pe or gazelle, and the combination of the head of the antelope (or
in other cases the goat) with the body of a fish is the most
characteristic manifestation of either god. In Egypt both Osiris and
Horus are at times brought into relationship with the gazelle or
antelope, but more often it represents their enemy Set. Hence, in some
parts of Africa, especially in the west, the antelope plays the part of
the dragon in Asiatic stories.[224] The cow[225] of Hathor (Tiamat) may
represent the dragon also. In East Africa the antelope assumes the role
of the hero,[226] and is the representative of Horus. In the AEgean area,
Asia Minor and Europe the antelope, gazelle or the deer, may be
associated with the Great Mother.[227]
In India the god Soma's chariot is drawn by an antelope. I have already
suggested that Soma is only a specialized form of the Babylonian Ea,
whose evil _avatar_ is the dragon: there is thus suggested another link
between the antelope and the latter. The Ea-element explains the
fish-scales and the antelope provides the horns. I shall return to the
discussion of this point later.
Vayu or Pavana, the Indian god of the winds, who afterwards became
merged with Indra, rides upon an antelope like the Egyptian Horus.
Soma's attributes also were in large measure taken over by Indra. Hence
in this complex tissue of contradictions we once more find the
dragon-slayer acquiring the insignia, in this case the antelope, of his
mortal enemy.
I have already referred to the fact that the early Babylonian deities
could also be demons. Tiamat, the dragon whom Marduk fought, was merely
the malevolent _avatar_ of the Great Mother. The dragon acquired his
covering of fish-scales from an evil form of Ea.
In his Hibbert Lectures Professor Sayce claimed that the name of Ea was
expressed by an ideograph which signifies literally "the antelope" (p.
280). "Ea was called 'the antelope of the deep,' 'the antelope the
creator,' 'the lusty antelope'. We should have expected the animal of Ea
to have been the fish: the fact that it is not so points to the
conclusion that the culture-god of Southern Babylonia was an
amalgamation of two earlier deities, one the divine antelope and the
other the divine fish." Ea was "originally the god of the river and was
also associated with the snake". Nina was also both the fish-goddess and
the divinity whose name is interchanged with that of the deep. Professor
Sayce then refers to "the curious proc
|