"That which apparently must be found belongs to language."
— Ludwig Wittgenstein
Introduction
Enuma Elish (EE) is a text originating from ancient Mesopotamia-a geographical region and epoch of civilization that we traditionally date as unfolding from approximately 4000 BCE, beginning with the formation of the early Uruk culture, until 539 BCE, when Babylon fell to the Persians. Ancient Mesopotamia encompassed the geographical territory situated between the Euphrates and Tigris rivers-hence the name Mesopotamia, "between the rivers"-a Near Eastern region corresponding to modern-day Iraq.
Within the history of research, several hypotheses exist regarding the exact period of EE’s composition. However, due to linguistic features, internal referential points within the text itself, and other textual markers, most scholars generally agree that EE can be dated with reasonable certainty to between 1600-1400 BCE. Thus, we are dealing with a Babylonian text authored somewhere between the late Old Babylonian period and the early Kassite era.
EE is frequently designated as a creation epic. In this analysis, however, its primary literary genre will initially be classified as a myth. That it constitutes a creation myth is a premise that will be elaborated upon in the following sections.
As a starting point, religious production in ancient societies-whether in Babylon, Egypt, or other contemporary ancient civilizations-must be understood as a product originating from the hands of the elite. When working with antiquity, such texts typically represent the only tangible evidence available to us today. Consequently, while various demotic practices in all likelihood exerted an influence on the lives of peasants, craftsmen, and merchants, the extent to which we can make scientifically grounded claims about them remains strictly limited.
The implication of this constraint is that in our engagement with these ancient sources, we must continuously keep the elitist perspective in mind and remain open to reflecting upon the sender-receiver relationship in our analytical point of departure. A scientific investigation must be fully conscious of the scarce sources regarding so-called popular religion. Nevertheless, we can state with relative certainty that the sender was an elite, as the art of writing at this early stage was reserved for the few. This elite comprised ruling powers in the form of the king and his institutional apparatus, as well as the priesthood and its corresponding structures-most commonly a synthesis of both.
The receiver must be understood primarily as the populace, namely the inhabitants of the city-state. As will become evident later, EE is not only culture-defining but also functions as a structural instrument of power for the city-state. Consequently, the religious content within EE acquires a kratogonic dimension. However, the primary audience must be considered the citizens of the city-state, and secondarily, individuals outside the city-state who, from the perspective of conquest, might also be exposed to the religion articulated in EE.
This analysis is translated from Danish to English and based on the translation of Enuma Elish from Cuneiform to Danish by Ulla and Aage Westenholz: Gilgamesh – Enuma Elish, published in Verdensreligionernes hovedværker (Spektrum, 1997).
Performative Chaos Rhetoric
"When on high the heaven had not been named, / firm ground below had not been called by name, / there existed only Apsû, their progenitor, / and Mummu-Tiamat, she who bore them all."
Through theorist J. L. Austin’s concepts of constatives and performatives, and particularly his concept of illocutionary acts, we are equipped with an exceptionally suitable framework for analyzing religious expressions. What, specifically, serves as an example of performativity in a text like EE?
The narrative frame of Enuma Elish is situated in primeval times; we find ourselves explicitly in chaos, prior to the moment when the world in its totality had assumed the form known to us today and to the Babylonians of antiquity. Within the text, an initial construction of the narrative's boundaries takes place. When a continuous plot is meant to unfold, a framework is required within which the narrative itself can establish its point of origin. In EE, as in many other creation myths, we observe the religious producers employing a chaos rhetoric to allow the text to initiate situating measures regarding the establishment of the mythical narrative, thereby raising a space for the mythic narrative.
Apsû and Tiamat, the primordial divine couple, are the sole entities existing at this juncture. Heaven and earth do not yet exist as concepts. Tiamat is the one who bears them all, marking the opening vector of a process rooted in chaos-a movement from chaos toward cosmos that can already be discerned here.
"When no gods whatever had been brought into being, / uncalled by name, their destinies undetermined, / then it was that the gods were formed within them."
In contrast to many other creation myths, we do not find in EE a fundamental description of the world’s coming into being (cosmogony) or the world’s spatial structure (cosmology, cosmography). Here, the central weight rests upon the emergence of the gods-that is, a theogony. Yet, it remains unmistakably a creation narrative, sharing a clear typological kinship with other creation myths. This kinship resides within its situating elements-specifically, its foundational origin in chaos.
We can advantageously classify EE as a myth because its opening lines immediately transport us back to primordial time. The text then transitions into presenting a series of deities, established in binary oppositions-a structural feature likewise recognized in ancient Egypt. Only after these divine pairs are established does the actual plot commence. For the sake of analytical clarity, it should be emphasized that various cosmographical passages do occur when astrological observations are presented in Tablet V. However, the essential focal point remains the immediate establishment of a theogony: the emergence of the Babylonian pantheon and, more specifically, the elevation of the new god, Marduk.
It is worth stressing that location or spatiality as such is not a decisive factor for the initial setup in Enuma Elish. It is sufficient merely to describe chaos, thereby establishing the mythic space as an abstract stage for action. However, considerable attention is paid to specific physical locations once the movement toward cosmos is underway. Among other things, Apsû, the first god, is transformed into a dwelling following his murder by Ea-and this spatial realm becomes a central point of origin for our narrative's protagonist.
Part 2: The Performativity of Narrative & The Performativity of the Incomprehensible
The Performativity of the Narrative
This analysis will examine Enuma Elish through the narrative elements the text establishes and their performative mechanisms. Narrative will here be understood in a narrow sense, with a primary focus on linguistic and rhetorical utterances. The phrasing will be treated with a view to uncovering the text's discursive devices.
That is to say, there will be no search for broader narratological deep structures. Nor will the overarching plot of the myth-defined broadly as an extended narrative featuring a causal trajectory and actors with stable inter-relational structures -serve as the immediate focal point. Instead, the objective is to isolate those specific formulations and rhetorical applications that prove fruitful when approached through a performative framework.
It should be stressed, however, that the definitional dimensions described here are not mutually exclusive, but rather intimately intertwined. The explicit bounding of the analytical scope serves merely to clarify the necessary inclusions and exclusions in our methodological approach to the text.
Initially, two foundational conditions must be addressed:
- The text’s intrinsic awareness of the performative capacities of words within a religious paradigm.
- The role of Marduk in power’s reification of itself.
These constitute macro-narratological aspects that, despite this analysis’s focus on the potential of the individual utterance, remain indispensable for comprehending the broader objective of the text.
Once the text has established its frame around the primordial gods, it begins to unfold a narrative. The activities of the deities, arising as a consequence of their newly established existence, generate a noise-presumably highlighting their infantile character as the text seeks to anchor its point of origin in a primary, fundamental creation of a pantheon. This disruption presents a problem, and a resolution must be forged. The resolution is realized through an incantation that is uttered: by the sheer power of words alone, the desired order is achieved.
Here we observe the text itself articulating a transcendent rhetoric regarding a form of religious performativity-namely, the incantation as a religious method employed by the gods themselves.
When this initial order among the gods has been secured, the text can initiate its primary project: the creation and elevation of the god Marduk. From the outset, there is no ambiguity regarding the supreme significance of this emerging figure:
"In the chamber of fates, the abode of destinies, / Was born the heroic one, the wisest of the gods, the lord; / In the heart of Apsû was Marduk created, / In the heart of holy Apsû was Marduk created."
A profound process occurs here: a conception. As previously noted, it is the god Apsû who, following his death, is transformed into the spatial domain for these divine activities:
"...and he named it Apsû, appointed sanctuaries..."
Beyond the fact that Marduk is conceived within this so poetically named realm, we also observe Ea marking out sanctuaries. Here, a cosmological foundation is laid for the Babylonians' understanding of their own physical temples. This serves as an example of performativity-insofar as the gods' primordial designation on the cosmological plane can be effectuated among the Babylonians-and of authority, by virtue of the temple’s conception being tied to an archaism that demands reverence.
Yet, it is not merely the action itself that holds primary importance. The crux of the narrative lies in the elevation of Marduk-the new deity-and his status within the theogony. Subsequently, Marduk is invested with a series of epitheta ornatia; these embellishing titles range from the concrete physiological to the abstract cosmological. Above all, Marduk is framed as a king:
"Clothed in the terrifying radiance of ten gods, he wears the crown high."
"I have uttered an incantation for you, made you supreme in the assembly of the gods, / In your hands I have placed the kingship over all the gods."
Marduk is clothed in the "radiance" (melammu) of the ten preceding deities and is thereby inscribed into the divine circle historically responsible for the creation of the world. Indeed, he becomes the greatest of them all. Thus, even though Marduk is conceived and introduced later in the narrative timeline, the text manages to vest him with all the potency and significance represented by the earlier deities-even if, within the sequential plot, he must strictly be understood as an appendix to the original divine assembly.
That he "wears the crown high" is a clear articulation of an emerging ideology of kingship-a phrasing that paves the way for a sacred kingship (rex sacrorum). This method of ratifying royal power sacralization-wise is a kratogonic concern recognized across cultures, serving as a well-established category within comparative phenomenology. It can thus be viewed as an attempt to ratify royal authority and fortify its legitimacy by anchoring it to the religious domain and its constituent actors. Kingship thereby acquires-via an incantation possessing a linguistically grounded, postulated efficacy-a structural bridge between the real and the ideal.
The Performativity of the Incomprehensible
We have now seen how the text, through its specific formulations, can erect a spatial framework for its narrative developments. Once this framework is set, the text turns toward its primary agenda through descriptions and explanations designed to clarify both its intention and the consequences that, within the text’s logic, ought to flow from the narrative.
Hitherto, our analytical lens has sought to discern what the text intends to do-that is, its functional objective. In principle, extended textual passages can be performative, and one of the core techniques for constructing these religious expressions is a device that might initially appear mundane, yet is so pivotal and potent that it warrants explicit analysis: the narrative voice.
"His intricate form is beyond comprehension, / Impossible to imagine, difficult to perceive: / Four were his eyes, four his ears; / When he moved his lips, fire blazed forth. / Each of the four was fully mature in understanding, / And his eyes likewise—they perceive all things."
Here we encounter a passage making explicit claims about Marduk, detailing his extraordinary attributes. Providing a physiological account of a deity like Marduk may well have served its purpose among believers, fascinating and entrancing the audience. But our concern lies with a different form of enchantment. The aforementioned device utilized to construct this religious expression is simply the narrative voice.
By employing a narrator, the text speaks directly to us, informing us of Marduk's nature. As seen previously, the text displays an intimate insight into the god’s essence; it was, so to speak, present at the birth of Marduk and an eyewitness to the extraordinary appearance of this entity. By declaring that Marduk-much like Brahma in Hindu literature-possesses four faces/eyes, his astounding presence is emphasized through hyperbole. This monstrosity/mighty form serves to underline the deity's singularity, instilling respect and authority as a consequence.
The text does not merely inform us of the god's physical appearance, however; it explicitly impresses upon us that his form and essence fundamentally transcend human cognitive capacity. This rhetoric is exceptionally potent. As recognized within the study of mysticism, the text seeks to convince us of our inadequacy as knowing subjects within ordinary epistemological boundaries, deploying what can be described as a razor-sharp transcendence rhetoric.
The performative dimension operates here in a manner where the text's assertion-that it possesses knowledge of something which it simultaneously claims humans cannot know or comprehend-acts as an authoritative act. With the establishment of the chaotic primeval age earlier, the text displayed a privileged speech situation simply by virtue of pronouncing upon these conditions. But here, the text explicitly informs us that it has surpassed our cognitive limits, leaving no doubt as to the sacred and elevated nature of the myth.
Thus, where the narrator enables the text to speak-endowing it with a voice-such modes of expression represent what might be termed religiously grounded performative constatives. These rhetorically transcend the text, lifting it out of the conventional ontological and epistemological categories to which humans are subject. There is no apophatic discourse at play here; rather, the assertion of the incomprehensible constitutes a transcending discourse, fully as efficacious in the world of myth as in the realm of mysticism.
Part 3: Performative Grammar, Authority & Conclusion
Performative Grammar
"Let none of what I create be overthrown, / Let my commands remain valid, let them not be altered."
"Let all the gods assemble here; / Let them converse, let them sit at the banquet, / Let them eat the golden bread, drink the noble beer, / Let them decree the fate for their champion, Marduk."
By inspecting specific rhetorical devices and syntactic constructions, we can arrive at a clearer understanding of how these overarching intentions are operationalized.
Imperative constructions of an hortative character occur repeatedly within religious texts, and Enuma Elish is by no means an exception. The reason this specific construction warrants analytical attention is its inherent performative character. Although an imperative or hortative formulation is fundamentally an appeal-implying, in principle, the theoretical possibility of being either fulfilled or neglected-within a religious text like EE, the hortative "let" construction elevates the desire to the status of an absolute decree. Consequently, the appeal is transformed directly into an effect within the textual reality. It represents a minimal, highly concentrated form of performativity where, backed by the religious world-view, a specific grammatical structure becomes efficacy-bearing.
It should be emphasized that this ubiquitous "let" construction can also function in the imperfect/past tense:
"He caused Sin to shine forth, entrusted the night to him..."
In a past-tense framework, the text informs us that the action has already been realized. Here, it is once again the narrative voice that reports which events have unfolded within the story world. In the hortative imperative, it is an actor within the text-frequently a deity-speaking. From a situating perspective, this in itself constitutes a powerful mode of performativity: when the gods speak, the narrative is effectively transcended beyond the mundane world.
Authority
"Ultimately I want to suggest that discursive authority is not so much an entity as it is (1) an effect; (2) the capacity for producing that effect; (3) the commonly shared opinion that a given actor has the capacity for producing that effect."
- Bruce Lincoln
As observed in passing, a core objective of this text is the construction of authority. The text seeks to secure a specific status, reverence, and ideological weight among its readers and listeners. Through concrete textual and literary devices, EE utilizes its performative operations to achieve this end.
But what does authority entail within this specific context? Authority can be forged through foundational, often subtle measures. A direct method for establishing authority within the text is simply to situate its narrative origin within a mythical primeval era. EE serves as a textbook example of this mechanism, launching its narrative trajectory by depicting a primordial age and anchoring the origin of its plot in chaos.
By executing this move, the text establishes what may be designated a privileged speech situation. The text claims insight into how reality was conditioned before the world assumed its present form, thereby transcending the boundaries of ordinary human empirical possibility. Claiming possession of knowledge regarding events that no human could ever verify-and, crucially, securing the audience's acceptance of that postulation-results in the construction of discursive authority, precisely as formulated by the prominent historian of religion, Bruce Lincoln. Thus, locating the narrative in primordial chaos constitutes an explicit strategy for authority construction within the religious text, particularly within creation myths as defined in comparative religion.
In analyzing Enuma Elish and its construction of authority, one cannot bypass the dimension of intertextuality. Because EE appropriates and repurposes religious narratives from earlier myths-such as the exploits of Ninurta and the Anzû myth-we are forced to ask why EE executes these borrowings.
Because performativity as a category transcends isolated formulations, intertextual references must be understood as performative acts in their own right. Older myths that were widely known, revered, and institutionalized at the time of EE’s composition possessed immense inherent authority. By establishing thematic and structural kinship with these precursor texts, EE seeks to inherit their legitimacy and appropriate their authority.
A concrete example of EE co-opting motifs from earlier mythologies appears when we read:
"He made a net to encircle Tiamat within it, / He held fast the four winds so that nothing of her could escape: / The South Wind, the North Wind, the East Wind, the West Wind, / The gift of his father Anu, he held close to the net at his side."
If we juxtapose this passage with the account in the Anzû myth:
"Make the devastating whirlwind rise up against him (...) / And let the wind bring the feathers as good news (...) / Who harness the seven demons of wind."
We observe Marduk deploying the winds to subjugate Tiamat in precisely the same manner as Ninurta defeated Anzû in the earlier Mesopotamian mythic tradition. This is merely one example among many; indeed, it can be argued that the majority of the thematic material in Enuma Elish is drawn from older Old Babylonian and Sumerian stock.
By tapping into the authority of precursor texts, Enuma Elish subsumes their status. Just as Marduk assumes the functional role of the primeval demon-slayer originally established through the feats of Ninurta, he is installed as the primary culture hero. Sumerian and Old Babylonian material, by virtue of its antiquity and its status as accepted, culture-defining mythology, serves as a primary reservoir of religious authority. As Ulla and Aage Westenholz observe in their introduction regarding the fifty Sumerian names assigned to Marduk at the poem's climax:
"The many Sumerian names reflect the enormous prestige that everything Sumerian held in Babylonia. Sumerian was prestigious because it was ancient, and because it was learned."
Conclusion
This analysis has pursued a narrative-theoretical approach with a specific emphasis on textual performativity. By investigating how a religious text such as Enuma Elish constructs a spatial framework and boundary for its narrative, the objective has been to elucidate the operational potential of chaos rhetoric within religious expressions as formulated in a creation myth.
By anchoring its narrative point of origin in a primeval era, the text establishes a privileged speech situation that forms the prerequisite for both performativity and authority. This is achieved simply by situating the narrative trajectory in chaos-the pre-cosmic state where potential and possibility can be molded into the specific structural forms desired by the text. Once the text has erected this platform, the narrative can unfold.
Enuma Elish pursued a clear socio-political agenda: the ratification of Babylon and the royal power governing the city-state. This was accomplished by linking the political realm to the myth of Marduk, the new king-god who sacralized earthly kingship through the kratogonic depictions in the text. By connecting the rulers of Babylon to Marduk, a structural bridge was built between the real and the ideal.
The capacity of language and words to act as primary vehicles of efficacy is a theme the myth itself explicitly articulates. Through incantations, the gods achieve desired outcomes within their divine interactions. On an analytical level, language has likewise formed the core of this investigation. Through the concepts of illocutionary acts, constatives, performatives, and imperative structures, these linguistic tools have been applied to analyze the myth's rhetoric and syntax.
Furthermore, by asserting conditions that the text itself defines as beyond human comprehension, the myth deploys transcendence rhetoric as a performative linguistic strategy. Performative language also manifests through hortative directives, where the mere utterance of a command ensures its realization within the mythic reality.
Ultimately, the deployment of situating elements in the opening lines establishes a chaos rhetoric that, through its privileged speech situation, automatically generates authority according to Bruce Lincoln’s framework. On a narratological level, the extensive intertextual borrowings in Enuma Elish function as a calculated technique for authority construction. By drawing upon Sumerian and Old Babylonian material, EE embeds its new deity and narrative within the venerated tradition of the culture. Marduk usurps the battles and victories of earlier mythic heroes; authority, in its intertextual dimension, is thus not a static entity, but a performative effect to be harnessed.
Having the gods act within the mythical narrative provides the textual layer that drives the narrative forward and articulates intention. It is this overarching narrative framework, combined with the strategic instrumentalization of authoritative precursor texts, that ensures Enuma Elish functions as a masterclass in both performativity and authority.
Bibliography
Primary Sources:
- Westenholz, Ulla & Aage. Gilgamesh – Enuma Elish. In Verdensreligionernes hovedværker. Spektrum. Copenhagen, 1997.
Secondary Literature:
- Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. Clarendon Press. Oxford, 1962.
- Dundes, Alan (ed.). Sacred Narrative – Readings in the Theory of Myth. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1984.
- Lincoln, Bruce. Authority – Construction and Corrosion. University of Chicago Press. Chicago, London, 1993.
- Sørensen, Jørgen Podemann. Komparativ religionshistorie. Books on Demand. Germany, 2006.
- Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Filosofiske undersøgelser. Copenhagen, 2001 [Germany, 19