comments by Patrick C. Ryan (1/17/98)
The male and female
principles separated (into sky and earth).
On the one hand, we have the male principle becoming the sky (Sumerian An, "sky") and the female principle becoming the earth (Sumerian Ki, "earth", wife of An); this seems to the overwhelmingly the commoner division of assignments to the gender principles. The idea of "Mother Earth" is virtually universal; "Father Sky" almost as prevalent.
But, on the other hand, we do have, notably, apparently a male earth-god and a female sky-god in Egypt:
"[Seb/Geb] and Nut were being born of Shu and Tefnut (author's translation)".
mjs.w jn Sw Tj.f-(J)nw.t [*Zwj3b/*Gjb] Hn' (J)nw.t
Seb/Geb (earth) is normally considered to be male; Nut (sky), female — and, if our analysis is correct, we have a male earth (Adam) and female sky (Eve) in the Hebrew creation account, which quite possibly is derived from Hurrian sources.
One of the major features in these creation myths is that the Sky first produces the Sun and the Moon, which are his/her eyes:
"That the heavens, or the skies, were considered to be a Face is evident from many allusions. Thus, the Sun is frequently called ‘Eye of Horus', and the Moon is also an ‘Eye of Horus', the Sun being the right eye, and the Moon the left."
EXCURSUSIn view of the attested Hurrian deity Adamma, the origin of Adam (Hebrew [?]adham) may be more complex than generally assumed. He may be a re-statement of the hermaphroditic creator-god from whom a female deity is "separated"; and, as such, represents the an actor in the process in creation of the separation of earth (Adam) and sky (Eve), interestingly mirroring the male earth/female sky division of responsibilities we have seen in Egypt (male Geb/female [Tef]nut). In view of Hebrew [?]adhâmâh, "earth" (from âdhom, "be red"), there will perhaps be less reluctance to consider the possibility that Adam represents the separated male earth component of the celestial ocean deity but what of Eve (Hebrew Hawwâh)? If Adam represents the earth, Eve should represent the sky. A connection between Eve and the Hurrian goddess Hebat, the wife of the weather-god Tešub, has often been considered; and, functionally, would be appropriate since the marriage metaphor frequently symbolizes a male/female division of an originally integral deity — and the weather has a close relationship with the sky. Without going into a lot of linguistic argumentation, let me say only that some words written with Hurrian b are believed to represent /w/ phonetically (Diakonoff 1971, pp. 27- 31) so that there probably would be no problem in relating Hebat to Hawwâh. And, it is even vaguely possible that the attested spouse of Adamma, Kubaba, might be distantly cognate as well. As for the meaning, Arabic Haw(w)â, "howl, yelp" and ?istaHwâ, "ask help against", which may correlate with Hurrian hawaha, "prayer" (and perhaps also Hebrew Hâwâh, "tell, declare, make known"), suggest that the basal meaning may be "howl(er)", an appropriate name for both the wind and fervent prayer in the Near Eastern style. For any who might think that "howler" is an inappropriate name for a deity, we might remember Greek Boréas, the "North Wind", which should be derived from Indo- European bher-, "buzz, drone, growl, mutter, thunder". In Creation (4), we will see that the sons of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, probably represent the seasonal variations signaled by the positions of the Milky Way, which also correlates with this line of reasoning. |
"At first there was neither earth nor sky, Shuzanghu and his wife Zumiang-Nui lived alone...In due time Zumiang-Nui gave birth to a baby-girl, Subbu-Khai-Thung, who is the Earth and to a baby-boy, Jongsuli-Young-Jongbu, who is the Sky. "
"Sedi is the Earth; Melo is the Sky. The Earth is a woman, the Sky is a man."
The purer and clearer part was thinly drawn out, and formed Heaven, while the heavier and grosser element was accomplished with difficulty."
There will probably never be a truly definitive answer to the question of why one culture has chosen to assign male or female qualities to the sky or earth but I would like to offer, what I hope, is, at least, a plausible explanation.
Natural phenomena, which elicited admiration and awe in our most ancient ancestors, were the ultimate bases for divinities. Every natural phenomenon can be experienced psychologically at different times and places, in two basic ways: positively, i.e. as something beautiful and pleasing, which correlates with femininity; or negatively, i.e. as something strong and potentially dangerous, which correlates with masculinity.
For a people dwelling in foothills or mountains, the Earth might well be regarded as male because of its hardness, ability to inflict pain while walking, and potentially dangerous falls; while another people, dwelling in a soft-carpeted forest, teaming with life of all kinds, might be inclined to regard the Earth as female. Similarly, to residents in a Mediterranean or North African setting, where weather is generally mild, the Sky might be considered female, contrasting with occupants of lands where terrible storms rage, where we might expect a male Sky-god.
So we can hypothesize that there is nothing intrinsically exclusively male or female about any given natural phenomenon; and further speculate, that the assignment of a gender to it is not so much originally doctrinally as situationally determined. But this has the additional correlate that, though the formative experience of people in a certain place may dictate a gender assignment, e.g. a female Sky in Egypt (Nut); the potential for a contrasting assignment of gender, perhaps based on previous residence in a different locale or the abstraction of a different aspect of the natural phenomenon, is always potentially realizable (Horus).
Of course, migrations of peoples from one locale to another, have complicated the picture; and sometimes we will see earlier assignments of gender being "inappropriately" retained or subtly modified, or grafted, with inevitable contradictions, on systems based on psychologically more consistent models. At a certain level of civilization, doctrinal considerations also become significant.
Therefore, the numina (powers that reside in natural phenomena) are inherently male and female (we can easily see how bisexuality and hermaphroditism are appropriate metaphors); and the pattern we will frequently find is that any given natural phenomenon will have male and female divinities associated with it, expressing only different aspects of the same phenomenon, frequently expressed through the more conventional metaphor of marriage (husband and wife).
To complicate our analyses even further, we will find that epithets which originally denoted only different sub-aspects of a divinity representing originally one natural phenomenon, have been differentiated into apparently separate divinities.
For example, the male realization of the planet Saturn, which is usually associated with the non-agricultural aspects of the earth, has been differentiated into Hephaestus, the lame smith (and hence, slow-moving), the lord of metallurgy; and Hades, the lord of the underworld — among the Greeks.
But, like the thread of Ariadne, the basic categories of the ancient human experience and their cosmic associations can lead us through the labyrinth of gods and goddesses which we actually find — if we can correctly identify and frame the basic categories and correctly associate them with cosmic phenomena:
earth/vegetation/death (Saturn); sky/weather (Jupiter); water/birth [from the release of amniotic fluid at birth] (Venus); aggression/blood/hunting (Mars); knowledge/medicine (Mercury); fire/family (North Star); social order/justice (Sun); sexuality/procreation (Moon); afterlife/prophecy (axis mundi, World Tree [travel between planes of existence]); ancestors (stars); and evil/demonic influences (comets).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aston, W. G. Translator. 1956. The Nihongi. London: George Allen and Unwin
Bonnet, Hans. 1971. Reallexikon der ägyptischen Religionsgeschichte. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter
Budge, E. A. Wallis. 1969 [1904]. The Gods of the Egyptians - or Studies in Egyptian Mythology. 2 vol. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
Cushing, F. H. 1896. Outlines of Zuni Creation Myths. in Thirteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Etnnology. Washington, D. C.
Diakonoff, I. M. 1971. Hurrisch und Urartäisch. Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft, Beiheft 6, Neue Folge. (Bernhard Forssman, Karl Hoffmann, Johanna Narten.) Munich: R. Kitzinger
Elwin, Verrier. 1958. Myths of the North-East Frontier of India. Calcutta: Sree Saraswaty Press
English, E. Schuyler, editor-in-chief. 1948. Holy Bible. Pilgrim Edition. New York: Oxford University Press
Gottlieb, Alma. 1992. Under the Kapok Tree - Identity and Difference in Beng Thought. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press
Graves, Robert. 1959. The Greek Myths. 2 vol. New York: George Braziller, Inc.
Hale, Horatio. 1888. Huron Folklore. In Journal of Americal Folklore, Ie. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Jacobsen, Thorkild. 1976. The Treasures of Darkness - A History of Mesopotamian Religion. New Haven and London: Yale University Press
Leach, Maria. 1956. The Beginning. New York: Funk and Wagnalls
the latest revision of this document can be found at
HTTP://WWW.GEOCITIES.COM/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/creation-3.htm
Patrick C. Ryan * 9115 West 34th Street - Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 * (501)227-9947
PROTO-LANGUAGE@email.msn.com