with the god Ninib* of the Babylonians. Much difference of opinion prevails as to what astronomical ideas were connected by the ancient inhabitants of Mesopotomia with the god Ninib.

Jensen admits that the generally received opinion as to Ninib is that he represents the "southern sun."† He, however, contends, with great eagerness that this is a mistaken opinion, and that Ninib is really the eastern or rising sun. Many of Jensen's arguments against the possibility of Ninib representing the southern sun are based on the assumption that the epithet "southern," applied to the sun, denotes the power of the mid-day sun; whereas in other descriptious of Ninib he appears as struggling with, though in the end triumphant over, storm, and cloud, and darkness.

But "southern sun," instead of the "alles verzehrenden und versengenden Sud-oder Mittags Sonne," may more fitly in an astronomical sense mean the struggling and finally triumphant sun of the winter solstice. And if we so understand the expression, the apparently contradictory references to Ninib are easily explained.

At mid-winter the sun rises and sets more to the south than at any other time of the year; at noon on the day of the winter solstice the sun is forty-seven degrees nearer to the south pole of the heavens than it is at the summer solstice.

If instead of adopting Jensen's contention, and looking upon Ninib as the eastern rising sun, we revert to the generally held opinion that Ninib was the god of the southern sun, and if we understand the southern sun in its astronomical sense as the winter, or more strictly speaking the mid-winter sun, it will naturally lead us to the conclusion that "the day of the beginning of the year," the day of the festival of Bau Ningirsu's (= Ninib's) "beloved consort," was held at the time of the winter solstice.

Speaking in round numbers, from 4000-2000 B.C. the winter solstice took place when the sun was in conjunction with the constellation Aquarius, which constellation, or some one of its stars, was, as we have suggested, called by the astronomers of Babylonia "Gula," Gula being another name for Bau.

It is not therefore surprising to find that those rulers of Lagash whose dates fell between 4000 and 2000 B.C. should have so often associated together Ningirsu and Bau; and further, that Gudea, whose rule is placed at about 2900 B.C., should on "the day of the

beginning of the year" have kept high festival in honour of Bau, as the beneficent deity presiding in conjunction with Ningirsu over the revolving years.

The precession of the equinoxes must necessarily in the course of ages introduce confusion into all zodiacal calendars and into all ritual and mythological symbolism founded on such calendars. From 2000 B.C. down to the beginning of our era, the winter solstice took place when the sun was in conjunction with Capricornus, not with Aquarius. In those later days, if the inhabitants. of Lagash still celebrated their new year's festival at the winter solstice, Bau ( Gula = Aquarius) could only have laid a traditional claim to preside over it.

In accordance with these astronomical facts, we learn from the teachings of the tablets that the especial reverence paid to BauGula, in the Lagash inscriptions was not extended to her in later times.

As to Ninib, we know that even at Gudea's date in the neighbouring state of Accad, and in later times in Babylon, he did not hold the pre-eminent position accorded to him by the early rulers of Lagash.

This difference in the religious observances of Accad and Lagash regarding Ninib-the god of the winter solstice-as we here suppose him to be, may also receive an astronomical explanation.

According to the evidence of "The Standard Astrological Work," the compilation of which is generally attributed to the date 3800 B.C., and according to the evidence of many other tablets, the year in Accad and afterwards in Babylon began not at the winter solstice, but on the 1st day of Nisan, and Nisan (Acc. Bar Zig-gar), the month of "the right making sacrifice," was, as its name suggests, the month during which the sun was in conjunction with the constellation Aries.*

At Gudea's date, about 3000 B.C., the 1st of Nisan, if it was dependant on the sun's entry into Aries, must have fallen about mid-way between the winter solstice and the spring equinox, and as

* Some scholars hold that the year in Babylon, and in Accad, was always counted from the spring equinox, not from the entry of the sun into the constellation Aries. They resort to the expedient of decrying the authority and reliability of the standard astrological work, of which so many copies were found in Assurbanipal's library.-See Sayce's Hibbert Lectures, pp. 48, 397, and Encyclopedia Britannica, Art. Zodiac.

century succeeded century, the 1st of Nisan must slowly but surely have receded further from the solstice and have approached more and more to the equinoctial point.

In Accad therefore, neither at Gudea's nor at any later date, did the year begin at the winter solstice, and hence we can understand why in that state, and afterwards in Babylon, Ninib was not as highly honoured as in Lagash, and why he and his consort Bau (= Gula) were not referred to as the deities presiding over the beginning of the year.

In a former number of these Proceedings* we drew attention to the Accadian calendar. We there suggested that the choice of the first degree of Aries as initial point of the zodiac was originally made when the winter solstice coincided with the sun's entry into that constellation, i.e., about 6000 B.C.

If that suggestion, and our present one concerning the new year's festival in Lagash are accepted, it will be easy to imagine that the Lagash observance betokened a sort of effort at reform of the sidereal calendar in use in Accad, and it may be elsewhere.

In Accad the calendar makers clung to the originally instituted star mark for the year, and made it begin with the sun's entry into Aries, therefore by degrees the beginning of their year moved away from the winter solstice, and in the first century B.C. coincided very closely with the spring equinox.

In Lagash, on the contrary, the calendar makers clung to the originally established season of the year, and made it begin at the winter solstice, therefore by degrees the beginning of their year moved away from the constellation Aries, and in Gudea's time the new year's festival was held in honour of the goddess Bau = Gula= Aquarius.

A-MUR-RI OU A-HAR-RI?

PAR A. J. DELATTRE, S.J.

Dans une étude sur quelques lettres de Tell el-Amarna, publiée dans les Proceedings, en mars 1891, nous avons écrit les lignes suivantes :

“La principauté ou gouvernement d'Azirou est désigné sous le nom d'A-mu-ri, A-mu-ur-ra, A-mur-ri; plus d'une fois Azirou semble désigner aussi son district par le nom de pays de Mar-tu. Tous les assyriologues savent que Martu est l'équivalent d'un autre nom qu'on a toujours lu, A-har-ri, mais qu'on pourrait aussi bien lire en lui-même A-mur-ri, et qui est exprimé par les mêmes signes que notre A-mur-ri. On s'est décidé pour la lecture A-har-ri, en se basant uniquement sur une étymologie présumée, car je ne pense pas qu'il existe une seul variante A-ha-ar-ri, qui justifie la lecture devenue classique. Je sais bien que l'A-mur-ri, ou A-mu-ri, de nos textes représente un district phénicien, et non toute la Phénicie comme l'A-har-ri des Assyriens (c'est-à-dire, des assyriologues). Mais il y a une exception remarquable à cet usage dans la grande inscription d'Assournazirpal. Celui-ci raconte qu'arrivé au bord de la Méditerranée, il reçut le tribut des pays de "Tyr, Sidon, Gebal, Makhallata, Maïza, Kaïza, A-har-ra-a, Aradus." Ici, A-har-ra-a, représente évidemment un canton particulier (voir notre travail, L'Asie occidentale dans les inscriptions assyriennes, 1885, p. 76); n'est-ce pas celui dont Azirou avait été le chef, et ne faut-il pas lire A-mur-ra-a?”

J'ai appris par M. Eb. Schrader (Das Westland un das Land Amurri, dans les Sitzungsberichte de l'académie Berlin, 1894, p. 1301) que M. Sayce avait défendu la même idée dans l'Academy, 20 mai 1893.

Quant à M. Schrader, il approuve naturellement la lecture Amurri, justifiée par les variantes, quand il s'agit de la principauté d'Azirou. Il ne nous conteste pas cette lecture dans le passage

cité d'Assournazirpal. Mais il maintient la lecture A-har-ri, comme nom de la Phénicie; il nie que dans les lettres d'Azirou le pays de Martu et le pays d'Amurri soient identiques, comme le Martu et le soi-disant Aḥarri dans les inscriptions de Babylone et de Ninive. M. Schrader insiste sur ce que les mots Martu et le prétendu Aḥarri signifient l'ouest dans les mêmes inscriptions: un tel rôle ne conviendrait pas à Amurri; le nom d'une principauté si insignifiante ne serait jamais devenu le nom d'un point cardinal.

Je crois cependant que tout doit céder devant un fait sur lequel M. Fritz Hommel a bien voulu attirer mon attention. Ce savant a observé que dans les contrats babyloniens publiés par M. Br. Meissner (Beiträge zum Altbabylonischem Privatrecht), un même. terrain est nommé, p. 42, ugar ̧ A-mu-ur-ri ki, et, p. 61, ugar Mar-tu, c'est-à-dire, le terrain de l'ouest, d'où il s'ensuit que,. dans les documents assyro-babyloniens, Amurri est bien le synonyme de Martu, même comme expression du point cardinal. L'équivalence des deux termes dans les lettres de Tell el-Amarna devient ainsi évidente car la lecture A-har-ri, comme synonyme de Martu, n'a jamais eu d'autre soutien qu'un rapprochement avec âhôr, le nom de l'ouest en hébreu, et ce soutien lui échappe manifestement. Azirou était donc le chef du pays d'Amurri, autrement dit Martu. Mais comment expliquer l'usage d'Amurri et de Martu pour signifier l'ouest, à Ninive et à Babylone? Il y a réponse à la question.

Le district d'Amurri confinait à la Méditerranée au nord de la ville de Simyra et du fleuve Eleuthéros, actuellement le Nahr elKebir. En effet, les vaisseaux abordaient au pays d'Amurri (The Tell el-Amarna Tablets in the British Museum, 13, lignes 12-14; 44, lignes 32-36). Dans le texte cité d'Assournazirpal, l'énumération procède du sud au nord: Tyr, Sidon, Gebal, ou Byblos...... Amurra (nous ne lisons plus Aḥarra), Aradus. D'après les lettres de Tell el-Amarna, la ville de Şumura, Simyra, est l'éternelle pomme de discorde entre Rib-Addou, préfet de Byblos, et les chefs qui se succédent au pays d'Amurri. On peut s'en assurer par un coup d'oeil jeté sur les passages qu'indique M. Bezold à l'article Şumura, dans la liste des noms propres à la suite des textes du British Museum. A certain moment, Simyra est bloqué sur terre par les princes d'Amurri, et sur mer par les vaisseaux d'Aradus (Der Thontafelfund von el-Amarna, 51, lignes 7-13). Enfin, au nord de Simyra et au sud-est d'Aradus, nous avons vu, comme beaucoup d'autres, les vestiges d'une ancienne ville phénicienne, aujourd'hui