Scholars have identified traces of Babylonian cultural expression in Isaiah 40-48 and concluded that this locates the author in a Babylonian milieu. S. L. Peterson has reviewed the older scholarship on this question (up to 1975), and discussed the texts that have been adduced and their characteristics of self-predication and self-praise.[1] His conclusion is that “Deutero-Isaiah[2] [Isaiah 40-55] intentionally adopted some details of Mesopotamian style and terminology”.[3] Nevertheless, he notes that while there may be specifically Babylonian elements in Isaiah 40-55, it is more often the case that those characteristics that scholars highlight are not just Babylonian, but broadly Near Eastern in provenance, and just as comparable with the Assyrian period and the older periods of Mesopotamian history.[4]
This judgment has been supported by H. M. Barstad[5] and the lines of questioning that he puts forward include: i) Are the similarities nothing more than common forms of expression around the Near East and an older cultural milieu; and ii) does the influence show that Second Isaiah was domiciled in Babylon? To these doubts we can add our proposal that if there are Babylonian echoes and allusions, it is due to Isaiah of Jerusalem’s engagement with the world-view of the Babylonian envoys (Isaiah 39) and his countering of the influence of the Babylonians that had settled in Northern Israel under Sargon II.
Scholars[6] have documented certain phrases and words common to Isaiah 40-55 and Babylonian texts, and while some of these are common to a broad range of Mesopotamian cuneiform texts, it is worth noting a sample of texts in order to judge the extent to which Isaiah of Jerusalem (or Second Isaiah if you are a critical scholar) uses Babylonian forms of expression. There are two types of text: i) those that describe Yahweh’s claims about himself; and ii) those that describe the relationship between Yahweh, the Servant and Cyrus.
Yahweh and the King
Examples of texts in this category include:
1) Calling an individual by name and, moreover, doing so with favour and in grace, is a feature of royal texts.[7] The Servant states that Yahweh “made mention of my name” (Isa 49:1), and Yahweh states, “I have called thee in righteousness” (Isa 42:6). This compares with Marduk pronouncing the name of Cyrus as recorded in the Cyrus Cylinder,[8] and other comparable phrases such as “they favourably designated his name” used of Nabonidus and “they favourably called my name” used of Esarhaddon.[9] The rhetoric here is that Yahweh has called the Servant and he also calls Cyrus (Isa 45:4) rather than Merodach-Baladan; any so-called calling by other gods is an empty claim.
2) The “holding of the hand” is a common ritual motif in dealings between the king and Marduk:
I shall lead him by his hand… Verse Account of Nabonidus[10]
…lead him [Marduk]… Cyrus Cylinder[11]
May thy heart turn towards him who takes thy hand… New Year Festival Prayer[12]
This bears comparison with,
Thus saith the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut… Isa 45:1 (KJV); cf. 41:13; 42:6
Stummer has identified a number of texts (hymns) addressed to Marduk that use the phrase “to take by the right hand”.[13] The point of the rhetoric in Isa 45:1 is directed against Marduk and Merodach-Baladan: Yahweh was the one who would hold the hand of Cyrus, not of Merodach-Baladan.[14]
3) In the royal texts, common phrases such as “the beloved of the god”, “the favourite of the god” and the “chosen/selected of the god” correspond to phrases in Isaiah like “loved one/friend” (Isa 41:8; 43:4) “my chosen one whom I desire” (Isa 42:1).[15] Following the call by a god, the king would be given tasks to fulfil, and this is the structure of the first Servant Song (Isa 42:1-9); the title of “Servant” is common for Mesopotamian kings.[16] In nominating Cyrus, the rhetoric is directed against both Hezekiah and Merodach-Baladan.
4) The motif of being called while yet in the womb is a common feature of the divine right of kings.[17] S. M. Paul cites texts from seven Assyrian and Babylonian kings. For example, Ashurbanipal (669-632) affirms,
I, Ashurbanipal, am the creation of Ashur and Belit…whom Ashur and Sin, the lord of the crown, already in the distant past had called by name for ruling, and who created him in his mother’s womb for the shepherding of Assyria.[18]
This bears comparison with Isa 49:1,
Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The Lord hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. Isa 49:1 (KJV)
This common form of expression contributes to the identification of the Servant as a king. This point in turn casts doubt on the Babylonian exilic reading, since the Jews had no king in exile. It lends support to our reading that the Servant is Hezekiah.
Yahweh and the gods
Examples of texts in this category include:
1) The Babylonian New Year Festival was a weeklong ritual and various activities were assigned to each day. In respect of the making of images, it is stated,
When it is three hours after sunrise he shall summon a craftsman; then shall he give him precious stones and gold from the treasury of Marduk for the making of two images for the sixth day. He shall summon a carpenter, and shall give him cedarwood and tamarisk wood. He shall summon a jeweller, and shall give him gold.[19]
This kind of language is echoed in Isaiah in texts such as,
The workman melteth a graven image, and the goldsmith spreadeth it over with gold, and casteth silver chains. Isa 40:19 (KJV)
They lavish gold out of the bag, and weigh silver in the balance, and hire a goldsmith; and he maketh it a god: they fall down, yea, they worship. Isa 46:6 (KJV)
While the rhetoric addresses the manufacture of idols, it also ridicules the Babylonian New Year Festival and is one of several allusions to the festival in Isaiah.
2) The prayers to Marduk offered during the Babylonian New Year Festival have points of contact with the defence of Yahweh in Isaiah:
Who does pass through the heavens, dost heap up the earth; Who dost measure the waters of the sea, who dost cause (the fields) to be tilled; Dwelling in E-ud-ul, Marduk the exalted…[20]
This bears comparison with,
Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance? Isa 40:12 (KJV)
Peterson suggests that there is a contrast going on in Isaiah: while Marduk passed through the heavens, Yahweh set their limits; while Marduk measured the waters of the sea, Yahweh did so with just the span of his hand; while Marduk heaped up the earth, Yahweh weighed the dust, mountains and hills.[21]
3) Enuma Elish is the Babylonian creation myth that was read during the New Year Festival. Part of the myth describes the formation of the gods,
Then it was that the gods were formed within them (i.e. the waters of Apsu and Tiamat)…Anshar and Kishar were formed, surpassing the others.
This mythology is addressed in Isa 43:10,
Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. Isa 43:10 (KJV)
Peterson comments, “…we have here a type of intellectual dependence upon a Babylonian tradition, which dependence is demonstrated by the prophet’s conscious rejection of, and polemic against, the tradition”.[22]
4) Self-predication is a form of speech in which a god asserts something of himself/herself. The form of speech is widely used in Mesopotamian texts. For example, in the following Sumerian hymn to Enlil (c. 1000-1300), we read,
I am the Lord, the lion of the holy An, the hero of Sumer, I make the fishes of the sea glad, and see that the birds do not fall down, the wise countryman, who ploughs the field, Enlil, I am he.[23]
The sequence of “I am the Lord” with intervening claims ending with a juxtaposition of the god’s name with the expression “I am he” bears comparison with many Isaiah texts:
Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the Lord, the first, and with the last; I am he. Isa 41:4 (KJV); cf. 43:10, 13; 46:4; 48:12; 52:6
The use of this form of speech is set against the competing claims of the gods. It is a form uniquely common[24] in Isaiah 40-48 and used in Yahweh’s polemical speeches.[25] There is an additional contrast to note: Peterson observes that the form is used to affirm the solitary power of Yahweh serving and saving his people; in Mesopotamian texts the self-predication is about self-honour.[26]
5) Shamash the sun-god is given praise in an old hymn found in the library of Ashurbanipal but thought to be older (c. 1000). Its theology has an obvious point of contact with Isaiah:
O illuminator of the darkness…you suspend (?) from heaven the circle of the earth…[27]
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in… Isa 40:22 (KJV)
Again, the rhetoric is brought into sharp relief: the Isaiah text affirms that it is Yahweh who controls the circle of the earth.[28]
6) The incomparability of the god is an important claim, and this was attributed to several Babylonian deities as well as other Near Eastern gods. In one text from Ashurbanipal’s library, celebrating the moon-god we read,
O lord, who decides destinies in heaven and on earth, whose saying no one can alter, who holds water and fire in his hands, who guides living creatures – who among the gods is as you are?[29]
The emphasis on “Who is like Nanna?” bears comparison with,
And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them shew unto them. Isa 44:7 (KJV)
The moon was critical in deciding the destinies of nations and the science of divination explained how the moon in its various positions and configurations conveyed to the king what was going to happen on earth.
Or again, a Hymn to Sin (the Moon god) begins,
O Lord, hero of the gods, who in heaven and earth is exalted in his uniqueness…In heaven who is exalted? Thou! Thou alone art exalted.[30]
Or again in a Hymn to Inanna,
My father gave me the heavens, and gave me the earth. I am the lady of heaven. Does anyone, any god, measure himself with me?[31]
which compares with Isa 44:24,
I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself… Isa 44:24 (KJV)
The greater frequency of this type of language in Isaiah 40-48 and its popularity in Babylonian hymns of self-praise, suggests that the language is directed towards these ideas.
Conclusion
The above examples establish that Isaiah’s rhetoric is engaged with Babylonian and/or Mesopotamian ideas and particularly those of the relationship between god and king.[32] It is possible to extend the connections between Isaiah 40-48 and the thought-world of Mesopotamia with more examples. For instance, the idea of divine control over history and the interest of the god in his people are obvious shared ideas reflected in Isaiah and Mesopotamian texts. In such a context, the argument in Isaiah is that Yahweh has such control and the Mesopotamian deities are without power and foreknowledge.[33]
The texts are used to support the idea of a Babylonian Second Isaiah. Our counter claim is that the echoes illustrate how Isaiah’s rhetoric is directed against the Babylonian envoys and Merodach-Baladan. Isaiah’s argument is that Yahweh is the one true God and the one who has chosen his Servant (Hezekiah). Since “the Servant” of “the deity” is a common motif for the Near Eastern king, Isaiah’s argument requires a pre-exilic context of interpretation.
[1] S. L. Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence in Deutero-Isaiah: A Bibliographic and Critical Study (Unpublished PhD Diss., Vanderbilt University, 1975), 2. This is the standard review up to 1975 and is often cited.
[2] Scholars typically regard Isaiah 40-55 as the work of a Babylonian prophet called Deutero-Isaiah or Second-Isaiah. We do not, but that is a different matter; our interest here is in Babylonian echoes in the text of Isaiah 40-48.
[3] Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 4; see also p. 45—“Deutero-Isaiah cast his message in unmistakeable contrast to the dominant Babylonian world view”.
[4] Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 75.
[5] See H. M. Barstad, “On the So-Called Babylonian Literary Influence in Second Isaiah” SJOT 2 (1987): 90-110.
[6] J. W. Behr, The Writings of Deutero-Isaiah and the Neo-Babylonian Royal Inscriptions: A Comparison of Language and Style (Pretoria: Pretoria University Press, 1937); W. Hallo, Early Mesopotamian Royal Titles: A Philological and Historical Analysis (AOS 43; New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1957).
[7] Behr, The Writings of Deutero-Isaiah and the Neo-Babylonian Royal Inscriptions, 20-21.
[8] The Cyrus Cylinder is an inscription on a clay barrel commemorating the capture of Babylon in 539—translation in ANET, 315-316. For an overview see A. Kuhrt, “The Cyrus Cylinder and the Achaemenid Policy” JSOT 25 (1983): 83-97.
[9] S. M. Paul, “Deutero-Isaiah and Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions” JAOS 88 (1968): 180-186 (182).
[10] The Verse Account of Nabonidus ANET, 313-315.
[11] ANET, 315.
[12] S. H. Hooke, Babylonian and Assyrian Religion (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1963), 109.
[13] F. Stummer, „Einige keilschriftliche Parallelen zu Jes. 40-66“ JBL 45 (1926): 171-189 (177-178).
[14] This rhetoric requires “Cyrus” to be “on the scene” and we have shown in an earlier article how “Cyrus” was a throne-name for the Persian royal house and noted the inscriptional evidence that Teispes (675-640) bore the name—A. Perry, “Naming Cyrus” CeJBI Annual (2008): 68-73.
[15] Paul, “Deutero-Isaiah and Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions”, 181; see also Behr, The Writings of Deutero-Isaiah and the Neo-Babylonian Royal Inscriptions, 21-22.
[16] Behr, The Writings of Deutero-Isaiah and the Neo-Babylonian Royal Inscriptions, 25-26.
[17] Behr, The Writings of Deutero-Isaiah and the Neo-Babylonian Royal Inscriptions, 21.
[18] Paul, “Deutero-Isaiah and Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions”, 185; see also Behr, The Writings of Deutero-Isaiah and the Neo-Babylonian Royal Inscriptions, 21.
[19] Hooke, Babylonian and Assyrian Religion, 104.
[20] Hooke, Babylonian and Assyrian Religion, 105; Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 83.
[21] Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 83-84.
[22] Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 97.
[23] W. Beyerlin, ed., Near Eastern Religious Texts relating to the Old Testament (London: SCM Press, 1978), 101.
[24] That is, Isaiah 40-48 characteristically expands upon the self-predication with relative clauses and participial phrases— Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 116.
[25] Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 109.
[26] Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 113
[27] Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Texts relating to the Old Testament, 102.
[28] Or again, given the prominence of the light of the sun and the moon in Babylonian divination, Isaiah counters with the promotion of Yahweh as the light of the people or of the Servant as the light to the Gentiles (Isa 42:6; 60:19-20).
[29] Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Texts relating to the Old Testament, 105.
[30] ANET, 385.
[31] Westermann, 156; Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 110-111.
[32] This is the thrust of Paul’s paper and observed by Peterson, Babylonian Literary Influence, 60.
[33] For example, compare the Esarhaddon Oracles in ANET 449-450 for points of contact with Isaiah 40-48.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One