The text in Jonah 2:1 states that John was in the midst of the fish for three days and three nights.” This expression is very rare in the Hebrew Bible. It only occurs twice.[1]Why does that say three days and three nights? Does this span of time simply refer to an amount of time that would have been “a far longer period than Jonah might have expected to survive”[2] or is it possible that this is a reference to the Sumerian/Akkadian myth “the descent of Innanna”? The purpose of this paper is to explore the background of the Sumerian and apply a basic comparative analysis with Jonah Chapter 2 in order to discern the possible relevance that this myth may have on the text of Jonah. This paper will be divided into three parts. Part one will focus on “the descent of Innamna.” We will first set the stage for the text by providing a brief historical and literary analysis of the text and then we will proceed to provide a brief summary of the narrative. Part two will then examine its Akkadian counterpart “the descent of Ishtar.” This will be done in order to discern the differences and similarities between each version. Part three will first examine the literary historical context of Jonah Chapter 2 and then we'll sometimes the narrative content of Jonah Chapter 2. We will then he positioned to analyze both the parallels as well as contrasts in order to give equally to both for it is within “The balance between comparison and contrast, for their combination in the appropriate proportions, which first provides the overall context for the biblical text.”[3]
THE DESCENT OF INNANNA
The descent of Innanna was originally composed somewhere between 2000 and 1500 B.C.[4] The text is Sumerian in origin but was also later adapted and transmitted by the Akkadians somewhere around 1000 B.C.[5] In fact, almost all Sumerian literature has been preserved by way of Akkadian preservation and transmission of the text. Nicholas Osler states, “Almost all the Sumerian literary texts that had been found were copied, often by schoolboys come in the first half of the second millennium, after the death of Sumerian as a living language.”[6] It is important to for our context that Sumerian gave rise to Akkadian as the lingua franca from 2000 B.C. to 600 B.C.[7] in case of our study, this means that if it's text as it all being read by the author of Jonah, it is in all likelihood being received in Akkadian. The text itself, whether it be in the Akkadian or Sumerian form, seems to be a religious text that conveys theological teaching about the nature of the underworld and its relationship to the goddess of love (i.e. Innanna/Ishtar).
As a narrative the Sumerian text can be broken up into four parts. First, Innanna’s preparation to go to the underworld. Second, her entrance into the underworld and her (unexpected?) death. Third, Ninshubur, her messenger, proceeds to find a goddess or gods that will help bring back Innana from the dead. Finally, Innana is brought back to life and then proceeds to go around visiting all the people that help her comeback from the dead.
Part one basically describes the scene where Innanna is preparing to go to the underworld “for some unknown reason.”[8] The text says simply, “my lady abandoned Heaven, abandoned earth, to the netherworld she descended, Innana abandoned Heaven, abandon the earth, to the netherworld she descended.”[9] In his portion of the story she does three things. First, the text mentions that she “abandons” seven different city in her purse in of the underworld. Second, the text then says that she “arrayed herself in seven ordinances.”[10] This refers to the fact that she is preparing herself with special clothing for her descent. The text describes special adornments for every part of her body (i.e. her head, hair, hand, neck, breast, her body, her eyes). Third, cheat and gives a special commission or instructions to her messenger Ninshubar. She basically tells Ninshubar what to do in the event that she does not return from the underworld. She is to mourn for her in her absence and beseech the gods on her behalf. She says, “when I shall have come to the netherworld, fill Heaven with complaints for me, in the assembly shrine cry out for me, in the house of the gods rush about for me, scratch thy eyes for me.”[11] She specifies several gods that Ninshubar must go to: Enil,
Part two basically describes her entry into the underworld. In this section we learn that for some reason or another Innana lies the gatekeeper of the underworld in order to gain entry. She states, “my elder sister Erechkigal, because her husband, the Lord Gugalanna, had been killed, to witness his funeral rites.”[12] At this point, Neti, the gatekeeper of the underworld, goes to Erechkigal and beseeches her on behalf of Innanna. In his speech to Erechkigal he describes the adornments, which she has put on for the occasion. Erechkigal then gives Netti the order to bring Innana through “the seven gates of the netherworld.”[13] As Netti brings her through each of the gates, he gives her an order to remove one specific item of her adornments. When asked why she must remove her adornments, he replies, “be silent, Innanna, the ordinances of the netherworld are perfect, O Innanna do not question the rights of the netherworld.”[14] Along the way she is ordered to remove: her crown, her measuring rod, her small lapis lazuli stones around her neck, his sparkling stones of her breast, the gold ring of her hand, her breastplate, and the garment of her body. Once she finally gained entrance into the netherworld she is judged by the Annunnaki who then proceed to “fasten their eyes upon her, the eyes of death.”[15]
The third part of the story then describes what Ninshubar does in response to the absence of Innanna. The text says, “After three days and three nights had passed, her messenger Ninshubar... fills the Heaven with complaints for her, cried out for her in the assembly shrine, rushed about four in the house of the gods, scratched his eyes for her.”[16] At this point, he begins to go around to all the gods that he had been instructed to beseech in her behalf. As it turns out all of the gods refuse to come to Inannana’s aide except for Eniki who fashions a creature who will bring back Inanna to life.
The last part of the story is incomplete. It begins to tell a story about how Inanna goes around visiting the gods who refused to help her when she was dead. Of course, she is accompanied by two teams from the underworld who are more than willing to carry out revenge for her. It is difficult to discern the function of this text, especially since we are missing some pieces from this puzzle.
THE DESCENT OF ISHTAR
The Akkadian version is considerably shorter. This version seems to lack an elaborate preparation for going into the underworld. It also seems to lack the revenge plot that we saw happening at the end of the Sumerian account. Nevertheless, the Akkadian narrative can be broken up into three parts.
Part one describes the descent of Ishtar into the underworld as well as her forceful access into the underworld through a series of threats, rather than a craftily formed a lie like we saw in the Sumerian account. Ishtar states, “if thou openest not the gate so that I cannot enter, I will smash the door, I will shatter the bolt, I will smash the doorpost, I will move the doors, I will raise up the dead, eating the living, so that the dead will outnumber the living!”[17] After gaining entrance into the underworld, she is then forced to remove all of her clothes as she passes through the seven gates of the underworld.
Part two describes how she is put to death, which results in a subsequent infertility among the living. The text states, “After Lady Ishtar [had descended to the land of no return], the bull springs not upon the cow, [the ass impregnates not the Jenny], in the street, [the man in impregnates not] the maiden.”[18]
Part three describes how she is brought back to life, which in this case is not done by a messenger who has been previously commissioned but rather Pappsukal who is described as a “vizor of the great Gods.”[19] In this case, he does not beseech the gods on the basis that Ishtar has been killed as we saw in the Summerian account, rather he brings forward the problem of infertility that has resulted from her death. She is then brought back to life and consequently all of her close a return to her as she leaves seven gates of death.
It would seem that in the Akkadian account there is a much clearer emphasis on fertility, whereas the Sumerian account placed a greater emphasis on the place of the gods. Inanna’s place was in the "great above" and not in the "great below." She also seems much more crafty and subtle about the way she gets into the underworld, where as in the Akkadian account we have a very forceful Ishtar threatening her way into the underworld.
JONAH AND THE GREAT FISH
The book of Jonah is extremely difficult to tie down historically. It is possible that the book was written by Jonah himself as early as 780 B.C (2 Ki 14:25). Certainly was written no later than 200 B.C. whereby it was already known as a book and viewed as canonical. However, some authors propose that it was possibly written somewhere “between the sixth century B.C. and the mid-fourth.”[20]
When it comes to taking the book of Jonah, one needs to consider several kinds of evidence. First, there is the evidence of authorship. There is no explicit evidence that Jonah is indeed the author of the book of Jonah. If it is indeed the case that he not the author, then one need not place the authorship during his lifetime.
Second, there is the evidence taken from the descriptive statements about
Third, there is a strange occurrence of that King declaring a fast that extended to even the animals and livestock (3:7). Allen maintains there is evidence points to the fact the author and imposing Persian custom onto the Akkadians. In support of this position, Alan draws attention to Ezra 7:14, Daniel 6:17, and Herodotus.
Fourth, there is the apparent use of Jeremiah 18 and Joel 2 found in Jonah Chapter 4.
Finally, there is the linguistic evidence. There is the presence of several so-called Aramaism such as, “think” (יתְעַשֵּׁ֧ת (Jon 1:6), “rage” (מזַּעְפּֽוֹ (Jon 1:15) and, “decree” (מִטַּ֧עַם (Jon 3:7) This type of evidence can be read in either as late Aramaic intrusions or possibly “pure Canaanitisms or common northwest Semitic.”[22] There is also linguistic evidence which that attests to late Biblical Hebrew such as “ship” “hurl” “be quite” and
“to appoint.”
For the purposes of this paper, we will not investigate and weigh all of this evidence. We are simply asking the question: is it possible that the author of Jonah would have had access to the Akkadian version of the descent of Ishtar? In my assessment, it seems that it is possible but not very likely.
It is possible that Jonah himself could have become aware of the expression “three days and three nights” via his visit to
However, it seems unlikely that the reference to “three days and three nights” is a reference to the descent of Ishtar. Even though it is very likely that the prophets were to some degree aware of the theological narratives outside stricture and even occasionally made reference to these narratives within Scripture, it does not seem likely in this case for several reasons. First, the book of Jonah and the descent of Ishtar are due in two very different things. Ishtar in some sense aims at providing a theological/mystical explanation for seasonal pattern change whereas Jonah aims at providing a theological understanding about God's relationship to both Jews and Gentiles. Second, although there are some loose parallels between the story of Jonah and the story of Ishtar, there does not seem to be enough to substantiate a genuine connection between the two. It seems to me that if the author wanted to make reference to Ishtar, then he would have done so with greater forcefulness and clarity. However, this procedure would assume that the author of Jonah (perhaps Jonah himself) would be directing the text as an Akkadian audience. It does not seem to make a lot of sense for the author to be making use of secular theological narratives for a Jewish audience. Third, although the phrase is rare within Scripture, there is one other occurrence within Scripture that could help explain the meaning. First and 30:12 states, “they gave him a piece of a cake of figs and two clusters of raisins. And when he had eaten, his spirit revived, for he had not eaten bread or drunk water for three days and three nights,” (ESV). This is the same Hebrew expression, which simply means a period of time that threaten his man's survival. I believe this strong evidence that suggests this phrase may have just been a common expression throughout the Semitic speaking world.
In conclusion, we can now see that it is possible to view the Jonah 2:1 with the possible background of the descent of Ishtar, which was originally a Sumerian myth describing Inanna’s rather whimsical flood into the underworld. In addition, according to my estimation, it doesn't seem very likely that need to be read as a reference to the Akkadian myth.
[1] 1 Sa 30:12 and Jo 2:1.
[2] Leslie C. Allen, The Books of Joel, Obedianh, Jonah and Micah, (Grand Rapids: William B. Erdmans Publishing Company, 1976), 213.
[3] William W. Hallo, “Compare and Contrast: Contextual Approach to Biblical Literature,” in The Bible in Light of Cuneiform Literature, (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1990), 2.
[4] James B. Pritchard, Ancient near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950), 52.
[6] Empires of the Word: A Language History of the World, (
[11] Ibid., 53.
[15] Ibid., 55.
[20] Leslie C. Allen, The Books of Joel, Obedianh, Jonah and Micah, 186.
[23] Nicholas Ostler, Empires of the Word, 60.
[24] The Akkadians made use of the Sumerian Syllabary for their written system. Ostler explains, “The only way to understand Akkadian cuneiflorm writing was to see it as an attempt to reinterpret & system that has been designed for Sumerian use. The intricacy, and probably the prestige, of the early Sumerian writing has been such that any outsiders who wanted to adopt it for their own language had largely had to take the Sumerian language with it,” Empires of the Word, 50.
No comments:
Post a Comment