Texts in Conversation
In Jeremiah 51, the threat to dry Babylon's waters may echo Baal's defeat of Sea in the Baal Cycle, linking the empire's fall to God's power over the waters.
Share:
2500 BCE
1000+ CE
KTU 1.2 IV:31
Cuneiform Texts from Ugarit
Ancient Near East
like a falcon from his fingers. Strike the skull of Prince Yamm (Ocean), the brow of Ruler Nahar (River)! Let Yamm collapse in a heap, and let him fall to the ground!' Then the mace leapt from the hand of Baal, like a falcon from his fingers. It struck the skull of Prince Yamm, the brow of Ruler Nahar. Yamm collapsed in a heap; he fell to the ground. His joints trembled, and his visage was discomposed. Baal gathered Up and drank Prince Yamm to the dregs, he exterminated Ruler Nahar. By name Athtart chided him Dry him Up, O Valiant Baal! Dry him up, O Charioteer of the Clouds! For our captive is Prince [Yamm], [for] our captive is Ruler Nahar. And […] goes out […] Valiant Baal dries him up, and […] Yamm is surely dead! Baal shall [reign]
Jeremiah 51:36
Hebrew Bible
35 The person who lives in Zion says, “May Babylon pay for the violence done to me and to my relatives.” Jerusalem says, “May those living in Babylonia pay for the bloodshed of my people.” 36 Therefore the Lord says, “I will stand up for your cause. I will pay the Babylonians back for what they have done to you. I will dry up their sea; I will make their springs run dry. 37 Babylon will become a heap of ruins. Jackals will make their home there. It will become an object of horror and of hissing scorn, a place where no one lives.
Search:
Notes and References
“... Many writers have noted the great frequency with which the combat myth
is described or alluded to in the Hebrew Bible.98 While it would be wrong to
claim that the biblical narratives derive immediately from the Ugaritic one,
it is unquestionable that they are joint heirs to one West Semitic strand of
the tradition. Both end up with the victor claiming a patrimony described
as his “inheritance”99 and they share many significant items of vocabulary,
as detailed →in Table 2 below.100 The real significance of these terms is not
just their usage across the divide between Ugaritic and Hebrew literature,
suggesting a cognate relationship (which spreads more widely across
diverse recensions of the tradition), but also their capacity, as key poetic
terms, to evoke the trope even when they are used in isolation, as in some
cases instanced here.101 These points of contact are too numerous to claim
that any similarity is superficial and inconsequential. They are evidently
organically linked. ...” “... b. ybṯ, ybš,
ḥrb, “dry
up”:103
KTU 1.2 iv
29 (ybṯ),
31 (ybṯ)
Isa 50:2 (ḥrb), Jer 51:36 (ḥrb), Nah 1:4 (ybš), Josh 2:10 (ybš) etc., Ps
74:15 (ybš), Isa 42:15 (ybš), 44:27 (ḥrb, ybš), Zech 10:11 (ybš), Exod
14:21 (ḥrb), Isa 44:27 (ḥrb). ...”
* The use of references are not endorsements of their contents. Please read the entirety of the provided reference(s) to understand the author's full intentions regarding the use of these texts.
Your Feedback:
Leave a Comment
Anonymous comments are welcome. All comments are subject to moderation.
1 && show(index - 1)"
@keydown.right.window="open && comments.length > 1 && show(index + 1)">
User Comments
,