Balang-Gods

Wolfgang Heimpel

In his 1997 essay “The Holy Drum, the Spear, and the Harp: Towards an Understanding of the Problems of Deification in Third Millennium Mesopotamia,” Gebhard Selz found that the items in his title and other ‘cultic objects’ were deified by providing them with a name, animating them with the magic of the mouth-washing ritual, and assigning them a cult place and offerings, with the result that their divine nature was the same as those of the images of the gods.

I treat here only the “harp,” actually a type of harp that I call the Balang-harp. My initial interest in the topic were the names and functions of the Balang-harp servant-gods that are found in large numbers in the god-list An:Anum (the first line and the modern title of a seven-tablet bilingual list of gods) and my belief that the balang instrument was indeed a harp, and not a drum as widely claimed. Pursuing these two interests and becoming aware of the great variety of uses of the word balang, I attempt in the following to define them and see how they relate to each other. The problem of deification that interested Selz is treated in further detail.

References to entries of the Catalogue are underscored.

A pictograph of the archaic texts shows a bow dissected with three or four straight lines, a simple but unmistakable representation of a harp (see Section 1d). The pictograph was replaced in the cuneiform stage of script of the Early Dynastic period (ED) by sign BALAĜ. That the cuneiform sign was in fact a replacement of the pictograph of a harp is shown by comparing the archaic and ED versions of the same list of words, where the sign BALAĜ takes the place of the harp pictograph. [2] An image of a harp that would have been represented by the cuneiform sign was not found, which allowed the possibility that it was a harp no more.

Before the publication of the archaic word lists, Cohen argued that the word balaĝ, which is written with the sign BALAĜ—and here rendered phonetically as “balang”—designates a drum. [3] He noted that the balang instrument had a hoop (kippatu 52) just like the drum alû. Indeed, pictorial representations of ancient Mesopotamian harps make it highly unlikely that they were fitted with a hoop. Cohen noted further that texts called er2-šem3-ma—‘tears of the shem’, an instrument that is indeed a drum—formed the last part of compositions called balang: “It seems rather unlikely that a composition composed for the drum would then be chanted to a harp.” Yes, but the tears of the shem drum were performed after the much longer part that was performed with the Balang-harp. Cohen also quoted a ritual that instructs the lamenter (gala) to take the ‘hand’ of a kettledrum (lilis), bring it before the gods, and perform a balang composition. That was a good argument at the time.

Gabbay (PHG:98–102) has now treated the relationship between balang and lilis and found that the latter supplanted the former as an object of royal dedications to gods and as the central instrument in performing balang compositions. He also noted a case where the lilis kettledrum built and dedicated by an OB king is identified in writing as ‘kettledrum’ (li-li-sa-am) or ‘bronze balang’ (BALAĜ.ZABAR, 44). Indeed, a ‘bronze balang’ appears already in a text from the Ur III period (35) and may be a kettledrum. As argued below, the lute as a cultic instrument could also be called a balang. That may also be the case of the kettledrum called the ‘bronze balang’.

As regards the balang instrument that is no kettledrum, Gabbay found the first and so far single textual proof that it was indeed a chordophone, an unpublished OB text containing the phrase “to slice the strings of the adviser” (PHG:96 with n140). Balang-gods, a category of servant-gods discussed below, were called “adviser” of the god they served, so the strings of the adviser would be the strings of the instrument of the balang servant-god.

In the god-list An:Anum (53), the title of balang servant-gods was written with the logogram GUD.BALAĜ, where GUD is the logogram for the bull. ED pictorial representations and finds of the remains of lyres show that their resonator was formed to resemble a bull [e.g. Figure 4, Figure 47—JCF]. Bull lyres are depicted typically in scenes of feasting; in the words of Michalowski, they were “an iconic symbol of elite entertainment in banquet scenes, and in similar representations of status-affirming conviviality.” [4] Gabbay points to the picture of an OAkk. cylinder seal that shows the cult scene of a lyre-player before the seated image of the goddess Ishtar in her warlike aspect with weapons emerging from behind her shoulders. [5] Boehmer interprets the scene as a musical performance meant to soothe the warlike Ishtar. [6] Gabbay builds on this interpretation, describing the scene as a “musical performance” that “is … intended to soothe Inanna’s raging heart, which is the exact role of the performance of Emesal prayers in their musical context, and thus it is not unlikely that the scene may belong to the world of the gala [i.e. lamenter].” Boehmer’s interpretation is debatable. Several OAkk. representations of Ishtar with weapons emerging from behind her shoulders are the common offering scenes. The famous seal of Adda (Boehmer no. 377) shows Ishtar standing as morning-star over the mountainland and above the sun-god emerging from below the horizon. This leads me to interpret the representation on the seal Boehmer no. 385 as a musical performance before the morning-star Ishtar. That performance would belong to the world of the temple-singer who celebrates her appearance that announces the coming light of day. Gabbay (2010) adopts Boehmer’s interpretation and proposes to strengthen the connection of the scene with the world of the lamenter by associating the musician sitting behind the lyre-player with the image of a chief lamenter on a stone bowl from Assyrian Nimrud who stretches out two objects in his hands that Gabbay interprets as sistrum and drum. I see in the object the stem and flower of a lotus plant. Lotus flowers were a pictorial motif adopted from Egypt in Assyria at the time. They are held in the hands of persons elsewhere in Assyrian art (Bleibtreu 1980:116–120). The object in the other hand of the chief lamenter can hardly be the percussion instrument on the knees of the sistrum player. Only two forward tips clearly separated by empty space are preserved.

I believe that the musician with sistrum and percussion instrument on his knees is a singer (nar) because these two instruments are held by a jackal in the famous animal ensemble that decorated one of the bull lyres found in the ED royal tombs of Ur. The head of a jackal served as pictograph of the Sumerian word for the singer (nar), about which more is said below in Section 3a.

The lyres and other instruments deposited in the ED royal tombs were probably not connected to the mourning of the deceased (as suggested by Selz and Gabbay). [7] While the balang instrument was put up and played for this purpose at burials (22), the objects buried in the royal graves of Ur thematize afterlife, not death. The precious lyre with the representation of an animal ensemble was surely a cherished possession in the lifetimes of the deceased and believed to keep entertaining in afterlife, so the lyres in burials are still examples of Michalowski’s characterization of items of elite entertainment.

The remaining argument in favor of identifying the balang instrument with a lyre is an entry in an ED lexical text from Ebla in Syria where the sign BALAĜ is translated with kinnār, the Akkadian and West Semitic word for the lyre (4d). The translation must be evaluated in connection with document 4c, an unprovenanced, but surely Mesopotamian, ED IIIa vocabulary containing a section listing six musical instruments. Two instruments were written with the sign BALAĜ, one with a modified BALAĜ sign, another with the logogram sequence AL.HUB2, the fifth har-har, known also from later texts as a musical instrument, and the last ki2-na-ru12, the ED spelling of kinnār “lyre.” It appears that the sign BALAĜ wrote two words designating two instruments, the modified BALAĜ sign a third instrument, possibly tigi, modified differently in later periods as NAR.BALAĜ, BALAĜ.NAR, and E2.BALAĜ, and finally ki2-na-ru12, the lyre, as still another instrument.

It is interesting that the word for lyre in 4c is written syllabically. Perhaps there existed no logogram for it. The reason for the equation of BALAĜ with kinnār in Ebla is unknown. The lyre in ED Northwestern Syria could have been an instrument used in cult. Or the balang instrument in Ebla was the lyre of a temple singer, and thus a cult instrument. [8] However the equation is understood, the following section shows that we have to reckon with instruments written with the balang sign that are not harps, and the lyre—including the lyre on the seal Boehmer no. 385—could be one of them.

Kilmer and Collon (RlA 6:512–517, *Laute) proposed that the instrument called “voice-making/speaking wood” in standard Sumerian ĝiš-gu3-di/de2, mu-gu3-di in Emesal Sumerian, was a lute. [9] It was a popular instrument according to pictorial representations of ribald entertainment (MgB 2/2 no. 81–84 and page 92). A lute was the instrument of the singer Urur as shown on his seal (MgB 2/2 no. 38). It was played before a god as shown on an OAkk. seal (MgB 2/2 no. 39). Great Dragon of the Homeland was a “balang” instrument (17b) that was called the “famous lute” (17a). As a person, the balang was “the beloved singer” of his master-god Ningirsu (17c). While walking in procession from the residence of Gudea, the governor of the province of Lagash, to the temple of Ningirsu that Gudea had just renovated (17d), he would have played a lute, not the Balang-harp that needed setting up before playing it (see Section 1d below).

Beginning with ED III, various harps are known from pictorial representations. All are bow harps. One type is small enough to be held with one hand and played by its player standing or walking. The upper end of the neck extends beyond the connection point of the outer string, the tip reaching more or less above the head of the male player (MgB 2/2 page 54 [more] and no. 32–35 [less]); short upper ends may result from space limitation. In one case, a donkey plays the harp walking on his hind legs. Another follows him playing claves (MgB 2/2 no. 30). [10]

Another type is a harp the size of an upright person. Two such harps are depicted on a three-tiered seal of the wife of an ED III ruler of Mari. The harp in the middle band appears to have a foot. They are played by women and accompanied by women playing claves. [11] A similar harp is depicted on a lapis-lazuli seal that was found in the grave of a queen in the royal cemetery of Ur (MgB 2/2 no. 29). The upper end of that harp ends in a circular knob and from the lower end extends a slightly curved narrow engraved line that may be a foot as one might expect for an instrument of that size. The harp was played by a woman. Opposite her stands a woman accompanying her with claves, or so it seems. It must have been difficult to engrave the hard stone, causing thin lines and shallow relief.

A different harp is shown on an early OAkk. cylinder seal (MgB 2/2 no. 44). The upper end of the neck curves back, forming a wide bend. At its upper end, it flares out to form a flat-topped knob. It is played by a woman in front of a god coming back from the hunt. [12]

The archaic pictograph of the Sumerian word balaĝ is the image of a bow harp. Stauder (RlA 4:115, *Harfe) illustrates the then-known examples from the two archaic phases of script, Uruk IV and III. The references for the archaic sign in Englund and Boehmer 1994 include three signs showing four strings. [13] The least abstracted form shows that the upper end of the instrument’s neck was extended in a straight line above the upper connection point of the outermost string (MgB 2/2 no. 27 and 1).

The earliest post-archaic form of the balang sign dates from an early phase of the succeeding ED period when the pictographic character of the archaic script gave way to more abstract forms as the drawing of lines, so ill-fitted to the medium of moist clay, was more and more replaced by impressing wedges. A partly pictographic and cuneiform balang sign is found on a tablet from Ur (3). The sign shows the neck of the harp bending back sharply above the upper connecting point of the outer string and ending in a longish straight line. [14]

Written sources of the ED period become more numerous and with wider geographical spread in period ED IIIa. The balang sign of this period is complex and differs radically from the earlier forms. The numerous variants of the sign are drawn by Deimel 1922:6 and quoted as LAK 41. [15] They are the prototypes of the later fully cuneiform balang sign. The sign LAK 41 takes the place of the archaic balang sign in the ED version of the list of persons Lu2 A (2 and 4a). Parallel lines in the center of the sign suggest strings, but their proper attachment is not shown, and the overall form and details of the sign are not matched by any Mesopotamian pictorial representations of harps of any period. That a harp is represented at all is confirmed by a scene of a plaque from Susa from the same time. [16] It forms a clear match with the sign LAK 41 (Heimpel 2014). At the time, Susa had close ties with Mesopotamia. Such plaques are well attested in the Diyala area where Elamite and Mesopotamian cultures meet. They were used to frame a peg protruding from the door jamb that served as anchor for a rope attached to the door that was slung around it to keep the door closed (Zettler 1987). The plaques show secular scenes, the principal figure probably being the master or mistress of an upscale house for which the plaque was made. Other objects found together with the plaque also demonstrate the cultural tie between Susa and Mesopotamia at the time (Marchesi and Marchetti 2011:82–83). Cuneiform was written there, too, including the ED version of the list Lu2 A. [17]

The Susa harp was a large instrument, its neck reaching from the bottom of the resonator to a point behind and slightly above the head of the seated player. At the bottom, the neck disappears inside the resonator. A foot is not visible, but can be expected for an instrument of that size. The high and fairly thick resonator was fastened to the lower neck. It was probably a cylinder, not a box, because hoops were part of the Balang-harp (52); this answers one argument against identifying the balang instrument with a harp (Cohen 1974). The neck emerges from the resonator and continues for a little less distance than the resonator’s height and bends to a point under the left armpit of the player to form the bow that frames the strings. On the right shoulder of the player, it recurves, forming a wide semicircle, and ends behind and slightly above the player’s pate. At the upper end, the neck of the instrument flares and forms a flat surface similar to the otherwise quite differently shaped OAkk. harp MgB 2/2 no. 44.

The general form of the ED IIIa balang sign is similar, though some details are not. The neck of the instrument of the sign gains in girth toward the bottom and forms the resonator. Close to the lower end is a horizontal line that may mark the upper end of a stand. The wide recurved bow at the upper end of the neck of the Susa harp is clearly marked in the sign, but much smaller and tighter. The two groups of parallel straight lines may be the strings, with the lower group not reaching the other end of the bow and the upper group being the upper ends of strings beyond the point of fastening.

The Susa harp was played by a seated man with the strings between neck and player. All other representations of harp playing from the early periods show that the neck was between player and strings.

The harp shown on the Susa plaque is a type that matches the balang instrument. Both were large. The Balang-harp was “set up” (gub) before being played (17e, 20c, 22, 47a), carried from place to place by harp carriers (balaĝ-il2), and “repositioned” from its place in its home temple to various locations on a procession route including other cities (10). Bull hide (36 and 41), black he-goat hide (41), kid hide (46), or just hide (48) was issued for Balang-harps, surely to cover their resonators.

The recurved uppermost section of the neck of the Balang-harp would have been called the ‘grapple-hook’ (ĝešba), otherwise used in wrestling. [18] The grapple-hook (23a3) and perhaps other parts of the neck were plated with silver (24) and gold (23g2, 42c), and the instrument as a whole was often called ‘shining’ as a result. [19] The grapple-hook is mentioned in the name or epithet of a balang servant-god of Ningirsu in An:Anum V 102 (53): ‘Dragon of the Outback-Grapple-hook of House Fifty’. The grapple-hook seems to have been so characteristic of the harp that the harp itself could be so called. The Ur III tablet PDT 1 456 records the expenditure of a silver ring as present for the son of a singer (nar) “for having played a grapple-hook” (mu gešba in-tag-tag-a-še3). [20]

The harp also had an ‘eye’, probably an opening in the resonator (23a3), and a mysterious tooth/teeth/nose/mouth (KA) of the left ‘wood piece’ (42b).

A single reference (35) attests a “bronze balang,” probably a kettledrum that was occasionally so called (see Section 1a).

The lack of Mesopotamian pictorial representations of the type of harp that corresponds to the ED IIIa balang sign and the similar Susa harp was probably caused by the use of this instrument in mortuary cult (22). Depicting it would have raised the specter of death.

That was not the case in ED Susa where a similar kind of harp was used for elite entertainment, much like the bull lyre in contemporaneous Mesopotamia. While the general design of the large harp was identical in Susa and Mesopotamia, it clearly played different roles in Elamite and Mesopotamian cultures.

There are numerous attestations of positioning Balang-harps at cult places in ED IIIb administrative documents (9–14). The word balang was written without divine determinative and names of the instruments are not recorded in administrative documents. I found one harp-god name in such documents of the OAkk. period (15). Many names are found in texts of the Ur III period. They were written without the divine determinative in the province of Lagash, and with the determinative in sources outside of that province.

The sign of the determinative is the pictograph of a single star. With few known exceptions, it precedes names of gods, so its presence or absence is important for the question of deification. [21]

The Babylonian temple mirrored an elite household. The divine master and mistress of a temple commanded a staff of servants who cared for their every need. An instructive source is the description of a temple renovation by Gudea, ruler of the province of Lagash of the third dynasty of Ur at the end of the third millennium BCE. It is written in Sumerian with the partly syllabic and logographic cuneiform writing of the time. Due to its length and good preservation, the text has been studied much and translated repeatedly. While problems of translation persist, it represents the best available textual source for the architecture and function of a city-god’s temple for this period.

After completion of the renovation, Ningirsu, master of the temple, moved from temporary quarters into his newly made quarters. Moving the image of the god had to be done with the utmost care so it would not be upset. [22] Yet, as Gudea describes it, Ningirsu arrived as a gust of wind and his wife Baba moved to her wing in his temple (she had her own separate temple nearby) flowing stately like the Tigris river—a drastic difference from what actually happened (“fully mythological” as Franklin calls it). [23] The next day Gudea woke Ningirsu with a breakfast in the bedroom suite, and Ningirsu assumed his role as master of the household by reviewing, in the courtyard, the heads of the temple departments “passing before him with their duties.”

The review of the temple-servants is described more as a fully actual review than a mythological process. Plough animals in the province of Lagash were also made to pass the reviewer in single file (Heimpel 1995:120). Most but not all names of the temple-servants are preceded in writing by the divine determinative. The divine determinative is found typically for the same gods whose image and house are attested in contemporaneous administrative documents. It is therefore significant that house and image are not attested for the servants whose names are written without the divine determinative. They are the second general, the butler of the bedroom suite, the deer-keeper, and the two balang servants. One might imagine that the two balang could have been a lute with a name and a Balang-harp with a name that were carried around; but this is hardly a solution for ‘Lord Deer’. Whether goatherd (as Jacobsen interprets the difficult passage describing him and his duties) or deer-keeper, he was not an object, and lacking the divine determinative in writing, and image or temple in administrative documents, he must have been the human temple-servant in charge of providing the dairy products for the meals of Ningirsu. The balang servants could thus have been the singer (nar) and lamenter (gala) of the temple who carried their instruments with them. The Balang-harp of the lamenter Fierce-faced King would actually have been carried by a harp carrier (4g, 10). The only case for a “house” of a harp-god is 23d3.

The following table lists the servants and whether they are marked with (+) or without (-) the divine determinative. In the “occupation” column, the first identification is that of Jacobsen 1987, the second mine:

Records of the OB administration of the Ninurta temple Eshumesha in Nippur list recipients of food and drink allocations of the entire temple household as follows (+ = presence, - = absence of divine determinative): [25]

The three balang-gods of Ninurta of Eshumesha that are listed in An:Anum (I 268–270) were not allocated food and drink. However, eleven human temple-servants receiving food and drink from the temple (Sigrist 1984a:173) do include a chief lamenter (gala mah) and chief singer (nar-gal). They would have performed the duties of the balang servant-gods.

Servant-gods may already occur in the long ED IIIa god-lists from Fara, so possibly ^dmuhaldim-zi-Unug (‘Good Cook of Uruk’) and others mentioned by Krebernik 1986:165. There are two candidates for a Balang-harp god name, ^dAb2-er2-ša4 (‘Tear-crier Cow’), sharing the first element with Ab2-he2-nun, the harp-goddess of Nin-KI.MAR (20); and ^dNin-er2(-ra) (‘Lady of tears’). [27]

The OB forerunner of An:Anum TCL 15 10 lists the names of several servant-gods, without identifying their occupations. According to their listing in An:Anum, the forerunner lists butlers (lines 72, 164, 185, 394), caretakers (53–54, 141–144), attendants (167), doorkeepers (101–102), and two balang-gods—A-ru6 and Ur(sic)-a-ru6 (93–94), the balang-gods of Damgalnuna (wife of Enki) in An:Anum II 315–316.

The earliest exemplars of An:Anum belong to the Kassite period, the first phase of the Late period. [28] It is the single best source for the number and variety of servant-gods, and especially balang servant-gods, of the major temple households of Babylonia. The master-gods are listed according to their rank in the Babylonian pantheon. Listed after each master-god are the names of family members and servant-gods. Renger, treating the servant-gods as an example of household staff, counted forty occupations (RlA 4:436–437, *Hofstaat A). Some were particular to their master-gods. For example, only Enlil had a slaughterer, reflecting the large number of live meat-animals brought for slaughter to the supreme temple of the land. Only Inana had a troupe of five translators, in line with her international character. Only the sun-god had a runner, who carried, at the speed of light and over far distances from the ever moving position of his master, numerous answers to oracle inquiries and legal matters. Other servant-gods were employed by several master-gods. For example, both Enlil and Baba had a housekeeper (agrig), and many master-gods with large temples had butlers, caretakers, attendants, and door-keepers.

Balang-harp servant-gods are by far the most numerous group of servant-gods in An:Anum. This remarkable feature could result from the bias of an author or redactor who was a lamenter, as indicated by document 54.

A master-god could have several balang servant-gods. The moon-god had eight; the sky-god An and war-god Ningirsu seven; the mother goddess, the weather-god, and the sun-god six; none had five, two four, and one three. The remaining twenty-three balang-gods either came in pairs or as singles. These numbers do not mirror the hierarchy of the master-gods themselves, but rather the level of apprehension about a master-god’s tendency to be absent; divine absence threatened the well-being of the community, and called for Balang-harp and lamenter to bring absent gods back for their and the community’s good. [29] The moon- and sun-gods disappeared frequently, and the heaven-god An seemed always distant.

The plurality of harp-gods of one and the same master-god has a further aspect. Some names of harp-gods coincide with names of festivals, indicating that an individual balang-god went into action on a specific occasion. The clearest examples are two of the seven harp-gods of An. One is named after the constellation One-Acre-Star whose appearance marks the beginning of the year (53 I 79). Another is named after the festival ‘Sitting Gods’ when all the gods come together (53 I 75). At the Sitting Gods festival, the oratorio was performed whose lyrics are known from the balang composition Elum Gusun (CLAM 1: 272–318). [30] The Balang-harp and balang-goddess Ninigizibara participate in the oratorio Uru’amma’irabi in which Inana laments the death of her husband Dumuzi (47a). A search for further links between Balang-harps and their corresponding servant-gods and particular oratorios should be fruitful, but has not been attempted here.

A particular feature of balang instruments is their not-infrequent appearance in groups of seven (documents 9, 11, 37, and 43). [31] Document 43 describes an attempt to pacify Enlil when his rage had already caused the destruction of the kingdom and the city of Akkad. One Balang-harp was not enough to pacify him. It was attempted with seven, the number whose magic made it more than seven times one. [32] Against the background of major temples having several festivals with so many oratories and so many balang instruments, the motif of the seven balangs also meant that all festival activity was then pooled in the one great effort to pacify Enlil. Document 9 lists allocations of oil to a ‘large balang’, or ‘chief balang’, in second position after an up-drum, and at the very end a group of seven balangs. Document 11 also mentions a group of seven balangs close to the end of a list of allocations of food. This group of balangs belongs to the temple of Nin-MAR.KI in the province of Lagash. The position of the groups of seven balangs in documents 9 and 11 indicates a low rank among the cultic institutions of the temples of Nanshe and Nin-MAR.KI. The function of the seven-magic in these cases is unclear.

Balang-gods were given the title GUD.BALAĜ in An:Anum, a term translated as mumtalku ‘the one with whom one takes counsel, confidant’ in KAV 64 II 17. The same function was expressed in Sumerian with the title ad-gi4-gi4, literally ‘sound repeating’, in conventional translation ‘adviser’, or as we might say ‘sounding board’.

Gabbay (PHG:103–109) pointed out that the designation GUD.BALAĜ is restricted to An:Anum, not attested as Sumerian word, and probably a logogram of ad-gi4-gi4 ‘adviser’. He quotes in favor of his understanding An:Anum II 94–95: ^dad-gi4-gi4 = ŠU (‘same pronunciation’, that is, adgigi), ^dMIN (that is, ^dad-gi4-gi4) GUD.BALAĜ (written GUD.BALAĜ) ŠU (‘same pronunciation’). The gloss MIN indeed points to a pronunciation adgigi. Gabbay further provides an improved reading of An:Anum V 17–18 where the balang-gods of Ninsun and Lugalbanda are listed as divine ‘advisers’ (^dad-gi4-gi4) rather than as GUD.BALAĜ.

Michalowski 2010a:221–222 notes that the sign BALAĜ actually writes two words, balaĝ and gud10, and interprets GUD.BALAĜ as ^gudgud10 (see 4g). It is indeed tempting to read the sign BALAĜ as balaĝ when the instrument is meant and gud10 when it is the balang servant-god. Yet Ningirsu’s temple-servant Fierce-faced King in Gudea Cylinders B is said to be ‘his balang’ (balaĝ-ĝa2-ni) where the spelling rules out a reading gud10. The use of the word balaĝ to designate the lamenter may go back to the archaic period (1 and 2).

The following table gives the numbers of balang-gods and other common types of servant-gods in An:Anum. With caretakers and attendants, the name of the temple rather than that of the master-god was preferred.

The names of balang-gods show that they were thought to be male or female. Balang-gods serving female master-gods have female names and balang-gods serving male master-gods have male names. Three exceptions are one female balang-god each of the male master-gods Enki, Utu, and Nanna.

A fourth possible exception is Ninigizibara, the balang servant-god of Inana. Gabbay (PHG:112) points out that BM 38593, a Late version of the balang composition Uru’amma’irabi, translates the name Nin-igi-zi-bar-ra into Akkadian as ‘whom (masculine suffix) the Lady (= Inana) regarded well’—and further that this balang-god is called Inana’s husband (23f, but see Section 4a5, ‘my husband’). The maleness of Ninigizibara does fit the short form Igizibara, which was used for the harp-god in records from Ur III Umma and is attested as a masculine PN in the ED and Ur III periods. [36] Gudea calls himself Igizibara of Nanshe in Statue B II 10–1 (RIME 3/1 1.1.7.StB). Yet maleness is contradicted by 23h and 23i where the element nin of the full name Ninigizibara is given in Emesal Sumerian as gašan ‘lady’.

Gender-revealing names are presented in the following tables: The advising function of balang-gods agrees with their gender distribution and the main characters of oratorios. A woman rather than a man is typically the better confidant to console, soothe, and commiserate a goddess, and a male adviser can better deal with the rage of a god.

Gudea’s list of non-divine and divine temple-servants includes a description of their duties vis-à-vis their master. The Balang-harp servants advised, pacified, and entertained their masters. Who were the human temple-servants that performed the duties of the Balang-harp temple-servants and Balang-harp servant-gods?

The pictograph of a canine head in archaic texts identifies the singer (1). This is shown by the archaic ancestor of Lu2, the oldest version of a list of signs for words that designate persons and professions. The list includes this pictograph in register 105 (2). From later lexical texts we know that the cuneiform sign that developed from the canine head pictograph wrote thirteen words, among them ‘fox, jackal’ (ka5-a); animal and common PN; ‘false’ (lul); ‘singer’ (nar); and one name of a god, Dunga—the god of singers. [37] This combination of meanings reflects the melodious howling of the jackal and the capacity of the fox to deceive. [38]

Singers serving in a divine household are attested in Ur III administrative documents. [39] The balang temple-servant Great Dragon of the Homeland was a singer (17c). He played the lute, an exemplar built by Gudea to entertain Ningirsu. He also managed musical performances in the courtyard and in the bedroom suite. In the latter, he played, or oversaw play with, two more instruments, the ‘hoe-setter(?)’ (al-ĝar), and the ‘Marian’ (miritum), possibly the ‘Mari harp’ listed in an ED lexical text (4b). Great Dragon’s duty was further to make sure that joyous music was played in the courtyard (17c). At the musical performance for the inauguration of the renovated temple, he led the drums into the courtyard (17d). He also took care of the tigi instruments (17c). In addition to being a singer and lute-player, he acted as a kind of musical director. [40] The lack of divine determinative indicates that Great Dragon of the Homeland was a human singer. He might have had his own normal PN, but in relationship to the master-god his professional name was ‘Great Dragon of the Homeland’.

In an archaic record of persons, the jackal-head pictograph, serving as sign of the word nar ‘singer’, is followed by the pictograph of a roundharp (1). The same sequence is found in the archaic version of the list of persons Lu2 (2). In the ED IIIa version of that list, the pictograph of the roundharp is no longer found, nor is the sign of the Balang-harp. The place after the singer is taken by two pictographs, UŠ and DUR2. The first designates maleness in its various aspects. The rather abstract pictograph appears to depict an ejaculating penis. The second pictograph writes the words for buttock, sitting, farting, excrement, and wet.

The combined signs write the Sumerian word gala, ‘lamenter’. Steinkeller 1992:37 proposed that the combination of meanings that characterize the lamenter are penis and buttock, so that the proper rendering of the sign would be GIŠ3.DUR2 rather than the conventional UŠ.KU. It is difficult to think of another meaningful combination of the two signs. The gala would accordingly have been someone who practiced anal intercourse. [41]

It was the lamenter whom the god of wisdom, Enki, created to extricate the goddess Inana after she was killed in an attempt to add the netherworld to her dominion. The lamenter entered the netherworld and succeeded to gain the trust of its queen Ereškigal by commiserating with her suffering body and mind. In turn, she allowed him the choice of a gift, for which he selected the revival and return of Inana. Sexual activity could resume. [42]

In his visit to the netherworld, the lamenter proved he could manipulate its queen. This would have enabled him to alleviate the destiny of the dead in the netherworld. “When a body was interred, the lamenter set up the balang, elicited tears” (22a). He would have elicited the tears of those present, commiserated with their sense of loss, and exercised his influence on the queen of the netherworld for a good treatment of the deceased in her realm.

Did the lamenter play the Balang-harp that he had set up? Document 22b shows that the lamenter and a harpist collaborated at a mourning rite. That was also the case of oratorios where the harp was played by the harpist, not the lamenter. The only statement that the lamenter played the Balang-harp is the Late period document 51 whose Sumerian text and Akkadian translation are not trustworthy. The lamenter was connected with the Balang-harp in oratorios and burial rites as master of ceremony.

The suru was a particular type or designation of lamenter. [43] He is attested already in document 13 from ED IIIb Girsu where the expenditure of beer for the suru and Balang-harps, set up in different places, is recorded. In this case, the suru could not have impersonated the Balang-harp. Perhaps the beer was destined for the harpist who was not the suru.

In ED pictorial representations, men played the portable roundharp (MgB 2/2 no. 32, 34, 35) and women the large roundharp with foot (MgB 2/2. no. 29 and Marcetteau 2010:69–70). An OAkk. seal (MgB 2/2 no. 44) shows a woman playing a portable roundharp with recurved neck before a god. The female harpists are accompanied by two female musicians with claves, and so is a donkey playing a portable roundharp (MgB 2/2 no. 30). The horizontally held angle-harp that arrived in the OB period was played by women and men.

In OAkk. texts, all harpists (balaĝ-di) appearing in administrative documents were women. [44] On the other hand, a harpist with masculine name Dada is attested in an ED IIIa text (6) and two Akkadian translations of the Sumerian term balaĝ-di are masculine active participles (see p594).

Krecher 1966:162n467 observed that the lamenting goddess in an oratorio addresses a harpist, for example “I am displaced from the house, my tears (flow) without end. Oh harpist, I am displaced from the house, my tears (flow) without end” (CLAM 520 A+2–3), or “the cattlepen destroying day, the sheepfold shredding day! Oh harpist, the day when the intent of its heart is not found” (VS 2 12 I 7–8). The harpist must be a woman in this scenario. In the performance of the oratorio, she played the harp and sang. An OB pictorial representation shows a singing female harpist. [45] Her words would have been mostly the words of the goddess, repeated in commiseration and not repeated in script. In two cases, actual answers of the harpist are included in the lyrics of an oratorio:

(1) Sherida, the wife of the sun-god, addresses her harpist (Wilcke 1973):

The harpist answers:

(2) In another oratorio (Römer 1983), the city-goddess of Isin laments that an enemy defiled her and her temple on the instigation of An and Enlil. She left her city while her city called for her to stay, giving up responsibility for her temple and city to the enemy. The harpist answers: The harpist in the first case consoles with a rational argument; in the second she tells the lamenting goddess to blame herself. Both actions fit an adviser.

Two additional statements round off the advising role of female harpists. Shehata 2009:94–97, treating the role of harpists, quotes lines 65–66 of the composition A Man and His God (ETCSL 5.2.4) where a harpist is asked to act on behalf of the lamenting man: “Is not my sister a harpist of sweet sounds? Let her speak to you [the personal god] in tears of my deeds that have brought about my ruin.” [48]

Lines 68–69 of the Nippur Lament describe the reaction of harpists to the lament of a personified temple: “Like a cow separated from its calf, the house emitted bitter cries about itself, was tear-stricken. The harpists, those of sweet sounds, answer its words in tears like nursemaids singing a lullaby.” [49]

According to the first statement, the harpist can soften the heart of the personal god enraged about the deeds of his human client. In the second, she is compared to a nursemaid who can put a baby to sleep. Clearly the female harpist is seen as adviser of her divine mistress. She impersonates the Balang-harp servant-goddess in the role as adviser.

Franklin alerts me to the recent treatment by Arnaud 2010:164-174 of a long known, mostly Sumerian cuneiform inscription from Byblos with Ur III sign-forms. This curious document concerns the restoration of the cult in the temple of Ishtar of Byblos. Its lines are arranged vertically, as in monumental inscriptions of the Ur III period; but the signs are horizontally oriented, as in later periods. The section that Arnaud recognizes as a description of the temple’s former state mentions a female singer and female harp player (munus nar munus balag-di3), presumably belonging to the original temple staff.

As mentioned already, the only male balang-player appearing in an administrative record known to me is in document 6.

Not all male balang temple-servants had something to do with the Balang-harp. Great Dragon of the Homeland was a singer, lutist, and director of musical entertainment for his divine master. That may also be the case of some of the male balang-gods for whom we have no information beyond the name. The late version of the list of persons Lu2 includes the equation lu2 balaĝ-di = ZA-ri-ru (MSL 12, 134:175). The Akkadian word is a masculine active participle of three Akkadian verbal stems with none of the known meanings fitting a harpist. [50]

The Eblaite translation of balaĝ-di, na-ṭi3-lu-um, is also a masculine active participle. In the comment to document 4d, I translate the Eblaite word as Akkadian ‘observer’ and link it with the Sumerian ‘observer’ (igi-du8) who acts together with the Balang-harp to soften the impact of, and divert, an oncoming storm (29). His interactions with the storm-god are called ‘confrontations’ (gaba ri). According to the Sumerian equivalence ‘harpist’ for the ‘observer’, it was he who played the harp. He would have impersonated the harp-god as adviser. The use of the word ‘confrontation’ shows that his adviser role involved strength.

Perhaps the most revealing passage for the many things a balang is said to be comes in the form of a string of designations with which Inana laments the loss of her Balang-harp Ninigizibara in the oratorio Uru’amma’irabi (23f). It entails the illogical element of Inana lamenting the loss of her Balang-harp while that very harp accompanies and responds to her lament. Otherwise, the designations provide a veritable ontology that sets apart and unifies Balang-harp, advising servant-god, and lamenter. The literary form frames the string of designations between the balang instrument and the Balang-harp servant-god, so we can expect that the whole string of designations was meant to itemize the aspects of one and the same thing or concept (“entity” in Selz’s terminology).

1. ‘The junior’, or ‘impetuous Balang-harp’.
          The meanings of Sumerian ban3-da include ‘young’ and ‘younger’ as age designations, and ‘junior’ as rank designation. The latter could contrast with Inana’s more important Balang-harp god Ninigizibara. That would be Ninme’urur who is Inana’s other adviser and Balang-harp mentioned next to Ninigizibara in the same text (23). Another meaning of ban3-da is ‘impetuous’, von Soden’s “ungestüm” in AHw s.v. ekdu. An incantation describes a breed bull mounting a cow as ekdu (BAM [Köcher 1963–1980] 3 248 III 19). If that meaning applies, it could hardly refer to the female Ninme’urur.

2. ‘My bellowing aurochs’.
          According to the Late ritual for covering a kettledrum—the instrument that eventually took over the role of the Balang-harp—the spotless black hide of a bull never touched by goad or stick became the drum head and its vibrations on the drum the transformed heartbeat of the killed bull turned kettledrum-god. [51] I assume that this Late ritual already existed earlier in some form and was applied to the leather covering of musical instruments with bull hide resonators used in cult. The use of bull hides for Balang-harps is attested in administrative records (36, 41, 42b) and the Balang-harp is called a bull (comment to 4g, 21, 49b). Its sound was the transformed bull’s vocalizations.

From bull to god was a small gap to jump in Mesopotamian culture: anthropomorphic gods carried horns on their headgear, betraying an original bovine nature. According to the ritual, it happened by way of the death of the bull. It was important that it was not a working animal, not touched by goad or stick in the ritual, even less touched by civilization in the OB version of the oratorio Uru’amma’irabi an undomesticated aurochs bull.

3. ‘The shining Balang-harp’.
          ‘Shining’ is the standard characterization of the sheen of silver and refers here to silver plating the neck of the Balang-harp (see note to 42a).

4. ‘My lapis lazuli’.
          Gold and silver for decorating Balang-harps is attested (23g, 34c, 42c); lapis lazuli is not. This stone was part of the inlays framing the sound box of ED lyres. The statement ‘my lapis lazuli’ must serve for the time being as sole indication that also the Balang-harp was decorated with lapis lazuli.

5. ‘My husband’.
          There does not appear to be a reasonable linguistic way around understanding ‘my husband’ as describing the relationship of the Balang-harp god with his mistress Inana. This seems to confirm Gabbay’s proposal that Ninigizibara was male, yet the Emesal form gašan for standard Sumerian nin indicates a female (see Section 2d). The context of the lament of Inana is the start of the dry season when her other husband, Dumuzi, departs on his way to eventual death. According to the plot of the oratorio, he was abducted by the same enemy that took her harp. Not many lines after calling Ninigizibara her husband, Inana laments his loss, without calling him her husband, and then the loss of her husband Dumuzi, including in her words the longing for making love with him. The literary form of the lines makes it clear that the status of husband and the wish of making love with him is restricted to Dumuzi (see the comment to 23f). This leaves me doubting the textual tradition. One of the sources writes instead of the expected mu-ud-na-zu (‘your husband’) mu-ud-nu-bi, which is enigmatic and as lectio difficilior the more likely to be authentic.

6. ‘My adviser’.
          This expresses the service of the balang servant-god for Inana. [52]

7. ‘My great suru’.
          The word suru designates a priest who is classified as lamenter (gala). [53] A suru priest and a Balang-harp set up in the city center received beer according to an ED IIIb document (13). Balang-gods of the weather-god Adad are named ‘Great Suru’ and ‘Day of the Suru’ in An:Anum (53 III 260 and 261). By virtue of being a balang servant-god of the male weather-god, the suru should be male, which again favors Gabbay’s argument for the maleness of Ninigizibara.

8. ‘My adviser Ninigizibara’.
          The last designation identifies the harp servant-god whose name is preceded by the divine determinative.Different aspects that are separated here were explicitly merged elsewhere. The Balang-harp and the corresponding balang servant-god were merged by making a function of the harp-god that of the instrument: ‘his advising instrument’ (niĝ2 ad-gi4-gi4-ni, 17a). The balang servant-god is ‘fashioned’ (23a1). The (neck) of the harp-god is treated with fish-oil (23a2). The grapple-hook and eye of the harp-god is plated with silver (23a3). The harp-god Ninigizibara is ‘set up’ in 47a.

On the other hand, the instrument and the suru lamenter are recorded to have received drink separately (13).

To call this section ‘Rational ontology’ would be presumptuous for me. I will simply describe what I believe is the reality behind the identifications of instrument, instrument god, and human temple-servant. Two epistemological problems are the identification of instrument and person, and the deification of the person.

The instrument was personalized as result of being named. [54] When Gudea planned the renovation of the temple of Ningirsu, he was advised to keep the god happy in temporary quarters with the gift of a chariot and “his beloved balang, Great Dragon of the Homeland” (17a). The name already existed, the instrument did not, so the name was traditional. Beginning in the OB period, kings, not tradition, named the instrument (40). Judging by the lack of the divine determinative, Gudea’s Great Dragon of the Homeland was no deity. [55] He should have been the incumbent temple singer, who assumed the name of the instrument when exercising his functions. With the name of the instrument he would have received the history of his particular office, including the care for the musical entertainment of the divine master of the temple, traditional dress, and perhaps a dragon mask. [56]

The mutual dependency of musical instrument and player would have been the link of identity. Great Dragon of the Homeland was, so to speak, the ‘first lute’ in musical performances. Without its player, the lute could not ‘advise’ Ningirsu, and without his instrument, Great Dragon of the Homeland could not do so either.

Fierce-faced King presents us with a different situation. His particular duties identify his profession as lamenter. But instead of giving him that title, he is called Ningirsu’s “balang,” which may either be the instrument, or the designation of the lamenter as attested in archaic texts and the ED IIIa version of the list of person Lu2 A (1, 2, 4a). Lamenters do not appear to have played the Balang-harp themselves (see Section 3b), so their identification with the instrument rests on their mutual dependency at burial ceremonies and performance of oratorios. Lamenter and Balang-harp—albeit played by a harpist—each needed the other.

The word balang is at all periods written without the divine determinative. There are exceptions in Ur III administrative records (25, 26, 28). Still, the general lack of the determinative indicates that neither the instrument nor its named personification was deified in Old Akkadian (15) and the province of Lagash in the early Ur III period.

The deification of the personification outside of Lagash in the Ur III period could have resulted from introducing the magic of turning a bull, whose hide covered the resonator of the instrument, into a god in the Ur III period (see Section 4a §2). Alternatively, it emerged more indirectly from the intellectual climate that was also responsible for the widening importance of the cult of the deified king in the Ur III kingdom. Another motive could have been the expectation of increased prestige, and income, of the players and managers of balang instruments—the temple singers, lamenters, and harpists.

For periods up to and including Ur III, full documentation of meaningful references was the goal. A selection of OB (after 2000) and Late (post-OB) documents follows. The order is basically chronological, but I list under a single number documents about one and the same balang-god, and lexical entries from various periods. All dates of documents are BCE. [57]

1 W 9656,aa = P001443. Englund and Boehmer 1994:94 (transliteration), pl. 89 (copy), and MgB 2/2 no. 27 (photo). List of persons belonging to the household of a lord (en).

          The sign ZATU 672 is attested only on Uruk IV tablets, the very similar sign NAR on Uruk III tablets and later. Both signs depict the head and neck of a canid with long, erected ears. The lower end of neck is treated differently. ZATU 672 in W 9311,f is followed by -a, which is likely Ka5-a ‘Fox’ or ‘Jackal’, a common Sumerian PN. If the sign NAR = nar = ‘singer’ and ZATU 672 = ka5 in ka5-a ‘jackal’, and if the singer and the jackal are two words written with one sign, then ZATU 672 and NAR are variants of one and the same sign.

2 Archaic Lu2 105–106 (Englund and Nissen 1993:16–17).
          Great singer (nar-gal), great balang (balaĝ-gal).

3 UET 2 3:1–2 = P005577.
          List of recipients of kids. The first two recipients received two kids. The name of the second includes the word balang. [59]

4 Lexical texts.

4a ED Lu2 A 77–78 (MSL 12:11).
          Great singer (nar-gal), great balang (balaĝ-gal).

4b ED Practical Vocabulary from Ebla and Abu Salabikh 205–211 (Civil 2008:39; Michalowski 2010b:119).
          “Balang-type emarah, balang, Tilmun balang, Mari balang, flute, ? reed, BUR2-type balang.” [60]

4c ED Practical Vocabulary MS 2340+ XXII 15’–20’ (Civil 2010:210).
          BALAĜ, modified BALAĜ, Harhar, BALAĜ, lyre (ki2-na-ru12). [61]

4d Vocabulario di Ebla 571–572, MEE 4 (Pettinato 1982):264.
          “(Sumerian) Harpist (= Akkadian) seer, BALAĜ = lyre.” [62]
          The conventional transliteration of the word for lyre is gi-na-ru12-um. The sign GI was used to write /ki/ elsewhere in Ebla texts, and the Hebrew word, kinnōr begins with /k/. The word na-ṭi3-lu-um has been understood to mean ‘to raise one’s voice’. [63] In Akkadian, it means ‘to raise one’s eyes, observe’, and at Mari is also as substantive, ‘observer’. An observer (igi-du8) working with the balang instrument, used to control weather-storms, is attested in Ur III texts (29, cf. Section 3c2).

4e OB version of the ED bird list 101 and 110 (YBC 4613:26 and 35), Veldhuis 2004:220–222 and 345.
          bi2-za-gu3-balaĝ-kar-gir5-za-na^mušen and u5-bi2-za-gu3-­balaĝ-di-kar-gir5-za-na^mušen
          This bird name is written in many different ways. The literal meaning is unclear. One element is ‘balang voice’ (gu3-balaĝ). The unusual length of the name suggests a remarkable bird. Perhaps it is the Eurasian bittern (botaurus stellaris) of the heron family. The large bird is often called a bull or cow because part of the mating call sounds like the bellowing of cattle, for example Hungarian bölömbika ‘bellowing bull’, Spanish avetoro ‘bullbird’, German Rohrbrüller ‘reed bellower’, Kuhreiher ‘cow heron’ and many more bovid designations. The Sumerian expression “its porch of the balang was a princely sounding bull (21)” may refer to the fact that the cover of the soundbox was a bull hide rather than to the actual cattle-like sound. Yet the bovidity of the bittern may also refer to the mock attacks of the bird when it puffs up its considerable plumage, lowering its head, and opening its also considerable beak. [64]

4f OB MS 2645 IV 33, Civil 2010:191–192.
          ‘Sound-of-balang’ (ad-balaĝ-ĝa2mušen) is a bird name.
          Civil suggests that this is one part of the decomposed name of document 4e.

4g OB Proto-Ea 202–203 (MSL 14:40).
          Pronunciations bu-lu-un and gu-ud/gu2-ud/gu-du of the sign BALAĜ. Selz 1997:195n153 suggested an onomatopoetic ‘blang’ as pronunciation of what is conventionally transliterated as balaĝ. Bu-lu-un may indeed have been pronounced ‘blong’ or similar. Michalowski 2010a:221–222 considers the word gu-ud/gu2-ud/gu-du = gud10 and suggests that the term GUD.BALAĜ could be understood as ^gudgud10, “possibly an archaizing late creation that has no equivalent in earlier phases of the Sumerian language, and has as such nothing to do with the balag.” I believe the word “bull” was written with the balang sign when it designates a balang-god.

4h OB Proto Lu2 641–644 and 651–662 (MSL 12:56–57).

          The position of the snake charmer belongs with the singers rather than the lamenters as shown by the Ur III text BM 014618 (Gelb 1975:57 and 60–61).

5 ED IIIa SF 70 = P010663 (MSL 12:13).
          List of professions.
          Registers 1–11: “bishop, carpenter, leather worker, jeweler, smith, lapidary, mat weaver, balang-player (balaĝ-di), ‘bull player’ (gu4-di), singer (nar), builder,” etc.; lamenter (gala) not included.

6 WF (Deimel 1924) 107 = P011065.
          List of recipients of bread, among them Dada, ‘the balang-player man’ (Da-da lu2 balaĝ-di).

7 SF 47 III 6–8 = P010632 (MSL 12:14).
          List of professions:
          “Singer man, festival/song man, balang BUR2 man.” [66]

8 Volk 1988.
          PN1 lamenter, PN2, PN3, PN4, PN5, barley consumers, balang. Distribution of shares. [67]

From records of the state archive of the kingdom of Lagash. The references for balaĝ from these records are summarized in Selz 1995:103–105.

9 The wife of Lugalanda, ruler of the state of Lagash, traveled annually from her residence in Girsu to the city of Lagash and on to the city of Nina during month VIII (November) at the occasion of the Malt-Eating festival; she offered fat and dates in Lagash, and then in Nina for Nanshe, her pantheon, holy places, and the recipients listed below. Offerings on day one of the month of Malt-Eating of Nanshe: one liter of oil and dates each to gods and various sacred institutions, ending with “silver up(-drum), ‘large balang’, copper datepalm, stele, statue of Ur-Nanshe, statues inside the house, the eight of them, (and) balangs, the seven of them.” [68]

10 Similar records from three consecutive years of expenditures of food, for annual journeys of the ruler’s wife from Girsu to Lagash and Nina. The occasion was called “it is (expenditures) of the balang carrier having been repositioned” (balaĝ-il2 e-ta-ru-a-kam). The translation ‘repositioned’ is assured by the corresponding passive form (ba-ta-ru-a-ne) that designates laborers who had been moved from one to another work place (Nik 1 90). Balang carriers are also attested in later lexical lists of professions. [69] The recipients in 10b include temples and gods in Lagash and a mortuary installation (ki-a-naĝ), presumably also in Lagash, on the first day. A chief lamenter (gala-mah) is listed as recipient of barley in the final section without indication of a particular day (Selz 1995:103–104).

10a DP 167 dated Urukagina 2 = P220817.
          The steward Shul-utul-Men brought bread and beer to Nina and to Lagash “when Shasha, wife of Urukagina, king of Lagash, had repositioned the balang in Nina. (Year) 2.” [70]

10b VS 14 93 Urukagina 3 = P020108.
          List of cereals expended for the major gods of the territory of Lagash, holy places, and a chief lamenter (gala-mah). “(Responsible for the expenditure was) the administrator Puzur-Mama of Shasha, wife of Urukagina, king of Lagash, when the balang carrier was repositioned in Nina. (Year) 3.” [71]

10c VS 14 118 Urukagina 4 = P020134.
          “The scribe En-ig-gal brought it (fish), when the governor had repositioned the balang carrier. Year 4.” [72]

11 DP 55 undated = P220705 (Selz 1995:103).
          A group of seven balangs (see 9) belonged to the temple household of Nin-MAR.KI, city-goddess of Gu’aba. [73] Expenditures of flour, beer, and fish went to four major and two minor gods; eleven ‘places’ (ki), among them steles and statues; and in last position “the balangs, the seven of them” (balaĝ 7-ba-kam) and two Enki sanctuaries in the countryside.

12 Expenditures at the occasion of a journey of the wife of the governor of Lagash to an Abzu. The term abzu designates the cosmic realm of the groundwater ocean and a type of sanctuary of the water-god Enki. The particular Abzu mentioned in the following texts was one of five such sanctuaries in the territory of Lagash. [74] It was located on the bank of a river and named Circle Side (Da-niĝin2). The name may refer to a layout that allowed circumambulation of a waterhole believed to be bottomless.

12a Nik 1 148 Lugalanda 5 = P221917.
          Baranamtara (wife of Lugalanda, governor of Lagash), while staying at the Abzu of the river bank, offers two rams and a male lamb to Enki of Circle Side and a kid to the sanctuary Antasura on day one, two rams for Enki of Circle Side on day two, and “1 kid for the balang on day three” (1 maš ^ĝišbalaĝ u4 3-kam).

12b DP 66 Urukagina 4 = P220716.
          Expenditures for Shasha (wife of Urukagina, governor of Lagash) on the occasion of the festival of malt-eating of Ningirsu, [75] among them for the Abzu of Circle Side on day one (IV 3) and the Antasura as well as ‘a new balang’ (balaĝ gibil) on day three (rev. II.1–3).

13 VS 14 75 Lugalanda 6 = P020090 (Selz 1995:104).
          Record of beer expended to a type of lamentation-priest called Suru (sur9) and for Balang-harps. [76] “The Suru drank, the Balang set up in city center drank, the Balang set up in Fierce Water drank.” [77]

14 VS 27 55 Enentarzi 5 = P020371.
          Record of use of pine lumber: “One extra large piece of pine for the arch of the gate of the balang.” [78]

15 CUSAS 13 156 Adab undated = P329186.
          List of deficits of fat incurred by priests of several gods, including a certain Namahani for the balang Nin-PA. [79] Nin-PA, perhaps Nin-gidri (‘Lady Scepter’ [80] ), is not attested as PN. Namahani is probably the lamenter (gala) of TCBI 1 [Pomponio et al. 2006] 99 = P382351.

16 Two of seven attestations of female harpists (balaĝ-di). Male harpists are not attested in this period.

16a RIME 2.1.4.54

Inscription on door plaque from Girsu:
          “Son of Naram-Sin the Strong, Nabi-Ulmash governor of Tutu. Lipush-Ja’um, harpist of Sin, his daughter.” [81]

16b List of agricultural plots? Molina 1991:142–145 (photo P101667).
          “[PN, the female] harpist stayed at the house of female harpists.” [82]

I Inscriptions of Gudea of Lagash and references from administrative texts. [83]

17 Great Dragon of the Homeland (Ušumgal-kalam-ma).
          Ušumgal and its Akk. equivalent bašmu designates a monstrous venomous snake that is associated with Marduk and several other gods (Wiggermann 1992:166–169). On the other hand, ‘Great Dragon’ is also an entry of a type of person or profession in line 99 of the archaic list Lu2 A (Englund and Nissen 1993:17). It is a frequent element in Sumerian PNs throughout early Babylonia. A servant-god, the vizier of the Mungoose divinity Nin-kilim, is called ‘Great Dragon’ (An:Anum V 40).

17a Gudea Cylinder A 6.24–25 (RIME 3/1:73).
          Gudea, governor of the territory of Lagash, was visited in a dream by Ningirsu, city-god of the capital Girsu. The governor went to consult with the goddess Nanshe, a dream interpreter and Ningirsu’s sister. She told him that her brother wanted him to rebuild his temple. Gudea should make Ningirsu a gift of a chariot and “his beloved balang, Great Dragon of the Homeland, the famous lute, the thing that advises him.” [84] The two presents would keep the god happy during his stay in temporary quarters. [85]

17b RTC (Thureau-Dangin 1903) 201:7’ = P216974.
          ““Year when the balang Great Dragon of the Homeland was fashioned.” [86]

17c Gudea Cylinder B 10.9–15 (RIME 3/1:94).
          “The inauguration of the renovated temple included a review of the twenty-three servant-gods of Ningirsu’s temple household. They passed in line before the seated image of the master-god Ningirsu. Great Dragon of the Homeland was the tenth in line. He is described as Ningirsu’s ‘beloved singer’ (nar), his duties the management of the musical instruments tigi, bringing joy to the courtyard, and spreading a good atmosphere throughout the temple with the help of the musical instruments alĝar and miritum that entertained Ningirsu in his bed chamber Good House (e2-du10-ga). Balang music in the bed chamber of the moon-god Nanna of Ur is attested in line 441 of the OB text Lamentation over the Destruction of Sumer and Ur. [87]

17d Gudea Cylinder B 15.19–16.2 (RIME 3/1:97).
          “Gudea makes his first visit of the renovated temple of Ningirsu:

17e Gudea Cylinder B 18.22–19.1 (RIME 3/1:98).
          “The first offering in the renovated temple was an occasion for musical performance: “(Gudea) placed Great Dragon of the Homeland among(?) the tigi, let the ala [a large drum], a storm, roar for Ningirsu.” [92]

17f Amherst (Pinches 1908) 17 = P100855.
          “This administrative record from Girsu, dating from the 25th regnal year of Shulgi, lists expenditures of beer, bread, and soup for households of servant-gods in the “new house of Ningirsu,” among them “the balang Great Dragon of the Homeland.”

18 Fierce-faced king [93] (Lugal-igi-huš)
          “Passing before Ningirsu in line behind Great Dragon of the Homeland (17c) was Fierce-faced King, the second balang in Ningirsu’s household. His duty was pacification of Ningirsu, specifically at his return from victory over the inimical mountain land, which he achieved on behalf of the king of gods Enlil. According to the literary text “The Return of Ninurta to Nippur,” the god’s demeanor and the frightful appearance of his trophies and weapons cause anxiety among the gods as he approaches Nippur (Cooper 1978:26–27). The name ‘Achieving his Triumph’ (^dU3-ma-ni sa2-di) of a balang of Ninurta in An:Anum I 269 may refer to his triumph over the mountain land. Fierce-faced King is listed in An:Anum V 97–98 together with Great Dragon of the Homeland as one of five attendants of House Fifty, the temple of Ningirsu.

Gudea Cylinder B 10.16–11.2 (RIME 3/1:94):

19 Lady Conversing Grandly with An (Nin-an-da-gal-di, see 25)
          “Gudea Statue E IV 12–14 (RIME 3/1:44).
          “Gudea renovated the temple of Ningirsu’s wife Baba, furnishing it with a seat from which to pronounce her judgments, a treasure chest, and a balang:

20 Cow of Plenty (Ab2-he-nun and Ab-he-nun). [98]
          “The identity of Ab2-he-nun and Ab-he-nun is confirmed by the association of the latter with lamenters in documents 20a and 20b. Cow of Plenty is probably a harp-god of Nin-KI.MAR. A fairly common PN in Girsu is Ur-(^d)Ab-he-nun with (Gomi 1981:183 no. 197 etc.) and without (Snell 1986:205 no. 66 etc.) divine determinative. The genitive is occasionally expressed in writing, for example Ur-ab-he-nun-na in ITT 2 736, and a rare writing of the double genitive Ur-^dAb-he-nun-ka ‘Hound-of-Cow-of-Plenty’ in ITT 5 6795. The divinity ^dAb-ir-nun of ED IIIb Girsu texts may also designate a balang-god. It is associated with the silver up-drum and so are a ‘person’ (lu2) of the silver up-drum and a ‘person’ of ^dAb-ir-nun, presumably the players of these instruments. The references are treated by Selz 1995:133–134. The name could mean ‘Cow of Princely Aromatic’, which compares well with the balangs named Cedar Aroma (27, 30). Other ‘cow instruments’ are treated in PHG:109–112 where the opinion that these were instruments fashioned with cow hides as opposed to bull hides is rightly rejected (see 36). The name of a balang of Shamash is ‘Cow of his risen heart’ (Ab2-ša3-ila2-na) in An:Anum IV 13.

20a SAT 1 256 no year, month III, Girsu = P131365.
          “Record of expenditure of flour and drink for the deity Cow of Plenty (^dAb-he-nun), a courtyard where the instrument was presumably played, an unclear destination, and lamenters (gala-me).

20b BPOA 1 182 no date, Girsu = P206136.
          “Record of expenditure of drink for the temple of Nin-KI.MAR, flour and drink for Cow of Plenty (^dAb-he-nun), the ‘house Plant of Life’ (e2 u2 nam-ti), and another unclear destination.

20c Nanshe Hymn 39–47 (Heimpel 1981).
          “The OB text of the hymn describes in much detail the working of the temple household of Nanshe in Nina during the time of Gudea when it was surely composed. [99] It includes a description of the New Year festival in Nina. The musical arrangement of the occasion is described in unusual detail. The governor of Lagash in person placed the Balang-harp Cow of Plenty “on, at, among, next to,” or any other location with respect to one or more tigi instruments. The harp occupies here the same place as Great Dragon of the Homeland with respect to tigi (17e). Claves in the form of copper sickles accompany the ‘holy song’ (šir3-ku3) that praises the temple. [100] Line 45 is probably the song’s incipit, as first lines of praises often start with the verbal na-form. [101] The chief singer (nar gal) plays the ibex horn. Being the chief implies other singers and instrumentalists playing Cow of Plenty, silver balang, tigi instruments, and claves. (Cow of Plenty shares the second part of its name with the balang of Gula, Lady of Plenty: 40.)

20d Hymn to Hendursanga 19–20 (Attinger and Krebernik 2005:38).
          “Another function of the Cow of Plenty was to entertain Nanshe, or to relieve her anxiety, as she traveled by boat to visit the god Hendursanga. See also 34b.

“The silver boat in which the lady, mother Nanshe sails for you—in it (?) plays for her Cow of Plenty.” [103]

21 Gudea Cylinders A 28.17–18.
          “Among descriptions of parts of House Fifty was a porch on which the balang was placed, possibly a shaded elevated platform overlooking a courtyard and close to the gate leading to it. [104] “Its porch of the balang was a princely-sounding [105] bull, its courtyard holy prayer, shem and ala (drums).” [106]

22a Gudea Statue B V 1–4 (RIME 3/1 1.1.7.StB).
          “The city was cleansed in preparation for construction of the temple of Ningirsu. Women were not used as porters during that time, the use of whips was disallowed, mothers barred from striking their children, and balang laments at burials not enacted: “The hoe was not employed at the cemetery of the city, a body was not interred. The lamenter did not set up a balang, did not elicit tears.” [107]

22b ITT 2 893 = P110763.
          “Record of expenditures, including beer and bread received by lamenters and harpists, and flour for nine days when a balang was placed ‘over the ghost’(?) at ‘the place of mourning for the king’. [108]

23 Ninigizibara, Ninsigarana (^dNin-si-gar-an-na), and Ninme’urur (^dNin-me-ur4-ur4), were the balang servant-gods of Inana.
          “Ninigizibara is widely attested, in Babylonia in the cities Uruk, Umma, Isin, and Larsa, and on the Middle Euphrates in the cities Mari (see 47) and Tuttul (23g, Durand and Kupper 1985:111). The name of the harp-god was Igizibara in Umma. A lamenter (gala) in Ur III Girsu had the professional name Ur-^dIgi-zi-bar-ra (MVN 8 179 I 11). [109]

Ninsigarana and Ninigizibara are listed as the two balang-gods of Inana in the Emesal Vocabulary (23i). The name Ninsigarana means ‘Lady Heaven’s Bolt’. Cavigneaux and Krebernik (RlA 9:488–489, *Nin-siĝar-ana) list the few attestations in Ur III records, the most informative document being 23b2. They propose that the form of the instrument is likened to the bolt of the name. I believe the name refers to the role of the harp servant-god to relieve the anxiety caused by the departure of Inana as planet Venus when the planet disappeared at the onset of conjunction. It was believed that a gate had to be opened and closed as the stars and planets passed the horizon.

Ninme’urur is associated with Ninigizibara in the Isin god-list (23e) and in the oratorio Uru’amma’irabi, where she is mentioned next to Ninigizibara as one of the two advisers of Inana (RlA 9:470–471 [Cavigneaux and Krebernik, *Nin-me-urur]). The gender of Nin-me’urur is female according to the writing NIN ga-ša-an-me-ur4-ur4 in Uru’amma’irabi (kirugu XX, line 11). In the Late Babylonian version (BM 38593 I 17–18), Inana laments the loss of Ninigizibara and “my lamenter of the house, Ninme’urur, the face that watches the mountain land.” [110] Perhaps the harp Ninme’urur was believed to be lamenting Inana’s absence while watching the eastern mountains in wait for the planet’s appearance as morning star.

In the OB list of gods SLT (Chiera 1929) 122 II 25–26, Ninigizibara is followed by an ‘adviser’ (^dAd-gi4-gi4), the common epithet of balang-gods. This may refer to Ninsigarana or Ninme’urur.

23a Ninigizibara and Igizibara in Ur III.

23a1 Year-name Ibbi-Sin 21.
          ““Year when Ibbi-Sin … fashioned the balang Ninigizibara for Inana.” [111]

23a2 MVAG 21, 22 FH 5 Umma, Amar-Sin 1 = P113033.
          “Expenditure of fish-oil for the preservation of divine images, statues, and (the neck of the harp) Igizibara, written with divine determinative.

23a3 Princeton 1 523 Umma Amar-Sin 4 X = P127212.
          “Receipt of “9 3/4 shekels of silver for plating the grapple-hook (and) eye of Igizibara.” [112]

23b Ninigizibara in rituals according to records from Ur III Umma.
          “The beginning of the dry season was celebrated during the first month of the year as withdrawal leading to the ultimate death of the god Dumuzi. The goddess Nin-Gipar, an Inana image in the temple of the city-god of Umma, was brought out ‘to the head-grass (u2-saĝ)’. [113] In the same month, Nin-Ibgala, the local Inana figure, ‘went’ to the nearby city of Zabala to join lamenting the death of her husband Dumuzi. She was accompanied by her balang Igizibara.

23b1 SA (Jean 1923) 129 Amar-Sin 5 I = P128740, Tavolette (Boson 1936) 346 Amar-Sin 6 I = P132131, UTI 3 1885 Amar-Sin 8 I = P139904, UTI 4 2563 = P140582.
          “Food for Nin-Gipar ‘having gone out to the head-grass’, as well as for Nin-Ibgala and Igizibara going to Zabala.

23b2 MVN 1 42 Šu-Sin 5 I = P113075.
          “Expenditures of flour for the temple of the city-god Shara and his wife Ninura; the deity of Ibgal (diĝir Ib-gal), otherwise called ‘Lady of Ibgal’; Ninsigarana, the balang-god of Inana; and a deified musical instrument called ‘Harmony Wood’ (^dGiš-ha-mun). While the date in the first month coincides with the time of the journey to Zabala of the previously listed records, the association with Ninsigarana and the absence of the journey to Zabalam indicate a different cultic context. Note also the difference of the name: Igizibara is paired with Nin-gipar in 23b1 and 23c, Ninigizibara with the deity of Ibgal here.

23c BPOA 6 1176 Umma Šu-Sin 3 = P292368.
          “King Shu-Sin offered in the temple of the city-god Shara small cattle to Shara, Manishtusu—a statue of the divinized former king of Akkad—and Igizibara. The reason for this offering is not given. Perhaps the balang Igizibara was played as part of the cult of the dead Old Akkadian king.

23d Records from the central royal distribution center Puzrish-Dagan (Drehem) of expenditures for Ninigizibara in Uruk in connection with the absence of the planet Venus venerated as Nanaya.
          “The fact that the expenditures fall in the same month of two consecutive years means that the two events are not linked with actual inferior and/or superior conjunctions of the planet with the sun. The ‘disappearance place’ would be the ecliptic at the western horizon.

23d1 BPOA 7 2870 Drehem Šulgi 35 I = P303662.
          “Small cattle for the Gipar, the sanctuary in the house of Nanaya in Uruk, ‘things of the disappearance place of Nanaya’ (niĝ2 ki-zah3 ^dNa-na-a), and for Ninigizibara.

23d2 Schneider 1932 58 Drehem Šulgi 36 I = P101353, Sallaberger 1993 1:221. Expenditures of lambs and kids by the governor of Uruk in Uruk:

23d3 SET (Jones and Snyder 1961) 42 Drehem Šulgi 37 V = P129452.
          “Expenditures of large and small cattle, among them one kid for the ‘house’ of Ninigizibara in Uruk and two kids for the gerrānum-lament of the house of Belat-Suhnir (for gerrānum, see 45).

23e List of gods from OB Isin A II 11/ B II 14–A II 13/ B II 16 (Wilcke 1987:94).
          “^dNin-igi-zi-bar-ra, ^dNin-me-ur4-ur4, ^dNin-he-nun-na. For Ninhenuna see 42. Here, balang-goddesses of Inana and Gula are grouped together.

23f Oratorio Uru’amma’irabi, OB version from Tell Haddad (col. III 9–12). Inana laments the loss of her two Balang-harps and their gods: VS 2 32 I 11–14 contains the answer of the harpist: The late version of these lines in the seventeenth tablet of Uru’amma’irabi is treated by Volk 2006. He understands the designation ‘my husband’ (mu-ud-na-mu) as an expression of the close relationship between Inana and Ninigizibara, translating ‘Auserwählter’. Gabbay (PHG:112–113), noting the grammatical male gender of the translated name Ninigizibara in this version, does not exclude understanding this balang-god as male and sexual partner of Inana (see Section 2d).

The overall context of the passage is Inana’s lament about the abduction of her husband Dumuzi and removal of her prized possessions. Later in the text, Inana utters her wish that the enemy return her shining balang Ninigizibara and her husband Dumuzi (IV 18–21), longing to lie with him.

23g1 For Ninigizibara in Mari rituals see 47.

23g2 ARM 25:566. “(Memorandum) about sending to Tuttul 4 pounds (2kg) of silver and 5 shekels (41.67g) gold for work on Ninigizibara.” [117]

23h Balang composition of Inana CT 36, 35 BM 96933 I 8 (A) and Kramer 1987, BM 96680, lines 342, 351, and 406 (B).
          “Inana is called ga-ša-an Igi-zi-bar-ra in A and ga-ša-an ^dIgi-zi-bar-ra in B. The reading of A is also found in the Late text MMA 186.11.3509 9a’: ga14-ša-an Igi-zi-bar-ra (Maul 2005:79). The reading in B indicates as meaning ‘lady of Igizibara’, which reflects her relationship as mistress of her servant balang-divinity.

23i N-A copy of Emesal vocabulary I 88–89 (MSL 4:9). Lady Bolt of the Sky (Ninsigarana) and Lady Well Regarded (Ninigizibara in women’s Sumerian and standard Sumerian), the two balang-gods of Inana. [118]

24 Lady Occupying the Palace (^dNin-e2-gal-e-si).
          “AUCT 1 (Sigrist 1984b) 969 Drehem Amar-Sin 3 VI = P103814. Record of the royal gift of a silver mirror for the goddess Gula of Umma and silver for her balang Ninegalesi. The name of the balang-goddess refers to the temples of Gula that were called Palaces (e2-gal). The verb si(g) means ‘to fill’, with the direct object of the English verb corresponding to the Sumerian locative-terminative. It is often difficult to know what exactly is meant. Obviously the harp does not literally fill the palace. Perhaps the verb describes here the sound of the instrument that fills the space of the temple. [119]

25 (= 19) and 26 Greatly talking with An (^dBalaĝ An-da-gal-di) and Divine Powers from Pure Heaven (^dBalaĝ Me-an-ku3-ta).
          “SAT 1 198 Girsu Amar-Sin 1 III = P131307. Record of expenditure of fattened small cattle as offerings, including two fattened kids as offerings for the two balang-gods. An-da-gal-di of the text is short for Nin-an-da-gal-di, attested as balang-god of Baba (19). Variation of the name with and without initial Nin ‘lady’ is also found in case of the name Ninigizibara (23).

27 Cedar-resin Balang of Baba (balaĝ šim ĝišeren ^dBa-u2).
          “TUT 112, fragment of a large tablet from Girsu, records in IV 11’ expenditure of beer for this balang, and MVN 22 121 of Šulgi 37 XI expenditure of wool. Brunke and Sallaberger 2010:49 give examples for the exceptional use of cedar wood for the manufacture of furniture, but it is unlikely that the long curved and recurved neck of the Balang-harp could have been made of soft cedar wood. The neck could have been treated with cedar-resin (see 23a2). The city-goddess of Gu’aba, another city in the province of Lagash, also had a cedar-resin Balang (30).

A cedar-resin balang appears in a much treated and discussed OB record of cult expenditures in Larsa, fully edited and treated anew in Westenholz and Westenholz 2006:3–81. [120] It includes a word read there qu2-tur4, for which W. Sallaberger proposed the reading ^kušbalaĝ. Löhnert 2009:68n312 commented on the context: “Während der am Abend stattfindenden Zeremonie Öffnen des Hauses, wenn die Gottheit eintritt, erhalten (die Klagesänger) Substanzen für Rauchopfer und das Kohlebeckenritual; allerdings wird hier mit der Neudeutung W. Sallabergers auch das Balag Instrument erwähnt.” Gabbay (PHG:70 with n. 69) proposed a different interpretation: Lamenters “took part in the performance of a Balag during a cultic act involving cedar incense.”

28 ‘Balang of the Day of Laying’ (balaĝ u4 nu2-a), that is, the day of invisibility of the moon. The moon’s absence was apparently feared despite its regular and predictable occurrence. [121] In Umma, this balang belonged to the household of the goddess Nin-Ibgala, an Inana-figure hailing from Lagash and venerated in Umma. A Girsu record of skins left over from small cattle offerings lists five skins from offerings to the divine balang (^dbalaĝ), or ‘balang-god’ (diĝir-balaĝ) for as many months of the year Šulgi 39, and twelve skins for the full year of Šulgi 40 (TCL 5 5672). This would have been the balang of the day of laying.

29 ‘Balang of the storm’ (balaĝ u4-da). SAT 2 166 Umma Šulgi 37 XII = P143367; ITT 2 1021+1022 III’ 22’ date broken, Girsu = P110891.
          “Records from Umma mention an ‘observer’ (igi-du8) as recipient of small cattle for prayer offerings described as ‘having confronted the storm’ (u4-da gaba-ri-a). As pointed out by Sallaberger, [122] two of these records replace the word u4 with ^dIškur, the name of the weather-god, confirming that u4 means ‘storm’, not ‘day’, in this context. The confrontations with the weather-god would have typically taken place in spring when thunderstorms form in the area and threaten the barley harvest. The ritual of confrontation was performed in specified field areas. The observer (igi-du8) appears as responsible for the expenditure for balaĝ u4-[da] in the tablet fragment ITT 5 6916 from Girsu. He would have identified which field area was located in the path of an oncoming storm and confronted it with the balang that would calm the weather-god down. Among the balang servant-gods of the weather-god in An:Anum, ‘Storm of the Suru lamenter’, ‘X his Thunder’, or ‘He Roars’ (53 III 261, 263–264) may have been used for the purpose. For a possible link with the Eblaite word for harpist, see 4d.

30 ITT 3 4977 Girsu no year XI = P111073.
          “The text records the expenditure of beer and flour for the goddess Nin-KI.MAR and ‘cedar-resin Balang, the balang of the storm in the house of Ninmar’ (balaĝ šim-eren balaĝ u4-da ša3 e2 ^dNin-marki). For another cedar-resin balang see 27.

31 ‘Balang of the Storm, house (and) city encircled’ (balaĝ u4-da e2 uru niĝin-na).
          “The ritual involving this balang took the form of a circumambulation of the temple and the city, as detailed in TCT 1 (Lafont and Yildiz 1989) 796. The circumambulation included offerings at the east and west gates of the Holy City of Girsu, ‘tears’, and remuneration for the actions of lamenter (gala) and observer (igi-du8). The observer would have determined that a storm threatened the entire city of Girsu. If he corresponds to the ‘seer’ in ED Ebla, he played the harp. [123] The lamenter could have sung a song such as CT 15, 15–16 of the type ‘tears of the drum of Ishkur’ (er2-šem3-ma ^dIškur), which describes the god as riding a storm that causes his mother Ninlil to take fright and the king of gods, Enlil, to duck. Enlil then acknowledges the power of Ishkur’s thunder, lighting, and hailstones, and asks him to use it against a rebel land. Ishkur obeys, emerges from his temple pacified, his thunderstorm having moved away. According to HLC 23 = P109901, the chief lamenter (gala-mah) Utu-Bara was responsible for flour expended for the Balang-harp.

See further Sallaberger 1993 1:297 and 2 Tab. 105; Heimpel 1998; Gabbay 2013:235–239.

32 ‘Balang of the storm, facade toward Uruk house’ (balaĝ u4-da igi e2 Unu{ki}-še3).
          “The location is the west gate of the Holy City of Girsu (Heimpel 1996:20). The balang appears to be directed against a storm approaching from the west, but not deemed a threat for the entire city. Sallaberger 1993:Tab. 105; Gabbay 2013:236n36 understands igi e2 Unu as a location outside Uruk.

33 ‘Balang of bathing’ (balaĝ a-tu5-a).
          “BPOA 7 1792, Umma, Amar-Sin 6 = P292088.
          “Record of expenditures of flour for the “Balang of bathing at the festivals, the three of them” (balaĝ a-tu5-a ezen 3-a-ba). These were the festivals of the fourth, eighth, and eleventh months. Sallaberger 1993:239 demonstrated that the bathing of Shara, the city-god of Umma, was the central cult act of these festivals and that it was associated with ‘heart cooling’ (ša3-te). The latter was effected by a balang, as this newly published text shows. The procedure of bathing a divinity is described by Sallaberger 1993:192: the image in its cella is disrobed, water is poured over it as part of the life-restoring ritual called ‘washing of the mouth’, and the image is then newly clothed. The manipulation of the image brought with it the danger of enraging the divinity, which was counteracted by the sound of the balang.

34a–35 Balang of Nanna and Ninsun. Sigrist 1999:132–138 Drehem Amar-Sin 2 XI = P200532.
          “Record of offerings for the ghost of king Shu-Sin, netherworld divinities, and ghosts, as well as offerings of kids for the balangs of the moon-god Nanna and Ninsun on day sixteen in Ur (rev. II 10–11), and for the balang of Ninsun again on day seventeen (rev. IV 22’–23’).

34b BPOA 7 2856 Drehem Amar-Sin 4 XII = P303644.
          “Record of royal offerings of small cattle at the occasion of the harvest festival for the moon-god Nanna, the boat on which Nanna had come from Ur to the festival house Akiti, and for a balang. The balang may have entertained the moon-god and relieved his anxiety on the boat trip. See also 20d.

34c UET 3 298 Ur = P136617.
          “A smith receives 1/3 pound 8 ½ shekels minus 15 grains (189.6g) gold for plating a balang of Nanna.

35 UET 3 282 = P136599 (PHG:93n111, and 102n178).
          “Receipt, of the administrator of the temple of Ningal, of cream, cheese, raisins, honey, dates for regular offerings (sa2-[du11]), regular monthly cult expenses (niĝ2-dab5), and a bronze balang (balaĝ UD.K[A.BAR]). The record is sealed by the steward in the temple of Ningal, the wife of the city-god in Ur. While the sign for bronze is not fully preserved, there are no easy alternatives. Possibly the ‘bronze balang’ was in fact a kettledrum. [124]

36 Balang of Ninura
          “TCL 5 5672 V 16 and VI 9 Umma = P131743.
          “The text registers two bull hides to be used for the balang of Ninura, the wife of the city-god of Umma.

37 NATN (Owen 1982) 824 Nippur = P121521.
          “The seven balangs of Nin[     ] receive a fattened ram. [125]

38 Princeton 1 99 Drehem Šulgi 47 I 28 = P126788.
          “Record of offerings in Uruk, among them small cattle for the gate of the residence of the En priest (ka2 gi6-par3-ra) of Inana, a balang, and Aratta. Cavigneaux 1998 read aratta (LAM!xKUR.RU), which would mean that there existed in Uruk a physical presence of the city Aratta, the prehistoric anta­gonist of Uruk. He notes that Aratta is mentioned repeatedly in the oratorio Uru’amma’irabi.

39 UTI 4 2849 = P140868 (PHG:102n179).
          ““2 cured hides and 1/3 pound of glue—balang of the chief lukur priestess covered.” [126]

40 Ishbi-Erra-Enlilda-Nirgal. RIME 4 1.1.1.
          “The king of Isin dedicates a balang to Enlil in Nippur. Unlike in earlier times, the king’s name appears in the name of the balang instrument.

41 Inana Ishbi-Erra. BIN 9 445 Ishbi-Erra 25 = P236455.

          “The balang that had been named and presumably commissioned by Ishbi-Erra was already ‘old’ (sumun) in the king’s lifetime. ‘Inana Ishbi-Erra’ does not belong to any name type; probably the real name was longer, and abbreviated in the administrative context. The harp would have belonged to the Inana cult in Isin.

42 Lady of Plenty (Nin-Henuna).
          “Nin-Henuna was the second balang of Gula, city-goddess of Isin, according to An:Anum V 187. She is listed in the OB god-list from Isin together with Nin-me-ur4-ur4 and Nin-igi-zi-bar-ra, the balang-gods of Inana (23e). See Cow of Plenty, Ab(2)-he-nun-na (20).

42a Nin-Isina’s Journey to Nippur lines 42–48.
          “A song for Gula under her name Lady of Isin (^dNin-Isina) celebrates the rise of the city of Isin to first rank among the cities of Babylonia after the fall of the Ur III kingdom, recounting the city-goddess’s triumphant return from a visit with Enlil who had bestowed on her a good fate for her city. Her husband Pabilsang welcomed her back. The king was there, too, and the music struck up. The returning Lady of Isin was praised and the lamenters pacified the highest ranking gods, An, Enlil, Enki, and Ninmah, perhaps because they were feared to be upset about the move of rule over Babylonia to Isin.

The text is a MA copy of an OB Sumerian text with imperfect Akkadian translation. Wagensonner 2008 identified an OB fragment, recopied the Late (MA) tablets, and provided an up-to-date translation and comments.

42b BIN 9 433 (Ishbi-Erra 19) = P236443. Quoted by A. Cavigneaux and M. Krebernik in RlA 9:378, *Nin-hinuna.
          ““5 shekels (3 m²) cured bull-hide (for) peg tooth/teeth/nose/mouth (KA) of the left ‘wood’ of Ninhenuna.” [132]

42c BIN 10 75 (Ishbi-Erra 14) = P236619.
          ““Gold decoration [133] was applied to Ninhenuna.” [134]

43 Curse on Akkad 199–204.
          “The survivors of catastrophe, sent by Enlil after destruction of his temple, aim to pacify the god’s wrath:

44 UET 8 79 Inscription of Warad-Sin or Rim-Sin I of Larsa (PHG:99).

45 HAV 13 rev. V 12’–15’. Kramer 1985:115n1; PHG:86, 141n568, 153n662.
          “A passage laments changes in the cult of Nin-Isina, partly in terms of Akkadian words replacing Sumerian ones. The hitherto unexplained Akkadian correspondence of kašbir with ma-zu2-um was recognized by Sallaberger (personal communication).

46 BIN 9 312:8 = P236322.
          “One kid hide (for) balang. [140]

47 Ishtar Rituals from OB Mari. Dossin 1938; FM 3 no. 2 and 3; FM 9:55–64, including a model of the arrangement of participants and furnishings, with the Balang-harp (Ziegler’s lyre) in central position.

47a FM 3 no. 2 I 3’–11’.

          “The following lines describe the position taken by other participants, including craftsmen and hairdressers with their tools. A table sprinkled with flour and a pitcher of water is set before Ishtar. Latarak and other servant-gods take their seats to her left, the identities of those to her right are lost in a break. The emblems of goddesses are brought from their shrines, the king takes his seat behind the lamenters, the servants take their places, and “the lamenters sing the Uru’amma’irabi of the beginning of the month” (II 19’–20’). [142]

At this point something is said about the behavior of an ecstatic. Lines 24’–25’ are read and restored by Durand and Guichard to mean “after they (the lamenters) have reached (the words) ĝa2-e u2-re-[men2], the overseers let the singers go. If (the ecstatic) gets [into trance, they sing] ĝa2-e u2-re-m[en2].” These are the words that follow the fifth section (ki-ru-gu2) of the OB version of the oratorio Uru’amma’irabi.

After four missing lines at the head of the third column, a foot race is mentioned and the lamenters are said to be singing i-gi-it-te-en di-ba-x(-x). As the race ends in the temple of Ishtar, they sing the song AN-nu-wa-še, the king gets up and one of the lamenters sings an ershema to Enlil to the accompaniment of the halhallatum drum ([i]-na ha-al-ha-la-tim er-se-[m]a-kam a-na ^dEn-lil2 i-za-mu-ur).

47b FM 3 no. 3 I 21’–22’.
          “[    ^dNin]-gi-zi-pa-ra
          “[            ] li-li-si-im
          “The two lines appear to confirm that the harp-god is not identical with the kettledrum.

48 VS 10 216: 4–8 Catalogue of liturgical texts (Krecher 1966:33; Löhnert 2009:16 [Hinweis Gabbay]).
          “‘Oh IllaLUM, Oh IllaLUM’ 1 [(leather)] balang of Sin. ‘The Lord, the … of the Lord in his Land’ 1 incantation song of [Suen], (altogether) 1 (leather) balang and 1 incantation song of Suen.” [143]

The meaning of balang is clearly the lyrics of a song. The determinative indicates that the instrument identifies the song.

49 Examples from laments of temple-mistresses about loss of their home, including the venue of balang performances.

49a Balang composition Uruhulake of Gula according to CLAM 256 (for difficult parallel lines from VS 2 25 see Krecher 1966:151; line a+47 is obscure).

49b Balang composition CT 36 46 III 5–9.

The image in line 7 could refer to gate sculptures, the bovidity of the balang, or the throng of the congregation at occasions when the balang strikes up.

50 CT 36 41:16–20 (Cohen 1981:104 [reference courtesy of Gabbay]). Gula laments disuse of cherished implements and musical instruments:

51 CLAM 420 a+36–a+41.
          “Late text of the penultimate section of an unidentified balang composition (see Maul 1999:297n53; PHG:81–82 and 85). The section has an explanatory character rather than being lyrics of an oratorio:

52 Late lexical series HAR-RA hubullu V 105–107 (MSL 6, 60).

53 ‘Balang bulls’ (GU4.BALAĜ) servant-gods in the Late god-list An:Anum (Litke 1998). [149]

In the OB version of the oratorio Elum Gusun, the gods are exhorted to go to the place called ‘Sitting Gods’, where the first fruits (nesaĝ) of the New Year were served (VS 2 11 II 12’–14’). Löhnert’s interpretation of Elum Gusun as being connected with the maintenance of irrigation works (Löhnert 2009:56) fits the timing, as the threat of downpours flooding fields during the barley harvest coincides with the Babylonian New Year. The term Sitting Gods is also found in Enuma Elish I 24, designating a location where the younger gods made merry, thus enraging the older ones and leading to war between the generations. The netherworld gods had their own occasion for Sitting Gods. In an incantation prayer to Enmeshara, the netherworld is called markas, ‘link, center’ of ‘Sitting Gods’ (Ambos 2004: 120.44).

The One-acre constellation consists of alpha, beta, gamma of Pegasus, and alpha of Andromeda. The constellation leads the stars of the path of An as they rise at the beginning of the year (RlA5:45 [Hunger, *Ikû]). The four stars were matched with the lands of the four cardinal points expressed as the lands of Assyria, Akkad, Elam, and Amurru (RlA4:412–413 [Hunger, *Himmelsgeographie]). The One-acre Star oratorio would have been performed at night, the first half of the Babylonian twelve-hour day.

A sanctuary of this name was located in the territory of Lagash, probably at its northwestern border (Gabbay 2013:19–20). The name was translated “Vom Himmel herabgetropft (dripped down from sky)” by Falkenstein 1966: 164, “Twinkles from Heaven” by George 1993:68. Perhaps it was a shrine built over a meteorite.

The literal meaning is ‘destroyed place’. The term also designates a type of person. B. Landsberger contrasted it with ki-sikil ‘pure place’ = ‘(virgin) girl’ and understood it as the designation of a raped girl (ap. Jacobsen ap. Gordon 1959:477). The standard translation is ‘waif’. The literal meaning fits the present context.

Ur-Zababa was the last king of Kish at the turn from the ED III to the OAkk. periods. FM 9:53, an OB letter from Mari of a music instructor of Yasmah-Adad, king of Mari, mentions musical instruments and singles out MA2.TUR ur-za-ba-bi-tum [Sa-a]m-si-Ya-as2-ma-ah-^d Adad. The editor N. Ziegler suggests that MA2.TUR designates the soundbox of the named instrument. The name means ‘My-sun-Yasmah-Addu’. The association with Ninurta and the use of the instrument by the singer (nar) is attested in lexical texts (CAD s.v. urzababītum).

Footnotes