonous creature ». Cf. Hab. 2:5; Job. 18:13. Ps.
49:14. The conflict between Yahweh and the Sea is well attested;
basic references are in Heidel Bab. Gen. 104-14. Heidel himself
emphasis the differences between the Hebrew and other traditions
13.
A god who shows excessive kindness to a mortal in seeking to
save him from his fate may incur the anger of other gods. Shamash
objects to Enkidu's
13 I have not had access to Cassuto's work on « the conceptual
connection between the terms of 'the nether parts of the earth'
(Heb. tal;1tit haare~) and 'the sea' and 'the river' (Heb.
yam-nahar) ». (Baal and Mot ... p. 84, where the reader is referred
in n. 24 to the author's discussion in «Tarbiz 12 (1940-41), pp.
6-9 (Hebrew); and in my Italian articles referred to there ».
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 109
death and is rebuked by Enlil. Compare Il. XVI 449 where Hera
warns Zeus of the anger of the other gods, if he attempts to rescue
Sarpedon, 'whose fate was decided long ago' and XXII 168 where
Athene says the gods will be angry if Zeus rescues Hector. In the
Akkadian Gilgamesh Enlil is angry with the other gods because a
human has been allowed to survive the flood. (The other gods have
had second thoughts about the flood: their feeling that anything
would be better than the complete destruction of the human race has
its parallel in Gen. 8:21-2).
There are some noteworthy similarities between a story about
Baal and the story of Achilles in Iliad 1. In UT 137:10 H. (UMC 43
H.) two envoys of Yam come to demand that Baal be surrendered to
him « so that I may inherit his gold ». Baal is angry with Yam and
resents it when El and the gods agree to Yam's demand. He declares
that he will be victorious. The envoys seem nervous and El
reassures them. Anath and Ashtoreth restrain Baal from ,attacking
the envoys with a dagger. The craftsman of the pantheon provides
Baal with weapons to slay Yam.
In Iliad I two envoys of Agamemnon . come to demand Achilles'
prize Briseis « to show you how much stronger than you I am» (185
f.). Achilles is angry with Agamemnon and tells Athene that he will
kill him. Athene co-operates with Hera to restrain him. The envoys
are nervous, but are kindly received by Achilles. The craftsman of
the pantheon provides Achilles with weapons to slay Hector, who
later becomes the object of his wrath. The Iliad story is more
complex than the Ugaritic but contains many similar elements which
may be listed as follows:
1. The hero 14 is angered by the attempt of an equal to rob him
of his honour. .
2. There is a threat to retaliate. 3. The hero is told by the
gods to yield. 4. Two female deities are mentioned as restraining
him. 5. A pair of envoys comes from the enemy to reinforce his
claim. 6. Both pairs are nervous, but 7. The hero is obliged to
yield to the envoys. 8. The visit of the envoys follows a·-scene in
which the hero has angrily
reproved the enemy for his arrogance and has predicted his
humiliation. The natural inference in this case is that the Greek
story has been
influenced by the Ugaritic; cf. p. 126 below. The theme that
siding with a god's enemy incurs divine wrath is very
common in the Old Testament, especially in terms of the wrath of
Yahweh
14 It must of course be borne in mind that Baal is a god and
Achilles a mortal. 'Hero' in this section means simply the hero of
the story.
-
110 P. Considine
being aroused by the breaking of the Covenant. To serve other
gods is the most flagrant way of siding with Yahweh's enemies. The
principle is spelled out in 2 Chron. 19:2:
And Jehu ... said to king Jehoshaphat, 'Does one give help to a
criminal? Are you going to be the friend of Yahweh's enemies?' That
is the way to bring Yahweh's wrath on your head.
(Jehoshaphat had fought with Ahab against the Syrians).
Cf. Ex. 32:8-10, where Yahweh says to Moses:
Your people ... have made themselves a calf of molten metal and
have prostrated themselves before it and sacrificed to it. . They
have said 'This is your god, men of Israel' ... so now keep out of
my way, so that my anger can blaze out against them and I can
devour them.
Nu. 25:3-4:
And Israel joined forces with Baal Peor: and the anger of Yahweh
blazed Out against Israel.
The possibility of a deity's anger being diverted to a human or
a god that sides with the object of the anger is mentioned in all
three literatures. In Odyssey xiii 341-3, Athene speaks of
Poseidon's wrath against Odysseus and says she was afraid to oppose
Poseidon on Odysseus' behalf; i.e. she was afraid of joining or
replacing Odysseus as the object of Poseidon's wrath:
But you know I was not in a position to quarrel with my uncle
Poseidon, who resented what you had done - naturally he was angry
that you had blinded his own son.
In 3 Aqhat « rev. » 6 H. Anath is angry with Aqhat and will turn
her wrath on El if he sides with Aqhat. Old Testament examples are:
Nu. 33:55-6:
If you do not drive out the present inhabitants of the country
... I will treat you as I intended to treat them.
1 Sam. 28: 18:
It is because you did not carry out Yahweh's instructions,
because you did not make the Amalekites feel the fury of his anger,
that Yahweh has done this to you to-day.
Compare also the scenes between Ishtar and Anu and between Enlil
and Sham ash mentioned above (pp. 90, 100).
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 111
6. A covenant with a god is broken
Yahweh's care for his people within the covenant relationship
and his wrath against them when they transgressed the provisions of
the covenant are the obverse and reverse of the same coin, and the
central theme of the Old Testament. The feature most commonly
mentioned is the desertion or dishonouring of Yahweh by serving
other gods; but breaking the covenant includes all the other
specific oHences which could provoke Yahweh to anger, and « serving
other gods» commonly stands for breaking the covenant. Some basic
texts are Ex. 6: 2-9; 19-23; Numbers 25:3-4; Deuteronomy 4:23-5;
11:16-17; 29:10-29; 31:17; Joshua 23 : 16, which reads:
When you break the covenant of Yahweh your God, which he has
ordered you to keep, and go and worship other gods and prostrate
yourselves before them, the anger of Yahweh will blaze out at you,
and you will soon disappear from the fertile country which he has
given you.
Homer does not present any case of a convenant formed between
deity and human like the covenant of Ex. 6: 19-23, where there are
specific pro-mises by Yahweh and specified responsibilities to be
fulfilled by men. Gordon's comment (BB 256) that « the idea of a
covenant between a man and the god of his father ( s) is fully
developed in Homeric tradition» is a very misleading way of
referring to hereditary connections between deities and heroes in
Homer. However, there are numerous instances in Homer of especially
intimate relationships between gods and men. Athene is Odys-seus'
protector, Poseidon stands in a sort of patron saint-cum-guardian
angel relationship to the Phaeacians, Hera says that Argas, Sparta
and Mycenae are especially dear to her (IV 51-2); many heroes are
sons of deities and enjoy their aHection and care. Thus Achilles is
cared for by his mother Thetis, Sarpedon by his father Zeus; but it
is noteworthy that both heroes are associated with particularly
poignant expressions of the tragedy of human mortality. Cf. also
XVI 433-8 and 522, where Glaucus speaks reproachfully of Zeus'
neglect of Patroclus: «he does not even help his own son ». The
theme of divine wrath aroused by ingratitude, disloyalty or
disobedience on the part of the human covenant partner is found
(e.g. IlI:413 H.) but is not common. In general in Homer a human
favoured by a god shows no inclination to deprive himself of the
advantages of the relationship by provoking the god to anger.
In III 413, Aphrodite sends Helen to Paris, whom she has rescued
from Menelaus, and is angry at Helen's refusal.
Aphrodite answered her angrily: 'Don't provoke me, you stubborn
creature, or I may get angry and send you pack-
ing; so far I have treated you with the greatest affection, but
I can be just as goo~ at hating'.
-
112 P. Considine
Poseidon's resentment of the Phaeacians' giving safe sea
journeys to all men should perhaps be interpreted in terms of
covenant breaking. As the progenitor of their king (vii 56 ff.),
and bestower of their skills as seamen (vii 34-6), he resents their
independence in disposing of his gift and usurping his
prerogative.
A simple kind of covenant is implied in the Hittite Prayer of
Kantuzilis (ANET 400): «My god who was angry at me and rejected me
- let the same (god) care for me again and grant me life! » Compare
Mursilis' analogy (ANET 395) of the master-servant relationship, in
which infringements deserve wrath, but penitence looks for
forgiveness 15.
This theme is not found in the extant Ugaritic texts. A deity is
angry if his/her claims are disregarded but there are no cases of
divine wrath caused by the violation of a special relationship
between a deity and human individual or group 16.
7. Failure to honour a god with sacrifices
A frequent cause of divine wrath is failure to honour the god
with due sacrifices.
In Iliad I 65 ff. Achilles suggests to Agamemnon that they
consult a prophet to discover whether Apollo is angry because of
some sacrifice ommitted -
to tell us why Phoebus Apollo is so angry with us - whether he
finds fault with us for not fulfilling some vow, or for failing to
offer a hecatomb.
In V: 177 H. Aeneas urges Pandarus to shoot at Diomedes « unless
he is some god who is angry with the Trojans because they have not
sacrificed to -him ». In IX 499 ff. Artemis is angry with Oineus
for not offering
15 Hittite treaties are discussed by Mendenhall, sup. cit., pp.
27-35. 16 A widespread theme is the concept of divine protection of
the king, testifying to
a close covenant relationship between king and god. See e.g. 2
Sam. 23: 5: «He has made a covenant with me to last for ever; he
himself guarantees that its terms will be kept ». (A free rendering
of Heb.: 'aruka b~k6l us~mura; irk suggests that the covenant is
duly drawn up in correct 'legal' form, smr that it is preserved,
i.e. guaranteed, by Yahweh). The possibility of disloyalty
incurring wrath is very near the surface in David's song in 2
Samuel 22: 2-51, especially 21-8. And Saul undoubtedly lost the
protection of the covenant with Yahweh because of his disobedience.
No wrath term is used but clearly Yahweh was angry. See 1 Samuel
10:24; 11: 15; 2 Samuel 8-16.
In Homer the king has the special protection of Zeus, who
protects him by virtue of his royal office, whereas Athene protects
kings by virtue of a hereditary connection with their family.
Telemachus as well as Odysseus, Diomedes as well as Tydeus, are her
proteges. The concern of Zeus for the office of king is very clear
in Iliad XX 293-
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 113
her sacrifice along with the other gods. «The daughter of great
Zeus was the only one to whom he did not sacrifice» (536). In iv
351 H. is the story of Menelaus being detained in Egypt because he
had angered the gods by not oHering sacrifices to them.
In a Hittite Instruction for a Temple Official (ANET 208) it is
laid down that misappropriation of sacrifices must be severely
punished and in an Omen Text (ANET 497) a deficient oHering is a
possible cause of divine anger. More interesting is the case of the
hunter Kdsi, who was punished for neglecting sacrifice to the gods
(see p. 122). The Plague Prayer of Mursilis (ANET 395-6) says that
a plague was caused by the fact that the Hattians had discontinued
sacrifice to the river Mala.
The Old Testament is not much concerned with the failure to make
regulation sacrifices to Yahweh but it is very much concerned with
(1) the purity of the sacrifice, i.e. no alien Canaanite elements
are to be incorporated in sacrifice to Yahweh. Compare 1 Ki. 12:25
H.; 13:1 H.; 15:9-15. 1 Ki. 3:3, 2 Ki. 12:3. (2) The importance of
sacrificing o,,!ly to Yahweh. This theme is found passim in the Old
Testament and is the' basis of the covenant. (3) The importance of
the moral intention of sacrifice and the necessity of the right
disposition on the part of the one sacrificing. In the Prophets
this theme takes the form of declaring Yahweh's hatred for
sacrifices not accompanied by pure intentions. Compare Ps. 40:6;
51:16 H.; Is. 1:10-17; Hos. 6:6-9; 8:4-6.
Failure to satisfy anyone of these conditions may incur divine
wrath. See Gray Legacy pp. 192-208 for Canaanite sacrifice and its
relation
to ·that of Israel. Divine wrath seems not to be caused in
connection with breaches of correct procedure either of the Homeric
or of the Old Testament kind.
308 where Poseidon says Zeus will be angry if Achilles kills
Aeneas, who is destined to be king of the Trojans.
In Mesopotamian literature also the links between god and king
are very close; compare ANET 270, 274, 276, 451. It is worth
referring here to the intimate relations between the god Chemosh
and the king Mesha, as attested on the Moabite stone (c. 830 B.C.;
ANET 320).
In Ugaritic literature there are many indications of the king's
special relationship with the gods; Keret is the 'servitor of El',
and El is Keret's 'father'. In Aqhat «El took hold of his servant,
he blessed / Danel the Rephaite (and) showed favour to the nero»
(CML 49). See Gray Legacy pp. 209 H. and compare his Canaanite
Kingship in Theory and Practice VT II 1952 pp. 190-220.
On the theme of divine kingship in the Ancient Near East see
C.]. Gadd Ideas of Divine Rule in the Ancient Near East, Schweich
Lectures 1945; H. Frankfort Kingship and the Gods, Chicago 1948;
The Sacral Kingship = Studies in the History of Reli-gions IV Brill
1959; S.H. Hooke ed. Myth, Ritual and Kingship, Oxford 1958; A.
]ohnson Sacral Kingship, Cardiff 1955; 1. Engnell Studies in Divine
Kingship in the Ancient Near East, Uppsala 1943.
8
-
I
114 P. Considine
It appears from the above that the Greek, Hittite and
Mesopotamian texts present some parallels of general interest but
none of a specific nature. The absence of similar passages in
Canaanite literature may be fortuitous but the Old Testament is
sharply distinguished from the other literatures in its approach to
the question.
8. Irrational
In a number of Greek and Hebrew passages divine wrath is aroused
for reasons not stated. And it is clear that in both literatures
there is a belief that divine wrath could be caused, and recognised
by men, without the cause being known. A similar concept appears in
Hittite and Akkadian literature. « Irrational» expressions of
divine wrath include wrath of which the cause is unknown and
unknowable and wrath of which the cause as stated is apparently in
conflict with the attitude of the offended deity on other
occa-sions. These two types are to be distinguished from cases in
which the cause of the wrath is in fact unknown but is capable of
being discovered; but common to all three categories is that
heightened sense of the numinous which is occasioned by the shock
of the unexplained onset of divine anger.
In addition to these categories there are some passages in Homer
in which no reason is given for the deity's anger and no
assumptions made about its rationality.
Thus in VI 205 no reason is given for the wrath of Artemis, who
killed Laodameia in anger. In VI 200 Laodameia's father Bellerophon
is said to have become «hated by all the gods» and to have wandered
in solitude avoiding human company - possibly a way of saying the
gods made him mad as a punishment. The cause of their anger is not
stated, but the reference is no doubt to the legend of
Bellerophon's attempt to fly to heaven on Pegasus.
In Iliad XXI 522 ff. the destruction of a hypothetical city is
mentioned as a commonplace situation in which the wrath of gods is
visited upon men. It is not clear whether a particular cause should
be assumed - not mentioned because irrelevant - or whether the
passage shows a concept of human misfortune being a priori the
result of divine displeasure, even if the reason for it is not
known and is in fact unknowable.
This concept, that misfortune is the result of divine wrath, is
clear in a number of Akkadian texts which are - perhaps
significantly - the principal examples of cases in which no reason
is given for divine wrath and it is assumed that no reason is
discoverable; e.g. the Lamentation to Ishtar (ANET 384) and the
Prayer to the Moon God Sin (ANET 386). The Prayer
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 115
to Every God (ANET 391) is a particularly illuminating
commentary on Akkadian views on the identity of misfortune and
divine wrath.
The sin which I have done, indeed I do not know The Lord in the
anger of his heart looked at me The god in the rage of his heart
confronted me When the goddess was angry with me, she made me
become ill.
On the Moabite stone no reason is given for Chemosh being «
angry with his land ».
Two Old Testament cases of apparently unmotivated divine wrath
are 2 Sam. 6:7 and 24: 1. In 2 Sam. 24: 1: «The anger of Yahweh
blazed out against Israel, and he roused David against them: «Go
and take a census », he said, « of Israel and Judah ». David does
so, but then repents of his sin, and the people are punished with a
pestilence. This apparently bizarre sequence of events is to be
considered in terms of three axioms of Old Testament thought: (1)
That God is the ultimate cause of all that happens ( 2) That to
take a census is to interfere with matters concerning the increase
of the race, which is God's prerogative (3) That misfortune is
likely to be the result of divine wrath.
We are still left without a motive for the wrath which seems to
be of the 'unexplainable' type, closely linked with misfortune, and
so well repre-sented in the Akkadian texts.
In 2 Sam. 6: 7 Yahweh is angry with Uzzah for accidentally
touching the Ark. This passage is illuminated by a comment of Otto
(Idea of the Holy p. 32): «It is patent from many passages of the
Old Testament that this 'wrath' has no concern whatever with moral
qualities ... It is 'like a hidden force of nature', like stored up
electricity, discharging itself upon anyone who comes too near ».
Cf. Nu. 4: 15: «They must not touch the sacred objects, or they
will die »; Ex. 33:20: «He said, You can not see my face: nobody
sees me and lives ». (A comparison of these passages shows how
considerable was the overlap between the semantic fields of the
wrath and the holiness of Yahweh in the Old Testament).
The 'explanation' of Yahweh's wrath in this case is implicit in
the very concept of his wrath or holiness. In two further passages
Yahweh is apparently angry with men for doing what he told them to
do. In Nu. 22: 20 H. Balaam goes with Yahweh's approval but then
Yahweh is angry with him for doing so. In 1 Ki. 16:7 Yahweh is
angry with Baasha for smiting the house of Jeroboam although he had
ordered him to do so; see 14:9-10 and 15:29-30. Compare It. . II 1
H. where Zeus sends a deceitful dream on Agamemnon and IV 68 H.
where Zeus initiates the breaking of the truce although he is the
god who avenges truce breaking.
-
116 P. Considine
In iv 351 H. and I 65 H. divine anger has no apparent cause but
it is assumed that the cause can be discovered. The same concept is
found in the Hittite Plague Prayer and Omens (ANET 395 and
497).
Chapter Two THE MANIFESTATION OF DIVINE WRATH
Divine wrath in all the literatures studied is recognised as
being mani-fested in a variety of ways. There is no common factor
such as the element of opposition to the divine will which
generally helps to cause a god to be angry.
The classification of passages in this chapter is rather
arbitrary; it is based simply on the isolation of some of the more
striking recurrent features in the manifestation of divine anger.
Since the circumstances of a god's anger may diHer widely these
features fall into a heterogeneous collection of sub-classes.
1. Natural calamity
a. Failure of crops
An angry deity frequently shows his displeasure by interfering
with the season's crops; a few examples are given, but it is not to
be expected that this theme will provide anything but the most
general of parallels unless associated with clearly related story
patterns.
A good Old Testament example is Deut. 11: 16-17 where the
Israelites are warned of the penalty for idolatry:
The anger of Yahweh will blaze out against you, and he will shut
up the skies and stop the rains, and the land will not produce its
crops.
Compare 29:22-4:
They will see the land ruined by blight and plague, sent by
Yahweh ... and they will say: 'Why has Yahweh treated this country
in such a way? What has caused such a devastating outburst of
wrath?'
In the Iliad and Odyssey the feature of crops failing is not
singled out for mention, but see below on other natural calamities
which include such failure. In the Homeric Hymn to Demeter (see
especially 301 H.) the theme of Demeter's anger resulting in the
failure of the crops is the pivot of the
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath - 117
whole story. T.H. Gaster (Thespis pp. 453 H.) convincingly
interprets the Hymn to Demeter as a « liturgical chant designed for
one or other of the great seasonal festivals, and embodying the
cult myth peculiar to the occa-sion ». He points to correspondences
between the Hymn to Demeter and the ritual of Thesmophoria, at
which the rape of Persephone was enacted as a sacred drama. Common
elements are: (1) A female torchlight procession; HD 47-8, 60-1.
(2) A fast (there was a nine-day lent in Cyprus); HD 40-50, where
Demeter wanders for nine days .(3) An absence of merriment and
indeed a prevailingly grim mood; HD 200-5. (4) The chanting of
obscene Iambic songs to promote fertility; Iambe's jokes make
Demeter smile, HD 200-4. (5) The terms used for Iambe are technical
terms associated with the festival and are used also by
Aristophanes and Pausanias with reference to festivals of
Demeter.
Thus, like the Hebrew psalms, the Hymn to Demeter was reLated to
« a libretto of the seasonal drama ».
With reference to such features as drought Gaster compares the
phraseology of the Hymn to Demeter, the Telepinus Myth, Joel I and
the Ugaritic Baal poem. He refers to the havoc caused by « the
abduction of Persephone and the grief of her mother Demeter »; but
in fact HD clearly emphasizes the wrath of the goddess, which is
also stressed in T elepinus and is obvious though not explicit in
Joel. In the Hittite T elepinus myth all nature begins to die when
Telepinus goes away in anger: «Cattle, sheep and men no longer
breed ... the trees dried up ... famine arose, so that man and gods
perished from hunger ... The Storm-god... (said) ... He has flown
into a rage and taken with him every good thing ». In the book of
Joel:
Oblation and libation have vanished from the house of Yahweh.
Wasted lie the fields, the fallow is in mourning. For the corn has
been laid waste, the wine fails the fresh oil dries up. (1:9 H.)
JB.
With these passages compare Hesiod Works and Days 242 H.: «The
son of Kronos makes the people suffer the misfortunes of famine and
plague at the same time ». A possible Canaanite reference is UT 75
II:45 (UMC 93; CML 73) where « the water-courses were parched
dry/for seven years El was filled [with wrathJ/and for eight
revolutions of time [with anger] ». (Driver's translation and
restoration). The thought world is that of HD where the absence of
the crops is also interpreted as a sign of divine anger 17.
17 Gordon's translation of mla by « is abundant» is not entirely
convincing in the context; Driver's « was filled» is more literal
(cf. UT Glossary s.v. ml'). The real justi-
-
118 P. Considine
In a Hittite Instruction for a Temple Official (ANET 208) the
destruction of crops is one element in the manifestation of a god's
anger:
If ... anyone arouses the anger of a god, does the god take
revenge on him alone? Does he not take revenge on his wife, his
children, his descendants, his kin, his slaves and slave girls, his
cattle (and) sheep, together with his crop, and will utterly
destroy him?
The Neo-Babylonian Sargon Chronicle says that because of
Sargon's irreverence « the great lord Marduk became enraged and
destroyed his people by hunger» (ANET 266) but the passage, though
interesting, is too late to be really important for the present
study.
b. Plague
Reference to the manifestation of divine wrath by means of a
plague is a natural enough accompaniment to accounts of destruction
of crops caused by divine anger. Such a reference is probably to be
seen in the Hittfte passage just quoted, and is explicit in other
Hittite texts. The Plague Prayer of Mursilis is a good example:
The Hatti Land was cruelly afflicted ... So I made the anger of
the gods the subject of an oracle.
(ANET 395)
fication for the restoration is that a seven-eight year period
of drought and deprivation is a commonplace in Ugaritic as well as
in other ANE-n literatures, and that it suits the context. Cf. 1
Aqht 42-4: (UMC 132; CML 59): «Seven years may Baal afflict thee /
Eight, the Rider of Clouds! Let there be no dew / Let there be no
rain». Cf. UT 49:V 7 ff. (UMC 85; CML 113).
The feature occurs in OT in Gen. 41: 17-31 (Pharaoh's dream of
the seven fat and seven thin cattle, interpreted by Joseph as seven
year cycles of plenty and famine respectively) and 2 Ki 8: 1-3
(
-
The Theme of Divine Wrath 119
Cf. ib.:
But since the Hattian Storm God is angry for that reason and
people are dying in the Hatti land ... because I humble myself ...
let the plague stop in the Hatti land!
Plague is also attributed to divine agency in a Ritual against
Pestilence (ANET 347).
In Numbers 11:33:
the anger of Yahweh blazed out against the people and Yahweh
killed many of the people with a severe plague.
In Numbers 14: 11 Yahweh says to Moses:
I will strike them with a plague, and disinherit them, and make
a larger and stronger nation from you.
No term for wrath is used, but it is clear that Yahweh is angry
with the people.
A clear Akkadianexample occurs in the probably eighth century
Prayer to Every God (ANET 391):
When the goddess was angry with me, she made me become ill.
In Iliad I 9-12 Apollo « was angry with the king for insulting
the priest Chryses, and afflicted the army with a plague, of which
many died ».
c. Storm and Fire
The part played by plague as a manifestation of divine wrath in
Hittite literature is largely, and perhaps f