DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.57036#0053
40
Bannlösung (nam-erim-bür-ru-da)
(ICD = International Statistical Classification of Diseases
and Related Health Problems) from the Symptoms named in
the cuneiform sources. A retrospective diagnosis could hardly
accommodate for the culturally and epochally bound nature of
the illnesses portrayed. a factor scarcely to be underestimated.223
The cuneiform sources also clearly demonstrate that. in the
Mesopotamian healers’ eyes. the illness termed märmtu “ban”
also often appeared in tandem with further ‘sicknesses’224 or
developed from other afflictions also attested by name. It might
already be recognised therein that the ancient Near Eastem
concept of ‘illness’ considerably differs from that of the modern
present day. as. indeed. might be expected.
From the perspective of ancient Near Eastem healers. the
fever named sein, for example. could veer into ban-illness225 and
a dry cough could worsen so much that it transformed into a
colic. and finally into the “hand of the ban”.226 It seems as if the
ancient Near Eastem healers would always have established the
shifting of complaints into the “hand of the ban” were an acute
illness to have assumed a chronic course.227
The so-called Assyrian-Babylonian medical prognostic
and diagnostic handbook (SA.GIG) attests that the healing
practitioners of the ancientNear East undertook a thoroughbodily
investigation prior to treatment. this proceeding systematically
from head to heel (u capite ad calcem)?2* Most prominently
within the 22nd tablet. many intimations derived from the ban
affliction are compiled.229 As. in medicinal-therapeutic texts.
descriptions of the long course of the ban illness are accorded so
vital a Status, it may be safely assumed that the healers conducted
an anamnesis with their patients or third parties in order to gather
a sense of their client’s history of illness within the framework of
the present complaint. The initially less evident early Symptoms
of the ban malady could likely only be idcntificd in retrospect by
means of a Professional enquiry. Nevertheless. direct evidence
for the practice of anamnesis is lacking in the context of the ban
suffering.
223 Within their book. Diagnoses in Assyriern and Babyloniern medicine.
Ancient sources, translations, and modern medical analyses (Urbana
2005). J. Scurlock and B. R. Andersen present a fundamentally different
appraisal of the problem.
224 See. e.g. Text no. 73-74. 1-3; Text no. 75. 7"—11"; Text no. 78. 18-19 and.
moreover. forexample. D.Amaud. Corpus des textes. 78. no. 21. 36-37 and
W. R. Mayer. OrNS 68. 148-149. 1-9 (KAR 26 and //). On the Connection
with the illness termed muruskabarti, see AMT 15/3. 16 (=K 67+. 43) and
BAM 124. col. II. 34. On Connection with the anal affliction durugiqqu,
see moreover BAM 95. 19 and BAM 96. col. II. 20-21. On the Connection
with the ailment similar to Yellow Fever associated with the demon
Ahhäzu, see SA.GIG Tablet 22.1. 16.
225 See Text no. 79. 69' and also M. Stol. CM 36. 37.
226 See PBS 1/2 72 (= S. Parpola. LASEA II. 495-496) with the partial
translation by B. Böck in: K. Radner. E. Robson (eds.). The Oxford
Handbook of Cuneiform Culture. 700-701. Furthermore. cf. SA.GIG
Tablet 28.1. 7-8 = TDP 192. 43 (summa antasnbbü ana qätIstar itürsn qät
mämtti).
227 For this. see M. Stol. CM 36. 37 with fn. 99. This explanation presented
by M. Stol in 2007 may be considered as more appropriate than Stol's
Suggestion presented 1997 in BiOr 54. 408. According to this the shifting
of complaints into the “Hand of a Curse" was due to the development of
a “'natural' ailment " into a “supematural disease". An argument for the
notion that a chronic illness was connected with the term of the “hand"
is also lent by Text no. 78. 2: “..., then this individual is suffering from
nikimti säri and the seh/-illness. Should his condition be of lasting nature.
then it is the “hand of the gh[ost"]."
228 See. on this. the lipsnr litany preserved in Text no. 34-37. 1'—35" along
with the appurtenant commentary.
229 See J. Scurlock. Sourcebook. 185-194 and also R. Labat. TDP. 176-186
and N. P. Heeßel. Babylonisch-assyrische Diagnostik. 250-271.
In order to specify an individual’s illness. an array of other
methods decidedly foreign to the modern researcher were at
the disposal of ancient Near Eastem healing practitioners in
addition to those forms of diagnosis previously discussed. In
their minds. it was also possible to acquire information as to
their patient’s illness and chances of recuperation by means of
divinatory procedures. If the prognostic-diagnostic handbook
is to be believed. then a healer observed very precisely any
unusual encounters and portents on the way to the patient’s
house in order to obtain indications as to the nature and course
of the invalid’s affliction before even inspecting him. The
Erst two tablets of the work are dedicated solely to this topic.
containing nigh 150 entries. For example. were the healer to
come across a “piebald ox”. then. according to one tradition. this
speit that the invalid to whom he had been summoned would
“swiftly die” as “the ban had seized him.” Others saw therein
the demoness Lamastu at work.230 A sign that the patient to be
inspected suffered from a ban was also believed to be identified
were the cultic instrument written with the sign combination
KI.UD.BA231 to enter a healer’s view immediately upon exiting
to visit an invalid.232 Furthermore. the extispicy of entrails233 or
the autopsy of a sacrihced bird234 could also render evidence that
an individual had fallen under a ban’s sway.
Were this to be proven unequivocally. then a causal treatment
of the suffering by means of the procedure for dispelling a ban
named nam-erim-bür-ru-da was to be undertaken. and. if
necessary. a symptomatic treatment begun in order to alleviate
the patient’s condition.
7. The Procedures for dispelling a Ban
With accessto the therapy termed nam-erim-bür-ru-da. itwas
believed that a means existed to treat causally those conditions
to be derived from a ban. A procedure for the dispelling of a ban
should banish the ban. and. ideally. the ultimate asomatic cause
of the ban affliction should be removed from the world before
the appearance of serious Symptoms.
Within the correspondence of the Late Assyrian kings. direct
attestations exist for the performance of ban dispelling procedures.
Thus. discussed in one letter addressed to the Assyrian sovereign
are the qualities of an experienced healer who had evidently
successfully carried out the btt rimki, e-gal-ku4-ra. and "mämiti
u pasäri“ procedures for the prefect Bel-etir.235 As another letter
evidences. the queen mother had also completed the therapy termed
".va mämitipasäru“ among various other treatments.236 It might be
deduced from the colophons of many of the texts herein published
that the healers of Assur had primarily excerpted the Scripts of the
procedures for dispelling a ban on practical grounds. namely to
prepare for the performance of corresponding therapies.237
230 See E. von Weiher. SpTU 3. 131. Text no. 87. 14.
231 According to A. R. George. RA 85. 154. a KI.UD.BA was a “cultic fixture
of some kind. at or on which rites of sacrifice and purification could be
carried out."
232 A. R. George. RA 85. 146. SA.GIG Tablet 1.1. 3 (see also ibid.. 154).
233 See above fn. 170.
234 J.-M. Durand. MARI 8. 275.
235 S. Parpola. SAA 10. 308. Text no. 371.
236 S. Parpola. SAA 10. 162-163. Text no. 201.
237 Text no. 1. rev. 28' and Text no. 14. rev. 21: “Hastily excerpted for
the preparation of the performance (of the curative treatment) "; Text
no. 11.25": “Excerpted in order to perform it".
Bannlösung (nam-erim-bür-ru-da)
(ICD = International Statistical Classification of Diseases
and Related Health Problems) from the Symptoms named in
the cuneiform sources. A retrospective diagnosis could hardly
accommodate for the culturally and epochally bound nature of
the illnesses portrayed. a factor scarcely to be underestimated.223
The cuneiform sources also clearly demonstrate that. in the
Mesopotamian healers’ eyes. the illness termed märmtu “ban”
also often appeared in tandem with further ‘sicknesses’224 or
developed from other afflictions also attested by name. It might
already be recognised therein that the ancient Near Eastem
concept of ‘illness’ considerably differs from that of the modern
present day. as. indeed. might be expected.
From the perspective of ancient Near Eastem healers. the
fever named sein, for example. could veer into ban-illness225 and
a dry cough could worsen so much that it transformed into a
colic. and finally into the “hand of the ban”.226 It seems as if the
ancient Near Eastem healers would always have established the
shifting of complaints into the “hand of the ban” were an acute
illness to have assumed a chronic course.227
The so-called Assyrian-Babylonian medical prognostic
and diagnostic handbook (SA.GIG) attests that the healing
practitioners of the ancientNear East undertook a thoroughbodily
investigation prior to treatment. this proceeding systematically
from head to heel (u capite ad calcem)?2* Most prominently
within the 22nd tablet. many intimations derived from the ban
affliction are compiled.229 As. in medicinal-therapeutic texts.
descriptions of the long course of the ban illness are accorded so
vital a Status, it may be safely assumed that the healers conducted
an anamnesis with their patients or third parties in order to gather
a sense of their client’s history of illness within the framework of
the present complaint. The initially less evident early Symptoms
of the ban malady could likely only be idcntificd in retrospect by
means of a Professional enquiry. Nevertheless. direct evidence
for the practice of anamnesis is lacking in the context of the ban
suffering.
223 Within their book. Diagnoses in Assyriern and Babyloniern medicine.
Ancient sources, translations, and modern medical analyses (Urbana
2005). J. Scurlock and B. R. Andersen present a fundamentally different
appraisal of the problem.
224 See. e.g. Text no. 73-74. 1-3; Text no. 75. 7"—11"; Text no. 78. 18-19 and.
moreover. forexample. D.Amaud. Corpus des textes. 78. no. 21. 36-37 and
W. R. Mayer. OrNS 68. 148-149. 1-9 (KAR 26 and //). On the Connection
with the illness termed muruskabarti, see AMT 15/3. 16 (=K 67+. 43) and
BAM 124. col. II. 34. On Connection with the anal affliction durugiqqu,
see moreover BAM 95. 19 and BAM 96. col. II. 20-21. On the Connection
with the ailment similar to Yellow Fever associated with the demon
Ahhäzu, see SA.GIG Tablet 22.1. 16.
225 See Text no. 79. 69' and also M. Stol. CM 36. 37.
226 See PBS 1/2 72 (= S. Parpola. LASEA II. 495-496) with the partial
translation by B. Böck in: K. Radner. E. Robson (eds.). The Oxford
Handbook of Cuneiform Culture. 700-701. Furthermore. cf. SA.GIG
Tablet 28.1. 7-8 = TDP 192. 43 (summa antasnbbü ana qätIstar itürsn qät
mämtti).
227 For this. see M. Stol. CM 36. 37 with fn. 99. This explanation presented
by M. Stol in 2007 may be considered as more appropriate than Stol's
Suggestion presented 1997 in BiOr 54. 408. According to this the shifting
of complaints into the “Hand of a Curse" was due to the development of
a “'natural' ailment " into a “supematural disease". An argument for the
notion that a chronic illness was connected with the term of the “hand"
is also lent by Text no. 78. 2: “..., then this individual is suffering from
nikimti säri and the seh/-illness. Should his condition be of lasting nature.
then it is the “hand of the gh[ost"]."
228 See. on this. the lipsnr litany preserved in Text no. 34-37. 1'—35" along
with the appurtenant commentary.
229 See J. Scurlock. Sourcebook. 185-194 and also R. Labat. TDP. 176-186
and N. P. Heeßel. Babylonisch-assyrische Diagnostik. 250-271.
In order to specify an individual’s illness. an array of other
methods decidedly foreign to the modern researcher were at
the disposal of ancient Near Eastem healing practitioners in
addition to those forms of diagnosis previously discussed. In
their minds. it was also possible to acquire information as to
their patient’s illness and chances of recuperation by means of
divinatory procedures. If the prognostic-diagnostic handbook
is to be believed. then a healer observed very precisely any
unusual encounters and portents on the way to the patient’s
house in order to obtain indications as to the nature and course
of the invalid’s affliction before even inspecting him. The
Erst two tablets of the work are dedicated solely to this topic.
containing nigh 150 entries. For example. were the healer to
come across a “piebald ox”. then. according to one tradition. this
speit that the invalid to whom he had been summoned would
“swiftly die” as “the ban had seized him.” Others saw therein
the demoness Lamastu at work.230 A sign that the patient to be
inspected suffered from a ban was also believed to be identified
were the cultic instrument written with the sign combination
KI.UD.BA231 to enter a healer’s view immediately upon exiting
to visit an invalid.232 Furthermore. the extispicy of entrails233 or
the autopsy of a sacrihced bird234 could also render evidence that
an individual had fallen under a ban’s sway.
Were this to be proven unequivocally. then a causal treatment
of the suffering by means of the procedure for dispelling a ban
named nam-erim-bür-ru-da was to be undertaken. and. if
necessary. a symptomatic treatment begun in order to alleviate
the patient’s condition.
7. The Procedures for dispelling a Ban
With accessto the therapy termed nam-erim-bür-ru-da. itwas
believed that a means existed to treat causally those conditions
to be derived from a ban. A procedure for the dispelling of a ban
should banish the ban. and. ideally. the ultimate asomatic cause
of the ban affliction should be removed from the world before
the appearance of serious Symptoms.
Within the correspondence of the Late Assyrian kings. direct
attestations exist for the performance of ban dispelling procedures.
Thus. discussed in one letter addressed to the Assyrian sovereign
are the qualities of an experienced healer who had evidently
successfully carried out the btt rimki, e-gal-ku4-ra. and "mämiti
u pasäri“ procedures for the prefect Bel-etir.235 As another letter
evidences. the queen mother had also completed the therapy termed
".va mämitipasäru“ among various other treatments.236 It might be
deduced from the colophons of many of the texts herein published
that the healers of Assur had primarily excerpted the Scripts of the
procedures for dispelling a ban on practical grounds. namely to
prepare for the performance of corresponding therapies.237
230 See E. von Weiher. SpTU 3. 131. Text no. 87. 14.
231 According to A. R. George. RA 85. 154. a KI.UD.BA was a “cultic fixture
of some kind. at or on which rites of sacrifice and purification could be
carried out."
232 A. R. George. RA 85. 146. SA.GIG Tablet 1.1. 3 (see also ibid.. 154).
233 See above fn. 170.
234 J.-M. Durand. MARI 8. 275.
235 S. Parpola. SAA 10. 308. Text no. 371.
236 S. Parpola. SAA 10. 162-163. Text no. 201.
237 Text no. 1. rev. 28' and Text no. 14. rev. 21: “Hastily excerpted for
the preparation of the performance (of the curative treatment) "; Text
no. 11.25": “Excerpted in order to perform it".