An oath, its curse and anointing ritual.

• Author: Kitz, Anne Marie

INTRODUCTION

Scholars have long acknowledged that curses were expressed in conventional ways throughout the ancient Near East. (1) Thus, maledictions could endure over many centuries in diverse texts with relatively minor changes in terminology. (2) Since curses were somewhat standardized, it may not be surprising to find they could be incorporated into oaths which are nothing other than a form of conditional self-cursing. The purpose of this brief examination is to demonstrate how a well-known malediction could be incorporated into an oath whose accompanying ritual is specifically designed to intensify the anathema. Such a "ceremonial curse" appears to be intrinsically linked to the nature of the malediction's punishment. (3) This, in turn, may have contributed to the endurance of certain terminological expressions that remained a feature of the same curse not only in Neo-Assyrian texts but also in Psalm 109 of the Hebrew Bible.

A Hittite oath ritual which links anointing with the "putting on a garment" of an oath-curse will be examined through an investigation of a similar, recurrent simile curse that is found in Akkadian texts. The Middle Babylonian texts demonstrate the independent nature of the curse. Here the simile is expanded by the reference to the skin condition sahar.sub.ba, which results in social expulsion. Surpu, a collection of Akkadian and Sumerian invocations and rituals, provides additional information on the character and activities of a personified mamitu, curse, oath-curse, and her relationship with the moon deity Sin. The well-known Neo-Assyrian loyalty oath (ade) agreements of Esarhaddon use expressions reminiscent of the Hittite oath ritual and the Babylonian Sin-curses. (4) As will be shown, Psalm 109 shares a similar range of standardized vocabulary that immediately suggests a connection with the Akkadian maledictions as well as the Hittite ceremonial curse incorporated into oath rituals.

HITTITE LITERATURE

An Oath Ritual

Let us open by reviewing an important Hittite text, KUB 26.25, that CTH dates to the reign of Suppiluliuma II (c. 1200-1180). (5) The passage is a fragment of an oath ritual which compares the act of coating a person with oil to smearing MAMI[T.sup.HI.A], oath-curses, into the body. This is followed by a garment simile, the effectiveness of which depends on the unique characteristic of oaths as a form of self-cursing.

[Just as] you [.sup.5a]rub yourself (4) down with oil, [.sup.5b][thus also] let these oath-curses (6) be rubbed down onto [you]! Just as you put on a garment, (7) so also put on these oath-curses! (6) The text is simple and to the point. The action of katta iskiske-, "rubbing oneself down," with [I.sub.3], "oil/fat," is paralleled with the rubbing of oath-curses into the body, katta iskiyan esdu. The fact that the anointing is self-administered most likely reflects the conditional self-imprecation assumed by the one who takes the oath. The terminology also emphasizes the internalization of the oath-curse. The oil penetrates the skin and forms a protective, repellant layer or an invisible cloak, if you will. The next sentence uses a metaphor to illustrate an external characteristic of the oath-curse. It is like a garment that is put on the body and worn as though it were an article of clothing.

Since all ancient Near Eastern oaths involve self-cursing, whether implicit or explicit, the nature of the harm in the curse expressed by the oil simile may be determined according to the negative qualities implied in the comparisons. Faithfulness to the oath will sustain the positive features of the oil such as shine, protection, resistance, and a sound physical appearance. Failure to honor the oath will allow the skin to become dull, enhance vulnerability to disease, and attract harm. Just as the oil softens and smoothes the skin, the curse will make it rough, dull, scaly, and even flaky. Moreover, as a feature of the malediction's public disclosure, the curse's appearance on the body as a garment would indicate to all the divinely condemned status of the oath violator.

AKKADIAN LITERATURE

Kassite and Post-Kassite Kudurru/Naru Inscriptions

It is curious to find that certain Akkadian texts use similar terminology. Typically, these imprecations retain the garment imagery and identify the skin affliction as sahar.sub.ba, a Sumerian term that was borrowed into Akkadian as saharsubbu. (7) Often described as "Sin-Fluche" because the moon deity Sin is regularly invoked in these anathemas, curses of this variety generally appear in two types of texts. The earliest are the kudurru/naru inscriptions, which date to the Middle Babylonian period, followed by Neo-Assyrian usage, which is attested in the ade agreements. Additional information about the nature and effect of oath-curses on human beings is provided by the Surpu texts. (8)

The first "Sin-Fluch" appears on a kudurru/naru dating to the reign of the Middle Babylonian king Meli-Sihu (c. 1186-1172) of the Kassite dynasty. The relevant passage reads: "May Sin ... clothe his body with saharsubbu like a garment, and while he is alive, may he be deprived of his house and may he roam the open country like a wild animal but not walk over the square of his city." (9)

When compared to the Hittite oath ritual, the Hittite expression TU[G.sub.2]-anza GIM-an ... wassiskisi, "just as you put on a garment," finds a certain level of correspondence in the Akkadian phrase kima subati pagarsu lilabbisma. The curse, however, has been expanded with the addition of sahar.sub.ba/saharsubbu, a skin affliction, which appears to be a physical manifestation of the anathema. This, in turn, is associated with deprivation of dwelling, a wandering lifestyle, and restriction from the city.

The second kudurru/naru inscription, believed to date to the reign of Marduk-nadin-ahhe (c. 1100-1083) of the Second Dynasty of Isin, illustrates several other important expansions: "May Sin ... clothe his whole body in saharsubbu, which will never lift so...