The Fifty Names of

Marduk in Enuma elis

ANDREA SERI
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Enuma elis is one of the few Akkadian texts that are relatively well known beyond the
cryptic domain of the Assyriologist. The "popularity" of Enuma elis seems to relate, at
least in part, to one of its most transparent themes, namely, the creation of the universe. An
emphasis on the etiological aspect of the composition appears already in George Smith's
translation entitled The Chaldean Account of Genesis published in 1876, only some twenty
years after the official decipherment of cuneiform writing. In successive decades, other
scholars adopted Smith's title, if slightly modified, and variants such as The Babylonian
Genesis, The Poem of Creation, or The Epic of Creation are still frequent.'
Although early commentators concentrated on highlighting similarities and differences
between the Mesopotamian and the Biblical accounts of Genesis, it became apparent rela-
tively soon that the text served not only mythological motives but that it also had other reli-
gious, ideological, and political purposes (see Michalowski 1990: 383-84). The creation
story was thus the means to convey, proclaim, and justify the enthronement of Marduk as
Babylonia's main deity. The glorification of Marduk is so forceful that the poet has him
take over Enlil's role as head of the pantheon. This was achieved progressively throughout
the text, first by suggesting Marduk's righteous genealogy, then by presenting him as the
hero who defeated Tiamat and fashioned the universe, and finally by granting Marduk fifty
names. In this paper, I wish to address the structure of the section dealing with the fifty
names and its function within the poem as a whole.

GOD LISTS AND

THE FIFTY NAMES
The existence of certain affinities between Marduk's fifty names at the end of EnQma
elis and those attested in fragments of god lists was pointed out as early as 1902. Thus,
when Leonard W. King published The Seven Tablets of Creation, he incorporated fragments
of god lists that he considered pertinent for the reconstruction, comparison, and under-
standing of Marduk's names.^ And in the description of the contents of CT 25 (1909),
King suggested once again that certain god lists included in the volume might help to
restore the related broken lines of Enuma elis. Similarly, in his study of the fifty names
of Marduk, Franz Bohl (1936) also referred to these connections, in particular to the list

I wish to express my gratitude to Gary Beckman, Peter Machinist, Piotr Steinkeller, Irene Winter, and Norman
Yoffee for reading this paper and offering valuable comments. Special thanks are due Piotr Michalowski with whom
I had stimulating discussions about Enuma elis during a seminar that he offered at the University of Michigan in
1998.
1. See, for example, Bohl 1936: 191; Deimel 1912; Foster 1996: 350; Heidel 1942; Labat 1935 and 1959;
Lambert and Parker 1966; Talon 2005.
2. See in particular his Appendix One, "Assyrian Commentaries and Parallel Texts of the Seventh Tablet of the
Creation Series" (vol. 1, 158-81).

Journal ofthe American Oriental Society 126.4 (2006) 507

508 Journal of the American Oriental Society 126.4 (2006)

An : Anum. Years later, in his Yale doctoral thesis (1958), Richard Litke noticed that a
passage of the big god-list An : Anum could be compared with the fifty names of Enuma
elis. Litke rightly saw and briefly mentioned that Marduk's names in the second tablet of
An : Anum resemble those of Enuma elis, although the arrangement is slightly different
(Litke 1998: 89).
The connections between Enuma elis and An : Anum were finally brought into the
spotlight in the 1980s, when Walther Sommerfeld (1982: 175) resorted to this god list to
argue for a Kassite date of composition for Enuma elis.^ His claim, however, prompted
the response of Wilfred Lambert (1984: 3-4) in a review in which he defends the later
date that he had proposed twenty years earlier, i.e., the reign of Nebuchadnezzar I (see
Lambert 1964). Lambert maintains that rather than being borrowed from An : Anum,
the list of names in Enuma elis "is incorporated in toto (with a little rearrangement at the
beginning) from a triple-column god list" (Lambert 1984: 4).'* Thus, Lambert writes, there
are two god lists, "neither of which is demonstrably based on the other." It should be noted
that both Sommerfeld and Lambert focused the discussion on dating Enuma elis. Other
implications pertaining to the inclusion of a god list in a literary text have not been further
explored.^
I shall leave the hypothetical date of composition aside and stress the fact that Marduk's
multiple names were not the result of the composer's creative genius, but were taken from
already existing god Hst(s).^ In other words, the names were not conceived ad hoc to crown
Marduk's heroic deeds in Enuma elis. This does not imply, however, that the last part of the
sixth and the seventh tablets are a later addition missing from an alleged earlier version. On
the contrary, the originality of this section resides precisely in the technique of ingeniously
interweaving a rather dry string of names into a literary text. This builds on intertextuality,
a device consistently used throughout the poem, as will be discussed later. Naturally, the
choice of fifty names was not accidental, because fifty was Enlil's number. In the strict
sense, the ancestors, in Enuma elis, actually grant Marduk fifty-two names. The last two,
however, were not originally Marduk's: they are bel matati, Enlil's epithet, and Anu. These
two extra names are simply final bonuses, and they do not follow the pattern of the pre-
ceding list. It is worth remembering, after all, that at the beginning of the section, the gods
make clear their intention to bestow "fifty" names upon Marduk.^ Since in ancient Meso-
potamia divine names were traditionally compiled in lists, an examination of certain god
lists closely related to the names in Enuma elis is now necessary.

3. Sommerfeld's suggestion is based on that of his teacher, Wolfram von Soden. The Kassite period is one of
the three times of composition proposed for Enuma elis. The others are the Old Babylonian period (e.g., Jacobsen
1968: 107; Dalley 1997) and the reign of Nebuchadnezzar I (Lambert 1964). Most scholars today tend to favor
Lambert's interpretation that the text was composed no earlier than the later second millennium (e.g., Bottero 1975-
76; Michalowski 1990; Foster 1996; Machinist 2005).
4. The fragments of this list that Lambert mentions are CT 25 46-47 (K.7658 + 8222) and STC 1 165-66
(K.8519 and K. 13337).
5. For instance, in his detailed study of the tablets containing the commentary on the fifty names in parallel
with Enuma elis, Jean Bottero (1977) did not refer to god lists; this absence is also to be seen in his analysis of the
role of the fifty names in EnUma elis (Bottdro 1975-76: 106-13).
6. Although I am not entirely convinced by the explanation that Enuma eliS was composed to celebrate the return
of Marduk's statue, I acknowledge a later-second-millennium or even an early first-millennium date of composition.
7. i nim-be-e-ma ha-sd-a su-me-e-su "Let us proclaim his fifty names" (VI: 121).
 SERI: The Eifty Names of Marduk in Enuma elis 509

THE GOD LIST

AN :ANUM
The edition of An: Anum prepared by Litke ([1958] 1998) is a composite based on
several manuscripts. It has the Yale text (YBC 2401) as a matrix because, unlike the other
manuscripts, this contains the entire series. Marduk's names are recorded on the second
tablet from lines 185 to 235; the current edition of Tablet II is based on eighteen copies.^ In
spite of the multiple extant sources, some of the names are completely missing; others
preserve only certain signs and were restored from lists that do not seem to belong to the
same tradition.' Although the exact number of names in An : Anum is, therefore, not imme-
diately apparent, it is likely that there were some fifty-three and not fifty as in Enuma elis.
For example, the name Zi-"-ukkin appeared twice in An : Anum.'" It is first listed under
''Tu-tu in line 196, and again under ''Sa-zu in line 204, but it is attested only once in Enuma
ells. It is also evident that the preserved entries of An: Anum include names that do not
appear in the literary text, for instance, ''Mar-uruj-S'^tukul (1. 193) and ''Mu-"-[ku] (1. 201).
An: Anum is a two-column list that has the god's name on the left and either a brief
comment or the ditto sign on the right. Under Marduk's names the explanations in the
second column are written in both Sumerian and Akkadian. In the preserved lines Asal-lii-
hi is explained as dumu-sag Eridu-ga-ke4, "the first-bom child of Eridu" (1. 185); Nam-ru
is explained as Marduk .sa meti, "Marduk of the dead" (1. 187); Mer-sa-kus-ij has eziz u
mustal, "angry but deliberative" (1. 192); and finally Mar-uruj-S'^tukul is followed by abub
8'^tukul""=^, "Flood of weapons" (1. 193)." The names in the left column are arranged accord-
ing to meaningful groups, either classified by assonance or demarcated by the ditto sign,
which is clear from the fully preserved lines. For instance, the first name for Marduk is
Asallubi. The ditto signs indicate that Nam-ti-la and Nam-ru are related to the Asallufii group,
and Asar-ri, Asar-alim, and Asar-alim-nun-na share the first sign (Asar = Asal). Under the
second name, i.e., Marduk, the arrangement is by assonance: Marduk, Mer-sa-kus-su, Mar-
uruj-S'^tukul, Ma-ru-uk-ka, and Ma-ru-tu-uk-ka. The same general principle seems to rule the
arrangement of the names in Enuma ells.
This shows that both An: Anum and Enuma ells share most of the deity's names and
certain organizational principles. Nevertheless, the arrangement of names at the beginning
of the two lists is different. Thus:

8. These are A = YBC 2402; B = K.4349 (CT 24 20-50); C = K.4340+79-7-8, 294 (CT 24 1-2, 4-5, 9);
D = K.4333 (CT 24 2-3, 6-8, 10-11); E = VAT 10812 (KAV 50); F = K.12786 (CT 25 46); G = 2NT 349;
a = K.4338B (CT 24 19); aa = K.7662 (CT 25 7); ab = K.4339 (CT 25 9-14); ac = Bu.89-4-26, 77 (CT 25 28),
AO.5376 (TCL 15 25-31); and eme = Emesal list (MSL IV).
9. For example, the names from line 210 on are poorly preserved in the various duplicates of An : Anum.
They were restored by Litke from other Marduk lists such as Sm 78 + Sm 1078: 13 (CT 25 46), Sm 115 (CT 25 38),
and K 7558 (CT 25 46).
10. For the transliteration of Zi-"-ukkin and other names, I use the conventional " to indicate ditto, which was
written with the sign min.
11. For the name Asallutji, one manuscript has dumu-sag ''En-ki-ga-ke4 instead of Eridu-ga-ke4 (CT 24 12-17 =
K.4332, ii 64b). Marduk Sa meti has to be understood as "the one who brings the dead back to life" (e.g., Surpu IV:
99, Asatluhi sa ina tesu lii.ugj ibatlutu; Ee VI: 153 [Marduk] ina sit plka mitum iballut; and VII: 26 [Marduk] bet
Sipti elleti mubatlit miti). Mersaku§u eziz u mustal appears verbatim in Ee VI: 137. Although the name ''Mar-uruj-
S'^tukul is not in Enuma elis, a phrase that resembles part of the explanation appears in Ee VI: 125: S'Hukul-iu abubi,
"his Flood weapon."
510 Journal of the American Oriental Society 126.4 (2006)

An-Anum Enuma elis

line col. i col. ii line'2
185 "Asal-lu-bi ''Marduk 123 ''Marduk
185a dumu-sag Eridu-ga-ke4 133 ''Ma-ru-uk-ka
186 ''"Nam-ti-la ''Marduk 135 ''Ma-ru-tu-uk-ku
187 ''"Nam-ru " sd me-ti 137 ''Mer-sa-kus-u

188 dAsar"-™-ri 139 ''Lugal-dim-mer-an-ki-a

189 ''Asar-alim 143 ''Na-ri-lugal-dim-mer-an-ki-a

190 ''Asar-alim-nun-na 147 <'Asal-lu-hi

191 ''Marduk 151 ''Nam-ti-la

192 ''Mer-S^-kus-u " e-ziz u mus-tdl 155 ''Nam-ru
193 ''Mar-urUj-S'Hukul " a-bu-ub S'^tukul""^^ 1 ''Asar-ri
194 ''Ma-ru-uk-ka 3 ''Asar-alim
195 ''Ma-ru-tu-uk-ka 5 ''Asar-alim-nun-na

196 '•lU-tu 9 ''TU-tu

etc. etc.

In the passage of An : Anum there are thus three groups: the Asalluhi cluster, the Marduk
sequence arranged by assonance, and finally those names belonging to the Tutu group. In the
Enuma elis section, however, there are four groups: the Marduk sequence similarly arranged
by assonance, the name Lugaldimmerankia and its expansion Nari-lugaldimmerankia, the
Asalluhi cluster, and finally the Tutu names.
The beginning of the Marduk section in An : Anum seems to be perfectly consistent
with a certain hierarchical view of the Mesopotamian pantheon and with the ordering of
this list in general. The deity's most common name, Marduk in this case, is written in the
right column, and his other names are listed in the opposite left-hand column (see Lambert
1957: 475). The reason why Asallu^i appears as Marduk's first name in the left column
has to do with the fact that Marduk is listed right after Enki and his wife Damkina. As is
well known, in certain traditions Asallulii was the couple's son, and Asallu^i was assimi-
lated to Marduk, especially in magical contexts (see Lambert 1975a; Geller 1985). In An :
Anum, Asalluhi is then the name chosen to link Marduk with Enki and Damkina. This
also explains, I think, why the name Marduk and its phonological variants are listed after
Asalluhi.
Similarly, the arrangement of names in Enuma ells is neither arbitrary nor accidental.
It follows the order of names that the gods give to Marduk throughout the poem. Marduk
is his birth name that appears for the first time in tablet I: 81, Ina qe-reb Apsu Ib-ba-ni
Marduk, "Marduk was created in the midst of Apsu." The lead name of the next group is
Lugaldimmerankia, which the gods grant secondly to Marduk in tablet V: 112, Lugaldim-
merankia zik-ra-su su-a-su ti-ik-la-su, "Lugaldimmerankia is his name, trust in him!" And
Asallubi is the name that Marduk receives third in the body of the composition; thus VI:

12. Lines are those of tablets VI and VII. Since I completed this article before Talon's edition of Enuma elis
appeared (2005), I follow the text established and copied by Lambert and Parker (1996).
 SERI: The Eifty Names of Marduk in Enuma elis 511

101, u-Sd-tir An-sdr ''Asal-lu-lji it-ta-bi su-us-su, "Ansar gave him an additional name,
Asallul)i." The rest of the names seem to follow in general the arrangement of other similar
god lists.'3 In Enuma ells, therefore, Marduk bears first his birth name. He is then called
king of all the gods (Lugal-dim-mer-an-ki-a), which is followed by its Akkadian translation
bel Hani sa same u ersetlm, "king of the gods of heavens and earth." After his monarchic
name comes Asalluhi, an indirect reference to his paternal filiation. This allusion was cer-
tainly intended because Marduk's parents at the beginning of Enuma ells are Nudimmud
(Enki/Ea) and his wife Damkina (Ee I: 78-80). It is by now certain that Marduk's kingship
had become more important than his kinship.
This indicates that the list of names in Enuma elis was not a careless and later addition;
rather, certain names were arranged to suit the plot of the previous tablets. Another set of
anticipations reinforces this point. These are references, in connection with Marduk, to
the number fifty, to various of the fifty names, and to the act of naming itself. They can be
summarized as follows:

1. After Marduk was born, "fifty pulhatu ('awesomeness') were heaped upon him":
pul-ha-a-tu ha-sat-sl-na e-ll-su kdm-ra (I: 104).
2. The gods assign the name Lugaldimmerankia to Marduk (V: 112).
3. Marduk himself names the human being "man": lu-us-zlz-ma lul-la-a lu-ti a-me-lu
mu-su, "I shall make stand a human being; let 'Man' be its name" (VI: 6).
4. The number fifty is mentioned again in connection with the great gods celebrating the
creation of Esagila: dingir-dingir gal-gal ha-am-sat-su-nu u-sl-bu-ma, "The great gods,
fifty of them, took their seats" (VI: 80).
5. At this banquet, Anu assigns three names to Marduk's bow, im-bi-ma sa S'^ban ki-a-am
vmx'^^^-sa / i-su a-rik lu is-te-nu-um-ma sd-nu-u lu-u ka-sld / sal-su sum-sd mul ban Ina
an-e u-sd-pl, "He named the bow; these are its names: 'Longwood' shall be the first, the
second shall be 'May it be on target,' the third name 'Bow star,' he made visible in the
heavens" (VI: 88-90).
6. Ansar gives Marduk his third name, Asalluhi (VI: 101).
7. Finally, the gods announce their decision to grant Marduk fifty names right before these
are enumerated (VI: 121).

As can be seen, both the mention of Marduk's "fifty pulhatu" and the act of naming
foreshadow his fate: he will become the king of the gods. Although remarkable, the corre-
spondences of names in Enuma ells and An : Anum are not absolute. A significant differ-
ence between the two lists is that when an explanation follows the name in An : Anum, it is
very brief—no longer than two or three words. The explanations in Enuma ells are longer.
Their length varies from two up to twelve lines, as is the case with Nam-ru. Resemblances
with fragments of other god lists are even more apparent, as we will now see.

13. For instance, although fragmentary, CT 25 46 (Sm 78 + Sm 1078) preserves the sequence corresponding
roughly to names 17 to 27+ of Enuma elis, with differences similar to those of An : Anum. Thus, [''Zi-"]-ulckin fol-
lows [''§a]-zu (11. 4'-5'). Another fragment has those names listed in EnHma elis from 42 to 47 in the same order
(see CT 25 46 [K.7658]).
512 Journal of the American Oriental Society 126.4 (2006)

THE THREE-COLUMN
GOD LIST STC\: 165-66 + CT 25 46-47'"
This god list can currently be reconstructed, as far as I know, from four British Museum
fragments. The first has parts of the last seven lines of the obverse and parts of the ten initial
lines of the reverse {STC 1: 165 [K.8519]). The second is a very small fragment that includes
segments of eight lines which duplicate eight lines distributed on the first tablet over the
obverse and the reverse {STC 1: 166 [K. 13.337]). These fragments belong to the third col-
umn, and they have eight of Marduk's names, corresponding to numbers 37 through 44 of
Enuma elis. The third fragment is also very small and contains portions of six lines, with
only two columns distinguishable. It includes six of Marduk's names, from numbers 42
through 47 of Enuma ells (CT 52 46 [K.7658]). There is finally a bigger fragment that pre-
serves traces of three columns and 20 lines, of which the first ten contain six of Marduk's
names, corresponding to numbers 45 through 50 of Enuma ells (CT 25 47 [K.8222]). We
thus have the following reconstruction:

Col. i col. ii col. iii

1' [''Lugal-ib-duburj] [dingir min] [ ta\m-tim
2' [ x]-'^8'5tukur-me-ra
3' [''Pa4-gal-gu-en-na] [dingir min] [ ]'nap^-har be-lim
4' [ ]-a e-mu-qa-su
5' [''Lugal-dur-mal)] [dingir min] [ ] 'mar-kas^ dingir-mes be-el dur-ma-ffi
6' sd ina su-bat lugal-u-fi sur-bu-u
7' 'x^ dingir-mes ma-'-dls si-ru
8' [''A-rS-nun-na] [dingir min] ma-lik "^E-a ba-an dingir-me ad-me-.SH
9' [ ]-na[ a\-lak-ti ru-bu-ti-su
10' [ ]-mas-sd-lu dingir a-a-um-ma
lr [''Dumu-duj-ku] [dingir min] [ ] dug-kii u-ta-da-sii
12' [ ]-bat-su el-let
13' [ ] '^x^ la kuA-su ''lugal-duj-ku-ga
14' [''Lugal-su]-an-na [dingir min] [ ] sd-qa-a e-mu-qa-su
15' [''Ir-ug5]-gu dingir [min] [ ] 'su^-nu qir-bis tam-tim
16' [''Ir-kin]-gu dingir min [ ] a-bi-iS, me
17' [''Kin]-me'5 dingir min
18' [''E-sisJkurj dingir min sd sd-qis ina 6 lk-[
19' [''Bil]-gi (= Gibil) dingir min mu-kin a-sa-at[
20' tam-tim i-ban-[
21' [''Ad-du] dingir min sd kis-sat an-e[
22' ta-a-bu rig-ma[
23' [''A-54-ru] dingir min sd ki-ma slu
24' i-su-ru dingir-mes[
25' dingir min mul-.su sd ina an-e [

14. These references encompass four British Museum fragments: K.8519 and its duplicate K.13337 (STC 1:
165-66), plus K.7658 and K.8222 (CT 25 46-47). See Lambert (1984: 4). Note that Bohl (1936: 198) had already
pointed out K.8222 as an explanatory god list, "erklarende Gotterliste," important for the study of Marduk's fifty
names. Another well-known god list. An : Anu Sa ameli, is similarly laid out in three subcolumns. For the organi-
zational principles of this god list with commentary see Lambert (1975: 196).
15. The passage starting with Kin-me through Neberu is from CT 25 47 (K.8222). The tablet preserves the last
part of the first column, but the names are mostly unreadable. The names have therefore been reconstructed. After
the name Neberu, this fragment presumably continues to list more Marduk names. This seems to be the case because
we have dingir min after [Neberu] (from lines 11' to 20', numbered according to the extant lines on this fragment).
 SERI: The Eifty Names ofMarduk in Enuma elis 513

If we compare the explanations of the names of Marduk in this three-column god list
with those of Enuma elis, we can see that they are practically identical. Here I provide a
transliteration of those lines of Enuma eliS that correspond to the god list. To make the
comparison easier, the lines of the god list are intercalated. '^

Text line name #

EeVII 91 37 ''Lugal-ab-duburj lugal sa-pi-ih ep-set Ti-amat na-si-hu
God list l'-2' [''Lugal-ab-dubur2 ta]m-tim [ ]
EeVII 92 0 sd ina re-e-si u ar-ka-ti du-ru-us-sii ku-un-nu

EeVII 93 38 ''Pa4-gal-gu-en-na a-sd-red nap-har be-li sd sd-qa-a e-mu-qa-sii

God list 3'-4' [''Pa4-gal-gu-en-na ] 'nap^-har be-lim [ ]-a e-mu-qa-su
EeVII 94 0 sd ina dingir-dingir 5e5-5H sur-bu-u e-til nap-har-su-un

Ee VII 95 39 -mat) sar-ru mar-kas dingir-mes en diir-mah-hi

God list 5' [""Lugal-dur-mab ] 'mar^-kas dingir-mes be-el dur-malj-hi.
Ee VII 96 Sd ina su-bat lugal-fi sur-bu-u an dingir-dingir ma-'-dis si-ru
God list 6'-7' Sd ina Su-bat lugal-ii-r/ Sur-bu-u '\^ dingir-mes ma-'-diS si-ru

Ee VII 97 40 ''A-ra-nun-na ma-lik ''E-a ba-an dingir-mes ad-mes-™

God list 8' [••A-rS-nun-na] ma-lik ''E-a ba-an dingir-me ad-me-™
Ee VII 98 Sd a-na a-lak-ti ru-bu-ti-Sii la li-maS-Sd-lu dingir a-a-um-ma
God list 9'-10' [ ]-na\ a\-lak-ti ru-bu-ti-Sii [ ]-maS-.Sd-lu dingir a-a-um-ma

EeVII 99 41 ••Dumu-duj-ku sa ina dug-kti u-ta-ad-da-Su Su-bat-su el-let

God list ir-12' [''Dumu-duj-ku ] duj-ku u-ta-da-Sii [ ybat-su el-let
Ee VII 100 "•Dumu-duj-ku Sd ba-li-Su es-bar la i-par-ra-su ''Lugal-duj-ku
God list 13' 1 ] la kud-.rM ''Lugal-duj-ku-ga

EeVII 101 42 •'Lugal-su-an-na iar-ru ra ma dingir-dingir Sd-qa-a e-mu-qd-a-Su

God list 14' [''Lugal-su]-an-na [ ] Sd-qa-a e-mu-qa-Sii
EeVII 102 0 be-lum e-muq ^A-nim Sd Su-tu-ru ni-bu-ut an-Sdr

EeVII 103 43 •'Ir-ugs-ga Sd-til gim-ri-Sii-nu qir-biS Ti-amat

God list 15' [""Ir-ugjl-gu [ ]-Su-nu qir-biS tam-tim
EeVII 104 0 Sd nap-har uz-ni ih-mu-mu ha-si-sa pal-ki

EeVII 105 44 "Ir-kin-gu sa'-///""kin-gu a-bi-iS ta-ha-zi

God list 16' [''Ir-kin]-gu [ ]a-bi-iS^mh

EeVII 106 0 mut-tab-bil te-ret nap-ha-ri mu-kin en-ii-ti

EeVII 07 45 "Kin-ma mu-ma-'-ir nap-har dingir-dingir na-din mil-ki

God list 7'
EeVII 08 0 Sd a-na Su-me-Su dingir-mes gin, me-lje-e i-Sub-bu pal-hiS

EeVII 09 46 ''E-siskur2 Sd-qiS ina e ik-ri-bi li-Sib-ma

God list 8' ["•El-siskurj sa' Sd-qiS ina e /*-[ ]
EeVII 100 dingir-dingir mah-ri-Su li-Se-ri-bu kat-ra-sti-un
EeVII 11 0 a-di i-rib-Sii-nu i-malj-lia-ru-ni
EeVII 120 ma-am-man ina ba-li-Sii la i-ban-na-a nik-la-a-te
EeVII 130 er-ba sal-mat sag-du bi-na-tuS-Su
EeVII 140 la i-ad-da dingir ma-am-man

16. For the sake of clarity, I have separated each of Marduk's names with dotted lines.
514 Journal ofthe American Oriental Society 126.4 (2006)

EeVII 115 47 ""Gibil (= bil-gi) mu-kin a-sa-at

God list 19' [""Bin-gi mu-kin a-sa-at [ ]
EeVII 116 Sd ina mfe Ti-amat i-ban-na-a nik-la-a-ti
God list 20' [ ] tam-tim i-ban-[ ]
EeVII 117 0 pal-ka uz-ni et-pe-Sd Ija-si-sa
EeVII 1180 lib-bu ru-ii-qu Sd i-lam-ma-du dingir-dingir gim-ras-su-un

EeVII 119 48 ""Ad-du lu-u Sum-Su kiS-Sat an-e li-rim-ma

God list 21' [••Ad-du] Sa kiS-Sat an-e [ ]
EeVII 120 ta-a-bu rig-ma-Su ugu ki-fi'm li-ir-ta-si-in
God list 22' ta-a-bu rig-ma [ ]
EeVII 121 0 mu-um-mu er-pe-e-ti liS-tak-si-ba-am-ma
sap-US a-na un-meS te-'-ii-ta lid-din

EeVII 122 49 •'A-s^-ru Sd ki-ma Su-mi-Su-ma i-Su-ru dingir-me§ nam-me§

God list 23'-24' ["iA-S^-ru] Sd ki-ma S[u- ] i-Su-ru dingir-meS [ ]
EeVII 123 0 kul-lat kal un-mes Sii-u tu-ii pa-qid

EeVII 124 0 50 ^N€-be-ru ne-be-re-et an-e u ki-tim lu-ii ta-me-eh-ma

EeVII 125 0 e-lis it sap-liS la ib-bi-ru li-qi-'u-Su Sd-a-Su
EeVII 126 ^Ne-be-ru maX-sii Sd ina an-e li-Sd-pu-u
God list 25' [''N6-b6-ru] mul-s'rf Sd ina an-e [ ]
EeVII 127 0 lu-a sa-bit kun-sag-gi Su-nu Sa-a-Su lu-ii pal-su-Su

As this score shows, there are only minimal variations in certain lines, mostly pertaining
to the use of different signs. '^ For instance, in EnUma eliS, tahdzu is written syllabically
and in the god list with the logogram me (Ee 105 ~ god list 16'); the god list usually has
me for the Sumerian plural while Enuma eliS has mes (Ee 97 ~ gl 8')- There is also a dif-
ference in the use of mimation, thus beli vs belim (Ee 93 ~ gl 3'-4'). And most interestingly,
the god list consistently has tamtim {tam-tim) where Enuma eliS has Tiamat (Ee 91, 103,
116 ~ gl r , 15', 20'). In view of the very few variations, the last example seems to be a pur-
poseful substitution intended to tum the noun tdmtum into the name of Marduk's enemy,
Tiamat, which is but the absolute form of that noun with uncontracted vowel sequence.
Another significant difference is the length of the explanations following the names of
Marduk. As mentioned earlier, those of Enuma eliS tend to be longer than the comments of
the god list. On the score I have marked the lines of Enuma eliS that are absent from the
god list with 0. Thus we find that there are names in Enuma eliS followed by two lines of
explanation where only the first line copies the full text of the god list (names 37, 38, 42,
43, 44, 45, and 49). But two lines of explanation can also be followed by copies of the
corresponding lines from the god list (names 39, 40, and 41). In one case, Enuma eliS has
three lines of explanation, while only the first two are found in the god list (name 48). Yet
in another, the literary text has four lines and the god list only the first two (name 47). And
the section with the name E-siskur2 consists of six lines, but only the first is attested in the
god list. The case of the last name, Neberu, is interesting because, contrary to the previous
instances, the line from the god list is not copied right after the name of the god in Enuma
eliS, but after the third line. '^

17. Philippe Talon's new edition of Enuma eliS (2005) has STC 1 165 (K.8519) as one of the manuscripts for
the seventh tablet; therefore, he includes the readings of this fragment as variants. It is my view that STC 1 165 is
a god list, and as a result those diiferent readings are not variants of Enuma eliS in the strict sense.
18. It is not clear to me whether we should read this name as Neberu in Sumerian, intended to be a continuation
of the previous list, or as Neberu in Akkadian, meant to suggest a rupture with the Sumerian names.
 SERI: The Eifty Names ofMarduk in Enuma eH§ 515

This three-column list, at least in the fragments known to me, preserves those names
listed in Enuma eliS from number 37 through 50 in exactly the same order. This fact, together
with the verbatim repetition of the explanations that follow the names, makes this—or a very
similar—list a strong candidate for being the text from which the fifty names of Enuma elis
were drawn. Nevertheless, .identifying the original source is, for the purpose of my argu-
ment, of little relevance. Marduk's name in Enuma eliS—as well as others not included—
were available in the form of lists with or without explanations, either in a similar or in a
different arrangement. For instance, STC 2 (plates Ixi and Ixii) contains two fragments of a
tablet (K.2107 + K.6068). The reverse has a list of temples while the obverse includes
some of Marduk's names in the left column and their explanations on the right (see STC 1:
171). In this list, certain names that also appear in EnUma eliS have a different arrangement,
and there are others in the list that were left out of Enuma eliS. Even the three-column list
{STC 1: 165-66 + CT 25 46-47) that closely parallels Enuma eliS seems to contain other
Marduk names following Neberu. '^ After all, of the many names of Marduk in circulation,
only fifty were needed to grant Enlil-ship to the new hero of the gods.^"

INTERTEXTUALITY
IN ENUMA ELIS
When we look at it in perspective, the inclusion of a god list at the end of Enuma eliS
should not come as a surprise. All of the previous tablets abound in examples of intertex-
tuality borrowed from Akkadian and Sumerian traditions (Foster 1996; 26). In Enuma elis
allusions to other texts are both general and specific. A variety of traditional literary motives
can be traced, for instance, the presence of a mother goddess, the battle of the gods, fighting
with spells, the whereabouts of the tablet of "destinies," the master plans and tricks of Enki/
Ea, the creation of the world, and the creation of the primeval human being {lullu) from the
blood of a god slaughtered for the purpose. The creation of lullii undoubtedly brings Atra-
hasls to the reader's mind, but of course the reader knows that there is a new twist in the
plot. In Enuma eliS, it is Ea who creates lullu, although the original idea is Marduk's; the
event has thus been slightly altered to exalt Marduk's role. Other passages are consciously
based on Anzii and incorporate other items of the Ninurta tradition as well (Lambert 1985).
Similarly, the opening section of the fifth tablet of Enuma eliS closely parallels certain lines
of the astrological omen series Enuma Anu Enlil (Landsberger and Kinnier-Wilson 1961:
172). What is more important, Peter Machinist (2005) has recently argued that intertextuality
is deliberate, because it is meant to be recognized as a fundamental part of the poetics of
Enuma elis.
The god list that served as the basis for Marduk's fifty names has been skillfully woven
into the text. The columnar arrangement of god lists was omitted in Enuma elis, and thus
this section looks exactly like the rest of the composition, concealing its origins. Never-
theless, certain clues reveal the source, such as the use of the ditto sign after the name of
the god. There is, moreover, the use of ordinal numbers to establish the connections in a
sequence of names. That is the case, for instance, in the Asallujji group. Here each name is

19. As mentioned in note 15, it is possible that the names after [Neberu] refer to Marduk. However, the eolumn
bearing the names is broken, and only the explanations are preserved.
20. If we were to collect the names and epithets scattered in different lists, it is clear that there were many more
than fifty names for Marduk. Note, for instance, that tablet VII (II. 1-66) of An : Anum contains over 60 names for
this god that are different from those listed in tablet II.
516 Journal ofthe American Oriental Society 126.4 (2006)

separated by several lines of text and—without the visual aid of the column arrangement—
Enuma eliS explains the relation among names as follows:

VI: 147 ''Asal-lu-hi mu-.SH Sd im-bu-u a-bu-Sii M-num

VI: 151 ''Asal-lu-hi ''Nam-ti-la Sd-nis im-bu-u dingir muS-neS-Su
VI: 155 dingir min ''Nam-ru Sd in-na-bu-u Sal-sis ma-Su

Asalluhi is the first name of the group, then the text explains that Asalluhi is "secondly"
{SaniS) Namtila, and Namru is connected by means of the ditto sign (min) and the ordinal
"thirdly" {SalSiS).
Furthermore, the choice of a god list with explanations to close the composition carries
further complexities because this kind of list displays certain features of lexical texts beyond
the mere arrangement of names, and these features are accordingly to be found in the list of
Marduk's names in Enuma eliS.^^ Thus, besides the frequent use of associated pairs, there
is the translation of Sumerian words into Akkadian, a device characteristic of bilingual lists,
for example, e-siskurj followed by the translation bit ikribi, "house of prayer" (VII: 109).
This is also the case with the use of thematic associations such as hyponyms, associated
pairs, synonyms, and antonyms in lines of Enuma eliS not preserved in the fragments of the
three-column god list known to me. Thus, under the name '*Zi-ku we find mu-Sab-si si-im-ri
u ku-bu-ut-te-e mu-kin he-gal (VII: 21), where the term simru ("wealth"), kubuttu ("abun-
dant wealth"), and hegallu ("abundance") are hyponyms, i.e., words that belong to the
larger class of a generic category.
Most interesting is the fact that from the preserved lines of the three-column god list
one gets the impression that certain episodes of Enuma eliS have been drawn from the
explanations of the god list. This is not an innovation, for lexical lists had already inspired
the composition of literary texts, as Miguel Civil (1987) has shown (see also Veldhuis
1998: 82-84). Aside from the praise of Marduk, specific events taken from the god list
include: the defeat of Tiamat and disarming her of her weapon (iii: \'-2'); the slaughter of
Kingu (iii: 16'); the creation of skillful things as a consequence of Marduk's victory over
Tiamat (iii: 20'); and the positioning of Neberu mentioned in tablet V: 6 (iii: 25').^^ In a
few instances one may even suspect a closer connection, for some lines of the god list seem
to have made their way into previous tablets of Enuma elis. Thus the use of related words
from the god list seems to be present in tablet V: 59, when Marduk ties Tiamat's tail to the
durmahhu, the link that unites heaven and earth. In this instance the god list has markas
and durmahhi, while tablet V: 59 has durmahhiS and urakkis, that is, both feature the noun
durmahhu and another term derived from the root r k s. A. similar case occurs with the
explanation of the name Gibil (Ee VII: 116 ~ gl 20'), where the clause ibannd nikldti, "he
(Marduk) can create ingenious things," also appears to be related to the defeat of Tiamat in
tablet IV: 136. This is most likely a play of borrowing within borrowings.^-'

21. For the organizational principles of lexical lists, see Martha Roth's (1985: 135-42) clear and systematic
classification.
22. The references in parentheses correspond to the column and line numbers of the three-column god list
STC 1: 165-66 + CT 25 46-47.
23. Although not in the available fragments of the three-column list, I suspect that Marduk's thirty-fourth name
Mummu is also derived from the god list. Interestingly enough, another three-column list (STC 2, plates Ixi-lxii
[K.2107 + 6068]) has the name ''Tuj-tUj, which could be read mu7-mu7, the Sumerian word for "noise." This fits
nicely into Michalowski's (1990) analysis of mummu and, as posited above, it might further strengthen the argu-
ment that the composition of Enuma eliS was inspired by the god list.
 SERI: The Eifty Names ofMarduk in Enuma elis 517

These selected examples indicate, I believe, that intertextuality in Enuma eliS is far-
reaching. Naturally, a thorough enumeration of intertextual examples would be far beyond
the scope of this section. For the sake of brevity, suffice it to say that Enuma eliS includes
allusions to a variety of traditional genres and motives as well as literary conventions.
These encompass etiological myths, epic stories, phraseology from omen literature, royal
inscriptions, hymns, prayers, cosmological topics, literary devices of lexical lists, god
list(s), and putative genealogies.

THE ROLE OF THE FIFTY NAMES IN THE POEM:

NAMES REPLACE GENEALOGY

The very first eighty-five lines of Enuma e/w contain the clues for understanding the role
of the fifty names as well as the way in which the exaltation of Marduk will be accom-
plished. First, there is the mention of the lack of names in the opening line: Enuma eliS Id
nabu Samdmu, "When above heaven had not been named." And the absence of names appears
again in the following line. This betrays from the outset the intention to create a circular
account, because the beginning lacks what abounds at the end. Immediately following, from
the third through the seventeenth line, there is a genealogy. This includes pairs and their
descendants, namely, Apsu and Tiamat, Lahmu and Lafeamu, Ansar and Kisar, the unpaired
Anu, and finally Nudimmud (Enki/Ea). Next, Nudimmud is praised above his forebears: He
is wise, strong, and unrivaled among his ancestors. Genealogy is then interrupted by a pas-
sage that introduces the confiict. This encompasses the gods disturbing Tiamat with their
noise, Ea's killing of Apsu, and his subsequent creation of his dwelling upon Apsu. At this
point, the genealogy is resumed and completed, because Marduk is born to Ea and his wife
Damkina in the midst of Apsu. Marduk is then praised even more than his father. In this
genealogy, the great absent figure is, of course, Enlil, who is played down by being com-
pletely ignored. He will appear later to give Marduk his own epithet, bel mdtdti, personally.
Thus a relatively short passage not only introduces the important characters and the
plot's confiict, but it also lays out the positive qualities of the future hero. It shows that
Marduk was the son of the most outstanding god, Ea, and that his grandfather was none
other than Anu. Marduk's identity is thus established by means of ancestry. After this,
however, Marduk—as would any successful Mesopotamian king—seeks out fame by un-
dertaking heroic deeds. He volunteers as the champion of the gods, requesting the special
powers that enable him to defeat Tiamat. As if this were not enough, he creates the heavens
and earth out of his rival's corpse. At this point, the last portion of tablet four mirrors Ea's
deeds in the first tablet. Marduk establishes dwelling places in the enemy's body, as Ea had
done before him, but Marduk does this in a grandiose way, superseding his father. He then
proceeds to fashion the stars, the planets, and the rest of the universe.
The exaltation of Marduk has several stages. He has the right ancestry and successfully
undertakes heroic deeds. Both facts convey the ideal background of a Mesopotamian ruler.
But additionally he becomes a demiurge, and this obviously places him far above his human
counterparts. This progression moves from kinship to kingship. The transition is expressed
in such a manner that the ultimate caesura is unambiguous. This is presented in the shape
of an address to the Igigi-gods: "Previously Marduk was our beloved son / Now he is your
king" (V: 109-10). The gods further bestow upon him his second name, Lugaldimmerankia,
"king of the gods of heaven and earth."
The stages taken to develop the exaltation of Marduk and his preeminent role in the pan-
theon convey, I believe, yet another intertextual allusion. The circular structure of the story.
518 Journal of the American Oriental Society 126.4 (2006)

the putative genealogy at the beginning, the undertaking of heroic deeds to establish name
and reputation, and the transmission of those deeds are all present in one of Mesopotamia's
best known stories: the Standard Babylonian "epic" of Gilgame§. From the beginning, Gil-
games is presented as the son of Lugalbanda and the goddess Ninsun, two-thirds god and
one-third human. He decides to undertake heroic deeds and seeks advice from the elders
arid the young men of Uruk. Gilgames aims at immortality like Uta-napistim, while Marduk
aspires to become Enlil. In his search for fame, Gilgames kills the innocent Qumbaba,
whose role had been to protect the Forest of Cedar, and Marduk kills Tiamat, who was
legitimately avenging the murder of Apsu. Whereas Gilgames fails, Marduk succeeds.
Finally, both Gilgames's and Marduk's deeds are meant to be transmitted to future genera-
tions. Gilgames's travails were recorded and enshrined in a foundation deposit in the wall
of Uruk, and the narrator invites his audience to read out from a lapis-Iazuli tablet the story
of the king of Uruk. Similarly, Marduk's story and names were written on seven tablets,
and the narrator urges future generations to remember, study, transmit, and repeat those
names. ^"^
The enumeration of the fifty names occupies a considerable portion of the sixth and
almost the entirety of the seventh tablet. The names are strategically listed at the end of the
composition in order to celebrate Marduk's greatness and to install him unequivocally as
the head of the Babylonian pantheon. But having the names at the very end is also intended,
I think, to highlight the contrast with the first tablet. It further implies that towards the end
of Enuma eliS Marduk's genealogical filiation becomes less relevant because by defeating
Tiamat and creating the universe he is able to establish a reputation for himself. It is in this
sense that names replace genealogy. But here the composer plays yet another of his tricks,
because, as Lambert (1975b) has convincingly shown, the list of ancestors in the first tablet
was fashioned after the genealogical tradition of god lists.

REFERENCES
Bohl, E M. Th. 1936. Die funfzig Namen des Marduk. AfO 11: 191-218.
Bott^ro, J. 1975/76. Antiquit6s Assyro-Babyloniens. Annuaire 1975-6de I'Ecole Pratique des Hautes
Etudes IV Section, pp. 70-126.
. 1977. Les noms de Marduk, l'ecriture et la "logique" en M6sopotamie ancienne. In Essays
on the Ancient Near East in Memory of J. Finkelstein, ed. M. de Jong Ellis. Memoires of the Con-
necticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, vol. 19. New Haven: Archon Books. Pp. 5-28.
Civil, M. 1987. Feeding Dumuzi's Sheep: The Lexicon as a Source of Literary Inspiration. In Language,
Literature, and History: Philological and Historical Studies Presented to Erica Reiner, ed. E Roch-
berg-Halton. New Haven: American Oriental Society. Pp. 37-55.
Dalley, S. 1997. Statues of Marduk and the Date of Enuma elis. AfO 24: 163-71.
Deimei, A. 1912. Enuma elis: epos babylonicum de creatione mundi. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute.
Eoster, B. R. 1996. Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature. 2nd edition. Bethesda,
Md.: CDL Press.
Geller, M. 1985. Forerunners to Udug-hul: Sumerian Exorcistic Incantations. Wiesbaden: Eranz
Steiner Verlag.
Heidel, A. 1942. The Babylonian Genesis, the Story of Creation. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Jacobsen, Th. 1968. The Battle between Marduk and Tiamat. JAOS 88: 104-8.

24. This passage reads: "With the name 'Fifty' the great gods / Proclaimed him whose names are fifty and made
his way supreme, / Let them be kept in mind and let the elder (scholar) explain them. / Let the wise and the intelligent
discuss them together, / Let the father repeat them and thus instruct his son, / Let them he known by the shepherd
and the herdsman" (VII: 143-48). The translation is by Michalowski (1990: 394-95).
 SERI: The Eifty Names ofMarduk in Enuma elis 519

King, L. W. 1902. The Seven Tablets of Creation, or the Babylonian and Assyrian Legends concerning
the Creation ofthe World and of Mankind. 2 vols. London: Luzac and Co.
. 1909. Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, part 25. London:
The British Museum.
Labat, R. 1935. Le poeme babylonien de la creation. Paris: Librarie d'Amerique et d'Orient.
. 1959. Les origins et la formation de la terre dans le poeme babylonien de la cr6ation. AnBi
12: 205-15.
Lambert, W. G. 1957. "Gotterlisten." RIA 3: 473-79.
. 1964. The Reign of Nebuchadnezzar I: A Turning Point in the History of Ancient Meso-
potamian Religion. In The Seed of Wisdom: Essays in Honor of T. J. Meek, ed. W. McCullough.
Toronto: Univ. of Toronto Press. Pp. 3-13.
_. 1975a. The Historical Development of the Mesopotamian Pantheon: A Study of Sophisti-
cated Polytheism. In Unity and Diversity: Essays in History, Literature and Religion ofthe Ancient
Near East, ed. H. Goedicke and J. Roberts. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press. Pp. 191-200.
_. 1975b. The Cosmology of Sumer and Babylon. In Ancient Cosmologies, ed. C. Blacker
and M. Loewe. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd. Pp. 42-63.
. 1984. Studies in Marduk. BSOAS IA: 1-9.
_. 1985. Ninurta Mythology in the Babylonian Epic of Creation. In Keilschriftliche Literaturen,
Ausgewalte Vortrage der XXXIP Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Munster, 8.—12.7.1985,
ed. K. Hecker and W. Sommerfeld. Berlin: Detrich Reimer Verlag. Pp. 55-60.
_, and S. Parker. 1966. EnUma elis. The Babylonian Epic of Creation: The Cuneiform Text.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Landsberger, B., and J. Kinnier Wilson. 1961. The Eifth Tablet of Enuma elis. JNES 20: 154-79.
Litke, R. 1998. A Reconstruction of The Assyro-Babylonian God-Lists, An: ''A-nu-um and An: Anu sa
ameli. New Haven: Yale Babylonian Collection.
Machinist, P. 2005. Order and Disorder: Some Mesopotamian Reflections. In Genesis and Regenera-
tion: Essays on Conceptions of Origins, ed. S. Shaked. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and
Humanities. Pp. 31-61.
Michalowski, P. 1990. Presence at the Creation. In Lingering over Words: Studies in Ancient Near
Eastern Literature in Honor of William Moran, ed. T. Abusch et al. Atlanta: Scholars Press. Pp.
381-96.
Roth, M. 1985. The Series An-ta-gal = saqu. In The Series Erim-hus = anantu and An-ta-gdl = saqu,
ed. M. Civil and E. Reiner. MSL, vol. 17. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute. Pp. 131-259.
Sommerfeld, W. 1982. Der Aufstieg Marduks. AOAT 213. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag.
Talon, P. 2005. The Standard Babylonian Creation Myth Enuma elis. Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text
Corpus Project.
Veldhuis, N. 1998. TIN.TIN = Babylon, the Question of Canonization and the Production of Meaning.
JCS 50: 77-85.