In this post, I will be looking at the Cherubim. The Cherubim were used upon the Ark with regards to the mercy seat, as well as throughout the temple built by Solomon. The people of the Ancient Near East did not just use random images to decorate their temples. Everything had meaning. If one were to ask an "average Christian" what the cherubim were, the answer would naturally be angels. Of course this brings to mind images of human like celestial beings with wings, who have some sort of holy glow about them. However, I would like to argue the point that the Cherubim were not angels, but rather a common symbol and motif used throughout the Ancient Near East. Naturally, the concept of the Cherubim probably evolved throughout Israelite religion and Christianity into the concept of angels we think about today, but in this post, we will be trying to find the initial source of inspiration for the cherubim.
Our first clue that the Cherubim were not angels as we would imagine them is found in 2 Samuel 22:10,11 as well as in Psalm 18:10.
2 Samuel 22:10,11
10"He bowed the heavens also, and came down With thick darkness under His feet.
Our first clue that the Cherubim were not angels as we would imagine them is found in 2 Samuel 22:10,11 as well as in Psalm 18:10.
2 Samuel 22:10,11
10"He bowed the heavens also, and came down With thick darkness under His feet.
11"And He rode on a cherub and flew;And He appeared on the wings of the wind.
Psalm 18:9,10
9He bowed the heavens also, and came down with thick darkness under His feet.
Psalm 18:9,10
9He bowed the heavens also, and came down with thick darkness under His feet.
10He rode upon a cherub and flew; And He sped upon the wings of the wind.
It is obvious from these two verses, which are identical and have an obvious literary connection that Yahweh rode upon a Cherub. The verses in 2 Samuel are taken from a song of David after he was rescued from the hand of Saul. The verse in the Psalms seems to be drawing upon the writings in 2 Samuel (or vice versa). Now unless this is some weird sort of holy piggy-back ride (it is difficult to imagine Yahweh with his arms and legs wrapped around an angel flying through the air) it would stand to reason that the cherubim must have had some other form, rather than human.
Although there is no direct textual evidence for the Mesopotamian gods having a mount, it is very common among the gods of the near east to have some sort of beast associated with them. It may be a normal animal, but more often than not, it was some sort of hybrid. Sometimes, these beasts were used in art to symbolize the god, or they would be erected on a grand scale as statues to guard the entrance to the deity’s shrine. Some examples of these beasts of the gods were: the snake-dragon of Marduk, Nabu, and Ashur; the lion-dragon of the god Ishkur; the bull which usually identified a god associated with the weather or lightning; the lion which was associated with Ningirsu and the goddesses Ninlil, Inana, and Damgulnuna; the horse of the god Shamash; the dog of the goddess Gula; the turtle and goat-fish of the water god Enki/Ea. Below is a picture of a relief at Maltai depicting various gods on their respective animals. Below that picture is a drawing of the same relief which is slightly clearer.
It is obvious from these two verses, which are identical and have an obvious literary connection that Yahweh rode upon a Cherub. The verses in 2 Samuel are taken from a song of David after he was rescued from the hand of Saul. The verse in the Psalms seems to be drawing upon the writings in 2 Samuel (or vice versa). Now unless this is some weird sort of holy piggy-back ride (it is difficult to imagine Yahweh with his arms and legs wrapped around an angel flying through the air) it would stand to reason that the cherubim must have had some other form, rather than human.
Although there is no direct textual evidence for the Mesopotamian gods having a mount, it is very common among the gods of the near east to have some sort of beast associated with them. It may be a normal animal, but more often than not, it was some sort of hybrid. Sometimes, these beasts were used in art to symbolize the god, or they would be erected on a grand scale as statues to guard the entrance to the deity’s shrine. Some examples of these beasts of the gods were: the snake-dragon of Marduk, Nabu, and Ashur; the lion-dragon of the god Ishkur; the bull which usually identified a god associated with the weather or lightning; the lion which was associated with Ningirsu and the goddesses Ninlil, Inana, and Damgulnuna; the horse of the god Shamash; the dog of the goddess Gula; the turtle and goat-fish of the water god Enki/Ea. Below is a picture of a relief at Maltai depicting various gods on their respective animals. Below that picture is a drawing of the same relief which is slightly clearer.
This relief was created likely by the Assyrian king, Sennacherib (704-681 BCE). Sennacherib is depicted flanking the gods on the far left and far right. From left to right the gods on their respective animals are: Ashur on a snake-dragon and lion-dragon; Mullissu on a lion, Enlil or Sin on a lion-dragon, Nabu on a snake-dragon, Shamash on a horse, Adad on lion-dragons and bull, and Ishtar on a lion. This relief was carved on a cliff face on a road from Assyria to the Upper Zab valley.As you can see, a deity being associated with some sort of animal or hybrid animal is very common throughout the Ancient Near East. As I mentioned before, although the deities are often depicted in carvings as standing on their respective animals, this is not clear evidence that they rode upon them. It would seem that Yahweh is somewhat unique in this respect. Therefore, if the Cherub is something that can be mounted and rode as we saw in 2 Samuel and the Psalms, then it stands to reason that it must have been something animal-like in form. This would be consistent with the common motif of a certain animal or hybrid animal being associated with a deity in the Ancient Near East.
The Old Testament is somewhat scarce in its physical descriptions of the cherubim. In the construction of the temple, they are simply mentioned as being placed here and there. This along with the idea that they have wings is all we can glean from 2 Samuel. However in Ezekiel we do find a very vivid description of the cherubim from which we can begin to investigate the origins of this creature.
Ezekiel 1:4-14
4As I looked, behold, a storm wind was coming from the north, a great cloud with fire flashing forth continually and a bright light around it, and in its midst something like glowing metal in the midst of the fire.
5Within it there were figures resembling four living beings And this was their appearance: they had human form.
6Each of them had four faces and four wings.
7Their legs were straight and their feet were like a calf's hoof, and they gleamed like burnished bronze.
8Under their wings on their four sides were human hands. As for the faces and wings of the four of them,
9their wings touched one another; their faces did not turn when they moved, each went straight forward.
10As for the form of their faces, each had the face of a man; all four had the face of a lion on the right and the face of a bull on the left, and all four had the face of an eagle.
11Such were their faces. Their wings were spread out above; each had two touching another being, and two covering their bodies.
12And each went straight forward; wherever the spirit was about to go, they would go, without turning as they went.
13In the midst of the living beings there was something that looked like burning coals of fire, like torches darting back and forth among the living beings. The fire was bright, and lightning was flashing from the fire.
14And the living beings ran to and fro like bolts of lightning.
Later in Chapter 10, these creatures are confirmed as being the Cherubim.
20These are the living beings that I saw beneath the God of Israel by the river Chebar; so I knew that they were cherubim. 21Each one had four faces and each one four wings, and beneath their wings was the form of human hands. 22As for the likeness of their faces, they were the same faces whose appearance I had seen by the river Chebar. Each one went straight ahead.
Since I am trying to establish that Ezekiel’s description of the Cherubim is the same as those in the temple of Solomon, it is important to note that Ezekiel seems to have direct knowledge of the temple and is drawing heavily upon this knowledge. We can see this through the cherubim, the position of the wings of the cherubim being ready for flight, and the wheels of the bronze stands of Hiram(1 Kings 7:30-33). Thus we can carefully use this imagery to try to establish the form of the cherubim in Solomon’s temple.
There are three things that can be determined from Ezekiel’s description of the Cherubim. “All the living creatures have wings; the human countenance of the creatures is a prominent and constant feature of the cherubim wherever their faces appear; all their feet were the feet of the ox. (Waterman, pg. 250)” It is safe to assume that if the feet were that of the ox the lower bodies and extremities were also those of an ox. From this description in Ezekiel, we can reasonably conclude that the Cherubim were a composite animal of a human headed bull with wings (although the other faces on the cherubim were not human, the human face seems to be the prominent feature). This image very quickly brings to mind the winged bulls of Assyria as shown below.
These beasts would guard the entrance to the palaces of Assyria and the resemblance to the description of the Cherubim can scarcely be ignored. You can see in the second picture that these particular lamassu had had five legs, an artistic element designed so that the relief can be observed from the front and from the side. It is also worthy of note, that in both pictures of the lamassu shown above, they are wearing the horned cap of divinity which would designate this beast as either a god, or at the very least, as a celestial being. There is of course one major difference between these carved Assyrian lamassu and the cherubim which were constructed for Solomon’s Temple. The lamassu were still partly in relief whereas the cherubim seem to have been constructed fully round with outstretched wings.
1 Kings 6:27, 38
27He placed the cherubim in the midst of the inner house, and the wings of the cherubim were spread out, so that the wing of the one was touching the one wall, and the wing of the other cherub was touching the other wall. So their wings were touching each other in the center of the house.
28He also overlaid the cherubim with gold.
1 Kings 6:27, 38
27He placed the cherubim in the midst of the inner house, and the wings of the cherubim were spread out, so that the wing of the one was touching the one wall, and the wing of the other cherub was touching the other wall. So their wings were touching each other in the center of the house.
28He also overlaid the cherubim with gold.
As they are said to be placed in the midst of the inner sanctuary, it is very unlikely that these were in relief as the Assyrian lamassu were, but were likely fully round statues with outstretched wings ready for flight. Perhaps the Cherubim being in this position of outstretched wings preparing to fly is related somewhat to the cherubim being the mount of Yahweh. Perhaps they are prepared to carry Yahweh to wherever he wishes to go from his house. However, this is merely conjecture on my part.
The etymology of the word Cherub is worthy of examination as well and may provide evidence to their likeness as well. There are several different theories as to the origins of this word which I will lay out here. The first theory is that the Hebrew word KRB is related to the English word griffin, a composite figure of an eagle, and a lion. Some would use this as proof that the Cherubim takes on the form of a griffin like creature. However, this is taking the word forward in time, instead of backwards, which is what we are trying to discover. We must look backwards from the word KRB in order to find the origin of it.
It is suggested that the Phoenicians were the ones to transmit the word KRB to the Hebrews. The corresponding beasts in Babylonia and Assyria are named Shedu and Lamassu, which of course gives us no relation to the word KRB. However, the bull-men also have a designation ALAD LAMMA, which is a combination of the ideograms for Shedu and Lamassu, and we unfortunately do not know the phonetic reading of this combination. It has been suggested that it may have been something similar to KRB (but there is no strong evidence for this).
The Assyrian word karubu which means blessed, or reverently greeted would seem to have a good relation to the word KRB if it were to describe the function of the KRB. Also, the word karubu is often used as an epithet of deities which would strengthen our argument as being the etymology of the Hebrew word KRB. A derivative of the word karubu, is the word kuribu. The kuribu is defined in the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary as, “representation of a protective genius with specific non-human features.” Esarhaddon had the kuribu erected in his restoration of the temple of Ashur.
d-lahme d-ku-ri-bu sha tsa-ri-ri rushshu idi a-na idi ulziz
I placed lahmu-monsters and kuribu made of reddish gold facing eachother.
I placed lahmu-monsters and kuribu made of reddish gold facing eachother.
(In rendering the transliteration, I have used ‘sh’ as the designation for ‘shin’, and ‘ts’ as the designation for ‘tsin’. Normally ‘sh’ would be an ‘s’ with a down facing ‘<’ on top, and the ‘ts’ would be an ‘s’ with a dot below it. Due to my lack of a font for the transliteration, I have opted for this somewhat cumbersome rendering. My apologies to all.)
The kuribu is here demonstrated to be something that can be erected in a temple and is likely some sort of conglomerate creature. It is also interesting that the kuribu has the dingir sign of divinity in front of it designating it as a celestial being or something of the gods. Having said all of this, it is likely that the Hebrew word KRB (cherub) has its roots in the Akkadian semitic word karubu, or its derivative kuribu. Whether it was transmitted directly to the Hebrews, or via the Phoenicians is unknown.
As for the physical evidence, we are left with very little. However there are a few Hebrew seals found at Megiddo, which was under Israelite control at the time of Solomon (1 Kings 4:7-12), that provide us with an example of some of the art during that time. There are three seals: the first found in stratum II of Megiddo (650-600 BCE) and the other two from Stratum III (780-650 BCE). Solomon’s Temple was completed roughly around 950BCE and survived until the Exile in 586 BCE. From this, we can surmise that these seals found in Strata II and III can give us some indication as to the art of the period while the temple of Solomon was in existence.
The first seal has been called the seal of Elemar, after the inscription upon it which is translated, ‘belonging to Elamar’. The name Elamar itself means 'God has spoken,' which can be compared to the biblical name Amariah. This may suggest that the owner of this seal may have belonged to a priestly family. The inscription on the top reads ‘lalamr’ (belonging to Elamar), and below the inscription are pictured two uraei (winged serpents) facing each other. Below this is a picture of a conglomeration of a lion with a human head and outstretched wings which can be called a sphinx. The other two Hebrew inscribed seals belonging to Stratum III are the seals of Asaph and Shema. Both again have conglomerate animals corresponding to the sphinx and griffon. There are scholars who would propose that the Cherubim actually correspond to the sphinx, rather than a bull-man.
Another example of conglomerate creatures in the art in Megiddo is the example of the pottery shrines which were pictured in the previous post. In the one shrine, it is evidenced that there are creatures along the sides with the lower bodies of an Ox and human heads.
These belong to Stratum IV (1000-800BCE) which would place them as possible contemporaries of the actual construction of the temple of Solomon. This is probably the greatest physical evidence we have for the cherubim being of a bull/human conglomeration as these pottery shrines are mini-representations of temples of the time. From this physical evidence of the Hebrew seals and the pottery shrines we can conclude that this motif of conglomerate animal art was alive and well within the Israelite kingdom which did include Megiddo within its realm of influence.
From the arguments above, I would conclude that the Cherubim would have had the form very similar to that of the bull-man colossi of the Assyrian reliefs. I base this conclusion upon the textual evidence in Ezekiel which describes them as having the feet of an Ox (or the bodies and lower limbs of an ox), wings, and the head of a human. Also, it seems that the etymology of the word KRB stems from the Akkadian word karubu or kuribu, the latter of which refers to a type of guardian which was placed in the entrances of the temple. Lastly, although the Hebrew seals at Megiddo do show that the motif of conglomerate animals was indeed prolific, the case for the cherubim being a sphinx is not convincing. I believe rather that the pottery shrines are more indicative of the art used in the temples themselves, and are indeed contemporary with the time of the building of the temple of Solomon. Thus, it is my opinion that the cherubim were not angels per say, but rather a bull/human like figure with wings which was very much a common motif throughout the ancient near east at the time. It would also seem much easier for Yahweh to ride upon this type of beast, rather than piggy-back on an angel.
Sources:
The Ark. A Miniature Temple Author(s): H. G. May Source: The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Vol. 52, No. 4 (Jul., 1936), pp. 215-234 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/529185
The Heavenly Sieve Author(s): Samuel I. Feigin Source: Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Jan., 1950), pp. 40-43 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/542851
The Treasuries of Solomon's Private Chapel Author(s): Leroy Waterman Source: Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1947), pp. 161-163 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/542406
Seal of Elamar Author(s): Herbert G. May Source: The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Vol. 52, No. 3 (Apr., 1936), pp. 197-199 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/528950
On Ancient Hebrew Seals Author(s): Sabatino Moscati Source: Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 11, No. 3 (Jul., 1952), pp. 164-168 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/542634
The Damaged "Blueprints" of the Temple of Solomon Author(s): Leroy Waterman Source: Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1943), pp. 284-294 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/542354
Bull-Worship in Israel Author(s): Leroy Waterman Source: The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Vol. 31, No. 4 (Jul., 1915), pp. 229-255 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/528741
A Hebrew Incantation against Night-Demons from Biblical Times Author(s): H. Torczyner Source: Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1 (Jan., 1947), pp. 18-29 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/542231
Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia,
Jeremy Black and Anthony Green
Fifth University of Texas Press printing, 2003
Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago Volume 8 ‘K’
Published by the Oriental Institute of Chicago, 1971, Chicago, Illinois, USA
