Changes

[[File:lighterstill.jpg]]

[[File:lighterstill.jpg]][[File:Aleph.jpg|right]][[File:Lamed.jpg|right]]

ʾ'''Ēl''' (written aleph-lamed, i.e. אל, 𐤀𐤋, 𐎛𐎍 etc.) is the Northwest Semitic word for "deity", cognate to Akkadian ilum.

'''ʾĒl''' (written aleph-lamed, i.e. אל, etc.) is the Northwest Semitic word for "deity", cognate to Akkadian ilum.

In the Canaanite religion, or Levantine religion as a whole, Eli or Il was the supreme god,[2] the father of humankind and all creatures and the husband of the goddess Asherah as recorded in the clay tablets of Ugarit (modern Ras Shamra, Syria).[2]

In the Canaanite religion, or Levantine religion as a whole, Eli or Il was the supreme god,[2] the father of humankind and all creatures and the husband of the goddess Asherah as recorded in the clay tablets of Ugarit (modern Ras Shamra, Syria).[2]

The word El was found at the top of a list of gods as the Ancient of gods or the Father of all gods, in the ruins of the Royal Library of the Ebla civilization, in the archaeological site of Tell Mardikh in Syria dated to 2300 BC. He may have been a desert god at some point, as the myths say that he had two wives and built a sanctuary with them and his new children in the desert. El had fathered many gods, but most important were Hadad, Yam, and Mot.

The word El was found at the top of a list of gods as the Ancient of gods or the Father of all gods, in the ruins of the Royal Library of the Ebla civilization, in the archaeological site of Tell Mardikh in Syria dated to 2300 BC. He may have been a desert god at some point, as the myths say that he had two wives and built a sanctuary with them and his new children in the desert. El had fathered many gods, but most important were Hadad, Yam, and Mot.

==Linguistic forms and meanings==

==Linguistic forms and meanings==

Cognate forms are found throughout the Semitic languages. They include Ugaritic ʾil, pl. ʾlm; Phoenician ʾl pl. ʾlm; Hebrew ʾēl, pl. ʾēlîm; Aramaic ʾl; Akkadian ilu, pl. ilānu.

Cognate forms are found throughout the Semitic languages. They include Ugaritic ʾil, pl. ʾlm; Phoenician ʾl pl. ʾlm; Hebrew ʾēl, pl. ʾēlîm; Aramaic ʾl; Akkadian ilu, pl. ilānu.

The stem ʾl is found prominently in the earliest strata of east Semitic, northwest Semitic, and south Semitic groups. Personal names including the stem ʾl are found with similar patterns both in Amorite and South Arabic which indicates that probably already in Proto-Semitic ʾl was both a generic term for "god" and the common name or title of a single particular "god" or "God".

The stem ʾl is found prominently in the earliest strata of east Semitic, northwest Semitic, and south Semitic groups. Personal names including the stem ʾl are found with similar patterns both in Amorite and South Arabic which indicates that probably already in Proto-Semitic ʾl was both a generic term for "god" and the common name or title of a single particular "god" or "God".

Also in Northwest Semitic the typical belief and thought for El is that he controls the Moon and the Sun. In the myth, while he controls them they often fight for a place as his favorite. The results, day, night, day, night, are often explained as following. When it is day, the Sun has beaten the Moon. When it is night, the Moon has beaten the sun. When this myth formed it was not known that one part of the planet was in night and one in dark. They said that no heavenly body won twice in a row, except on the days of the eclipse.[citation needed][original research?]

Also in Northwest Semitic the typical belief and thought for El is that he controls theProxy-Connection: keep-alive

[edit] Proto-Sinaitic, Phoenician, Aramaic, and Hittite texts

 

oon and the Sun. IProxy-Connection: keep-alive

 

the myth, while he controls them they often fight for a place as his favorite. The results, day, night, day, night, are often explained as following. When it is day, the Sun has beaten the Moon. When it is night, the Moon has beaten the sun. When this myth formed it was not known that one part of the planet was in night and one in dark. They said that no heavenly body won twice in a row, except on the days of the eclipse.[citation needed][original research?] [edit] Proto-Sinaitic, Phoenician, Aramaic, and Hittite texts

A proto-Sinaitic mine inscription from Mount Sinai reads ʼlḏ‘lm understood to be vocalized as ʼil ḏū ‘ôlmi, 'ʼĒl Eternal' or 'God Eternal'.

A proto-Sinaitic mine inscription from Mount Sinai reads ʼlḏ‘lm understood to be vocalized as ʼil ḏū ‘ôlmi, 'ʼĒl Eternal' or 'God Eternal'.

A Phoenician inscribed amulet of the 7th century BCE from Arslan Tash may refer to ʼĒl. Rosenthal (1969, p. 658) translated the text:

A Phoenician inscribed amulet of the 7th century BCE from Arslan Tash may refer to ʼĒl. Rosenthal (1969, p. 658) translated the text:

:An eternal bond has been established for us. Ashshur has established (it) for us, and all the divine beings and the majority of the group of all the holy ones, through the bond of heaven and earth for ever, ...

:An eternal bond has been established for us. Ashshur has established (it) for us, and all the divine beings and the majority of the group of all the holy ones, through the bond of heaven and earth for ever, ...  

However the text is translated by Cross (1973, p. 17):

However the text is translated by Cross (1973, p. 17):

:The Eternal One (‘Olam) has made a covenant oath with us,

:The Eternal One (‘Olam) has made a covenant oath with us,  

:Asherah has made (a pact) with us.

:Asherah has made (a pact) with us.  

:And all the sons of El,</blockquote>

:And all the sons of El,</blockquote>  

:And the great council of all the Holy Ones.

:And the great council of all the Holy Ones.  

:With oaths of Heaven and Ancient Earth.

:With oaths of Heaven and Ancient Earth.  

In some inscriptions the name ’Ēl qōne ’arṣ meaning "ʼĒl creator of Earth" appears, even including a late inscription at Leptis Magna in Tripolitania dating to 2nd century (KAI. 129). In Hittite texts the expression becomes the single name Ilkunirsa, this Ilkunirsa appearing as the husband of Asherdu (Asherah) and father of 77 or 88 sons.[5]

In some inscriptions the name ’Ēl qōne ’arṣ meaning "ʼĒl creator of Earth" appears, even including a late inscription at Leptis Magna in Tripolitania dating to 2nd century (KAI. 129). In Hittite texts the expression becomes the single name Ilkunirsa, this Ilkunirsa appearing as the husband of Asherdu (Asherah) and father of 77 or 88 sons.[5]

See Ba‘al Hammon for the possibility that ʼĒli was identical with Ba‘al Hammon who was worshipped as the supreme god in Carthage.

See Ba‘al Hammon for the possibility that ʼĒli was identical with Ba‘al Hammon who was worshipped as the supreme god in Carthage.

==Amorites==

==Amorites==

Amorite inscriptions from Zinčirli refer to numerous gods, sometimes by name, sometimes by title, especially by such titles as ilabrat 'god of the people'(?), il abīka 'god of your father', il abīni 'god of our father' and so forth. Various family gods are recorded, divine names listed as belong to a particular family or clan, sometimes by title and sometimes by name, including the name Il 'god'. In Amorite personal names the most common divine elements are Il ('God'), Hadad/Adad, and Dagan. It is likely that Il is also very often the god called in Akkadian texts Amurru or Il Amurru.

Amorite inscriptions from Zinčirli refer to numerous gods, sometimes by name, sometimes by title, especially by such titles as ilabrat 'god of the people'(?), il abīka 'god of your father', il abīni 'god of our father' and so forth. Various family gods are recorded, divine names listed as belong to a particular family or clan, sometimes by title and sometimes by name, including the name Il 'god'. In Amorite personal names the most common divine elements are Il ('God'), Hadad/Adad, and Dagan. It is likely that Il is also very often the god called in Akkadian texts Amurru or Il Amurru. [edit] Ugarit

[edit] Ugarit

For the Canaanites, Eli or Il was the supreme god, the father of mankind and all creatures.[6] He may have been a desert god at some point, as the myths say that he had two wives and built a sanctuary with them and his new children in the desert. El had fathered many gods, but most important were Hadad, Yam, and Mot, each share similar attributes to the GrecoRoman gods: Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades respectively.

For the Canaanites, Eli or Il was the supreme god, the father of mankind and all creatures.[6] He may have been a desert god at some point, as the myths say that he had two wives and built a sanctuary with them and his new children in the desert. El had fathered many gods, but most important were Hadad, Yam, and Mot, each share similar attributes to the GrecoRoman gods: Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades respectively.

The theological position of the Tanakh is that the names Ēl and ’Ĕlōhîm, when used in the singular to mean the supreme and active 'God', refer to the same being as does the name, Yahweh. All three refer to the one supreme god who is the god of Israel, beside whom other gods are supposed to be either non-existent or insignificant. Whether this was a longstanding belief or a relatively new one has long been the subject of inconclusive scholarly debate about the prehistory of the sources of the Tanakh and about the prehistory of Israelite religion. In the P strand, YHVH says in Exodus 6.2–3:

The theological position of the Tanakh is that the names Ēl and ’Ĕlōhîm, when used in the singular to mean the supreme and active 'God', refer to the same being as does the name, Yahweh. All three refer to the one supreme god who is the god of Israel, beside whom other gods are supposed to be either non-existent or insignificant. Whether this was a longstanding belief or a relatively new one has long been the subject of inconclusive scholarly debate about the prehistory of the sources of the Tanakh and about the prehistory of Israelite religion. In the P strand, YHVH says in Exodus 6.2–3:

:I revealed myself to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as Ēl Shaddāi, but was not known to them by my name, Yahweh.

:I revealed myself to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as Ēl Shaddāi, but was not known to them by my name, Yahweh.  

This suggests the identity of Yahweh with either Ēl, in his aspect of Shaddāi, or with a god called Shaddāi.[citation needed] Also suggested is that the name Yahweh is a more recent revelation.[citation needed] One scholarly position is that the identification of Yahweh with Ēl is late, that Yahweh was earlier thought of as only one of many gods, and not normally identified with Ēl. In some places, especially in Psalm 29, Yahweh is clearly envisioned as a storm god, something not true of Ēl so far as we know (though true of his son, Ba'al/Hadad). (Noted Parallel: El is derived from Sumerian Enlil, God of Wind[8]) It is Yahweh who fights Leviathan in Isaiah 27.1; Psalm 74.14; Job 3.8 & 40.25/41.1, a deed attributed both to Ba’al/Hadad and ‘Anat in the Ugaritic texts, but not to Ēl. Such mythological motifs are variously seen as late survivals from a period when Yahweh held a place in theology comparable to that of Hadad at Ugarit; or as late henotheistic/monotheistic applications to Yahweh of deeds more commonly attributed to Hadad; or simply as examples of eclectic application of the same motifs and imagery to various different gods. Similarly, it is argued inconclusively whether Ēl Shaddāi, Ēl ‘Ôlām, Ēl ‘Elyôn, and so forth, were originally understood as separate divinities. Albrecht Alt presented his theories on the original differences of such gods in Der Gott der Väter in 1929. But others have argued that from patriarchal times these different names were indeed generally understood to refer to the same single great god, Ēl. This is the position of Frank Moore Cross (1973). What is certain is that the form ’ēl does appear in Israelite names from every period including the name Yiśrā’ēl ('Israel'), meaning 'ēl strives' or 'struggled with él'.

This suggests the identity of Yahweh with either Ēl, in his aspect of Shaddāi, or with a god called Shaddāi.[citation needed] Also suggested is that the name Yahweh is a more recent revelation.[citation needed] One scholarly position is that the identification of Yahweh with Ēl is late, that Yahweh was earlier thought of as only one of many gods, and not normally identified with Ēl. In some places, especially in Psalm 29, Yahweh is clearly envisioned as a storm god, something not true of Ēl so far as we know (though true of his son, Ba'al/Hadad). (Noted Parallel: El is derived from Sumerian Enlil, God of Wind[8]) It is Yahweh who fights Leviathan in Isaiah 27.1; Psalm 74.14; Job 3.8 & 40.25/41.1, a deed attributed both to Ba’al/Hadad and ‘Anat in the Ugaritic texts, but not to Ēl. Such mythological motifs are variously seen as late survivals from a period when Yahweh held a place in theology comparable to that of Hadad at Ugarit; or as late henotheistic/monotheistic applications to Yahweh of deeds more commonly attributed to Hadad; or simply as examples of eclectic application of the same motifs and imagery to various different gods. Similarly, it is argued inconclusively whether Ēl Shaddāi, Ēl ‘Ôlām, Ēl ‘Elyôn, and so forth, were originally understood as separate divinities. Albrecht Alt presented his theories on the original differences of such gods in Der Gott der Väter in 1929. But others have argued that from patriarchal times these different names were indeed generally understood to refer to the same single great god, Ēl. This is the position of Frank Moore Cross (1973). What is certain is that the form ’ēl does appear in Israelite names from every period including the name Yiśrā’ēl ('Israel'), meaning 'ēl strives' or 'struggled with él'.

The apparent plural form ’Ēlîm or ’Ēlim 'gods' occurs only four times in the Tanakh. Psalm 29, understood as an enthronement psalm, begins:

The apparent plural form ’Ēlîm or ’Ēlim 'gods' occurs only four times in the Tanakh. Psalm 29, understood as an enthronement psalm, begins:

:A Psalm of David.

:A Psalm of David.  

:Ascribe to Yahweh, sons of gods (bênê ’Ēlîm),

:Ascribe to Yahweh, sons of gods (bênê ’Ēlîm),  

:Ascribe to Yahweh, glory and strength

:Ascribe to Yahweh, glory and strength  

Psalm 89:6 (verse 7 in Hebrew) has:

Psalm 89:6 (verse 7 in Hebrew) has:

:For who in the skies compares to Yahweh,

:For who in the skies compares to Yahweh,  

:who can be likened to Yahweh among the sons of gods (bênê ’Ēlîm).

:who can be likened to Yahweh among the sons of gods (bênê ’Ēlîm).  

Traditionally bênê ’ēlîm has been interpreted as 'sons of the mighty', 'mighty ones', for, indeed ’ēl can mean 'mighty', though such use may be metaphorical (compare the English expression God-awful). It is possible also that the expression ’ēlîm in both places descends from an archaic stock phrase in which ’lm was a singular form with the m-enclitic and therefore to be translated as 'sons of Ēl'. The m-enclitic appears elsewhere in the Tanakh and in other Semitic languages. Its meaning is unknown, possibly simply emphasis. It appears in similar contexts in Ugaritic texts where the expression bn ’il alternates with bn ’ilm, but both must mean 'sons of Ēl'. That phrase with m-enclictic also appears in Phoenician inscriptions as late as the 5th century BCE.

Traditionally bênê ’ēlîm has been interpreted as 'sons of the mighty', 'mighty ones', for, indeed ’ēl can mean 'mighty', though such use may be metaphorical (compare the English expression God-awful). It is possible also that the expression ’ēlîm in both places descends from an archaic stock phrase in which ’lm was a singular form with the m-enclitic and therefore to be translated as 'sons of Ēl'. The m-enclitic appears elsewhere in the Tanakh and in other Semitic languages. Its meaning is unknown, possibly simply emphasis. It appears in similar contexts in Ugaritic texts where the expression bn ’il alternates with bn ’ilm, but both must mean 'sons of Ēl'. That phrase with m-enclictic also appears in Phoenician inscriptions as late as the 5th century BCE.

One of the other two occurrences in the Tanakh is in the "Song of Moses", Exodus 15.11a:

One of the other two occurrences in the Tanakh is in the "Song of Moses", Exodus 15.11a:

:Who is like you among the gods (’ēlim), Yahweh?

:Who is like you among the gods (’ēlim), Yahweh?  

The final occurrence is in Daniel 11.36:

The final occurrence is in Daniel 11.36:

:And the king will do according to his pleasure; and he will exalt himself and magnify himself over every god (’ēl), and against the God of gods (’ēl ’ēlîm) he will speak outrageous things, and will prosper until the indignation is accomplished: for that which is decided will be done.

:And the king will do according to his pleasure; and he will exalt himself and magnify himself over every god (’ēl), and against the God of gods (’ēl ’ēlîm) he will speak outrageous things, and will prosper until the indignation is accomplished: for that which is decided will be done.  

There are a few cases in the Tanakh where some think ’ēl referring to the great god Ēl is not equated with Yahweh. One is in Ezekiel 28.2, in the taunt against a man who claims to be divine, in this instance, the leader of Tyre:

There are a few cases in the Tanakh where some think ’ēl referring to the great god Ēl is not equated with Yahweh. One is in Ezekiel 28.2, in the taunt against a man who claims to be divine, in this instance, the leader of Tyre:

:Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre: "Thus says the Lord Yahweh: 'Because your heart is proud and you have said: "I am ’ēl (God), in the seat of ’elōhîm (God or gods), I am enthroned in the middle of the seas." Yet you are man and not ’ēl even though you have made your heart like the heart of ’elōhîm ('God' or 'gods').'"

:Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre: "Thus says the Lord Yahweh: 'Because your heart is proud and you have said: "I am ’ēl (God), in the seat of ’elōhîm (God or gods), I am enthroned in the middle of the seas." Yet you are man and not ’ēl even though you have made your heart like the heart of ’elōhîm ('God' or 'gods').'"  

Here ’ēl might refer to a generic god, or to a highest god, Ēl. When viewed as applying to the King of Tyre specifically, the king was probably not thinking of Yahweh. When viewed a general taunt against anyone making divine claims, it may or may not refer to Yahweh depending on the context.

Here ’ēl might refer to a generic god, or to a highest god, Ēl. When viewed as applying to the King of Tyre specifically, the king was probably not thinking of Yahweh. When viewed a general taunt against anyone making divine claims, it may or may not refer to Yahweh depending on the context.

Psalm 82.1 says:

Psalm 82.1 says:

:’elōhîm ('God') stands in the council of ’ēl

:’elōhîm ('God') stands in the council of ’ēl  

:he judges among the gods (elohim).

:he judges among the gods (elohim).  

This could mean that God, that is Yahweh, judges along with many other gods as one of the council of the high god Ēl. However it can also mean that God, that is Yahweh, stands in the divine council (generally known as the Council of Ēl), as Ēl judging among the other members of the Council. The following verses in which God condemns those whom he says were previously named gods (elohim) and sons of the Most High suggest God is here indeed Ēl judging the lesser gods.

This could mean that God, that is Yahweh, judges along with many other gods as one of the council of the high god Ēl. However it can also mean that God, that is Yahweh, stands in the divine council (generally known as the Council of Ēl), as Ēl judging among the other members of the Council. The following verses in which God condemns those whom he says were previously named gods (elohim) and sons of the Most High suggest God is here indeed Ēl judging the lesser gods.

Unfortunately Eusebius of Caesarea, through whom Sanchuniathon is preserved, is not interested in setting the work forth completely or in order. But we are told that Ēl slew his own son Sadidus (a name that some commentators think might be a corruption of Shaddai, one of the epithets of the Biblical Ēl) and that Ēl also beheaded one of his daughters. Later, perhaps referring to this same death of Sadidus we are told:

Unfortunately Eusebius of Caesarea, through whom Sanchuniathon is preserved, is not interested in setting the work forth completely or in order. But we are told that Ēl slew his own son Sadidus (a name that some commentators think might be a corruption of Shaddai, one of the epithets of the Biblical Ēl) and that Ēl also beheaded one of his daughters. Later, perhaps referring to this same death of Sadidus we are told:

:But on the occurrence of a pestilence and mortality Cronus offers his only begotten son as a whole burnt-offering to his father Sky and circumcises himself, compelling his allies also to do the same.

:But on the occurrence of a pestilence and mortality Cronus offers his only begotten son as a whole burnt-offering to his father Sky and circumcises himself, compelling his allies also to do the same.  

A fuller account of the sacrifice appears later:

A fuller account of the sacrifice appears later:

:It was a custom of the ancients in great crises of danger for the rulers of a city or nation, in order to avert the common ruin, to give up the most beloved of their children for sacrifice as a ransom to the avenging daemons; and those who were thus given up were sacrificed with mystic rites. Cronus then, whom the Phoenicians call Elus, who was king of the country and subsequently, after his decease, was deified as the star Saturn, had by a nymph of the country named Anobret an only begotten son, whom they on this account called Iedud, the only begotten being still so called among the Phoenicians; and when very great dangers from war had beset the country, he arrayed his son in royal apparel, and prepared an altar, and sacrificed him.

:It was a custom of the ancients in great crises of danger for the rulers of a city or nation, in order to avert the common ruin, to give up the most beloved of their children for sacrifice as a ransom to the avenging daemons; and those who were thus given up were sacrificed with mystic rites. Cronus then, whom the Phoenicians call Elus, who was king of the country and subsequently, after his decease, was deified as the star Saturn, had by a nymph of the country named Anobret an only begotten son, whom they on this account called Iedud, the only begotten being still so called among the Phoenicians; and when very great dangers from war had beset the country, he arrayed his son in royal apparel, and prepared an altar, and sacrificed him.  

The account also relates that Thoth:

The account also relates that Thoth:

Though Sanchuniathon distinguishes Poseidon from his Elus/Cronus, this might be a splitting off of a particular aspect of Ēl in a euhemeristic account. Identification of an aspect of Ēl with Poseidon rather than with Cronus might have been felt to better fit with Hellenistic religious practice, if indeed this Phoenician Poseidon really is Ēl who dwells at the source of the two deeps in Ugaritic texts. More information is needed to be certain.

Though Sanchuniathon distinguishes Poseidon from his Elus/Cronus, this might be a splitting off of a particular aspect of Ēl in a euhemeristic account. Identification of an aspect of Ēl with Poseidon rather than with Cronus might have been felt to better fit with Hellenistic religious practice, if indeed this Phoenician Poseidon really is Ēl who dwells at the source of the two deeps in Ugaritic texts. More information is needed to be certain.

==Footnotes==

==Footnotes==

# Robert du Mesnil du Buisson: "Le décor asiatique du couteau de Gebel el-Arak", in BIFAO 68 (1969), pp.63-83

#Robert du Mesnil du Buisson: "Le décor asiatique du couteau de Gebel el-Arak", in BIFAO 68 (1969), pp.63-83

# Matthews 2004, p. 79.

# Matthews 2004, p. 79.

# Smith 2001, p. 135.

# Smith 2001, p. 135.

# Binger 1997, p. 92.

# Binger 1997, p. 92.

# Kugel 2007, p. 423.

# Kugel 2007, p. 423.

# http://www.covenantseminary.edu/worldwide/en/CC310/CC310_T_21.html

# https://www.covenantseminary.edu/worldwide/en/CC310/CC310_T_21.html

# Fontenrose 1974, p. 213.

# Fontenrose 1974, p. 213.

# Scott C. Jones - Rumors of wisdom: Job 28 as poetry, Volumes 978-21472 (p. 84)

# Scott C. Jones - Rumors of wisdom: Job 28 as poetry, Volumes 978-21472 (p. 84)  

==References==

==References==

* Binger, Tilde (1997). Asherah: goddesses in Ugarit, Israel and the Old Testament, Continuum International Publishing Group

* Binger, Tilde (1997). Asherah: goddesses in Ugarit, Israel and the Old Testament, Continuum International Publishing Group

* Smith, Mark S. (2001). The origins of biblical monotheism: Israel's polytheistic background and the Ugaritic texts, Oxford University Press US

* Smith, Mark S. (2001). The origins of biblical monotheism: Israel's polytheistic background and the Ugaritic texts, Oxford University Press US

* K. van der Toorn, Bob Becking, Pieter Willem van der Horst, (eds) (2002), Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible

* K. van der Toorn, Bob Becking, Pieter Willem van der Horst, (eds) (2002), Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible

* Wyatt,Nick (2002). Religious texts from Ugarit, Continuum International Publishing Group

* Wyatt,Nick (2002). Religious texts from Ugarit, Continuum International Publishing Group  

==Further reading==

==Further reading==

* Bruneau, P. (1970). Recherches sur les cultes de Délos à l'époque hellénistique et à l'époque imperiale. Paris: E. de Broccard.

*Bruneau, P. (1970). Recherches sur les cultes de Délos à l'époque hellénistique et à l'époque imperiale. Paris: E. de Broccard.

* Cross, Frank Moore (1973). Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-09176-0.

* Cross, Frank Moore (1973). Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-09176-0.

* Fontenrose, Joseph Eddy (1974). Python: A Study of Delphic Myth and Its Origins, Biblo & Tannen Publishers.

* Fontenrose, Joseph Eddy (1974). Python: A Study of Delphic Myth and Its Origins, Biblo & Tannen Publishers.

* Rosenthal, Franz (1969). "The Amulet from Arslan Tash". Trans. in Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 3rd ed. with Supplement, p. 658. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-03503-2.

* Rosenthal, Franz (1969). "The Amulet from Arslan Tash". Trans. in Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 3rd ed. with Supplement, p. 658. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-03503-2.

* Teixidor, James (1977). The Pagan God Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-07220-5

* Teixidor, James (1977). The Pagan God Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-07220-5  

 

[[Category: Religion]]

[[Category: Religion]]