The Development, Heyday, and Demise of Panbabylonism by Gary D. Thompson
Copyright © 2004-2009 by Gary D. Thompson
The Development, Heyday, and Demise of Panbabylonism
Introduction:
This article primarily seeks to trace the twin influences leading to Panbabylonism. These were (1) the theme of Babylonian influence on the Bible, and (2) the theme of diffusion from Babylon. The theme of Babylonian influence on the Bible originated with the discovery of a Babylonian version of a flood myth that had similarities to the flood myth in the Old Testament Book of Genesis. The theme of diffusion of culture from Babylon originated with discoveries and theories regarding Babylonian metrology. Both ideas were to come together in the early 1900s in the Panbabylonian beliefs of Hugo Winckler. Winckler can be considered the real founder of Panbabylonism in his Geschichte Israels, Volume 2, 1900. By 1901, with the publication of his Himmels- und Weltenbild der Babylonier, Winckler had worked out a comparative schema of world mythology based on Babylonian presuppositions. An alternative term for Panbabylonism is the Astral-mythological school. The more exact designation for Panbabylonism would be Panbabylonian astralism. Ultimately it sought to explain many historical persons and events within a framework of astral mythology. Loosely, the last quarter of the 19th-century and the first quarter of the 20th-century comprised the period for the development, heyday, and demise of Panbabylonism.
(1) Development:
Assyriology can be said to begin with the agreement (achieved working independently) between four European scholars (Henry Rawlinson, William Talbot, Edward Hincks, and Jules Oppert) in 1857 on the method for correctly deciphering one particular type of cuneiform script. The early discoveries showed that at the earliest stage of the development of cuneiform writing there was a developed system of mathematics. This and the concept of diffusion of ideas from Mesopotamia (and the concept of star myths) were the basis for Panbabylonism. The Panbabylonism existing in Germany from circa 1904 to 1918 was comprised largely of Assyriologists and cuneiform philologists. Additionally, for much of the 19th-century (and declining by the 1920s) the study of Assyriology was often valued primarily as a means of illustrating the Bible. This period of biblical-Near Eastern comparative research resulted in what Samuel Sandmel has labelled as "parallelomania."
1850-1880:
Discovery of Babylonian Astronomy
In 1847 the German Orientalist Julius Oppert (1825-1905) moved to France and in 1869 was appointed Professor of Assyriology in the College du France. In 1856 Oppert gave the first approximate correct rendering of the Michaux Stone (Caillou du Michaux) which had been brought from Mesopotamia to Paris in 1800. This was one of the earliest decipherments of the new newly discovered language on Babylonian inscriptions.
In 1891 the Reverend Archibald Sayce (1846-1933), a pioneer Assyriologist, was appointed Professor of Assyriology at the University of Oxford and held the position until 1919. In 1874 Sayce published a long and important paper titled the Astronomy and Astrology of the Babylonians (Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, Volume 3, Part 1), with transcriptions and translations of the relevant cuneiform texts.
Both Oppert and Sayce were the first to recognise and translate astronomical cuneiform texts.
Notion of Diffusion from Mesopotamia
In 1872 the newspaper announcement by the Assyriologist George Smith (1840-1876) of his discovery of a close parallel in Babylonian cuneiform tablets to the Bible story of the Deluge (he had discovered a Babylonian Noah in cuneiform tablets) served to create a sensation and an unflagging public and professional interest in the subject of Assyriology in both Europe and North America. Smith announced that the Bible deluge story was merely a Hebrew adaptation of an older Babylonian story. ("The Chaldean History of the Deluge." appeared in The [London] Times, Number 27551, 4th December, 1872; and "The Chaldean Story of the Deluge." appeared in The [London] Times, Number 27552, 5th December, 1872.) Also triggered by Smith's discovery was an ongoing debate in Britain on the origin of culture and religion that engaged such scholars as James Frazer and Edward Tylor. (Smith first read a paper on his discovery to the December 3rd, 1872, meeting of the Society of Biblical Archaeology. His paper "The Chaldean Account of the Deluge." appeared in The Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, Volume 2, 1873, Pages 213-234.) In 1874/1875 he translated and pieced together the Babylonian creation story. The results of this further work by Smith was published in his book The Chaldean Account of Genesis (1876). Because the earlier Babylonian creation and deluge accounts were so similar to the biblical accounts it was recognised that the Bible narratives had been influenced by the Babylonian accounts.
The German Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch was in London at the time of the books publication and considered it to be an epoch-making book. He persuaded his brother Hermann to translate the text into German. The result was the book also appeared in a German edition in 1876; with a preface and afterward by Friedrich. Friedrich Delitzsch held that the Deluge accounts derived from a single source.
Babel-Bibel Controversy
The German Orientalist Eberhard Schrader (1836-1908) was the first scholar to publish, in his book Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament (1872), a compilation of what he believed were elements in the Old Testament that were borrowed from Babylonian religion. The commentary was arranged by canonical order of the Old Testament books. His commentary moved through each chapter and verse of the Old Testament, stopping at each verse where comparative philology, mythology, geography, or historical examples could shed light. It displayed a wide knowledge of the history of the ancient Near East and also of ancient languages. An English-language translation by Owen Whitehouse, of the second enlarged German edition, appeared in 1885-1888. (The German-language work was subsequently issued in revised form in 1903 by the German Assyriologists Hugo Winckler and Heinrich Zimmern. Needless to say they rewrote it in the interests of Panbabylonism.)
1881-1889:
Discovery of Babylonian Astronomy
The German Jesuit Joseph Epping (1835-1894) was the founder of the study of cuneiform mathematical astronomical texts. In 1876 he was appointed Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy at the Jesuit College at Blijenbeck Castle, Holland.
When arriving at Blijenbeck Castle in 1881 to work on his Alphabetisches Verzeichniss (published in 6 parts, 1882-1886) the German Jesuit Johann Strassmaier (1846-1920), an Orientalist and leading pioneer in Assyriological studies, sought the help of Epping to understand the cuneiform mathematical astronomical texts he had been copying in the British Museum since 1878; particularly the ones he had come across that year and several of which were dated.
Epping initially succeeded in 1881 in understanding the concluding columns of a lunar ephemeris (BM 34033). The end results of studying further cuneiform mathematical astronomical texts in the British Museum that were copied by Strassmaier were published by Epping in his small book Astronomisches aus Babylon (1889).
Notion of Diffusion from Mesopotamia
In the late 19th-century the idea of cultural diffusion throughout history was influential in Germany. Questions gradually polarised into a debate over polygenesis versus monogenesis. This helped lead the way to Panbabylonism. In 1889 the German Orientalist Carl Lehmann-Haupt (1861-1938), Professor of Ancient History at the University of Innsbruck, submitted a paper titled Das altbabylonische Maass- und Gewichtssystem als Grundlage der antiken Gewichs-, Münz- und Maassysteme [The Old Babylonian System of Volume and Weight as the Foundation of the Ancient System of Weight, Coinage, and Volume] to the 8th International Congress of Orientalists meeting in Stockholm. (See: Actes du Huitième Congrès International des Orientalistes, Tenu en 1889, Section I: Sémitique et de L'Islâm, Pages 165-249.) The paper resulted in the general acceptance of the notion that a single system of measures spread throughout the world by diffusion from Mesopotamia. The further influence of the paper was that it was also reasonable to infer that scientific thinking spread by diffusion from Mesopotamia. Hence, during the 1890s there was the development of the notion of diffusion of culture from Mesopotamia. This was to influence the star-myth school of both Ernst Siecke and Eduard Stucken.
Astronomical Interpretation of Mythology
Beginning circa 1880 various academics and popular writers began to publish astronomical interpretations of mythology. For example: Theogonie und Astronomie by Anton Krichenbauer (1881). The author (1825-1884), a classical philologist, interpreted Homer's Iliad as an astronomical allegory.
1890-1899:
Babel-Bibel Controversy
In 1891 the Assyriologist Heinrich Zimmern published an article (in Zeitschrift für alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, Band 11) in which he claimed that the feast of Purim, mentioned in the Old Testament only in the Book of Esther, is of Babylonian origin.
In 1892 the Assyriologist Peter Jensen published two articles on Elamite proper names (in Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes) in which he claimed (1) that the names Haman and Vashti in the Book of Esther are the names of Babylonian deities, and (2) that the names Mordecai and Esther (in the Book of Esther) are the Babylonian deities Marduk and Ishtar; and Hadassa, a Babylonian word for bride, is another name for Esther.
In 1895 Hugo Winckler published Volume 1 of his Geschichte Israels in Einzeldarstellung. In it Winckler viewed the history of Israel from the standpoint of Eberhard Schrader's Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament (1872). Between circa 1895 and 1900 Winckler also published various minor writings on the history of Israel from this same standpoint.
In 1896 Heinrich Zimmern published the "Babel-Bibel" pamphlet Vater, Sohn und Fürsprecher in der babylonischen Gottesvorstellung. It presented many ideas that were to be later expressed in 1902 by the German Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch in his lecture series.
In 1899 Hugo Winckler published Das alte Westasien. Both this publication and Winckler's earlier Geschichte Israels in Einzeldarstellung (Volume 1, 1895) precipitated the 1902 "Babel-Bibel" controversy by the Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch.
Star-Myth Movement
The German folklorist Ernst Siecke (1846-1935) was the real founder and most active supporter of the star-myth movement. In 1892 Siecke published his Liebesgesschichte des Himmels. This was the first of his many books and pamphlets supporting an astronomical interpretation of mythology. The result of his publications was that interest in star myths generally and the particular interest in Babylon had a mutual affect on each other and resulted in their combining together.
In 1892 the German Assyriologist Heinrich Zimmern published a paper "Der Jakobssegen und der Tierkreis." (Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Verwandte.Zimmern, Siebenter Band, Pages 161-172) in which he showed his a willingness to consider astronomical interpretations of Biblical literature.
The Star-Myth Movement laid emphasis on the predominant importance of the Moon ("Panlunarism") and also the sun.
The astro-mythological school of biblical interpretation began with the publication of Eduard Stucken's Astralmythen. The German Orientalist Eduard Stucken (1865-1936) began publication of his Astralmythen (5 parts, 1896-1907) on world mythology. (Part 1, 1896, Abraham; Part 2, 1897, Lot; Part 3, 1899, Jacob; Part 4, 1901, Esau; Part 5, 1907, Moses.) The work of Stucken, Astralmythen, Part 1, Abraham, and Part 2, Lot, began the idea that the origin of much of Hebrew culture lies in Babylonian mythology. Stucken had intellectual connections with the star-myth school of Siecke in that he adopted the methods of the star-myth school. However, Stucken knew no restraint and attempted to trace the whole system of world myths (at least those he believed to be astral) back to Babylon. It was the work of Stucken that paved the way for the attempt to make Babylonia the prime centre of all religious thought. Stucken held that the Pleiades was the key to the worldwide diffusion of astral myths from Babylonia. On the basis of cuneiform texts Stucken believed he could identify a calendar reform in 2800 BCE as the precise dated when astral myths began diffusing from Babylonia. Stucken believed the calendar reform was connected with a vernal equinox occurring in the constellation "Taurus" (to which the Pleiades belonged) in 3000 BCE.
The Star-Myth Movement and the Panbabylonian Movement affected each other mutually. The Star-Myth movement was the earlier of the two and the Panbabylonian Movement arose from within its ranks. The Panbabylonists further developed the tenets of the Star-Myth school specifically the mythological studies of Eduard Stucken. The Pleiades and the Zodiac, not the Moon and the Sun, were emphasised in Panbabylonism.
The Elamite scholar Georg Hüsing belonged partly to the Star-Myth School and partly to the Panbabylonian School. Hüsing derived all myths from Elam.
Panbabylonism
The sources for old Babylonian religion included an emphasis on, both actual and imagined, astronomical and meteorological phenomena. When the notion of diffusion was added on we had Panbabylonism.
The first person to publish a major work setting out Panbabylonist ideas was Eduard Stucken whose Astralmythen (Part 1) appeared in 1896. It was originally his (abandoned) doctoral dissertation. Stucken sought to prove that all the mythologies of the world were based on astral-lore encrypted in Mesopotamian myths.
The ideas of the German Assyriologist Hugo Winckler (1863-1913), a Cuneiform Philologist and Professor at the University of Berlin, were to lead to the school of thought termed Panbabylonism. (The term "Pan-Babylonianism" was apparently first used by Alfred Jeremias in 1906.) Panbabylonism was largely spread through the efforts of Winckler. (The term "Panbabylonism" was actually coined by the critics of the Winckler-Jeremias school of astral diffusion from Babylon but became adopted by them.) Winckler was to become the leader of the main Panbabylonist movement (distinct from episodes such as Friedrich Delitzsch and the Babel-Bibel controversy, and the independence of the German Assyriologist and Panbabylonist Peter Jensen). Winckler began actively propounding his developing theories all through the 1890s. At the beginning of 1890 Winckler had not systematically worked out the details to his approach to comparative mythology. He produced and edited the periodicals Altorientalische Forschungen (3 volumes, 1893-1906), and Kritische Schriften (6 volumes, 1898-1907) which were the original mouth pieces for his emerging Panbabylonist views. His early book Geschichte Babyloniens und Assyriens (1892) also marked the start of his emerging Panbabylonist views.
Steven Holloway has stated that Winckler's diffusionist model was likely inspired by the ideas of Georg Creuzer set out in his Symbolik und Mythologie der alten Völker besonders der Griechen (1822, 1-Volume edition).
Generally, the key Panbabylonists (Winckler and Jeremias) tried to show that the most important mythologies and world views of other peoples originated from an ancient system of astral myths diffused from Babylon. Hugo Winckler held that all world myth originated from Babylonian astral religion which had originated circa 3000 BCE. Both Winckler and Jeremias held to the "analogy doctrine" of similarities between Mesopotamia and Israel that were borrowed by Israel from Mesopotamia. Peter Jensen's approach to establishing the case for Panbabylonism was distinctively different. Jensen held that virtually the entire bible was a rewriting of the Akkadian Gilgamesh Epic. According to Jensen Israelite history in the Bible, and the story of Jesus of Nazareth, were simply a series of repetitions of the Epic of Gilgamesh. He attempted to prove that the prominent figures and key narratives in the Old Testament were based on literary influences from the Epic of Gilgamesh. His case for Panbabylonism made almost exclusive use of the Epic of Gilgamesh. Peter Jensen held that Mesopotamian myths, in particular the Epic of Gilgamesh, were the source of all the mythological patterns (world folk tales) in world literature (including the Bible).
(2) Heyday:
Panbabylonism flourished in Germany between 1900 and 1914. Indeed the Panbabylonists were almost confined to Germany. Though the founder of the main Panbabylonist movement was Hugo Winckler its short though virulent popularity was largely due to the writings of the German Archaeologist Alfred Jeremias. (Hugo Winckler has been described as the unsuspecting founder of Panbabylonian school of thought. He sided with the diffusionists and argued for monogenesis. It was Winckler who brought coherence to the tenets of Panbabylonism.) Jeremias was a great admirer of Winckler and untiring in both his promotion and defence of Winckler's views on Panbabylonism. The claim that moderate Panbabylonism was represented by Alfred Jeremias seems misplaced.
The initial core of staunch Panbabylonists consisted of Eduard Stucken, Hugo Winckler, Heinrich Zimmern, and Alfred Jeremias. (Eduard Stucken and Hugo Winckler had collaborated on a number of publications.) Their ranks were later added to by Peter Jensen (whose Panbabylonist arguments remained largely independent from those of the Winckler-Jeremias school) and Ernst Weidner. (Winckler, Jeremias, and Zimmern had all studied Assyriology at the University of Leipzig under Friedrich Delitzsch. Jeremias spent most of his working life as a Lutheran pastor in Leipzig. As a student he had studied both Assyriology and Theology.) They can be considered an extreme wing of the astral myth school.
Stucken's method was to identify motifs within Mesopotamian stories and then identify correspondences. Winckler's distinctive emphasis was the identification of number symbolism. Jeremias placed emphasis on astral symbolism. (Later, Jensen was to distinctively emphasise the influence of the Gilgamesh myth.)
1900:
Discovery of Babylonian Astronomy
In 1900 the German Jesuit mathematician and astronomer Franz Kugler (1862-1929) Franz Kugler published his first study of of Babylonian astronomy Die Babylonische Mondrechnung which brilliantly extended the previous work of Epping. By the end of the decade Kugler, a chemist who was appointed to teach mathematics and astronomy at Ignatius College in Valkenburg, had become a competent Assyriologist and single-handedly, and in scholarly isolation, demolished the tenets of the Panbabylonist movement. Most of his academic life was dedicated to the interpretation of cuneiform texts dealing with astronomy and with the related topics of chronology and mythology. The main characteristic of his method was the application of mathematical rigor for which he is still considered unsurpassed today.
Panbabylonism
The foundations of the whole Panbabylonian system were laid (with some reserves) by Winckler. At the end of volume 2 of his Geschichte Israels (1900) Winckler set out for the first time the mythological and astronomical tenets of the Panbabylonian system. In this publication his initial ideas focused on Isaelite legends. In this volume Winckler adopted and extended Stucken's point of view set out in Astralmythen. However, Winckler built his argument more upon the recurrence of characteristic numbers than upon parallel motifs. As example: The four wives of Jacob are the four phases of the moon; the twelve sons of Jacob are the twelve months; the seven children of Leah are the gods of the days of the week; Lot is associated with Abraham so the two must be Gemini; Abraham's wife Sarah is also his sister and so are identical with Tammuz and Ishtar (who in Babylonian mythology were similarly related to each other).
Both Winckler and Jeremias (and Stucken) had intellectual connections with the star-myth school of Siecke. Their Panbabylonism movement can be considered a special part of it which put forward particular tenets of their own. Stucken's work attracted the attention of Winckler. Winckler's Panbabylonism owed much to the volumous work Astralmythen (5 parts) by his pupil Stucken (which also had connections to the Star-Myth School of Siecke). It was the work of Stucken which laid the foundations for the Panbabylonist attempt to make Babylonia the prime centre of all religious thought (and grounded in an astral philosophy). (However, similar "Babel-Bibel" conceptions of the Old Testament antedate both these authors.) Stucken (essentially a writer, artist, and dramatist) had uncritically reached the conclusion that all sagas of all peoples can be traced back to the astral myths, such as the creation-myth, of the Babylonians. Stucken's method was to define myths by their motifs, not by persons or types, and he maintained that as it was motifs that were passed from people to people then only motifs could be used for the purposes of comparison.
The basic astral-myth tenets of Panbabylonism were fixed prior to the large-scale decipherment of Babylonian mathematical astronomical texts. The task was first begun with the pioneering work of Franz Kugler.
1901:
Panbabylonism
In 1901 Winckler published the booklet Himmels- und Weltenbild der Babylonier. The star-myth aspect of Winckler's Panbabylonism was only fully adopted with this publication. The booklet was very influential within Germany. Outside of Germany the publication attracted very little attention and remained obscure. Winckler contended that the zodiac was recognised when the spring equinoctial constellation was the "Twins" circa 4000 BCE. Also, Winckler believed he had worked out an important element of the ancient "world conception" in the formula Himmelsbild ist Welt and he used the term Entsprechungstheorie to describe the formula as the "theory of correspondence." (See also Winckler's: Die Weltanschauung des Alten Orients (1904).) Himmels- und Weltenbild der Babylonier caught the attention of the Assyriologist Alfred Jeremias who quickly became the major proponent of Panbabylonism.
1902:
Babel-Bibel Controversy
The Babel-Bibel controversy involved the extent to which the text of the Bible was dependent on Babylonian culture.
The "Babel-Bibel" controversy broke out in 1902 over two lectures by the German Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch (1850-1922). The lectures by Delitzsch brought Panbabylonism into the public arena. Previously the idea of Panbabylonism had been limited to discussions among academics specialising in Assyriology or Biblical studies. (By 1902 Panbabylonism was well established amongst German assyriologists and bible scholars. It was the German Panbabylonists who asked Delitzsch to present his ideas on such in his 1902 lectures.) In his two public lectures Delitzsch attempted to demonstrate the Babylonian origins for many Old Testament beliefs. The "Babel-Bibel" debate was a debate between scholars. Basically the initial reaction against the views expressed by Friedrich Delitzsch was that of conservative German protestantism. The anti-Semitic aspect of the views expressed by Delitzsch within his arguments did not really heighten until 1908. The Babel und Bibel lectures of Delitzsch raised a furor in Germany. The "Babel-Bibel Streit" ("Babel Bible Controversy") begun by Delitzsch was the most public controversy of the time. The "Babel-Bibel" controversy was at its height in throughout 1903 and began to subside in 1904.
The 1902 lectures by Delitzsch intensified the Babel-Bibel aspect of the Panbabylonism of both Winckler and Jeremias. (Delitzsch's Babel-Bibel view were part of the Panbabylonism movement supported by Winckler.) For several years after 1902 Winckler and Jeremias emphasised biblical studies. After 1902 the application of the Panbabylonian theory to the narrative of the Old Testament is made in detail by both Winckler and Jeremias. In this manner the publications of the Panbabylonists served to continue the Babel-Bibel debate. The Winckler-Jeremias school held that the astral conception of the world and of religion was known in Canaan and was expressed by the Israelite writers in the Old Testament stories especially. The Winckler-Jeremias school held that substantial Biblical narratives are presented under astral forms. (See also, apart from Geschichte Israels (Volume 2, 1900) by Winckler; Winckler in the first half of Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament (3rd edition) edited by Schrader; Zimmern in the second half of Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament (3rd edition) edited by Schrader; and Jeremias in Das Alte Testament.)
Panbabylonism
Publication of the pamphlet Die babylonische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zur unsrigen by Winckler marks the beginning of numerous publications over the next decade by the group of German scholars who would become known as Panbabylonists.
By 1902 the twin themes of Babylonian influence on the Bible (from George Smith in 1872 through to Friedrich Delitzsch in 1902) and diffusion from Babylon (from Carl Lehmann-Haupt in 1889, through Ernst Siecke in 1892, through to Eduard Stucken in 1896) had been absorbed into the Panbabylonism of Winckler and Jeremias. Before the 1902 lectures by Delitzsch interest in the Panbabylonism of Winckler was confined to limited academic circles in Germany. After the 1902 lectures by Delitzsch the Panbabylonism of Winckler went to extreme lengths in its reduction of the Old Testament to dependency of Babylonian astral mythology.
1903:
Panbabylonism
After 1900 Winckler found a vigorous and efficient ally in Alfred Jeremias. In his booklet Im Kampe um Babel und Bibel (1903) Alfred Jeremias first fully and emphatically accepted the hypotheses of the mythological system developed by Winckler. Jeremias followed Winckler in essentials but lay special stress on the notion of zodiacal ages. (The idea of zodiacal eras marked by the (shifting) location of the spring equinox in a constellation and dating back to circa 5000 BCE is not original with the Panbabylonism school but was merely put forward by them with more insistence on the Babylonian origin of such ideas.)
An important work published in 1903, supporting the tenets of Panbabylonism, was Keilinschriften und Babel nach ihrem religionsgeschichtlichen zausammenhang by the German Assyyriologist Heinrich Zimmern (1862-1931).
In a lengthy letter published in The [London] Times during 1903 the English Assyriologist William St. Chad Boscawen defended the German Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch from the growing number of attacks made on him since his his two "Babel-Bibel" lectures in 1902.
1904:
Panbabylonism
In his Die Panbabylonisten: Der alte Orient und die ägyptische Religion (1904) Jeremias agreed with Fritz Hommel in holding that the Egyptian religious system was based on, or derived from, the Babylonian religious system.
In 1904 Alfred Jeremias also published Das Alte Testament im Lichte den Alten Orients (2 Volumes). The later (1911) English translation of this book is the best presentation of Panbabylonism in English. It is a comparativist tour de force. In it Jeremias formulated and firmly grounded the Panbabylonian position, drawing upon his own area of expertise, the Biblical Near East. The book's major goal is to prove that the Old Testament Weltanschauung derives from and is the same as the Babylonian one.
The last of several early flirtations by Franz Kugler (the pioneer of the recovery of much of Babylonian astronomy) with the tenets of Panbabylonism is his essay "Die Sternenfahrt des Gilgamesh: Kosmologische Würdigung des babylonischen Nationalepos." (Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, Volume LXVI, 1904, Pages 432-449, and 547-561). It was an examination of the Gilgamesh epic as astronomical mythology. (A few years later in his Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel, Buch 1, (1907) Kugler rejected the article.)
Universal Solar Myth Movement
Publication of Das zeitalter des sonnongottes (1904) by the eccentric amateur anthropologist and ethnologist Leo Frobenius. Frobenius sought an ancient sun myth origin for world-wide mythology. The arguments in this book were to latter influence his last pupil Hertha von Dechend and result in her 1969 book (with Giorgio de Santillana) Hamlet's Mill.
1905:
Panbabylonism
After circa 1905/6 both Winckler and Jeremias retired from debates about the value of Biblical testimony for the Panbabylonist case. By circa 1905 reaction was setting in against the astral theories comprising Panbabylonism. However, the Panbabylonist debate continued and was not a spent force until the time of Winckler's death in 1913. Peter Brown expressed the opinion that with the death of Winkler Panbabylonism was scientifically dead. However, its tenets were never more than pseudo-scientific. After World War 1 it lingered on through the efforts of Alfred Jeremias and Peter Jensen (and, to a lesser extent, Ernst Weidner).
1906:
Babel-Bibel Controversy
Wilhelm Erbt in his book Die Hebraer (1906, Pages 196-201), under the influence of the astral theories of Panbabylonism, suggested that Canticles is a collection of paschal songs of Canaanitish origin. Erbt proposed that Canticles describes the love of the sun-god Tammuz (called Dod or Shelem), and the moon-goddess Ishtar (under the name of Shalmith). His arguments met with little favour.
Panbabylonism
The principal representatives of Panbabylonism (Winckler, Jeremias, and Stucken) were among the founders of the "Society for the Promotion of Comparative Mythology." Indeed, they were the key founders. (The Star-Myth School with Panbabylonism was established within such. It advocated the so-called astral mythology that was championed by Ernst Siecke.) The Society then proceeded to publish a "Mythological Library." The first volume published was Drachenkampfe: Untersuchungen zur indogermanischen Sagenkunde by Ernst Siecke (1907).
Publication of Das Gilgamesch-Epos in der Weltliteratur (volume 1) by the German Assyriologist Peter Jensen (1861-1936). (Volume 2 was published in 1928.) In this book Jensen maintained that the greater parts of the Old Testament (i.e., the Patriarchs and the Prophets) and even the substance of the Gospels (including Jesus) are simply faint echoes of the old Babylonian epic of Gilgamesh. It was an uncritical attempt to derive all ancient myths from the Babylonian Gilgamesh epic. Apparently it was this book and its doctrines that completely converted Zimmern to Panbabylonism. However, Jensen's book was largely ignored. In Jensen's view the Gilgamesh epic is a story that that deals with the movements of a planet in its conjunction with the fixed stars, and that the story is to be understood in terms of the astrological significance of such. The fallibility of Jensen's multitude of Gilgamesh parallelisms with various world-wide sagas, myths, and tales is that most of such are simply coincidences of detail, sometimes of a very natural and unsurprising character, and sometimes the resemblances are of such a general nature as to be quite useless as convincing evidence. Jensen never formed part of the Winckler-Jeremias school of Panbabylonism and a degree of hostility actually existed between them. Jeremias made clear the Winckler-Jeremias school of Panbabylonism specifically dissociated itself from the claims Jensen made in his highly controversial book on Gilgamesh.
Critique
Publication of "Winckler's altorientalisches Phantasiebild." by Hugo Gressmann (Zeitschrift für Wissenschaftliche Theologie, Band 49, 1906, Pages 289-309). An early and major criticism of Panbabylonism.
1907:
Discovery of Babylonian Astronomy
Kugler begins publication of his monumental Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel (2 volumes and 2 supplements, 1907-1924; supplement 3 by the German Assyriologist Johann Schaumberger, 1935). Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel [Star Science and Star Beliefs in Babylon] was the masterwork that recovered Babylonian astronomy. (Kugler's projected 5 volumes of Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel was unfortunately never completed.) Kugler demonstrated that the idea of a highly developed scientific astronomy in ancient Mesopotamia was untenable. Kugler showed that a highly developed astronomy did not originate at the beginning of Babylonian civilization but quite at the end of it - after circa 700 BCE. After World War I the open controversy between Kugler and the Panbabylonists was not renewed.
Panbabylonism
Publication of the book Die babylonische Geisteskultur by Hugo Winckler in which he set out for the general public the main ideas of Panbabylonism.
In 1907 the journal Im Kampfe um den alten Orient was established by Winckler to specifically further the cause of Panbabylonism. It largely avoided mythological arguments and the focus was on arguments based on cuneiform philology. Also, when the German Assyriologist and Panbabylonist Felix Peiser (1862-1921) became editor of Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, the German journal dedicated to ancient Near Eastern studies, Winckler and the supporters of Panbabylonism dominated its content.
Publication of the second edition of Die Panbabylonisten: Der alte Orient und die ägyptische Religion (1907) by Alfred Jeremias. The second edition gained great currency and was akin to a Panbabylonian textbook.
The German archaeologist Immanuel Benzinger (1865-1935) was converted to the ideas of Panbabylonisn by both Winckler and Jeremias. Benzinger's book Hebräische Archäologie (1894) was revised (1927) to include the Panbabylonian concepts of Winckler and Jeremias.
Critique
In his Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel, Buch 1, (1907) Kugler first set out his firm opposition to the tenets of Panbabylonism.
1908:
Critique
The ethnologist and historian Wilhelm Schmidt quite early set out to refute Panbabylonisism. His 1908 19-page pamphlet (off-print) Panbabylonismus und ethnologischer Elementargedanke was originally published as a journal article in: Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, Band XXXVIII, (der dritten Folge Band VIII).
In his "President's Address" (Transactions of the Third International Congress for the History of Religions, 1908, Volume 1, Pages 231-248) the American Semiticist Morris Jastrow Junior criticised the "Babel-Bibel" aspect of Panbabylonism. (At least one current academic mistakenly believes that Morris Jastrow Junior was a proponent of Panbabylonism.)
1909:
Panbabylonism
Publication of the monograph Moses, Jesus, Paulus: Drei Varianten des babylonischen Gottmenschen Gilgamesch by Peter Jensen. It continued the extreme claims he made in his book published three years earlier (i.e., particularly focused on his assertion that Gilgamesh was the ancient prototype of the Bible figures Moses, Jesus, and Paul).
Critique
Publication in the journal Anthropos of the trenchant article against Panbabylonism Auf den Trümmern des Panbabylonismus [On the Ruins of Panbabylonism] by Kugler. (The Panbabylonist Alfred Jeremias replied the same year with the 2nd edition of his 1908 booklet Das Alter der babylonischen Astronomie (1909).)
In the USA the Semiticist Albert Clay spent the first half of his book Amurru: The Home of the Northern Semites specifically critiquing the claims of Panbabylonism and arguing against a Babylonian origin for the religion and culture of Israel. (He was the leading opponent of Panbabylonism in North America.)
1910:
Babel-Bibel Controversy
The German Assyriologist Heinrich Zimmern (1862-1931) collected a mass of material from Babylonian sources which he used in an attempt to prove that the "Christusmythe" is derived from the legends of the Babylonian god Bel-Merodach [Bel-Marduk]. (Or, more exactly, simply a repetition of such.) Hermann Zimmern held that the New Testament mirrored the Babylonian Creation Epic and that the "myth of Bel-Marduk of Babylon" formed the basis for the story of Christ's Passion. His arguments were set out in his book Zum Streit um die Christusmythe (1910) but actually appeared as early as 1901.
Critique
Publication of the trenchant book against Panbabylonism Im Bannkries Babels [In Babylons Binding Spell: Panbabylonian Constructions and Facts of Historical Religions] by Kugler. The book was an expansion of his 1909 article in the journal Anthropos. In this book Kugler solidly rejected his previous astral interpretation of the Gilgamesh epic undertaken in his 1904 article.
In his article "Panbabylonianism." (The Havard Theological Review, Volume III, 1910, Pages 47-84) the American theologian Crawford Toy made a lengthy criticism of the "Babel-Bibel" aspect of Panbabylonism.
In his standard volumes The History of Babylonia and Assyria (2 Volumes, 1910-1915) the English Assyriologist Leonard King showed his disbelief in Panbabylonism by simply ignoring Panbabylonist tenets.
1911:
Panbabylonism
Publication of an English-language edition of the book Das Alte Testament im Lichte den Alten Orients (2 Volumes) by Alfred Jeremias. The English title was The Old Testament in the light of the Ancient East (2 Volumes). The translator was the Assyriologist (and Church Canon) Claude Johns (Master of St. Catherine's College, Cambridge) who, in his Editor's Introduction, confirmed his leaning towards the tenets of Panbabylonism. However, he he did not hold extravagant Panbabylonist views.
Critique
Publication of the booklet Astronomie, Himmelsschau und Astrallehre bei den Babyloniern by Carl Bezold. The booklet gave support to the criticisms of the Panbabylonist position made by Franz Kugler.
Publication in 1911 of Das Gilgamesh-Epos by Arthur Ungnad and Hugo Gressmann. It was an important study at the time of its publication and it included a critical lengthy discussion of possible astronomical elements in the Gilgamesh epic.
1913:
Panbabylonism
The first edition of Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur by Jeremias appeared. It quickly gained a wide and popular audience audience.
Critique
Publication of Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel. Ergänzungen zum Ersten und Zweiten Buch. I. Teil by Franz Kugler. It contained a further critique of Panbabylonism and a discussion of the origin and date of scientific astronomy in Babylon.
1914:
Panbabylonism
In 1914 the cuneiform philologist Ernst Weidner (1891-1976) entered the fray on the side of the Panbabylonists. After the publication of Im Bannkries Babels (1910) by Kugler the ranks of the Winckler-Jeremias Panbabylonism movement received support in the person of the very young Weidner who was not only expert in cuneiform languages but was also proficient in astronomy and mathematics. As a young Assyriologist Weidner was influenced very early by the Assyriologist and Panbabylonist Felix Peiser (who was editor of the journal Orientalistische Literaturzeitung). However, It appears that Weidner was a student of both Felix Peiser and Alfred Jeremias. The monograph (published by the Winckler-Jeremias movement) Alter und Bedeutung der babylonischen Astronomie und Astrallehre (1914) by Weidner was intended to be a refutation of Kugler's main contention regarding the falsehood of Babylonian knowledge of precession and the phases of Venus. Kugler responded with a highly critical review of the monograph.
Critique
Short critique of Panbabylonism in opening chapters of Pantheon Babylonicum (1914) by Nicolaus Schneider, an Assyriologist.
(3) Demise:
The Panbabylonists were unable to answer the many criticisms of Franz Kugler. The Panbabylonian controversy ended with the death of Hugo Winckler in 1913 and Panbabylonism was scientifically dead by the end of World War 1. The final publications were Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur by Jeremias, and Alter und Bedeutung der babylonischen Astronomie und Astrallehre by Weidner (and also Handbuch der babylonischen Astronomie by Weidner). Following World War 1 Jeremias spent his time mostly updating his key publications and produced only a few new pamphlets. In the mid-1920s Panbabyloniasm continued to receive the support of some influential scholars but was not nearly so dominant as it was by the time of the First World War. By the 1930s it had gradually faded into being a historical curiosity.
1915:
Panbabylonism
Publication of Handbuch der babylonischen Astronomie by Ernst Weidner. First volume of a planned multi-volume work on Babylonian astronomy. The other volumes were never proceeded with. Though published in 1915 the book had actually been written and printed in 1913.
1920:
Babel-Bibel Controversy
Die grosse Täüschung [The Great Deception] by Delitzsch (2 volumes, 1920/21). In this book Delitzsch claimed that many of the prominent stories in the Old Testament must be interpreted as astronomical information and that this information was derived from Babylonian scientific astronomy. The book was strongly anti-Semitic. In this diatribe against Judaism Delitzsch tried to prove, amongst other things, that Jesus had not been Jewish but a Galilean Aryan instead.
1923:
Precession
Publication of Berossos und die babylonisch-hellenistische Lieratur by Paul Schnabel. In this book he tried to demonstrate that precession was discovered by the Babylonian astronomer Kidinnu.
1924:
Panbabylonism
Publication of the 68 page booklet Gilgamesh-Epos: judäische Nationalsagen, Ilias und Odyssee by Peter Jensen.
1926:
Critique
The German historian of religion and Old Testament scholar Hugo Gressmann (1877-1927) was a staunch opponent of the Panbabylonist movement. One of his early critiques of the ideas of the movement was set out in the article "Babylonische-Assyrische Texte" with Erich Ebeling in their book Altorientalische Texte und Bilder zum Alten Testament (1926).
In 1926 the German Assyriologist Benno Landsberger gave a inaugural address when he was appointed Associate Professor of Assyriology at the University of Leipzig. (This was published as "Die Eigenbegrifflichkeit der babylonischen Welt." in Islamica, Band 2, 1926, Pages 355-372.) The address and paper was a benchmark reaction against the comparative methods underpinning the Babel-Bibel Controversy initiated by Friedrich Delitzch. Benno Landsberger sought to ensure that Mesopotamian culture was investigated on its own terms.
1927:
Precession
In his article "Kidenas, Hipparch und die Entdeckung der Präzession." (Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Verwandte Gebiete, Neue Folge, Band 3 (Band 37), 1927, Pages 1-60) Paul Schnabel revisited and expanded the arguments in his 1923 book regarding his belief that the Babylonian astronomer Kidinnu was the discoverer of precession.
1929:
Panbabylonism
Publication of Das Gilgamesch-Epos in der Weltliteratur (volume 2) by the German Assyriologist Peter Jensen. (The external cover has the publication date of 1929 and the inside page has the publication date of 1928.)
The second edition of Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur by Jeremias also appeared.
These were the last substantial publications by Panbabylonists.
1930:
Critique
By the beginning of the 1930s the extent and importance of Egyptian influence on the Levant had become obvious and provided an antidote for the ideas of Panbabylonism.
(4) Resurgence of Panbabylonism:
1932:
Precession
Publication of the doctoral thesis Die Kultrichtung in Mesopotamien (1932) by Günter Martiny, an architect and later medieval building archaeologist. He argued (unsuccessfully) for the precessional realignment of Babylonian temples.
1935:
Astral Mythology
In his Archaeological History of Iran (1935) the German Philologist and Archaeologist and Iranian expert Ernst Herzfeld maintained the localities for the most ancient Iranian myths are not on earth but in the heaven and later the gods became heroes with their places in the heaven projected onto the earth (Page 18). (Ernst Herzfeld was a Professor at the Friedrich-Wilhelm University of Berlin.)
1939:
Panbabylonism
The Panbabylonist ideas were also fostered by the writer Lord Raglan (Fitzroy Somerset, 4th Baron Raglan, 1885-1964) in his small book How Came Civilization? (1939). He insisted that all higher culture and civilization came from southern Mesopotamia.
1951:
Panbabylonism
Publication of the original French-language edition of Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy by Mircia Eliade (The revised and expanded English-language edition was first published in 1964.) It was one of a number of books on the history of religions (especially by the so-called phenomenologists of religion) that showed the influence of Panbabylonism.
The theory of an original diffusion of ideas from proto-historical Mesopotamia, as set out by Henri Frankfort in his book The Birth of Civilization in the Near East (1951) is quite different to Panbabylonism.
1957:
Panbabylonism
In his article "Survivances de l'ancien Orient dans l'Islam (Considerations generales)" in Studia Islamica, 1957, Volume 7, Pages 47-75, the Spanish Orientalist César Dubler draws on some of the Panbabylonist ideas of Hugo Winckler to explain the religious ideas of the Bedouin nomads. (However, César Dubler cannot be classed as a Panbabylonist.)
1958:
Panbabylonism
In his book Das Weiterlebendes des Alten Orients im Islam (1958; Pages 5-6) the Spanish Orientalist César Dubler again draws on some of the Panbabylonist ideas of Hugo Winckler to explain the religious ideas of the Bedouin nomads.
1963-2004:
Precession/Panbabylonism
The publication of Les Cycles du Retour Éternel (2 Volumes, 1963).by the French writer Jean-Charles Pichon contained the twin themes of an ancient zodiac and precession underlying the origin of world-wide mythical themes.
The publication of Hamlet's Mill (1969).by Giorgio de Santillana (USA) and Hertha von Dechend (Germany). The book, basically comprising von Dechend's material edited by de Santillana, contained the twin themes of an ancient zodiac and precession underlying the origin of world-wide mythical themes. The authors held the origin for such lay in the Ancient Near East (i.e., "Babylonia") circa 4000 BCE. The book basically consisted of Hertha von Dechend's poorly organised material for her 1961 and 1966 MIT seminars poorly edited into book form by Giorgio de Santillana when he was ill. Strong influential sources for Hamlet's Mill would have been two Panbabylonian books by Alfred Jeremias listed in the Bibliography of Hamlet's Mill - Das Alte Testament im Lichte des Alten Orients (3rd Revised Edition 1916 (2 Volumes); and Handbuch der Altorientalischen Geisteskultur (2nd Revised Edition, 1929). In the former Alfred Jeremias sets out such ideas as: (1) zodiacal world ages due to precession, (2) the change in world ages represented in myths, and (3) the celestial earth in the zodiac (ecliptic).
In her book The Death of Gods in Ancient Egypt: An Essay on Egyptian Religion and the Frame of Time (1992; 2nd edition, 2003) the American amateur Egyptologist Jane Sellers applied, with much speculation, the precessional theme of Hamlet's Mill to early Egyptian mythology.
In his book The Myth of Replacement: Stars, Gods, and Order in the Universe (1991).the the American Classical scholar Thomas Worthen unsuccessfully took up the themes of Hamlet's Mill with his own speculative examination of world-wide mythology.
In his book The Secret of the Incas: Myth, Astronomy, and the War Against Time (1996) the American writer and cultural anthropologist (?) William Sullivan unsuccessfully took up the themes of Hamlet's Mill with his own speculative examination of Inca mythology and beliefs.
In their book When They Severed Earth From Sky Elizabeth Barber and Paul Barber (2004) maintain that myth originated in prehistoric non-literate societies as a vehicle to preserve and transmit information about real events and observations. In Chapter 16: Of Sky and Time they uncritically follow the central theme of Hamlet's Mill by Giorgio De Santillana and Hertha von Dechend. Their arguments are uninformed and wildly speculative. Elizabeth Wayland is Professor of Linguistics and Archaeology at Occidental College, Los Angeles. Paul Barber is a research associate with the Fowler Museum of Cultural History at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Pan-Ugaritism and Pan-Eblaitism:
In the 1960s Michael Dahood was an influential scholar for pan-Ugaritism. The 1970s and 1980s saw the move to restudy the Old Testament in the light of the archaeological discoveries at Ugarit and Ebla in the ancient Middle East. Claims (the origin of which actually dates back to circa 1930) were made for the influence of the Ugaritic language and Canaanite beliefs on the Old Testament language and religion. Later, the scholars Mitchell Dahood SJ, Giovanni Pettinato, and David Freedman expressed ideas that approach pan-Eblaism. Scholars warned that such had the likelihood of repeating the errors and interpretive distortions of the Old Testament in the manner that the "Babel-Bibel"/Panbabylonism movement had done.
Other:
Pan-Amorite School:
After Pan-Babylonism came the equally militant, but smaller, Pan-Amorite School of Albert Clay. See: A Hebrew Deluge Story in Cuneiform by Albert Clay (1922).
Pan-Egyptionism:
Some Egyptologists and others have made claims for the influence of Egyptian ideas upon the Old Testament. Two leading Pan-Egyptian advocates of the 1920s were Grafton Elliot Smith (a distinguished anatomist) and Rendel Harris. They held that civilization only arose once - and this was in Egypt - and then spread across the globe. These two English "diffusionist" writers replaced Panbabylonism with an equally all-embracing Pan-Egyptionism.
Pan-Hurrian School:
The Pan-Hurrian School of the 1930s did not completely materialise.
Conclusion:
Panbabylonism was an episode of pseudo-science in early Assyrian studies. The Panbabylonism movement was characterised by excessive speculation and the absence of rigorous evidence. The puzzling aspect of Panbabylonism is how such an improbable explanation for religion and mythology became so widely popular so quickly when there was no adequate supporting evidence for most of its claims.
Appendix 1: Tenets of Panbabylonism:
The Panbabylonist school is historically rooted in a period of time when the cultural sciences were concerned with questions of the diffusion, migration, and independent or parallel invention of cultural traits. The Panbabylonists rejected independent or parallel invention. According to them the theory of independent of parallel invention could logically account for the overwhelming amount of systematic unity that they extracted from their data.
The Panbabylonist school held:
(1) All myths (they literally included every religion and mythology within their scheme of interpretation) are concerned entirely, or nearly so, with astral phenomena. (Most mythological narratives were held to have an astronomical basis and contain detailed (but hidden) astronomical information.) In particular they are concerned with the course of the Sun, of the Moon, and on occasion with that of the planet Venus, especially in relation to the twelve signs of the zodiac and the stars in them.
(2) This whole cosmological system was derived from Babylon where it was fully developed as early as circa 3000 BCE. From Babylon its influence gradually extended over the entire world. (In this regard the Panbabylonists were hyperdiffusionists.)
(3) In the 3rd millennium BCE the Babylonians held the concept of the universe as a double-sided principle i.e., the astral belief of correspondences that everything on earth corresponds to its counterpart in the heavens.
(4) The Babylonians as early as 3000 BCE knew that the sun moved through the zodiac in a fixed period of time (i.e., the precesion of the equinoxes) and were capable of reforming their calendar in accordance with such.
According to the theory of Winckler's school, Babylonian astronomy had reached its highest perfection as early as 3000-2000 BCE. By this period the Babylonians had established:
(a) A constellation scheme.
(b) A zodiacal scheme.
(c) Marked the ecliptic.
(d) A scheme of celestial coordinates.
(e) An accurate calendar.
(f) Knowledge of precession.
(g) A sophisticated mathematical knowledge.
Appendix 2: Critique of Panbabylonism:
Criticisms:
The Panbabylonists were criticised for their:
(1) Disregard for textual evidence.
(2) Excessive speculation and absence of rigorous evidence.
(3) Abuse of the argument from analogy.
(4) Wide use of secondary sources.
(5) Wide use of antiquated translations.
(6) Use of a preconceived chronology of Babylonian civilization.
(7) Uncritically argued ideas about an alleged Babylonian "Weltanschauung (i.e., astral philosophy)."
(8) Inability to provide any directly supporting statements contained in texts (i.e., the Panbabylonists could only argue their tenets were implied in widely divergent material).
One of the major flaws of the Panbabylonist school was to argue for a far too early date for the astronomical knowledge of the Babylonians. Part of the problem lay with a misplaced chronology. Up to circa 1930 Sargon of Akkad was generally believed to have reigned circa 3,800 BCE. This chronological error partly influenced the early dating of Babylonian astronomy by the Panbabylonists to circa 3,000 BCE.
The evidence shows Babylonian astronomy actually progressed through three phases:
(a) Simple descriptive (3rd millennium BCE): Names and mythic attributes.
(b) Systematic descriptive (2nd millennium BCE): Simple mathematical and positional.
(c) Scientific/mathematical (1st millennium BCE): Predictive and theoretical.
Appendix 2: Prominent Panbabylonists:
Founders:
(1) Star Myth School:
(a) Ernst Siecke (1846-1935) (Germany) Philologist?
(b) Eduard Stucken (1865-1936) (Germany) Writer/Amateur Philologist.
(2) Babel-Bible School:
(a) Friedrich Delitzsch (1850-1922) (Germany) Assyriologist/Philologist.
(3) Panbabylonism (Star Myth/Babel-Bible):
(a) Hugo Winckler (1863-1913) (Germany) Cuneiform Philologist.
(b) Alfred Jeremias (1864-1935) (Germany) Archaeologist.
(c) Heinrich Zimmern (1862-1931) (Germany) Assyriologist.
(4) Independent Stream (Star Myth/Babel-Bible):
(a) Peter Jensen (1861-1936) (Germany) Assyriologist. Professor für semitische Sprachen; Professor für orientalische Geschichte (at the University of Marburg). Obtained his Assyriological training at the University of Leipzig under Friedrich Delitzsch.
Supporters:
(a) Georg Hüsing (1869-1930) (Germany) Philologist.
(b) Fritz Hommel (1854-1936) (Germany) Semiticist.
(c) Felix Peiser (1862-1921) (Germany) Philologist.
(d) Karl Mücke (1854-1932) (Germany) Philologist.
(e) Immanuel Benzinger (1865-1935) (Germany) Protestant Theologian/Old Testament Scholar/Orientalist. Professor of Old Testament Exegesis at University of Berlin (1898-1902); spent 10 years (1902-1911) teaching (Old Testament Exegesis [?] in Jerusalem at various Christian institutes and at the Ezra Society School) and doing research (excavated at Megiddo from 1903 to 1905) in Palestine; Professor of Bible [Oriental Languages?] at University of Toronto (1912-19125); Meadville (Pennsylvania) (1915-1918); Riga (Latvia) (1921-1935). He was a follower of the Wellhausen school of biblical criticism before later becoming an adherent of the Panbabylonian school.
(f) Otto Weber (1857-1928) (Germany) Orientalist/Assyriologist.
(g) Ernst Weidner (1891-1976) (Germany) Assyriologist.
(h) Carl Fries (1867-?) (Germany) Classicist?/Philologist?
(i) Ferdinand Bork (1871-circa1950?) (Germany) Assyriologist/Philologist. Ferdinand Bork was an expert on Elamite script.
(j) Paul Haupt (1858-1926) (USA) Assyriologist/Philologist. Paul Haupt was a Semitic scholar and pioneer of Assyriology in North America. He was Director of the Oriental Seminary of the Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
(k) (Baron) Felix Oefele [Felix Freiherr von Oefele] (1861-1954) (Germany) Doctor of Medicine/Historian.
(l) Fritz Saxl (1890-1948) (Germany) Art historian. Later (1934) moved to England permanently with the relocation of the Warburg Institute from Hamburg to London. Saxl viewed the history of art as the history of the transmission of pagan mythology. He frequently traced the history of many medieval iconographic themes to ultimate origins in Babylonian traditions.
(m) Paul Schnabel (1887-?) (Germany) Philologist?/Historian.
(n) Paul Ehrenreich (1855-1914) (Germany) Ethnologist.
(o) August Wünsche (1839[1838?]-1913) (Germany) Christian Hebraist/Historian. A colleague of Alfred Jeremias. Focused on rabbinic literature.
(p) Knut Tallqvist (1865-1949) (Finland) Assyriologist. The founder of Finnish Assyriology. Obtained his Assyriological training at the University of Leipzig under Friedrich Delitzsch.
(q) Wilhelm Bousset [Commonly but incorrectly spelled Boussett.] (1865-1920) (Germany) New Testament Scholar/Theologian/Historian.
(r) Wilhelm Erbt (1876-1944) (Germany) Scholar. Authority on Jewish and Teutonic folklore.
(s) Wolfgang Schultz (1881-1936) (Germany) Philologist. The author was a member of the German "star myth" school. Favoured a lunar interpretation of mythology and iconography.
(t) Anton Deimel SJ (1865-1954) (Germany) Assyriologist. Professor of Assyriology at the Pontifical Institute in Rome. He studied Assyriology under Johannes Strassmaier in London. Tried to show the almost universal influence of Babylon from the 3rd-millennium BCE onwards.
Latter-Day Panbabylonists:
(a) Günter Martiny (1901-?) (Germany). Architect/Building Archaeologist.
(b) Lord Raglan [Fitzroy Somerset] (1885-1964) (England) Writer.
(c) Jean-Charles Pichon (1920-2006) (France) Writer/Occultist. Metaphysician and writer whose work is marked by esotericism.
(d) Giorgio de Santillana (1902-1974) (USA) Historian. Professor of the History and Philosophy of Science, M.I.T.
(e) Hertha von Dechend (1915-2001) (Germany) Ethnologist.
(f) Jane Sellers (USA) Writer/Amateur Egyptologist.
(g) Thomas Worthen (USA) Classicist. Retired in 1999 as Associate Professor, Department of Classics, The University of Arizona. Now an Emeritius.
(h) William Sullivan (1946- ) (USA) Anthropologist?/Writer.
(i) Rumen Kolev (Bulgaria) Software developer. Self-declared expert on Babylonian astronomy and astrology. Trenchant (and ill-informed) critic of most professional Assyriologists (both pioneering and modern). Avid supporter of the discredited Panbabylonism of Alfred Jeremias and Ernst Weidner. Currently (2009) promotes his radical and eccentric ideas through his own journal.
Appendix 3: Prominent Opponents:
(1) Star Myth School Tenets:
(a) Elard Meyer (1837-1908) (Germany) Philologist.
(b) Adolf Bastian (1826-1905) (Germany) Ethnologist. Professor at the University of Berlin. Generally recognised as the founder of ethnography. Was particularly opposed to the star myth ideas of Eduard Stucken (as well as Panbabylonism).
(2) Early Scientific Babylonian Astronomy Tenets:
(a) Franz Kugler (1862-1929) (Born in Germany but resided in Holland) Mathematician/Assyriologist.
(b) Carl Bezold (1859-1922) (Germany) Assyriologist.
(3) Babel-Bibel Tenets:
(a) Hugo Gressmann (1877-1927) (Germany) Old Testament Scholar. Professor at the University of Berlin.
(b) Albert Clay (1866-1925) (USA) Philologist. A Lutheran oriental scholar who, during his academic career, edited large numbers of cuneiform texts. He was ordained in 1892 and served as a Pastor in Philadelphia and South Bethlehem, Pennsylvannia; and Chicago, Illinois. During the latter part of his career he was Professor of Semitic Philology and Archaeology, University of Pennsylvania, 1909-1910. He was Professor of Assyriology at Yale University from 1910-1925, and Curator of the Yale Babylonian Collection, 1912-1925.
(c) Morris Jastrow Junior (1861-1921) (USA) Semiticist. Was Professor of Semitic Languages in the University of Pennsylvania.
(d) Crawford Toy (1836-1919) (USA). The Faculty of Divinity, Harvard University.
(4) Basis in Assyriology Tenets:
(a) Nikolaus Schneider (1887-1953) (Germany) Assyriologist.
(b) Leonard King (1869-1919) (England) Assyriologist.
Other Opponents:
(a) Wilhelm Schmidt (1868-1954) (Germany) Ethnologist/Historian.
(b) Otto Schroeder (1851-1937) (Germany) Assyriologist.
(c) Heinrich Rühle (1871-?) (Germany)
(d) Friedrich Küchle (1874-1921) (Germany) Theologian/Assyriologist.
(e) Eduard Meyer (1855-1930) (Germany) Philologist/Historian.
(f) Franz Boll (1867-1924) (Germany) Philologist.
(g) Franz Cumont (1868-1947) (Belgium) Philologist/Historian.
Appendix 4: References:
Arnold, Bill. and Weisberg, David. (2002). "A Centennial Review of Friedrich Delitzsch's 'Babel und Bibel' Lectures." (Journal of Biblical Literature, Volume 121/3, Pages 441-457). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Barton, George. (1908). "Recent German Theories of Foreign Influences in the Bible." (The Biblical world, Volume 31, Number 5, May, Pages 336-347). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Barton, George. (1908). "The Astro-Mythological School of Biblical Interpretation." (The Biblical world, Volume 31, Number 6, June, Pages 433-444). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Budde, Karl. (1903). Das Alte Testament und die Ausgrabungen. [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Ebach, Jürgen. (1998). "Panbabylonismus." In: Gladigow, Burkhard. et. al. (Editors). Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe, Band IV. (Pages 302-304).
Ermoni, Vincent. (1909). "Le panbabylonisme." (Revue des Idées, Tome 6, Pages 339-366). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Finkelstein, Jacob. (1958). Bibel and Babel: A Comparative Study of the Hebrew and Babylon Religious Spirit." (Commentary, Volume 26, July-December, Pages 431-444). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Gold, Daniel. (2003). Aesthetics and Analysis in Writing on Religion: Modern Fascinations. [Note: Focuses on Panbabylonian astral ideas. Contains numerous interesting references.]
Huffmon, Herbert. (1983). "Babel und Bibel: The Encounter Between Babylon and the Bible." (Michigan Quarterly Review, Volume XXII, Number 3, Summer, Pages 309-320). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Karge, Paul. (1913). Babylonisches im Neuen Testament. [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Klaus, Johanning. (1988). Der Bibel-Babel-Streit: Eine forschungsgeschichtliche Studie. [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
König, Eduard. (1905). "The Latest Phase of the Controversy over Babylon and the Bible." (The American Journal of Theology, Volume 9, Number 3, July, Pages 405-420). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
König, Eduard. (1922). Die Moderne Babylonisierung der Bibel. [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Korom, Frank. (1992). "Of Navels and Mountains: A Further Inquiry into the History of an Idea." ((Asian Folklore Studies, Volume 51, Pages 103-125).
Kugler, Franz. (1909). "Auf den Trümmern des Panbabylonismus." (Anthropos, Band IV, Pages 477-499).
Kugler, Franz. (1910). Im Bannkreis Babels: Panbabylonistische Konstruktionen und Religionsgeschichtliche Tatsachen. [Note: Book length refutation of the idea that a highly developed knowledge of astronomy existed in Babylonia circa 3000 BCE.]
Larsen, Mogens. (1995). "The "Babel/Bible" Controversy and Its Aftermath." In: Sasson, Jack. (Editor). Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. (Pages 95-106). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Lehmann, Reinhard. (1994). Friedrich Delitzsch und der Babel-Bibel-Streit. [Note: Book-length study of the Babel and Bible stream which focuses on Friedrich Delitzsch.]
Marchand, Suzanne. (2004). "Philhellenism and the Furor Orientalis." (Modern Intellectual History, Volume 1, Issue 3, November, Pages 331-358). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Oettli, Samuel. (1903). Der Kampf um Bibel und Babel. [Note: Focuses mainly on the Babel and Bible stream. Includes a discussion of Hugo Winckler's Panbabylonian astral ideas.]
Parpola, Simo. (2004). "Back to Delitzsch and Jeremias: The Relevance of the Pan-Babylonian School to the MELAMMU Project." In: Panaino, Antonio. and Piras, Andreas. (Editors). Schools of Oriental Studies and the Development of Modern Historiography. [Note: An informed and sympathetic approach to Panbabylonism.]
Rogerson, John. (1974). Myth in Old Testament Interpretation. (See: Chapter 4 "Astral Mythology and Anthropological Mythology", Pages 45-51). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
Sandmel, Samuel. (1962). "Parallelomania." (Journal of Biblical Literature, Volume 81, Pages 1-13).
Schmidt, Wilhelm. (1908). Panbabylonismus und ethnologischer Elementargedanke. [Note: The pamphlet (off-print) was originally published as a 19-page journal article in: Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, Band XXXVIII, (der dritten Folge Band VIII), Pages 73-91.]
Schmidt, Wilhelm. (1931). The Origin and Growth of Religion: Facts and Theories. (See: Chapter VIII "Star Myths and Panbabylonianism", Pages 91-102). [Note: Comprehensive but not wholly reliable.]
Shavit, Yaacov. and Eran, Mordechai. (2003). The War of the Tablets: The Defence of the Bible in the19th Century and the Babel-Bibel Controversy. [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream. An English-language edition is planned for this Hebrew-language book.]
Smith, Jonathan. (1982). Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown. (See: "In Comparison a Magic Dwells", Pages 19-35).
Surburg, Raymond. (1983). "The Influence of the Two Delitzsches on Biblical and Near Eastern Studies." (Concordia Theological Quarterly, Volume 47, Number 3, July, Pages 225-240). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream but recognises that it lies within the framework of Panbabylonism.]
Toy, Crawford. (1910). "Panbabylonianism." (The Harvard Theological Review, Volume III, Pages 47-84). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
de Vries, Jan. (1967). The Study of Religion: A Historical Approach. (See: Chapter Fourteen "Panbabylonism", Pages 95-98).
Wardle, William. (1925). Israel and Babylon. (See: Chapter XII "The Panbabylonian Theory", Pages 302-330). [Note: Focuses on the Babel and Bible stream.]
This web page was last updated on: Sunday, May 31, 2009, 12.30 pm.
This web page was created using Arachnophilia 4.0 and FrontPage 2003.
You can reach me here by email: