William Bousset, The Antichrist Legend
ORIGIN OF THE BABYLONIAN DRAGON MYTH.
“Tt may be safely afifirmed that no popular myth — can compare with that of the Antichrist legend in general interest, widespread diflfusion, and persistence,
from a hoar antiquity down to the present time.
In the present work, which deals mainly with the early Christian and media3val aspects of the subject, no attempt is made to trace the origin of the saga much farther back than about the dawn of the new era.
But the author leaves no doubt on the mind -of the reader that he regards it not
merely as a pre-Christian tradition quite independent of the New Testament writings, but as prior even to the oldest of the Old Testament records themselves.
From many passages it is evident that he is in full accord with Gnnkel, whose canons of interpretation he adopts, and whose views regarding the ultimate Babylonian source of the myth he implicitly accepts, though of course not in all their details.
Thus Gunkel’s reference of the mystic number 666 to the “primeval monster” (p. 11) is for obvious reasons rightly rejected, and a complete reconstruction of the old Babylonian legend by the aid of S. John’s Eevelation is declared to be opposed to all evidence, and consequently to be ” nothing more than a piece of pure fancy work.”
But on the other hand it is clearly implied that the Antichrist legend is nothing less than a later anthropomorphic transformation of the Babylonian Dragon myth, which is ” doubtless one of the earliest evolved by primitive man” (p. 13).
And although Gunkel may have exaggerated the influence of this legend on the New Testament writers, he is none the less declared to have done a real service by following up the after-effects of the Dragon myth ” to its last echoes in the New Testament” (p. 13).
My own attention was first attracted to this subject by the stimulating writings of Mr. Andrew Lang, and I was struck in a special manner by the theory, now almost become an axiom amongst folklorists, that the elucidation of the widely diffused mythologies of cultured peoples is to be sought, not in later ” solar myths ” or in literary influences of any kind but rather in the beliefs and traditions of our rnder
forefathers, of uncultured peoples, and possibly of primitive man himself.
This theory, it seems to me, receives a brilliant confirmation from the early history of the legend under consideration—a legend which may without exaggeration be said to link together some of the very oldest reminiscences of struggling humanity
with its aspirations for a better future (the Millennium) and its forebodings of the final consummation (the Last Judgment).
At least this much may be said, that Gunkel’s views regarding the evolution of the
Antichrist legend from the Dragon myth have been greatly strengthened by the results of recent studies in the hitherto almost unexplored field of early Babylonian folklore.
In Mr. Th. G. Pinches’ Religious Ideas of the Babylonians we plainly see how the myth of Tiamat, “the Dragon of Chaos,” prevalent amongst the Akkadian founders of Babylon and by them transmitted to the later Assyrian Semites, is the very
first and oldest element in the current mythologies of those ancient peoples.
At the same time this primeval dragon presents so many features in common
with the dragon of Revelation, as well as of the independent Antichrist legend, that the descent of ne from the other can scarcely any longer be denied.
All the more readily may the identification be accepted, when such obvious connecting links are afforded as may be drawn from the Books of Daniel and of Enoch, and even from many passages
in the prophets and other earlier biblical writings.
The parallelism between dragon and serpent is too close to need discussion, while the intimate association of the Hebrew writers with their Assyrian kinsfolk is
attested by such common popular names as Marduka (Mardochai),Shama’-ilu (Samuel), Ishm^-ilu (Ishmael), Mutu-sha-ili (Methusael), Gamal-ili (Gamaliel), and many others.
Ninip, the deity who, according to the Tell-el-Amarna tablets, was worshipped at Jerusalem before the advent of the Israelites, seems to have been identified with many gods, amongst others with Bel mätäti, ” Lord of the Lands,” this, as Mr. Pinches tells us (p. 17), being one of the titles of Merodach.
But Merodach himself (Amar-uduk, ” Brightness of the Day”) was the chief deity of the Babylonian pantheon, though not the father or the oldest of the ods.
In fact he was originally only the son of fia or Ae, king of the underworld, and acquired the place of eminence by his triumph over Mummu-Tiamat, the Dragon of Chaos, who is not distinguishable from the Kirbish-Tiawat associated with the ” Bel and the Dragon” myth.
In the Semitic account of the creation this Tiamat or Tiawat (both words meaning the ” sea “) is represented as presiding over the waste of waters in a time of disorder and confusion prior to the creation of Lahmu and Lahamu, of Anshar and Kishar, of Ann and the other gods of the heavens and the earth.
Then comes a period of strife between the primordial chaos and the established order.
Tiawat rises in rebellion against the gods, and arms herself (she is always represented as a female monster, the prototype of the scarlet woman of Babylon) with formidable weapons for the straggle. ”
I have collected unrivalled weapons—the great serpents are hostile (they war on her side)—sharp-toothed also, and I have made them relentless.
I have filled their bodies with poison like blood.
I have clothed dreadful monsters with terrors—fearful things I have set up and left
on high—scorpion-men, fish-men—wielding weapons, ruthless, fearless in battle,” and so on, in strains that recall the descriptions of the combatants in the Old
English poem of Beowulf.
In the first encounters the gods are worsted ; Anu, god of the heavens, avails not ; Eä himself trembles and, in prosaic language, runs away.
Then there appears to be a gathering of the gods, in which Ea’s son, Merodach, boldly offers to come to the rescue.
He also arms himself for the fight with formidable weapons, with spear, bow, and arrows ; he flashes lightning before him, fills his body with darting fiames ; and sets his net to catch and entangle the evil one.
She cries out in her rage, utters spells and charms, but is overthrown, and Chaos being thus ended, Merodach orders the world anew, and in gratitude for his great deeds lie is proclaimed king of the gods.
And the Assyrian text goes on:
As he tirelessly thwarted Kirbish-Tiawat,
Let his name be Nibu^u, seizer of Kirbish-Tiawat.
May he restrain the paths of the stars of heaven.
Like sheep let him pasture the gods, all of them.
May he imprison the sea [tiawat], may he remove and
store up its treasure,
For the men to come, in days advanced (i&., p. 6). ~William Bousset, The Antichrist Legend, Page xi- xvi
