Walter Scheidel

 Background

‘Incest’, in the sense of proscribed and abhorred sexual behaviour, is a cultural construct; its boundaries vary according to definitions that are specific to individual cultures (e.g., Willner 1983). However, most cultures agree on the core of what constitutes incest: sexual relations within the nuclear family. This perception corresponds to the biological fact that on average, parents and children on the one hand and brothers and sisters on the other share fifty per cent of their genes by common descent, and are therefore much more closely related than other potential mates. Over the last century, the ubiquity of the incest taboo for the nuclear family and resultant avoidance behaviour have been explained in several different and sometimes conflicting ways. Freudian theory has it that although by nature, children harbour incestuous longings, in the absence of legitimate expression these desires are suppressed into the subconscious, triggering abhorrence in adult life; the ‘family-socialization theory’ explains the incest taboo in terms of its functions in maintaining the social structure of the human family and in facilitating the process of socialization (e.g., Malinowski, Murdock, Parsons); anthropologists have argued that the need of families to exchange wives and resources in order to forge alliances militates against incestuous unions (e.g., Tylor, White, Lévi-Strauss); the ‘demographic theory’ predicts that under high mortality, siblings were compelled to find mates outside their own families. Critiques of existing views and further alternative theories continue to be published (e.g., Ember 1983; Roscoe 1994). According to the ‘indifference theory’, early childhood association results in sexual indifference and aversion between siblings and between parents and offspring; conversely, incestuous behaviour is often caused by the lack or insufficient intensity of early contacts (first propounded by Westermarck 1891; see now Shepher 1983 and Wolf 1995 for the fullest expositions). As a consequence, sexually mature family members of one sex migrate, i.e., marry, outside the nuclear family. Animal dispersal can be explained in the same fashion (e.g., Pusey 1990). From a Darwinian perspective, natural selection favoured the evolution of this instinctive preference in the first instance because of the negative genetic effects of close inbreeding, and also because of the evolutionary benefits of genetic variation (e.g., van den Berghe 1983; Thornhill, ed. 1993). By way of a gene-culture co-evolutionary process, cultural precepts tend to reinforce this behavioural pattern (Durham 1991). In spite of some criticism (Leavitt 1990), this model seems more plausible than its competitors, especially since the dangers of close inbreeding have now been amply documented and analysed with respect to both human and animal populations (e.g., Bittles & Neel 1994; Ralls, Ballou & Templeton 1988).

In reality, of course, tensions between this (supposedly innate) principle and extraneous exigencies impel compromises between inbreeding and outbreeding. With certain types of inbreeding, such as marriage of first cousins or of uncles and nieces, moderate health losses may be offset by social and economic gains (eg., Khlat 1989; Reddy 1993). Even in societies that condone close-kin unions at these levels, however, the taboo against marital relations within the nuclear family sex is usually upheld (Thornhill 1991; Bonte, ed. 1994), in keeping with the fact that the latter cause much greater damage to offspring than less close unions (esp. Seemanová 1971). This has led some distinguished researchers to declare this type of incest taboo a universal cultural constant (Murdock 1949) or to assume that it lay at the heart of human social evolution and civilization (Levi-Strauss 1969).


Evidence

The spread and force of incest avoidance make cases of socially and legally condoned marital and/or sexual relations within the nuclear family all the more intriguing. Paradoxically, they have been given short shrift in global surveys of incest (Fox 1980; Arens 1983; Héritier 1994). In a number of pre-modern societies, relations of this kind were the exclusive prerogative of kings and remained forbidden to commoners. ‘Royal incest’ (Bixler 1982), which serves to emphasize the supernatural qualities of the rulers (strongly associated with mythological traditions of divine incest) and insulates ruling families against intrusions, can be found around the globe, from the Pharaohs and Ptolemies of ancient Egypt (e.g., Cerny 1954; Carney 1987) and ancient Near Eastern rulers (e.g., Elam, Persia, Phoenicia, etc.) (Kornemann 1923) to kings in Central Africa (de Heusch 1958), the Inca of Peru and the Mixtec aristocracy of Mexico (Christensen 1998), and the chiefs of pre-contact Hawaii (Davenport 1994). In other cases, mostly in tribal societies, incestuous behaviour could be imagined to confer magical powers. By contrast, habitual nuclear-family incest outside ruling families was exceedingly rare. The census returns of Roman Egypt, preserved on papyrus, provide quantifiable documentary evidence of brother-sister marriage, mostly for the 2nd and early 3rd centuries AD (Thierfelder 1960; Sidler 1971; Hopkins 1980; Shaw 1992; Scheidel 1996a). At that time, one in five attested couples in Middle Egypt consisted of brothers and sisters (Bagnall and Frier 1994). The incidence of incest in the city of Arsinoe in the Fayum was higher still, indicating that virtually every man with a living younger sister married her instead of someone from outside the family. At that level, this custom must have assumed the function of a cultural norm (Scheidel 1995). Mazdaean (‘Zoroastrian’) religious doctrine, originating from Iran, not only legitimized but encouraged and extolled sexual relations between parents and children and between siblings. The very substantial corpus of pertinent evidence combines prescriptive Zoroastrian texts (mostly from the early Middle Ages) and descriptive accounts by outsiders, ranging from the 5th century BC to the Middle Ages and from western Europe to Tibet and China (West 1882; Spooner 1966; Sidler 1971; Bucci 1978; Frye 1985; Herrenschmidt 1994; Mitterauer 1994; Frandsen 2009). Half-sibling unions are also attested for a number of other societies but have so far eluded systematic investigation (Modrzejewski 1964; Goggin & Sturtevant 1964).


Objectives

The phenomenon of marriage within the nuclear family has never received comprehensive treatment. Studies of sibling marriage in Roman Egypt have failed to provide a compelling explanation of this custom (Hopkins 1980; Shaw 1992) and have usually considered this subject in separation from the cross-cultural record. Moreover, the (biologically) incestuous nature of Roman Egyptian sibling marriage has recently been called into question (Hübner 2007, with Remijsen and Clarysse 2008). This alone shows the need for comprehensive reconsideration. The evidence of Zoroastrian incest has never even been collected in an exhaustive manner, let alone properly analysed (Sidler 1971 and now Frandsen 2009 are the best efforts). Comparative evaluations – between Egypt and Iran, between incest among commoners and among kings, or between incest and less extreme forms of endogamy – simply do not exist. It is my aim to provide the first book-length study of all aspects of this subject. It will contain a cross-cultural, comparative assessment of ‘royal incest’ across the world, with due attention to religious and mythological parallels. Although folk traditions of incestuous behaviour have repeatedly been surveyed (most recently by Johnson & Price-Williams 1996), I am not aware of a complete collection of the incest motif in mythological contexts. In a second step, the Zoroastrian evidence will be gathered and discussed in full detail. My collection of pertinent evidence – in its present scope the first of its kind – covers some fifty pages. I will then return to Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt, building on my own previous research which, again for the first time, put this evidence into an interdisciplinary perspective by establishing levels of inbreeding and likely levels of inbreeding defects (Scheidel 1995, 1996a,b, 1997). Existing research on cousin marriage and similar customs (Holy 1989; Khlat 1989; Reddy 1993; cf. in general Goody 1990) offers interpretations that mutatis mutandis may also be applied to incest and thus further our understanding of this phenomenon. Furthermore, my work will draw on scientific research on the biological and psychological dimensions of close inbreeding in an attempt to embed the historical record within a broader, multidisciplinary framework.


Relevance

Albeit primarily designed as an historical study, my project does not address an exotic and marginal phenomenon. As indicated above, nuclear-family incest has played a crucial rôle in influential theories of human behaviour and development throughout this century, such as psychoanalysis, structuralism, and sociobiology. Incest and its avoidance occupy prominent positions in competing approaches to the understanding of human social behaviour, for instance in nature/nurture debates. As a consequence, the phenomenon of historical incest is of interest to scholars in a wide range of different disciplines. This project offers a rare opportunity to advertise ancient history to a wider academic audience, and to meet the twofold objective of contributing to historical scholarship and of bridging institutional boundaries between different disciplines.



References

Arens, W. (1986) The original sin: incest and its meaning. New York
Bagnall, R. S. & Frier, B. W. (1994) The demography of Roman Egypt. Cambridge
Bittles, A. H. & Neel, J. V. (1994) ‘The costs of human inbreeding and their implications for variations at the DNA level’, Nature Genetics 8: 117-121
Bixler, R. H. (1982) ‘Sibling incest in the royal families of Egypt, Peru, and Hawaii’, Journal of Sex Research 18: 264-281
Bonte, P., ed. (1994) Epouser au plus proche: inceste, prohibitions et stratégies matrimoniales autour de la Méditerranée. Paris
Bucci, O. (1978) ‘Il matrimonio fra consanguinei (khvetukdas) nella tradizione giuridica delle genti iraniche’, Apollinaris 51: 291-319
Carney, E. D. (1987) ‘The reappearance of royal sibling marriage in Ptolemaic Egypt’, La Parola del Passato 237: 420-39
Cerny, J. (1954) ‘Consanguineous marriage in pharaonic Egypt’, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 40: 23-29
Christiansen, A. F. (1998) ‘Ethnoarchaeological evidence for inbreeding among the pre-Hispanic Mixtec royal caste’, Human Biology 70: 563-577
Davenport, W. H. (1994) Pi’o: an enquiry into the marriage of brothers and sisters and other close relatives in Old Hawai’i. Lanham
de Heusch, L. (1958) Essais sur le symbolisme de l’inceste royal en Afrique. Brussels
Durham, W. H. (1991) Coevolution: genes, culture, and human diversity. Stanford
Ember, M. (1983) ‘On the origin and extension of the incest taboo’, in M. & C. R. Ember, eds., Marriage, family, and kinship: comparative studies of social organization. n.p.: 65-108
Fox, R. (1980) The red lamp of incest. London
Frandsen, P. J. (2009) Incestuous and close-kin marriage in ancient Egypt and Persia: an examination of the evidence. Copenhagen
Frye, R. N. (1985) ‘Zoroastrian incest’, in Orientalia I. Tucci memoriae dicata. Rome: 445-455
Goggin, J. M. & Sturtevant, W. C. (1964) ‘The Calusa: a stratified, nonagricultural society (with notes on sibling marriage)’, in W. H. Goodenough, ed., Explorations in cultural anthropology. New York: 179-219
Goody, J. (1990) The oriental, the ancient and the primitive: systems of marriage and the family in pre-industrial societies of Eurasia. Cambridge
Héritier, F. (1994) Les deux soeurs et leur mère: anthropologie de l’inceste. Paris
Herrenschmidt, C. (1994) ‘Le xwetodas ou mariage ‘incestueux’ en Iran ancien’, in Bonte, ed. 1994: 113-125
Holy, L. (1989) Kinship, honour and solidarity: cousin marriage in the Middle East. Manchester
Hopkins, K. (1980) ‘Brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt’, Comparative Studies in Society and History 22: 303-354
Hübner, S. R. (2007) ‘“Brother-sister marriage” in Roman Egypt: a curiosity of mankind or a widespread family strategy?’, Journal of Roman Studies 97: 21-49
Johnson, A. W. & Price-Williams, D. (1996) Oedipus ubiquitous: the family complex in world folk literature. Stanford
Khlat, M. (1989) Les mariages consanguines à Beyrouth: traditions matrimoniales et santé publique. Paris
Kornemann, E. (1923) ‘Die Geschwisterehe im Altertum’, Mitteilungen der Schlesischen Gesellschaft für Volkskunde 24: 17-45
Leavitt, G. C. (1990) ‘Sociobiological explanations of incest avoidance: a critical claim of evidential claims’, American Anthropologist 92: 971-993
Lévi-Strauss, C. (1969) The elementary structures of kinship. London
Mitterauer, M. (1994) ‘The customs of the Magians: the problem of incest in historical societies’, in Porter, R. & Teich, M., eds., Sexual knowledge, sexual science: the history of attitudes to sexuality. Cambridge: 231-250
Modrzejewski, J. (1964) ‘Die Geschwisterehe in der hellenistischen Praxis und nach römischem Recht’, Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, Rom. Abt. 81: 52-82
Murdock, G. P. (1949) Social structure. New York
Pusey, A. E. (1990) ‘Mechanisms of inbreeding avoidance in nonhuman primates’, in Feierman, J. R., ed., Pedophilia: biosocial dimensions. New York: 201-220
Ralls, K., Ballou, J. D. & Templeton, A. (1988) ‘Estimates of lethal equivalents and the cost of inbreeding in mammals’, Conservation Biology 2: 185-193
Reddy, P. G. (1993) Marriage practices in South India: social and biological aspects of consanguineous unions. Madras
Remijsen, S. and Clarysse, W. (2008) ‘Incest or adoption? Brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt revisited’, Journal of Roman Studies 98: 53-61
Roscoe, P. B. (1994) ‘Amity and aggression: a symbolic theory of incest’, Man 29: 49-76
Scheidel, W. (1995) ‘Incest revisited: three notes on the demography of sibling marriage in Roman Egypt’, Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists 32: 143-155
Scheidel, W. (1996a) Measuring sex, age and death in the Roman empire: explorations in ancient demography. Ann Arbor
Scheidel, W. (1996b) ‘Brother-sister and parent child marriage outside royal families in ancient Egypt and Iran: a challenge to the sociobiological view of incest avoidance?’, Ethology and Sociobiology 17: 319-340
Scheidel, W. (1997) ‘Brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt’, Journal of Biosocial Science 29: 361-371
Scheidel, W. (2004) ‘Ancient Egyptian sibling marriage and the Westermarck effect’, in Wolf, A. P. & Durham, W. H., eds., Inbreeding, incest, and the incest taboo. Stanford: 93-108
Seemanová, E. (1971) ‘A study of children of incestuous matings’, Human Heredity 21: 108-128
Shaw, B. D. (1992) ‘Explaining incest: brother-sister marriage in Graeco-Roman Egypt’, Man 27: 267-299
Shepher, J. (1983) Incest: a biosocial view. New York
Sidler, N. (1971) Zur Universalität des Inzesttabu: eine kritische Untersuchung der These und der Einwände. Stuttgart
Spooner, B. (1966) ‘Iranian kinship and marriage’, Iran 4: 51-59
Thierfelder, H. (1960) Die Geschwisterehe im hellenistisch-römischen Ägypten. Münster
Thornhill, N. W. (1991) ‘An evolutionary analysis of rules regulating human inbreeding and marriage’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14: 247-293
Thornhill, N. W., ed. (1993) The natural history of inbreeding and outbreeding: theoretical and empirical perspectives. Chicago
van den Berghe, P. L. (1983) ‘Human inbreeding avoidance: culture in nature’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6: 91-123
West, E. W. (1882) ‘The meaning of khvetuk-das or khvetudad’, in Pahlavi texts II. Oxford: 389-430
Westermarck, E. (1891) The history of human marriage (5th ed. 1921). London
Willner, D. (1983) ‘Definition and violation: incest and the incest taboos’, Man 18: 134-159
Wolf, A. P. (1995) Sexual attraction and childhood association: a Chinese brief for Edward Westermarck. Stanford

Babalon
Mother of Abominations
Seal of Babalon
Consort	Chaos

Babalon (also known as the Scarlet Woman, Great Mother or Mother of Abominations) is a goddess found in the mystical system of Thelema, which was established in 1904 with English author and occultist Aleister Crowley's writing of The Book of the Law (although the name Babalon does not occur in that text). In her most abstract form, she represents the female sexual impulse and the liberated woman; although in the Creed of the Gnostic Mass she is also identified with Mother Earth, in her most fertile sense.^[1] At the same time, Crowley believed that Babalon had an earthly aspect in the form of a spiritual office, which could be filled by actual women—usually as a counterpart to his own identification as "To Mega Therion" (The Great Beast)—whose duty was then to help manifest the energies of the current Aeon of Horus.

Her consort is Chaos, the "Father of Life" and the male form of the Creative Principle. Babalon is often described as being girt with a sword  and riding the Beast. She is often referred to as a sacred whore, and her primary symbol is the Chalice or Graal.

As Crowley wrote in his The Book of Thoth, "she rides astride the Beast; in her left hand she holds the reins, representing the passion which unites them. In her right she holds aloft the cup, the Holy Grail aflame with love and death. In this cup are mingled the elements of the sacrament of the Aeon".

Regular heptagram
Regular {7/2} heptagram
Edges andvertices	7
Schläfli symbol	{7/2}, {7/3}
Coxeter diagram	,
Symmetry group	Dihedral (D7)
Properties	star, cyclic, equilateral,isogonal, isotoxal

A heptagram, septagram, or septegram is a seven-pointed star drawn with seven straight strokes.

Geometry[edit]

In general, a heptagram is any self-intersecting heptagon (7-sided polygon).

There are two regular heptagrams, labeled as {7/2} and {7/3}, with the second number representing the vertex interval step from a regular heptagram, {7/1}.

This is the smallest star polygon that can be drawn in two forms, as irreducible fractions. The two heptagrams are sometimes called theheptagram (for {7/2}) and the great heptagram (for {7/3}).

The previous one, the regular hexagram {6/2}, is a compound of two triangles. The smallest star polygon is the {5/2} pentagram.

The next one is the {8/3} octagram, followed by the regular enneagram, which also has two forms: {9/2} and {9/4}, as well as one compound of 3 triangles {9/3}.

First heptagram {7/2}	Second heptagram {7/3}	Both heptagrams inscribed within a heptagon
Heptagrammic prism (7/2)	Heptagrammic prism (7/3)

Religious/occult symbolism[edit]

• The heptagram was used in Christianity to symbolize the seven days of creation and became a traditional symbol for warding off evil.
• The heptagram is also the symbol of perfection (or God) in many Christian religions.
• The heptagram is used in the symbol for Babalon in Thelema.
• The heptagram is known among neo-Pagans as the Elven Star or Fairy Star. It is treated as a sacred symbol in various modern Pagan and witchcraft traditions. Similarly, it has been adopted as an identifier by some members of the Otherkin subculture. Blue Star Wicca also uses the symbol, where it is referred to as a septegram. The second heptagram is also a symbol of magical power in some Pagan religions.

• In alchemy, a seven-sided star can refer to the seven planets which were known to ancient alchemists.
• In George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series, the dominant religion of Westeros follows The Seven, whose symbol is described as a seven-pointed star.

Tammuz (Syriac: ܬܡܘܙ; Hebrew: תַּמּוּז, Transliterated Hebrew: Tammuz, Tiberian Hebrew: Tammûz; Arabic: تمّوز‎ Tammūz; Akkadian: Duʾzu, Dūzu; Sumerian:Dumuzid (DUMU.ZI(D), "faithful or true son") was the name of a Sumerian god of food and vegetation, also worshiped in the later Mesopotamian states ofAkkad, Assyria and Babylonia.

Ritual mourning[edit]

In Babylonia, the month Tammuz was established in honor of the eponymous god Tammuz, who originated as a Sumerian shepherd-god, Dumuzid or Dumuzi, the consort of Inanna and, in his Akkadian form, the parallel consort of Ishtar. The Levantine Adonis ("lord"), who was drawn into the Greek pantheon, was considered byJoseph Campbell among others to be another counterpart of Tammuz,^[1] son and consort. The Aramaic name "Tammuz" seems to have been derived from the Akkadian form Tammuzi, based on early Sumerian Damu-zid.^{[citation needed]} The later standard Sumerian form, Dumu-zid, in turn became Dumuzi in Akkadian. Tamuzi also is Dumuzid or Dumuzi.

Beginning with the summer solstice came a time of mourning in the Ancient Near East, as in the Aegean: the Babylonians marked the decline in daylight hours and the onset of killing summer heat and drought with a six-day "funeral" for the god. Recent discoveries reconfirm him as an annual life-death-rebirth deity: tablets discovered in 1963 show that Dumuzi was in fact consigned to the Underworld himself, in order to secure Inanna's release,^[2] though the recovered final line reveals that he is to revive for six months of each year (see below).

In cult practice, the dead Tammuz was widely mourned in the Ancient Near East. Locations associated in antiquity with the site of his death include both Harran andByblos, among others. A Sumerian tablet from Nippur (Ni 4486) reads:

She can make the lament for you, my Dumuzid, the lament for you, the lament, the lamentation, reach the desert — she can make it reach the house Arali; she can make it reach Bad-tibira; she can make it reach Dul-šuba; she can make it reach the shepherding country, the sheepfold of Dumuzid

"O Dumuzid of the fair-spoken mouth, of the ever kind eyes," she sobs tearfully, "O you of the fair-spoken mouth, of the ever kind eyes," she sobs tearfully. "Lad, husband, lord, sweet as the date, [...] O Dumuzid!" she sobs, she sobs tearfully.^[3]

Tammuz in the Hebrew Bible[edit]

These mourning ceremonies were observed at the door of the Temple in Jerusalem in a vision the Israelite prophet Ezekiel was given, which serves as a Biblical prophecy which expresses YHWH's message at His people's apostate worship of idols:

"Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the Lord's house which was toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz. Then said he unto to me, 'Hast thou seen this, O son of man? turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations than these." —Ezekiel 8:14-15

It is quite possible that among other Judeans the Tammuz cult was not regarded as inconsistent with Yahwism.^[4]

Ezekiel's testimony is the only direct mention of Tammuz in the Hebrew Bible, though echoes of Tammuz have been seen in the books of Isaiah, and Daniel.^[5]

Dumuzid in the Sumerian king list[edit]

In the Sumerian king list two kings named Dumuzi appear:

• Dumuzid of Bad-tibira, the shepherd (reigning 36 000 years), the fifth King before the Flood
• Dumuzid of Kuara, the fisherman (reigning 100 years), the third King of the first dynasty of Uruk, reigning between Lugalbanda and Gilgamesh, circa 2,700 BC.

Other Sumerian texts showed that kings were to be married to Inanna in a sacred marriage, for example a hymn that describes the sacred marriage of King Iddid-Dagan (ca 1900 BC).^[6]

Dumuzid and Inanna[edit]

Today several versions of the Sumerian death of Dumuzi have been recovered, "Inanna's Descent to the Underworld", "Dumuzi's dream" and "Dumuzi and the galla", as well as a tablet separately recounting Dumuzi's death, mourned by holy Inanna, and his noble sister Geštinanna, and even his dog and the lambs and kids in his fold; Dumuzi himself is weeping at the hard fate in store for him, after he had walked among men, and the cruel galla of the Underworld seize him.^[7]

A number of pastoral poems and songs relate the love affair of Inanna and Dumuzid the shepherd. A text recovered in 1963 recounts "The Courtship of Inanna and Dumuzi" in terms that are tender and frankly erotic.

According to the myth of Inanna's descent to the underworld, represented in parallel Sumerian and Akkadian^[8] tablets, Inanna (Ishtar in the Akkadian texts) set off for the netherworld, or Kur, which was ruled by her sister Ereshkigal, perhaps to take it as her own.^{[citation needed]} Ereshkigal is in mourning at the death of her consort, Gugalanna (The Wild Bull of Heaven Sumerian Gu = Bull, Gal = Great, An = Heaven). She passed through seven gates and at each one was required to leave a garment or an ornament so that when she had passed through the seventh gate she was a simple woman, entirely naked. Despite warnings about her presumption, she did not turn back but dared to sit herself down on Ereshkigal's throne. Immediately the Anunnaki of the underworld judged her, gazed at her with the eyes of death, and she became a corpse, hung up on a meathook.

Based on the incomplete texts as first found, it was assumed that Ishtar/Inanna's descent into Kur occurred after the death of Tammuz/Dumuzid rather than before and that her purpose was to rescue Tammuz/Dumuzid. This is the familiar form of the myth as it appeared in M. Jastrow's Descent of the Goddess Ishtar into the Lower World, 1915, widely available on the Internet. New texts uncovered in 1963 filled in the story in quite another fashion,^[2] showing that Dumuzi was in fact consigned to the Underworld himself, in order to secure Inanna's release.

Inanna's faithful servant attempted to get help from the other gods but only wise Enki/Ea responded. The details of Enki/Ea's plan differ slightly in the two surviving accounts, but in the end, Inanna/Ishtar was resurrected. However, a "conservation of souls" law required her to find a replacement for herself in Kur. She went from one god to another, but each one pleaded with her and she had not the heart to go through with it until she found Dumuzid/Tammuz richly dressed and on her throne. Inanna/Ishtar immediately set her accompanying demons on Dumuzid/Tammuz. At this point the Akkadian text fails as Tammuz' sister Belili, introduced for the first time, strips herself of her jewelry in mourning but claims that Tammuz and the dead will come back.

There is some confusion here. The name Belili occurs in one of the Sumerian texts also, but it is not the name of Dumuzid's sister who is there named Geshtinana, but is the name of an old woman whom another text calls Bilulu.

In any case, the Sumerian texts relate how Dumuzid fled to his sister Geshtinana who attempted to hide him but who could not in the end stand up to the demons. Dumuzid has two close calls until the demons finally catch up with him under the supposed protection of this old woman called Bilulu or Belili and then they take him. However Inanna repents.

Inanna seeks vengeance on Bilulu, on Bilulu's murderous son G̃irg̃ire and on G̃irg̃ire's consort Shirru "of the haunted desert, no-one's child and no-one's friend". Inanna changes Bilulu into a waterskin and G̃irg̃ire into a protective god of the desert while Shirru is assigned to watch always that the proper rites are performed for protection against the hazards of the desert.

Finally, Inanna relents and changes her decree thereby restoring her husband Dumuzi to life; an arrangement is made by which Geshtinana will take Dumuzid's place in Kur for six months of the year: "You (Dumuzi), half the year. Your sister (Geštinanna), half the year!" This newly recovered final line upset Samuel Noah Kramer's former interpretation, as he allowed: "my conclusion that Dumuzi dies and "stays dead" forever (cf e.g. Mythologies of the Ancient World p. 10) was quite erroneous: Dumuzi according to the Sumerian mythographers rises from the dead annually and, after staying on earth for half the year, descends to the Nether World for the other half".^[9]

The "Courtship of Inanna and Dumuzi"[edit]

Aside from this extended epic "The Descent of Inanna," a previously unknown "Courtship of Inanna and Dumuzi" was first translated into English and annotated by Sumerian scholar Samuel Noah Kramer and folklorist Diane Wolkstein working in tandem, and published in 1983.^[10] In this tale Inanna's lover, the shepherd-king Dumuzi, brought a wedding gift of milk in pails, yoked across his shoulders.

The myth of Inanna and Dumuzi formed the subject of a Lindisfarne Symposium, published as The Story of Inanna and Dumuzi: From Folk-Tale to Civilized Literature: A Lindisfarne Symposium, (William Irwin Thompson, editor, 1995).

In Arabic sources[edit]

Tammuz is the month of July in Iraqi Arabic and Levantine Arabic (see Arabic names of calendar months),^[11] and references to Tammuz appear in Arabic literature from the 9th to 11th centuries AD.^[12] In a translation of an ancient Nabataean text by Kuthami the Babylonian, Ibn Wahshiyya (c. 9th-10th century AD), adds information on his own efforts to ascertain the identity of Tammuz, and his discovery of the full details of the legend of Tammuz in another Nabataean book:

"How he summoned the king to worship the seven (planets) and the twelve (signs) and how the king put him to death several times in a cruel manner Tammuz coming to life again after each time, until at last he died; and behold! it was identical to the legend of St. George which is current among the Christians."^[13]

Ibn Wahshiyya also adds that Tammuz lived in Babylonia before the coming of the Chaldeans and belonged to an ancient Mesopotamian tribe called Ganbân.^[12] On rituals related to Tammuz in his time, he adds that the Sabaeans in Harran and Babylonia still lamented the loss of Tammuz every July, but that the origin of the worship had been lost.^[12]

Al-Nadim in his 10th century work Kitab al-Fehrest drawing from a work on Syriac calendar feast days, describes a Tâ'ûz festival that took place in the middle of the month of Tammuz.^[12] Women bewailed the death of Tammuz at the hands of his master who was said to have "ground his bones in a mill and scattered them to the wind."^[12] Consequently, women would forgo the eating of ground foods during the festival time.^[12] The same festival is mentioned in the 11th century by Ibn Athir as still taking place at the appointed time on the banks of the Tigris river.^[12]

Tau Malachi writes:  The following is a traditional invocation of the Holy Shekinah from the Sophian Gnostic tradition:

Invocation to the Holy Shekinah

Kodesh Imma, Kodesh Kallah
Holy Mother, Holy Bride,
We invite you, we welcome you –
Please enter!

Ruach Ha-Elijah (Spirit of the Prophets)
Ruach Ha-Enoch (Spirit of the Initiates)
Ruach Ha-Messiah (Spirit of the Anointed)

Ruach Ha-Kodesh (Holy Spirit)

O Queen of Heaven and Earth
Holy Shekinah:

We open our minds and hearts and lives to you,
And pray you enter and indwell;

Uplift us now into the Bridal Chamber,
Bring us into the embrace of the Beloved,
So that we might put on our Supernal Image,
To shine with Light above and below;

Be the Divine Spirit, inwardly illuminating us with the Living Word
and Wisdom,
And in this way lead us in the path of righteousness,
So that we might be a sign of hope to the people,
In good times and bad;

We pray for the liberation of the people and the land from all darkness;
We pray for the healing of all illness and dis-ease;
We pray for the Divine Illumination of all living spirits and souls!

May all holy sparks be gathered in; May the Divine Light shine forth!

We pray for the resurrection and ascension of this Good Earth;
Amen and amen.

Shekinah: The Presence of Divinityby Rev. Mark Raines

Shekinah - also spelled Shekhina, Shekhinah, Shekina, and Shechina - is known in the Qabalah, an ancient form of Jewish mysticism, as one of the emanations of God and the actual Presence of God. The belief was that one could not see God in Its fullness, but could see the emanation of God, Shekinah. When Moses asked to see God, it was Shekinah that he saw. Shekinah is also the consort, or Bride, of God. As such, she is Mother to us all, just as God is our Father.

In earlier times, God was seen as either dwelling in the clouds or in high places like mountains or very high hills. With the construction of the Ark of the Covenant, and then the construction of the Temple, a part of the Godhead came to dwell in the Ark and then in the Temple. This could not be the male God, the God of the Sky and of High Places. So Shekinah, formerly known as Asherah, a Goddess of Earth and Sea, came to dwell in the Ark of the Covenant and then in the Temple.

Originally it was Asherah who dwelled in the Temple as the Bride of God, His representative there. But after the "reforms" of King Josiah, Asherah worship was forbidden in the Temple. Still, the Jews knew that their Lady was still living there as their Queen and the representative of El, their God. So Asherah evolved. She began to be seen as the presence of God, and less as a separate entity. She became Shekinah, which means something like She who dwells (from the Hebrew shakhan, which means the act of dwelling). However, Asherah did not really change. She was always the representative of Her Husband, just as He was always HER representative. She, an Earth Goddess, was also Queen of Heaven. He, as Sky God, was also Ruler of Earth. This occurred only through Their marriage. So, it was not really that Asherah worship ever changed much within Judaism, or that Asherah Herself changed; only, it was made to look like it had changed to fool the patriarchal priests.

Unfortunately, Shekinah has been all but lost to Christianity. Elements of Her remain in Mother Mary, who was perhaps Shekinah's incarnation. Mary Theotokos, as She is called, actually held the presence of God (Yeshua) within Her. She is known as the Queen of Heaven, but she is the representative of God to us and delivers our prayers to Him, according to Catholic tradition. Her apparitions are much more frequent than the apparitions of Yeshua, and the Father never appears. It seems that She is truly His representative to us, because (as we know) She is His Bride.

The union of Shekinah and El was never more evident than in the Sabbath. She is known as the Sabbath Bride, or the Sabbath Queen. Each week on the Sabbath, God and Goddess, El and Shekinah, act out the Song of Songs. One rabbi called that holy book the "Holy of Holies" of the Bible! Now take a look at this passage from the Zohar (the holy book of the Qabalah), called the Secret of the Sabbath, which tells us all about the Sabbath Queen: