The ape-man of the Bible

by Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels

The following remarks are intended to draw the attention of all friends of unvarnished truth to three highly interesting creatures – let us, for the sake of caution, call them Zoa for the time being – which are reliably documented on historical Assyrian monuments and in historical texts. These are the baziati and udumi on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser II (905-870 BC) and the pagutu on the relief of Ashurnasirpal II (930-905 BC) from Nimrud.

I permit myself to state the following undeniable facts for orientation:

I. Fact: The Zoa in question are referred to by inscriptions on the monuments themselves as baziati, udumi, and pagutu. The inscriptions are matter-of-fact historical texts, tribute lists that refer entirely to real things. These creatures, therefore, must have actually existed.

II. Fact: We have received absolutely reliable and lifelike representations of the baziati, udumi, and pagutu, which provide as solid a basis for further anthropological research as a skeletal find. The baziati and udumi are depicted on the famous Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser II (905-870 BC) and are labeled as such by an inscription on the monument itself. The obelisk with its historical texts is a political document, and any fantasizing or mythologizing is absolutely excluded here. It is equally excluded that the Zoa depicted on the obelisk could be unreliable due to a lack of artistic technique. The animal and human figures depicted on the same object are of astonishing natural accuracy. Incidentally, the Assyrians of this time showed a realism in their animal depictions in their sculpture that is still unparalleled today. The Assyrians have recently been jokingly referred to as the "Dutch of antiquity." The creatures really looked the way they are depicted.

III. Fact: Besides my "Anthropozoon Biblicum" and my "Theozoology," no anthropological study has been published on these Zoa in question. Their existence, therefore, seems to be entirely unknown to zoologists and anthropologists.

IV. Fact: Nevertheless, these now-extinct creatures deserve the greatest interest from an anthropological standpoint, as they are closer to humans than any known anthropoids to date.

We now turn first to the historical-archaeological evidence, specifically the baziati and udumi on the Black Obelisk. According to the inscription, the baziati and udumi were delivered as tribute from the land of Musri to the Assyrian king. Musri is an Aramaic region adjacent to the land of Eden, known from the Bible. Let us take a look at the baziati. These creatures have something ape-like about them, but they cannot be simply referred to as apes; their overall type – sack-like body, short limbs – is almost reptilian. Fischer remarks in the correspondence paper of the German Anthropological Society (1902, 155): "We thus see that the accumulation of primitive features in the embryonic skull points back to the reptilian state. The apes are in many aspects of their organization much lower than the so-called lower mammals." The arms of the baziati are again significantly shorter than the legs, a ratio not yet observed in known anthropoids.

This circumstance, the entire head posture, the extended leg position when walking, and the depiction on the obelisk itself prove that we are dealing with distinct bipeds who walked upright in a human-like manner, albeit uncertainly. The baziati likely stood 1.5 meters tall when upright, making them pygmies.

Autopsy teaches us that the Assyrian baziati are identical to the Egyptian Ptah and the Phoenician Pataikos depictions. The linguistic parallel to this is confirmed in my treatise Anthropozoon Biblicum in the quarterly Vierteljahrschrift für Bibelkunde (Perrot I, 3rd issue) and supported by the Phoenician text (II, 203). Moreover, we have an Assyrian historical text mentioning that "the (ba)zaati pagie ukupe tarbit saddisuun" were taken en masse from Thebes. The pagie we know as animal-men from the Nimrud relief. The ukupe are apes. The term tarbit appears in the newly discovered Hammurabi law code (c. 2250 BC). Strangely enough, the Assyriologists translate tarbit in the law code as "adopted," "foster son," thus as a human. Winckler translates Hammurabi's laws (1902) as follows:

185: If someone adopts a child under his name as a son and raises him, this adopted son – tarbit – cannot be reclaimed. 186: If someone adopts a child as a son and, after adoption, the child offends his foster father or mother, the adopted son will return to his father's house. 187: The son of a courtesan or a prostitute – amelit zikru – cannot be reclaimed.

No matter how incomplete our knowledge of the legal process described by these three paragraphs may be, we can still gather from it that the tarbit was not legally equal, presumably due to a birth defect.

The two larger creatures on the Black Obelisk are called udumi (Table I). The two individuals depicted are not entirely alike. The squatting, particularly powerful creature shows little hair. However, I do not place much importance on this detail, as we know from Herodotus that temple apes were shaved over their entire bodies every third day. The udumi have an enormous skull, with the facial area, particularly the nose and lower jaw, being more developed and human-like than the corresponding parts of the anthropoids. The head hair and chest tufts of the upright-standing creature strongly resemble Egyptian sphinx depictions. It is worth noting, as highly significant from an anthropological standpoint, that older sphinx depictions do not show human heads with lion bodies, but rather human heads with ape bodies. The hind legs almost always suggest a plantigrade gait. Only in the most recent epochs of Egyptian art does one combine the human head with digitigrade animal bodies. Both Bes-dwarfs and udumi are tailed, the former with shorter tails, the udumi with longer ones.

In Indian sculptures, we encounter depictions conforming to the baziati and udumi. I mention only the short-legged dwarfs with the fat, sack-like body at Amravati, and the upright-walking, tailed ape-men at Sanchi. A similar upright-standing pygmy-like ape-man is depicted on sculptures from Amravati, specifically on the bowl from Praenos (Museo Kircheriano).

In the most recent times, drawings of very peculiar animal-men, which bear a striking resemblance to the Assyrian ape-men, were found in the Paleolithic cave of Altamira in Spain. These drawings provide a new and unmistakable argument for the natural truth and reliability of the Assyrian depictions. Particularly noteworthy is a representation of an ithyphallic ape-man. Attempts to interpret this depiction have all failed; with the information we have about the Assyrian ape-men and their use for obscene purposes, this drawing finds a completely unforced and natural explanation.

There is no other historical report in Assyriological literature about the udumu, but the term Udumu appears twice as a designation for the land of Edom. It is important to note the following: the baziati and udumi really existed and looked exactly as they are depicted on the monuments. These creatures come from an Aramaic region, as does the pagu, which is yet to be described. The creatures, especially the pagu, are so striking that it would surprise us if the local and contemporary literature had overlooked them. For the local context – Aram – and the time period, we do indeed have a rich source of written evidence: the Bible!

Where, then, is the udumu in the Bible?

1. Udumu is the exact transcription of the biblical Adam.

2. Udumu comes from the land of Musri, which borders the biblical Eden.

3. In Semitic tradition, Eden coincides with Adonis, and Adonis had his main sanctuary precisely in the suburb of the region in question, namely in Hierapolis-Bambyce.

The Adonis cult is associated with wild orgies. It is important to note that the Egyptian word utn means "ape." Starting from the secure basis of the udumu depiction on the Black Obelisk, we see that the upright-walking udumu depicted there is shaggy and hairy. In Genesis 27:11, Esau (who is also called "Edom" in Genesis 25:30) is described as 'iss'air, a hairy man. If we follow the Hebrew word sair further, we encounter the following significant sentence in Leviticus 16:7: "They shall no longer offer their sacrifices to demons, to se'irim, with whom they have committed fornication." Jerome interprets se'irim as "incubi, satyrs, or wild men." The Targum translates it as sedim, as does the Peshitta, corresponding to the Hebrew sedim, which are generally understood as apes (Arabic sadi = ape). These se'irim roam the desert and forests (Isaiah 13:21; 34:14).

Diodorus I reports that the Egyptians venerated the rogus, just as the Greeks venerated Priapus, "because of the genital part." Lucian says, "If you ask about the gods in Egypt, it is a goat, a he-goat, or an ape." Festus mentions that in Cilicia, there are hircipili, men with thick, goat-like hair. We can now also properly appreciate Herodotus II, 46, where it says: "Goats and he-goats are not sacrificed by other Egyptians because the Mendesians believe that Pan is one of the eight gods, and these eight gods, they say, existed before the twelve. Painters and sculptors depict Pan with a goat's head and goat's feet; however, they do not believe he looks like this but like the other gods. Nevertheless, the Mendesians honor all goats, especially the male ones, and their herders hold great prestige, especially one particular goat, and when he dies, the entire Mendesian province mourns greatly." Both the goat and Pan are called Mendes in Egyptian.

Mendes, according to modern transcription, is bnt-t, and bnt means "ape." Therefore, the circle is complete, and rogus and ast are not what we call "goat" and "buck" today, but rather they are apes. With our European sexual sensibilities, we turn away in disgust from the abomination of bestiality and cannot comprehend how people could fall into such a vice and find pleasure in it. However, those familiar with the psyche of lowly races will find that the ancient reports are confirmed by evident facts in the present day. Even today, in Naples, goats adorned with ribbons and bows, specially trained for their task, are offered to foreigners for copulation. In Alexandria, there are brothels where, for an entrance fee, one can witness acts of bestiality between donkeys and women. The closer man stands anthropologically to the ape and the animal, the less he recognizes his own kind in sexual relations, and it is indifferent to him with which being he copulates. Therefore, the mixing of humans with highly developed Anthropozoa is all the more probable and natural.

We know from classical writers that Greek women, like the Semitic peoples, mourned the death of Adonis. Herodotus himself mentions that the Egyptians, like the Greeks, had the mysterious Linos song (III, 79) and that their god was called Maneros. Now, Egyptian utn means "ape," and Min refers to Pan. Therefore, no matter which path we follow, we constantly encounter the ape-man. The ancient reports seem miraculous and fabulous only as long as one uncritically accepts the previously accepted translations, established by classical philologists who were untrained in anthropology and unfamiliar with oriental languages. These "translations" mostly date back to the early 19th century and thus predate Darwin! The equation daimon = ape-man changes the entire situation at once. Incidentally, I believe the Greek daimon is a transcription of the Aramaic thamewan, meaning "ape." It is telling that Bochart, in his monumental work Hierozoicon (1675), fol. 642, literally says: "Moses (in Leviticus XVII, 7) alludes to the impure lusts of the Egyptians, which he mentions with horror." Furthermore, Bochart exegetes 1 Corinthians 10:20: "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons" in relation to bestiality, stating (fol. 640): "It is certain that the Egyptians worshipped many hairy animals, such as oxen, dogs, wolves, baboons, monkeys, cynocephali, ichneumons, cats, and weasels." The interpretation of Paul's statement regarding bestiality is still upheld by the Catholic Church today (Jo. Pesch, S.J., Praelectiones Dogmaticae).

But let us return to Adam. Adam also means "red." Red is still considered the color of love today, and the mysterious beast of the Apocalypse (Revelation 17:3) is "scarlet" – bestia coccinea. This beast is full of blasphemy, and upon it sits the great harlot: "With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have become drunk with the wine of her fornication."

Even more interesting than the udumi and baziati are the pagutu depicted on the relief from Nimrud (Table III). These creatures again walk upright with a plantigrade gait, have particularly short arms that could be described as seal-like, a small round head, scaly skin, and a very long tail. Notably, the creatures are adorned with earrings. Whether they inserted these themselves or were pierced by humans, both possibilities indicate a close relationship to humans. Their height likely did not exceed 1 meter.

In the cuneiform texts, this strange creature appears in the following passages: pagutu rabitu and pagutu sihirtu (a large pagutu and a small pagutu) are received by Ashurnasirpal as tribute from the kings of the Mediterranean. "A large pagutu and river-men (amel nari) are sent by the king of Musri to Ashurnasirpal." What we can deduce from a simple observation of the monument – that this remarkable creature had a close connection with humans, that it was, if you will, a type of human – is confirmed by the historical record through the significant word amilu. Amilu means "man"! So even the Assyrians recognized this creature as a type of human! But there's more! What is already evident from the creature's entire habitus, namely that it is a water creature, is confirmed by the historical text. The pagutu are amel nari – river-men! Through its amphibious lifestyle and its entirely archaic appearance, the pagutu proves to be a remnant of an older, even ancient fauna. I refer here to the dinosaurs, predatory creatures from the secondary era, which, like kangaroos, moved by hopping or walking only on their hind legs. Their front legs are shorter than their hind legs. I merely draw attention to the similarity without claiming a direct connection.

The possibility that highly archaic types of animals could have survived in subtropical and tropical regions under corresponding modifications is all the less disputable, especially since a number of fabulously organized animals, particularly giant birds, have recently been discovered, all of which disappeared only in historical times.

Now, moving on to purely anthropological factual material to prove the existence of these Zoa and their relationship to humans, I note that these beings, more or less mixed, have persisted until our time. Kollmann, in his excellent treatise The Pygmies and their Systematic Position within the Human Race (1902, Separate Extract, p. 95), discusses two kinds of dwarfs, which he calls developmental dwarfs and racial dwarfs. He describes developmental dwarfs as follows: "Developmental dwarfs, often also called Lilliputians, arise demonstrably through degeneration, whereby it is assumed that the germ cell itself was already abnormal. Their height varies between 1 meter and 1.30 meters, and they are not poorly proportioned, except for the head." Above a small face, there usually rises a somewhat large upper head, containing enough brain to enable them to behave skillfully in human society. Such developmental dwarfs appear isolated among tall populations. However, I have noticed that these figures, reminiscent of the Assyrian baziati and Egyptian Ptah figures, are particularly found in remote areas and near old monasteries.

These types of people have been protected in the shadow of charitable monasteries, which provided them with a daily portion of sustenance, shielding them from extinction in the struggle for survival, which would be much harder without the generous monastery kitchen. In the Abbey of Admont, there is a centuries-old foundation for 12 male and 12 female cretins. Although they generally do not marry, they do reproduce. The local vernacular calls them "pilgrimage children!" We must therefore believe in the existence of the baziati, especially since we still have similarly shaped descendants among us.

As for the tails of the baziati and udumi, as well as their hairiness, I refer to Wiedersheim's The Structure of Man as Evidence for His Past (1902), where tailed embryos, tailed humans, dog-men, Pastranian people, etc., are depicted and discussed. Regarding pygmies and the findings of Anthropopithecus, I refer to the previously cited article by Kollmann and my Anthropozoon Biblicum. Kollmann also provides an excellent compilation of additional literature, to which I hereby draw attention.

But we must make a note here, as it pertains to Egypt, thus establishing the connection between the historical-archaeological and biological-anthropological evidence in a reliably accurate way, since the findings and texts refer to the same location. Kollmann (Separate Extract) says: "MacIver has included several photographic plates in his treatises, in which the skulls are meticulously reproduced from three different angles. From these plates, one can deduce with all desirable certainty that the population of Abydos (6000 BC) consisted of descendants of the great African races and descendants of pygmies, with pygmies making up approximately 20%. In light of these undeniable proofs of the presence of pygmies in Upper Egypt between 4000 and 6000 BC, it is highly probable, if not certain, that Aristotle, Homer, Herodotus, and other ancient writers received accurate reports of the presence of these racial dwarfs." Here, we have the testimony of a top authority in the field, arriving at the same conclusion as the historical (non-mythical) texts: that homo sapiens intermingled with these Zoa.

We now turn to the pagutu. Has our modern human race retained a memory of this hideous monster? Certainly, in the form of ichthyosis, or fish-scale disease, which is hereditary (and thus not a disease in the pathological sense), producing humans with grotesque, fish-like scales. Around 1800, the "porcupine men" from the Irish Lambert family caused a great stir throughout Europe. Tilesius published a highly detailed book about them: Detailed Description and Illustration of the So-Called Porcupine Men (Altenburg, 1802). Tilesius noted that this was a "variation" of humanity, as the "disease" was inherited, interestingly only through the male line. The illustrations that Tilesius painstakingly produced show the same scaly skin as that of the Assyrian pagutu. The entire body of these individuals (except for the face, palms, and soles) was covered by a furrowed, dirty-black crust. In some places, the scales grew into longer skin fibers. The fact that the crust was black is particularly noteworthy, as the pagu was also likely black-skinned. The pagu corresponds to what Herodotus reports as the Egyptian zawoa (Hebrew kamos, "the abomination of the Moabites"). Chemu and Cham both mean "black." It is also worth noting what Reh reports in Umschau VI, 867 about the pygmy peoples of Central Africa: "The skin shows a pronounced tendency to form folds."

What I have presented here is simple factual material, yet it should be of great interest to anthropology, as it opens up a highly promising perspective for further research, shedding new and modern light on many previously mysterious and wondrous phenomena.