Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1163/15692124-12341244
Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048
Journal of
Ancient Near
Eastern
Religions
brill.com/jane
A Study of the Serpent Incantation KTU
2
1.82: 17
and its Contributions to Ugaritic Mythology
and Religion
Adam E. Miglio
Assistant Professor of Archaeology, Wheaton College
adam.miglio@wheaton.edu
Abstract
Tis article treats KTU
2
1.82: 17, an Ugaritic incantation. It deals, frst, with matters of epigra-
phy, philology, morpho-syntax and lexicography. Tereafter, it discusses the contributions of this
incantation to understanding Ugaritic mythology and religion. In particular, it assesses the rela-
tionship of KTU
2
1.82: 17 to the Ugaritic Ba
lu Cycle.
Keywords
KTU
2
1.82, serpent incantation, Ba
lu Cycle
Ancient Near Eastern incantation texts are well known from the world of
Syro-Mesopotamia, having been preserved as artifacts of the cuneiform cul-
ture that characterized this region for more than three millennia. Tese incan-
tations were texts that, when spoken, were believed to bring about a desired
religio-magical efect. From the Late Bronze Age city of Ugarit, in particular,
incantations are attested in two general types. Te frst may be classifed as
historiolae. Historiolae were comprised of formal mythological texts typically
narrated in the indicative mood and accompanied by a ritual prescription.
1
Te second form of incantation at Ugarit was simply a formula or spell with-
out an accompanying mythological narrative that had a performative efect
when uttered.
2
1
See Seth Sanders, A Historiography of Demons: Preterit-Tema, Para-Myth, and Histo-
riola in the Morphology of Genres, in Historiography in the Cuneiform World, eds
T. Abusch, et al. (Bethesda, MD: CDL Press) 2001: 42940.
2
Tis twofold distinction is made by Dennis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit. Writings in
the Ancient World 10. [Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002]).
A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048 31
Tis article addresses one particular Ugaritic incantation found in the frst
seven lines of KTU
2
1.82 that was intended to cure a snakebite. At least three
other Ugaritic serpent incantations are known. Two of these can be classifed
as historiolae (KTU
2
1.100 [RS 24.244] and KTU
2
1.107 [RS 24.251]),
3
whereas the third belongs to the simpler type of incantation (RS 92.2014).
KTU
2
1.82:17 adds another example of the latter type in which a formula or
spell was believed to conjure religio-magical power. At the same time, KTU
2
1.82: 17 is distinctive in that while it is not an historiola, it still shows strong
connections with the mythological literature of Ugarit through its allusion to
one of the great myths, the Ba
lu Cycle.
Concerning KTU
2
1.82, in general, Andr Caquot observed that,
[l]a tablette KTU 1.82 dfe depuis longtemps la sagacit des dchifreurs.
4
As a result of its difculty, this tablet has elicited relatively few lengthy studies
since Charles Virolleaud frst published the editio princeps in 1957.
5
Focusing
on the frst seven lines of KTU
2
1.82, then, the present essay begins with mat-
ters of epigraphy, philology, morpho-syntax, and lexicography and thereafter
discusses three ways in which KTU
2
1.82: 17 contributes to our understand-
ing of Ugaritic mythology and religion. First, KTU
2
1.82: 17 can be shown
to be a distinctive incantation in the Ugaritic corpus in that it shows an aware-
ness of one of the great myths. Tis awareness in KTU
2
1.82: 17 suggests
that the incantation tradition and mythological literature at Ugarit were
closely related, a conclusion that is buttressed by the parallel phenomenon in
the Mesopotamian tradition, where incantations are also known to have
alluded to mythological texts. Additionally, the structure of KTU
2
1.82: 17
provides insight into the organization of the Ba
lu Cycle in KTU
2
3
It may also be that KTU 1.124 (=RS 24.272) is a historiola concerning a snakebite, see
Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit, 171.
4
Andr Caquot, Un Recueil Ougaritique de Formules Magiques: KTU 1.82, Studi Epi-
grafci e Linguistici 5 (1988): 331.
5
Te most recent is that of G. del Olmo Lete, KTU 1.82: Another Miscellaneous
Incantation, AuOr (2011): 24565 and another is Charles Virolleaud, Le palais royal dUgarit
II (Paris: 1957), 37. Te principle investigations over the past half-century are: 1) P.J. van Zijls
discussion, which he published over a span of three years in Te Journal of Northwest Semitic
Languages (Translation and Discussion of Text 1001:12 (R 15.134: 12), JNWSL 2 [1972]:
7485; Translation and Discussion of Text 1001:35a, JNWSL 3 [1974]: 8593; Transla-
tion and Discussion of Text 1001:5(b)7, JNWSL 4 [1975]: 7386.); 2) Johannes C. de Moor
and Klaas Spronk, More on Demons in Ugarit, Ugarit-Forschungen 16 (1984): 237250, who
provide a collation, normalized hand copy, and commentary; 3) Andr Caquots article Un
Recueil Ougaritique de Formules Magiques: KTU 1.82, Studi Epigrafci e Linguistici. 5 (1988):
33143; 4) and most recently G. del Olmo Lete, Canaanite Religion according to the Liturgical
Texts of Ugarit [Bethesda: CDL Press, 1999], 37378.).
32 A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048
1.82: 17 are consistent with the order of events as they have been recon-
structed in tablets KTU
2
1.31.6. And lastly, KTU
2
1.82: 17 constrains the
interpretation of the Ba
lu to seize serpents
(bat nma, line six). Second, Del Olmo Letes interpretation recognizes that
the genre of serpent incantations is already well known from Ugarit (e.g.
KTU
2
1.100 [RS 24.244] and RS 1992.2014). Moreover, as will be shown in
greater detail below, Del Olmo Letes hypothesis helps to explain numerous
other epigraphic, philological, morpho-syntactic and lexical complexities in
KTU
2
1.82: 17.
6
Tis conclusion is confdently afrmed by Del Olmo Lete, who has noted that . . . [i]t is
fairly clear that this [tablet] is a collection of incantations . . ., Del Olmo Lete, Canaanite Reli-
gion, 373. It is beyond the scope of this study, however, to address whether all of the incantations
on the tablet are thematically related (del Olmo Lete, Canaanite Religion, 373) or not (De Moor
and Spronk, More on Demons in Ugarit; Caquot, Un Recueil Ougaritique de Formules
Magiques).
7
Most recently in KTU 1.82: Another Miscellaneous Incantation.
A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048 33
2. Vocalization and Translation
8
1 [yi]mhas . Ba
lu [xx] t
9
y . Tunnana
10
. wa yaggul . wa yanassik .
A[tika]
2 [xx]y . l
arsi [
i]dya .
alata . l
ahu .
idya .
alatu .
nu layya
3 [si]bit . Ba
an .
uhud . ba
lima
7 [
a] ttumu . prtl . l ra
A[tika?]
2 [xx] to the earth. [Ten], I will not feel the curse; then, I will no longer be under
the curse.
3 [Se]ize, O Ba
lu, the arrow of Rapu. Know that he shoots at his kidney and his
heart.
4 [Lift] your voice among the mountains. Echo your cry in the clifs, your teeth
chattering
5 [and] your lips being unable to stop.
(For) if you cast
your bolts against Mtu,
6 [he wi]ll be overwhelmed. I will raise (my) voice! O apu, give life! / Seize the
snakes, O Ba
lu!
7 I will put prtl (?) on his head, hmt . tmt
3. Commentary
Lines 12: 1) [yi]mhas . Ba
A[tika] 2) [xx]y . l
arsi
Te initial difculty in the text is epigraphic and is the result of a chip in the
tablets upper edge and on its face that obscures several signs in the frst line.
8
I have provided a vocalization of the frst seven lines of KTU
2
1.82 as a heuristic practice
in order to make explicit my understanding of the morphology and syntax. Te particulars of my
interpretation will be addressed in the commentary below.
9
From the photos it appears that the t is clear; part of a horizontal wedge is visible (see del
Olmo Lete, KTU 1.82: Another Miscellaneous Incantation; Virolleaud, Le palais royal dUgarit
II ). Other possibilities that cannot be excluded are
ly], which,
while sensible, is epigraphically impossible: the photo in PRU II clearly indi-
cates the remnants of either an
a, t or n.
11
A certain restoration here is not
presently possible; at the same time, that a benefciary of this incantation is to
be found in the lacuna in the middle of line one and again at the beginning of
line two, as intuited by De Moor and Spronk, seems plausible.
12
What is beyond doubt is that Tunnanu is the object of the verb [y]mhs and
that this collocation facilitates an allusion to the mythological battle of Ba
lu
against Yammu found in KTU
2
1.3 iii 3646. Tis observation is important,
for it aids the analysis of the end of line one. At the end of this line, Virolleaud
indicated that after the
A[tika].
13
Tis suggestion is based upon three observations. First, the restoration fts in
the remaining space on the tablet given the fact that several of the lines are
written onto the edge (e.g. ll. 24, 6). Second, this restoration preserves
the parallelism of this bi-cola. Tird, the restoration
Atika in KTU
2
1.3 iii 3646 (esp. ll. 40, 44) as foes of
Ba
lu and
Anat.
14
If correct, the restoration of
Atika with the verb nsk might conjure a familiar image in Northwest Semitic
11
See Planche, IV; also see del Olmo Lete, KTU.182: Another Miscellaneous Incantation.
12
Del Olmo Lete has also proposed that this lacuna contains the location from which the
Tunnanu is driven, that is from the house [bb]t (KTU 1.82: Another Incantation, 246).
13
After the acceptance of this article for publication, I encountered the same proposal ofered
by del Olmo Lete, KTU 1.82: Another Incantation, 249.
14
On the designation of
Atiku as
gl
i]dya
19
.
alata . l
ahu .
idya .
alatu .
nu layya
Te linch-pins for interpreting line two are the noun
ah. De Moor and Spronk, van Zijl, and del Olmo Lete have under-
stood the noun
il in Ugaritic (
a.
20
Tus the correlation of this lemma with Hebrew (curse) by De Moor
and Spronk, van Zijl, and del Olmo Lete is to be preferred.
Te thorny issue of the verb
alt. Caquot and De Moor and Spronk have taken the verb
from a hollow root meaning to hasten, cognate with Hebrew , while del
16
Tat
ar wtnn [KTU
2
1.6 iv 51]). Tus in KTU
2
1.82
Atika would be another serpentine water-creature portrayed as having been hurled to the dry
land (i.e.
id] is restored in the lacuna at the beginning of line two with an enclitic
yd. Te conjunction with this enclitic morpheme is found only in KTU
2
1.82, to my knowl-
edge, and twice in this line.
20
Cf. KTU
2
1.6 vi: 27, which is the only other possible example of the word with the mean-
ing pillar, support; Cf. G. del Olmo Lete and J. Sanmartn, Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language
in the Alphabetic Tradition. HdO 67 (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 62.
36 A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048
Olmo Lete has cited a separate hollow root with the meaning to feel, cognate
with Hebrew . Te resulting translations are as follows:
Caquot: Alors, moi, je ne sens pas dappui, je nai pas dappui.
21
De Moor and Spronk: Did I not hasten to fulfll the sworn obligation? I have no
sworn obligation to fulfll.
22
Del Olmo Lete: Already I do not feel the curse, already the curse does not afect
me!
23
Tere are no morphological clues in the form
ah most likely is related to the Hebrew root . Tat is, De Moor and
Spronks translation represents an unusual coupling of the verb hw
(to hasten) with the noun
lu as
the subject, though the issue is whether the deity is renamed in line three or if
he is to be inferred from line one. Te frst option, namely to understand the
word b
l in line three as a vocative that restates the subject of the verb eases the
transition from third-person verbal forms in line one to second-person forms
in line three. At the same time, the alternative proposal has been ofered by
Cyrus Gordon, who analyzed b
lu. Tis is not surprising given the formers role alongside the god Yammu
in the death of king Kirtas brothers and wives (KTU
2
1.14: 1820). At the
same time, Rapu is poorly known at Ugarit and his malevolent behavior in
the mythical texts seems to stand in contradistinction with the more agreeable
presentation to be inferred from the deitys widespread appearance in the
Ugaritic onomastics.
Te fnal matter in this line that requires comment is the third-person suf-
fxes (kilyatahu .wa libbahu). Tese sufxes, whether masculine or feminine,
have no clear antecedent within the text. Te best solution, therefore, seems to
be that no antecedent is present in the text; rather these sufxes would have a
trans-textual referent, namely the person who benefts from this magical
incantation.
26
Lines 45: 4) [tin?] . pku . bi g
urri)
27
and clifs (halbi).
Te image here is akin to that in KTU
2
1.4 vii 2729: Ba
lu opens a rift in
the clouds. Ba
lu repeats
the utterance of his lips (pth). His holy voice (qlh) causes the earth [to shud-
der], the mountains ( g
lus attack against Mtu in line fve. I owe this observation to Matthew
Suriano.
36
Caquot, Un Recueil Ougaritique de Formules Magiques, 34.
37
Ibid.
A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048 39
clause in line fve as a second clause subordinate to t n . pk . b hlb, resulting in
en jambment. Tat is, the conjunction k subordinates the colon k tgwln . ntk
and the following clause [k .] w ptk . l ty, although in the latter case the
conjunction has been restored.
Line 56: 5) himma. tag
lu as the
subject of the verb tg
in line four (q
?
r),
though he translates the latter as if it were the lemma g
rm in line fve. Virolleaud did not indicate that these signs were difcult to read
nor did de Moor and Spronk, which suggest the possibility that del Olmo Letes tentative inter-
pretation of these signs is due to the fact that the tablet has sufered additional deterioration since
these previous editions were prepared.
40
Epigraphically these two letters are similar, difering only by a winkelhocken.
41
Contrary to de Moor and Spronk who suggest that Virolleaud intimated that the letter t
was legible. (De Moor and Spronk, More on Demons at Ugarit, 240), his copy simply indi-
cates one wedge that is efaced and transcribes br[-]k (Viroleaud, Le palais royal dUgarit II,
4,5).
42
Del Olmo Lete, KTU 1.82: Another Miscellaneous Incantation, 247, 249.
43
Epigraphically, it should be noted that no trace of the second wedge of the q is visible.
44
See E.L. Greenstein, YHWHs Lightning in Psalm 29:7. Maarav 9 (1993): 4957.
40 A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048
them.) and is consistent with Ba
lu Cycle and in
the context of KTU
2
1.82.
No restoration has been accepted by all interpreters at the beginning of line
six. De Moor and Spronk supplied the preposition l before what they inter-
pret as an infnitive hp.
45
Caquot suggested the reading [
ar]hp, which he
translated . . . je vollterai. Te metaphorical meaning of to be afutter, joy-
ful, however, is unattested for this root; rather, in Ugaritic, as with the cog-
nate form in Hebrew, rhp seems to be a verb of motion strictly associated with
fying (birds).
46
An alternative to the above proposals is to restore the verb shp,
which is congruent with the mythological overtones found throughout KTU
2
1.82.
47
Tis restoration is consistent with the fate that Mtu meets in KTU
2
1.6 ii:1119.
48
A point of comparison for this image in KTU
2
1.82 is found in
the Hebrew Bible, in Proverbs 28.3, which uses this verbal root to describe
the oppression of the poor as an overwhelming rain leaving no food
( ). In this biblical example, then, the verbal root is used to
carry the image of the powerful force of a rain-storm, which is precisely the
context in which it is restored in KTU
2
1.82.
49
Line 6: .
an .
uhud . ba
lima
Te remainder of line six concludes the mythological allusion to the Ba
lu
Cycle with two short appeals to the deities apu and Ba
lu.
49
Tis biblical passage not only illustrates the verbal roots association with the might of a
rain storm, but also shares the ironic use of agricultural imagery found in the Ba
lu Myths
description of Mtus defeat. KTU
2
1.6 ii:3035 : 30) t
ihd 31) bn .
nn
. b ht r . tdry 33) nn . b it . trpnn 34) b rhm . tthnn . b d 35) tdr
Ilu, Mtu. With a knife she splits him; with a winnowing fork she winnows him; with fre she
burns him; with a hand mill she grinds him, in the feld she sows him.
50
Te text uses qla, voice, rather than p, which is found above to describe Ba
lus
power in the storm (cf. KTU
2
1.4 vii: 29, 31). Te frst colon {p . hw} raises an epigraphic
A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048 41
Te frst statement appeals to Ba
lus
confict with Yammu (i.e. KTU
2
1.3 iii: 3845). Te second exclamation
invoking apu (Oh apu, give life!)
52
is less apparent, but is still consistent
with apus role as an ally of Ba
Ilu that
Ba
uhud . ba
uhd.
Del Olmo Letes has ofered a new reading: dgd. I have retained the earlier
reading of these signs for several reasons. First, del Olmo Lete acknowledges
that his collation yields an unintelligible reading, which forced him to emend
his new reading to b
!
gd (with coriander). Furthermore, while del Olmo Lete
states that the
u. As
for the h, all previous collations had recognized this sign without problem,
leaving one to wonder if del Olmo Letes new reading is simply the result of
question Caquot prefers the reading {hr} following Virolleaud. By contrast, del Olmo Lete takes
his cue from the collation of de Moor and Spronk who read {hw}. I have opted for the latter
reading.
51
Te form, itself, is very likely a plural since there are no putative uses of enclitic m used on
this tablet.
52
Del Olmo Letes attempt to interpret rnn as taking a double accusative seems unlikely in
light of the Hebrew usage, which does not function this way.
53
Richard C. Steiner has suggested that the Semitic phrase
uhd.
Line 7: [
ihu . hmt . t mt .
Line 7 is the only portion of this incantation that does not seem to be literarily
dependent on the Ba
lu Cycles theomachy
67
into an incantation with a religio-magical prescrip-
tion for a snakebite is intuitive: the theomachy motif frequently involved the
defeat of a serpentine adversary, often by taming, or binding, the mouth of
this adversary. For example, a theomachy, like that presented in the Ba
lu
Cycle, is alluded to in an Akkadian serpent incantation that invokes the Mes-
opotamian myth of Tipaks confict with a dragon.
68
In this Akkadian incan-
tation, a theomachy involving Tipaks defeat of a serpentine foe was used to
conjure the power to disarm a venomous serpents bite. Furthermore, it should
be added that a gods taming or controlling the mouth of a foe in mythologi-
cal texts could convey the victors complete subjugation of his opponent. Tat
is, the mouth in the ancient Near East was considered a source of life and
power and consequently one of the most difcult bodily organs to restrain.
69
Tus in the Mesopotamian myth Enma Eli, when Marduk confronts Tia-
mat she is uttering incantations and spells. Ten, once Tiamat has opened her
mouth to swallow Marduk, she is defeated by a blast that tears open her jaws.
Te fatal blow is directed at the gaping jaws of Tiamat to signal Marduks
incision at the locale of the bite, or bloodletting, as known from Te Brooklyn Papyrus. Te
practice of bloodletting is not known in the Near East prior to the Greek period (see, Sauneron,
Un trait gyptien dophiologie 278; 110112; on bloodletting, see M.J. Geller, Bloodletting in
Babylonia, in Magic and Rationality in Ancient Near Eastern and Graeco-Roman Medicine, eds.
H.F.J. Horstmanschof, M. Stol, C. Tilburg [Leiden: Brill, 2004], 30524.). Caquot has dis-
missed this interpretation, explaining that de Moor and Spronks solution may rest too heavily
on their understanding of the tablet as a treatment for unhealthy menstruation: . . . ces rap-
prochements sont trop incertains . . . pour quon restitue la ligne 1 [lbt]y en faveur de ma flle
et
[dth], ses rgles. (Caquot, Un Recueil Ougaritique de Formules Magiques, 36). Caquot,
himself, left this portion of the line untranslated.
67
For an excellent discussion of theomachy, see J.H. Walton, Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology.
Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns (2011): 6874.
68
Te incantation is VAT 8383 (edited in J. van Dijk, Vert comme Tipak. OrNS 38
[1969] 540). For the theomachy motif in this mythological tradition, see also F.A.M. Wigger-
mann, Tipak, His Seal, and the Dragon muhuu, in To the Euphrates and Beyond: Archaeo-
logical Studies in Honour of Maurits N. van Loon, eds. O. Haex et al. (Rotterdam: Balkema,
1989), 11733; Lewis, CT 13.3334 and Ezekiel 32, 2847.
69
See I. Marcus, In His Lips He Held a Spell, Notes in the History of Arts 13/4
(1994): 911.
A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048 45
unqualifed victory in this theomachy. Similarly, the biblical depiction of
Leviathan in Job 40.2526 calls attention to the might of a dragon by focus-
ing on its mouth: Can you pull leviathan with a hook or with a rope restrain
his tongue? Can you put a ring through his nose or with a hook pierce his
jaw?
70
And in the Ba
itbm [KTU
2
1.3 iii:
40]).
71
Tus while to-date KTU
2
1.82: 17 is unique at Ugarit, it nevertheless
fts within the larger Syro-Mesopotamian milieu that this incantation invokes
Ba
lus mythical powers associated with the defeated Tunnanu and Mtu for
the magical purpose of curing a snakes venomous bites.
Second, it should be noted that KTU
2
1.82:17 does not haphazardly
appeal to the well-known Ba
lu
Cycle.
Tird, KTU
2
1.82:17 nuances our understanding of the theomachy in
KTU
2
1.3 iii: 3845 of the Ba
ila rabbama
40) la
itabim tunnana
itam[id ]
ahu
41) mahatu bat na
aqallatna
42) alyata d ab
ati ra
ama
43) mahatu madda
ilima
ria
44) s immattu
igla
ili
tika
45) mahatu kalbata
ilima
ita
46) killtu bitta
ili dabba
38) I have certainly struck the
beloved of
39)
Ilu,
Ariu
44) I have defeated the calf of
Ilu,
Atiku
45) I have struck the bitch of
Ilu,
Itu
46) I have fnished of the daughter
of
Ilu, D abbi.
In this text, scholars have debated whether the epithets were simply applied
to the god Yammu or if they refer to independent creatures under Yammus
authority.
75
Wayne Pitard has re-taken this issue most recently and argued
that Yammu is to be equated with several of the serpentine creatures delin-
eated in the Ba
lu or
Anatu, see N.
Wyatt, Who Killed the Dragon?, Aula Orientalis 5 (1987): 18598; M. Smith and W. Pitard,
Te Ugaritic Baal Cycle, Volume 2. (Leiden: Brill, 2009): 2538.
76
Tis interpretation was originally advanced by F. Lkkegaard, A Plea for El, the Bull, and
Other Ugaritic Miscellanies, in Sudia Orientalia Ionnni Pedersen: Septuagenario, ed. F.F.
Hvidberg (Copenhagen: Hauniae, 1953), 21935. More recently, see W. Pitard, Te Binding
of Yamm, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 57/4 (1998): 276; Pitard, Just How Many Monsters
Did Anat Fight.
77
Pitard, Te Binding of Yamm, 279.
A. E. Miglio / Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013) 3048 47
tablet; it is an inference predicated on the close proximity of the two terms on
that tablet. Te fragmentary state of KTU
2
1.83 may equally be interpreted as
containing two distinct entitiesYammu and the dragon, Tunnanu. In fact,
the uncertainty surrounding this text is underscored by the fact that its precise
genre still remains unknown.
78
Moreover, in contrast to the position that
Yammu bore the epithet Tunnanu in KTU
2
1.3 iii: 3845, I would suggest
that KTU
2
1.82: 17 more clearly presents Tunnanuas well as
Atika whom
I have partially restored at the end of line 1as creatures distinct from
Yammu. As has been noted by numerous interpreters, this conclusion is con-
sistent with the best-known theomachy in Mesopotamia, that in Enma Eli
IV, where Timat is distinguished from the many serpentine creatures that she
has created and who are defeated alongside her in the battle with Marduk.
79
Furthermore, that Tunnanu as well as
Atika, whereas
a reference to Yammu is nowhere to be found. Should Yammu have been
portrayed as serpentine in KTU
2
1.3 iii: 3845, then one might expect that
Yammu would have been invoked by name in KTU
2
1.82: 17 in the efort to
conjure Ba
Atika in KTU
2
1.82: 17 as mere epithets for Yammu would be to inter-
pret Tunnanu and
lus theomoachy
in a text that is otherwise straightforward in its references to the Ba
lu Cycle.
By contrast, the prominence of Tunnanu and
Atika
were creatures distinct from the god Yammu, not being mentioned in KTU
2
1.82 precisely because of his lack of serpentine associations.
78
It seems to be either a short mythological text or an incantation (Pitard, Te Binding of
Yamm, 261).
79
While the observation by M. Smith and W. Pitard (Te Ugaritic Baal Cycle, Volume 2.
[Leiden: Brill, 2009]: 2556) that Enma Eli literarily portrays Timat in several diferent
forms is provocative, it sublimates the obvious structural parallels between the Mesopotamian
theomachy and that of the Ba
lu in KTU
2
1.3 iii:
3845.