Ugaritic Texts: Ba'al Cycle

By Scriptural Research Institute

The Ba‘al Cycle, or Ba‘al Saga, is a collection of stories about Ba‘al Hadad, the supreme god of the Canaanite pantheon in the late bronze age. The Ugaritic Texts are ancient tablets that were recovered from archaeological digs at the ruins of Ugarit, a bronze-age city in northwest Syria, at the foot of the mountain Jebel Aqra on the modern Syrian-Turkish border.

The Ba‘al Cycle is generally divided into several sections, based on the groupings of the tablets that were discovered, however, this series of translations is divided into just two sections, Victorious Ba‘al, and Ba‘al Defeats Mot. These divisions are always subjective. Some translators divide the central section regarding the building of Ba‘al’s Temple on Mount Zaphon from the preceding battle with Yam. Others also separate out the intermediate section involving Ba‘al’s discussion with Anat, however, this series is divided based on the apparent shift in source material between the early section and the later section. The earliest section appears to be a translation from ancient Egyptian and includes Egyptian loanwords, as well as numerous references to the houses of the gods, which seems to be a reference to the system of decans used in Egypt from the Old Kingdom onward, to tell time at night.

The main section of Ba‘al Defeats Mot, appears to have been translated from an old Akkadian text that retold a Hurrian and Hattic story about two gods descending into the underworld. Many Akkadian, Hattic, and Hurrian loanwords are found in the later section, which are mostly missing from the earlier section, as well as the conclusion. The major exception being the messenger Ủgar, who was a Hurrian psychopomp, like the Canaanite Horon, and Greek Charon. As the city of Ugarit was named after him, this name clearly predates the text itself, and so it cannot be used to date the text. Nevertheless, does indicate that the city was originally a Hurrian settlement before becoming Semitic, which helps to explain why the older second section, appears to be a translation of an Akkadian retelling of a Hurrian story. Additionally, Luwian names are found in the second section, which places the origin of the Akkadian source text to sometime between when the Luwians settled in western Anatolia, generally dated to circa 2000 BC, and when the Hittites absorbed the Hattians around 1700 BC. As the text appears to have then been translated into Egyptian, before Ugaritic, it may trace the route the Hyksos took to Egypt, via the Luwian, Hattic, and Hurrian lands.

The first section, Victorious Ba‘al, appears to be a later text, written after 1700 BC, when a massive series of earthquakes destroyed most of the Minoan cities and palaces. The earthquake marks the division between the Old Palace Period and the New Palace Period of Minoan architecture. At the time, there was a significant change in the sky, as the Bull stopped being the asterism that marked the northern vernal equinox, and the Ram replaced him. Unlike the Bull, the Ram was not on the ecliptic, the line in the sky that the sun and planets travel on relative to the earth, but above it. Below the ecliptic, and closer to it, was the Sea Monster, later called Cetus. The battle in the Victorious Ba‘al, was about the storm-god Hadad battling the sea-god Yam, to take over the kingship from the ram-god Attar, and appears to be about the struggle between these two gods to rule the earth after the bull god El had turned over his throne to the ram god Attar. That transition would have happened in circa 1700 BC, and so this text had to be written later than that.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Scriptural Research Institute
• Release date: May 31, 2021
• ISBN: 9781990289132

Book preview

Copyright

While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this book, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages resulting from the use of the information contained herein.

UGARITIC TEXTS: BA‘AL CYCLE

Digital edition. August 21, 2021

Copyright © 2021 Scriptural Research Institute.

ISBN: 978-1-990289-13-2

This English translation was created by the Scriptural Research Institute in 2021, primarily from the transliteration of the Ugaritic Texts by G.R. Driver, in Canaanite Myths and Legends (1956). Additionally, Driver’s translation in Canaanite Myths and Legends, as well as Theodor Gaster’s translation in Thespis: Ritual, Myth & Drama in the Ancient Near East (1950), and H.L. Ginsberg’s translation in The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures (1958), were used for comparative analysis. All are recommended for alternate interpretations of the text, however, Ginsberg’s interpretation leans heavily towards biblical parallels, and Gaster’s interpretation includes a lot of prose that cannot be traced back to the actual texts.

The image used for the cover ‘Jeroboam Offering Sacrifice for the Idol,’ painted by Jean-Honoré Fragonard in 1752.

Note: The notes for this book include multiple ancient scripts. For your device to properly render them, it will require a Unicode font capable of displaying Akkadian Cuneiform, Ancient South Arabian, Arabic, Avestan, Coptic, Devanagari, Etruscan, Ge‘ez, Greek, Extended Latin, Hebrew, Imperial Aramaic, Korean, Linear A, Linear B, Phoenician, Simplified Chinese, Syriac, and of course Ugaritic. A Unicode font used to resolve these issues that runs on all operating systems is the Noto font family from Google.

Forward

The Ba‘al Cycle, or Ba‘al Saga, is a collection of stories about Ba‘al Hadad, the supreme god of the Canaanite pantheon in the late bronze age. The term Ba‘al (𐎁𐎓𐎍) in the Ugaritic Texts, meaning ‘lord’ or ‘master,’ is the equivalent of the Akkadian belu (𒂗), Canaanite b‘l (𐤁𐤏𐤋), Sabaean bʿl (𐩨𐩲𐩡‎), Aramaic baʿla (𐡁𐡏𐡋𐡀), Hebrew bʿl (בעל‎), Syriac baʿla (ܒܥܠܐ‎), Arabic baʿl (بَعْل), and Ge‘ez bal (ባል). The Ugaritic Texts are ancient tablets that were recovered from archaeological digs at the ruins of Ugarit, a bronze-age city in northwest Syria, at the foot of the mountain Jebel Aqra (جبل الأقرع / Cebel-i Akra) on the modern Syrian-Turkish border.

The Ugaritic language was closely related to the later Canaanite language, and subsequent Aramaic and Hebrew languages, however, its script was unique. The Ugaritic script was an early alphabet, however, used the wedge shapes from the cuneiform scripts. Several abecedaries have been found in the ruins of Ugarit, either following the Northern Semitic sequence of letters found in the later Phoenician alphabet, or the South Semitic sequence of letters used in the later Sabaean alphabet. In its time, cuneiform was a rapid and standardized form of inscribing, that would have been as revolutionary as Bi Sheng’s invention of movable type in circa 1040 AD. This suggests that the Canaanite and Sabaean alphabets already existed in some form before the Ugaritic script was developed. Several of the shapes of the letters in both the Canaanite and Sabaean scripts appear to be derived from the much older, but poorly understood Byblos Syllabary. Only ten fragments of text in the Byblos Syllabary have been found to date, in Canaan, Egypt, and Italy, and estimated to date to the First Intermediate Period in Egyptian history. It cannot be proven that the Ugaritic, Canaanite, and Sabaean scripts are based on it, however, the three very different looking scripts are clearly related, as the Ugaritic abecedaries which follow both the Canaanite and Sabaean letter sequence have proven.

Thanks to the existence of the Ugaritic abecedaries, and the fact that they follow both the letter sequence of both the later Canaanite and Sabaean scripts, it is fairly easy to convert the script into Canaanite (or its modern Hebrew), and Sabaean (or its descendant Arabic), and compare the words to the modern and historic Semitic words. Therefore, most of the texts are translatable, however, some words appear to be loanwords from other languages. Unfortunately, the Texts that comprise the Ba‘al Cycle are damaged, especially in the first section, where Hadad fights Yam to become Ba‘al. In the subsequent section where the battle is discussed, Anat’s defeat of the seven-headed monster Lotan is mentioned, however, this section is missing from the battle itself. Many tablets are believed to be lost from the epic, nevertheless, it is an important series of texts, as it allows us to see the other great religion of Canaan in the era that the early Israelite (later Samaritan and Jewish) religion was forming.

The Ba‘al Cycle is generally divided into several sections, based on the groupings of the tablets that were discovered, however, this series of translations is divided into just two sections, Victorious Ba‘al, and Ba‘al Defeats Mot. These divisions are always subjective. Some translators divide the central section regarding the building of Ba‘al’s Temple on Mount Zaphon from the preceding battle with Yam. Others also separate out the intermediate section involving Ba‘al’s discussion with Anat, however, this series is divided based on the apparent shift in source material between the early section and the later section. The earliest section appears to be a translation from ancient Egyptian and includes Egyptian loanwords, as well as numerous references to the houses of the gods, which seems to be a reference to the system of decans used in Egypt from the Old Kingdom onward, to tell time at night.

The traditional Canaanite system, while poorly documented, however, near the conclusion of the text, the children of Asherah are divided into two groups, the ‘chiefs’ (𐎗𐎁𐎎) and the ‘very smallest’ (𐎄𐎖𐎊𐎎𐎎), suggesting that they may have used the same 36 ‘decan’ stars the Egyptians used. The same system is used in the Testament of Solomon, however, it is unclear she the text was written. Like many of the terms found in the conclusion of Ba‘al Defeats Mot, the translation of ‘very smallest’ (𐎄𐎖𐎊𐎎𐎎) is debatable, as it does not appear to be a Semitic term, but Egyptian.

The term is based around the Semitic and Egyptian root word ‘dq,’ found in the Hebrew dak (דק) and Arabic daqqa (دَقَّ), meaning, ‘small,’ ‘faint,’ ‘thin,’ or ‘insignificant.’ The Arabic word daqqa (دَقَّ) can also mean ‘crush,’ ‘grind,’ or ‘pulverize,’ which results in different attempts to translate the word. The second part of the word is ymm, a plural form of ym (𐎊𐎎), which can itself be translated several ways, including ‘sea,’ ‘lake,’ ‘day,’ ‘daylight,’ and ‘Yam’ (the god of the sea). As it is plural, Yam is not being referenced, however, that still leaves multiple options. It is sometimes interpreted as ‘waves’ from ‘crush’ and ‘sea,’ however, this seems out of context, as waves were not worshiped by the Canaanites. Unfortunately, small seas, small lakes, and small days, also weren’t worshiped by the Canaanites.

The Egyptian term ‘dq’ means the same the Semitic terms, and the Egyptian word ‘ym’ also meant ‘sea’ or ‘lake,’ and some theorize it once meant ‘daylight,’ ‘light,’ or ‘eye,’ however, these additional translations are not universally accepted. However, ‘ymm’ would be a plural translation of the Egyptian jmy, which when used following an adjective would be a superlative, making ‘dqjmy’ meaning ‘very smallest’ in Egyptian, and ‘dqymm’ mean the plural form of ‘very smallest’ in Ugaritic. If the additional possible translations of the Egyptian ‘dq’ are correct, then the original meaning could have meant ‘very faintest’ in Egyptian.

The numerous Egyptian loanwords are accounted for as the Ugaritic text being a translation of an Egyptian work, which appears to be what the postscript was referring to. The main body of the text is followed by the following postscript:

Transcribed by Elimelek the shebeny. From the work of Aten-pran, chief of the priests, chief of the shepherds, the master. (During the reign of) King Niqmaddu of Ugarit, father of Jacob, lord of Taremu.

There are several debatable terms in this postscript, however, the Egyptian name Aten-pran (𐎀𐎚𐎐𐎟𐎔𐎗𐎍𐎐) is clear enough. The name in the Ugaritic script transliterates directly as ʾAtn prln, which is not a Semitic name, but an Egyptian name, Aten prꜥn, meaning ‘Aten ascends here’ in Middle Egyptian, or ‘Aten ascends again’ in Late-Egyptian. Aten was one of the names of the sun since the Old Kingdom, which became the supreme deity of Egypt for a couple of decades in the New Kingdom Era, around 1350 BC. There is nothing about the Ba‘al Cycle that indicates it was part of the solar-cult of Aten, and therefore the name is likely not connected to the short-lived religion of Atenism, but simply the name, which is transliterated as Aten-pran in this translation.

The word ‘shebeny’ (𐎌𐎁𐎐𐎊) is translated instead of translating it, as the term is not Semitic, but Egyptian, however, the meaning cannot be proven. Shebeny (transliterated hieroglyphs: šbny) is the masculine form of sheben (transliterated hieroglyphs: šbn), which meant ‘mix together.’ It could be a term used to describe translation between Egyptian and other languages, however, that is not proven, and therefore the word is simply transliterated as a proper title. Depending in the meaning of shebeny, Elimelek could be described as ‘writing,’ ‘copying,’ or ‘transliterating’ Aten-pran’s text.

The name at the end of the text is also somewhat debatable. There were two know kings of Ugarit known as Niqmaddu. The reign of Niqmaddu II is believed to have begun in 1350 BC, however, this Niqmaddu is likely Niqmaddu I would reigned sometime earlier. Niqmaddu I was recorded a having a son known as Yaqarum (𐎊𐎖𐎗𐎎) in a broken seal, who is likely the ‘Jacob’ in this postscript. The name translated as Jacob is recorded as yrgb (𐎊𐎗𐎂𐎁), which appears to be an Ugaritic transliteration of the Egyptian spelling of Jacob, yaqb (transliterated hieroglyphs: yꜥqb), and therefore the name Jacob is used. His position of lord of Taremu (𐎚𐎒𐎎𐎐) is curious, as it suggests he lived during the Canaanite 14th, or Hyksos 15th dynasties of Egypt, when Canaanites held senior positions in northern Egypt. During this era, one pharaoh was even named Jacob-Horus, (transliterated hieroglyphs: yꜥqb-ḥr), however, it is unclear when he lived due to the fragmentary records from the era.

The main section of Ba‘al Defeats Mot, appears to have been translated from an old Akkadian text that retold a Hurrian and Hattic story about two gods descending into the underworld. Many Akkadian, Hattic, and Hurrian loanwords are found in the later section, which are mostly missing from the earlier section, as well as the conclusion. The major exception being the messenger Ủgar (𐎜𐎂𐎗), who was a Hurrian psychopomp, like the Canaanite Horon, and Greek Charon. As the city of Ugarit was named after him, this name clearly predates the text itself, and so it cannot be used to date the text. Nevertheless, does indicate that the city was originally a Hurrian settlement before becoming Semitic, which helps to explain why the older second section, appears to be a translation of an Akkadian retelling of a Hurrian story. Additionally, Luwian names are found in the second section, which places the origin of the Akkadian source text to sometime between when the Luwians settled in western Anatolia, generally dated to circa 2000 BC, and when the Hittites absorbed the Hattians around 1700 BC. As the text appears to have then been translated into Egyptian, before