Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1018RE: [ANE-2] Parpola & the Assyrian Tree

Expand Messages
  • Victor Hurowitz
    Apr 5, 2006
      >2) trees which seem to be being eaten by animals. The later type
      >of representation would be the type of evidence I look for so that I can
      >call the trees "tree of life", although in any case I would proceed

      I would be even more cautious. As I said, "tree of life", if used as a
      technical term does not need to be connected with life at all. I've opened
      Eliade's Traité, the reprinted 1949 edition, the relevant chapter is "La
      végétation. Symboles et rites de renouvellement" on pp. 229-309. There he
      an "Essai de classification" with seven groups: arbre microcosme, arbre
      du Cosmos, arbre-théophanie cosmique, arbre symbole de la vie, arbre centre
      monde, liens mystique entres arbres et hommes, arbre symbole de
      There are no clear borders between the various types.

      I can see that all or most of these characteristics might be wrapped up in a
      single tree. A cosmic tree, a Weltbaum, which is a microcosm of the
      universe, divine and divinely omnipresent stands at the center of the
      universe, binding together heaven, earth, the underworld and the
      subterranean sea, and offering life, rejuvenation and resurrection to all
      who "partake" of its fruit or its shade. Nice! Wow! Sounds great, but how
      can we know?

      >>This fits well into the
      >>terminology of the study of religions. On the other hand, at least in
      >>Akkadian and in Ugaritic we have trees that are qd$, quddu$u
      >>respectively, which is often being translated as "sacred". So I don't
      >>know, why "sacred tree" should be better.
      >I think you made a mistake here and mean to say that "at least in Akkadian
      >and Ugaritic we DON'T have trees that are qd$, quddu$u".
      And what about `s. qd$ in the incantation RS 92.2014 and in Akkadian at
      least $e:p lemutti, 81-82.

      I'm afraid I don't have these texts in front of me, but I'd like to see the
      terms in context.

      >That being the
      >case, then the term "sacred tree" is used only because they seem to be
      >objects of rituals or associated with recognizably divine creatures.

      And what about discussing the "tree of death" instead?
      Excuse my ignorance, but is there such a creature?

      Victor Hurowitz
      Dept. of Bible, Archaeology, and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
      Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
      Beer-Sheva, Israel

      Tomas Marik

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic