THE BABYLONIAN STORY OF THE CREATION. 21 



there is no real statement that Apason was the husband of 

 Tiamthu, though this may be regarded as impHed, and the fact 

 comes out more clearly — though not so clearly as might be 

 wished — in the second tablet. In the succeeding tablets of the 

 series, however, the husband of Tiamthu bears an entirely 

 different name, but whether this indicate the same or a diff erent 

 mythological personage, is not known. 



In Dache and Dachos, it is easy to see that there has been 

 a confusion between the Greek letters Delta and Lambda, which 

 so closely resemble each other. Dache and Dachos should 

 therefore be corrected to Lache and Lachos (as has been often 

 pointed out by the Assyriologists who have preceded me) the 

 Lahmu and Lahamu (better Lahwu and Lahawu), of the 

 Babylonian text These deities were the male and female 

 personifications of the heavens, and are mentioned, in the lists, 

 with Anu and Anatu, the god and goddess of the heavens, 

 though in what these two groups of names differed (for they 

 must have differed in some way) is at present uncertain. 

 Ansara and Kisara are the Syrian author's Assoros and 

 Kisare, the meaning of which, according to the bilingual 

 inscriptions, should be " Host of Heaven " and " Host of Earth " 

 respectively. The three proceeding from them, Ano, Illinos, 

 and Aos, are Anu, the god of the heavens, Ellila, the god Bel in 

 Akkadian (afterwards identified with Merodach), and Aa or Ea, 

 the god of the waters, the deep, and of unsearchable wisdom. 

 This deity was the husband of Damkina (better, perhaps, 

 Dawkina), the Dauke of Damascius. From these last, as he 

 says (and the tablets confirm this statement), Belos, i.e., Bel- 

 Merodacb, was born, and if this last deity did not "fabricate 

 the world," he at least ordered it anew, after his great fight with 

 the Dragon of Chaos, as we shall see when dealing with the 

 other tablets of the series. 



What will in all probability strike many of my audience is 

 the remarkable correctness of the statements of the ancient 

 author whom I have quoted. Evidently he was quoting a 

 document w^ith which he was well acquainted. It forms part 

 of the mass of material contained in his work entitled Doubts 

 and Sohdions of the first Principles. As this author, who was 

 a Syrian of Damascus, lived at the end of the fifth and the 

 beginning of the sixth century of the present era, the question 

 as to the source of his information is not without interest. It 

 is stated that the well-known temple tower at Borsippa, near 

 Babylon, was as late as the fourth century still a place of 

 Babylonian worship, the old rites and ceremonies being even at 



