Anat was one of the main goddesses in the
pantheon of
Ugarit, a city located in the north of modern
Syria on the
Mediterranean coast whose religion was closely related to that of Mari. According to the
Ugaritic texts, Anat resides on a mountain known under the name ‘Inbubu, whose location remains unknown. An association between her and
Mount Saphon, while also known, is infrequently attested. In the standard
Ugaritic list of deities, she is placed between
Athirat and
Shapash. In the analogous text written in syllabic
cuneiform, her name is rendered as
da-na-tu4. In Ugarit Anat was regarded as a warrior goddess, though she was not the only deity cast in this role. She is described using both a sword and a bow. Additionally, sources such as
KTU 1.114 and KTU 1.22 attest that she was portrayed as a huntress as well. However, Theodore J. Lewis points out that due to relying on an incorrect collation of the tablet KTU 1.96, a number of older publications overestimated the degree to which Anat was portrayed as belligerent by ascribing
cannibalistic tendencies to her. Lewis' conclusion is also accepted by other researchers today. In reality, as discovered during the digitalization of Ugaritic texts currently stored in
Damascus, the text does not mention the goddess at all, as it is not plausible that
‘nn is a mistake for
‘nt. The older reading was based not on inspection of the object itself, but rather on an old photo which from a modern perspective is "washed out and epigraphically useless." While the meaning of the rest of the text remains uncertain, Gregorio del Olmo Lete suggests that it might be an incantation against the casting of an
evil eye (
‘nn hlkt). This proposal is also accepted by Gebhard J. Selz. It has been pointed out by multiple authors, including Peggy L. Day and Mark Smith, that the fact that Anat engages in pursuits which in Ugaritic culture were viewed as typically masculine, namely warfare and hunting, constitutes "gender inversion" of the
roles human women were expected to take in society. Less formally, Dennis Pardee labeled her as a "
tomboy goddess," a characterization also employed by Izak Cornelius. In response to her threat, El describes Anat so: "I know you, my daughter, that you are a manly sort, and that none are emotional as you." It has been suggested that Anat was also regarded as a "
mistress of animals," in part based on pendants from Ugarit showing a goddess depicted in the pose associated with this archetypal motif, but this view is not universally accepted. Textual sources describe Anat as winged and capable of flight, which is commonly employed to identify possible depictions of her among the works of art from Ugarit. One possible example is a
cylinder seal showing a winged goddess in a helmet decorated with horns and a knob, standing on a bull and holding a lion. However, it cannot be established with certainty that every winged goddess depicted on a seal found in modern Syria is necessarily Anat. It is possible that due to the influence of iconography of Mesopotamian
Ishtar, other local goddesses could be depicted with wings too. Some researchers, among them Silvia Schroer, employ terms such as "Anat-
Astarte type" when describing figures depicted in art to mitigate this problem.
Epithets It has been postulated that the character of Ugaritic deities is well reflected in the
epithets applied to them. In Anat's case the most frequently occurring one is
btlt, which is also overall the second best attested divine epithet in the entire Ugaritic corpus, after
‘ali’yn b’l (
aliyn Baal; "Baal the mighty"). As of 2008, it has been identified in a total of forty nine passages. Its exact translation was a subject of scholarly controversy in the past, though today it is most commonly rendered as "
maiden" in English. Other proposals include "virgin," "girl" and "adolescent." However, it is now agreed that the term, even if translated as "virgin," does not refer to
virginity in the modern sense, but simply designates her as young and nubile. The proposal that
btlt had a more precise meaning, "young woman who did not yet bring forth male offspring," is considered baseless. An
Akkadian cognate,
batultu, occurs chiefly in legal contexts, and it has been pointed out that while it does refer to a woman's age, it appears to be used "without prejudice to her sexual or marital status." Aicha Rahmouni points out that while the Akkadian evidence does imply a woman referred to as a
batultu would likely be expected to be chaste according to
social norms of the period, there is no indication that Ugaritic deities were bound by identical norms. She proposes that the use of
ardatum, similarly conventionally translated as "maiden" (in order to refer to various goddesses in Mesopotamia), offers a close semantic parallel. A further well attested epithet of Anat is
ybmt l’imm, known from ten passages, but there is no consensus regarding its translation. The element
l’imm is usually interpreted as a common noun meaning "peoples" or "nations," though Dennis Pardee treats it as the name of a deity, analogous to Lim which is known from theophoric names from Mari. However, according to Alfonso Archi the element
lim, while theophoric, should be treated simply as a religious understanding of the concept of the
clan or similar traditional social structure. Its persistence in known sources might only reflect a
pastoralist lifestyle (or memory of it) which relied on the social bonds denoted this way. References to Lim are uncommon in Ugaritic texts, and the presumed deity shows no apparent connection to Anat. A single passage in the text KTU 1.108 refers to Anat as
gṯr, possibly "the powerful." According to Rahmouni
gṯr is most likely a scribal mistake for the feminine form
gṯrt, while Dennis Pardee proposes that in this case it is an otherwise unattested
noun, "
power," instead of the adjective well known from other texts. An entire sequence of otherwise unknown epithets is listed in the following verses of the same tablet: "the mistress of kingship" (
b’lt mlk), "the mistress of dominion" (
b’lt drkt), "the mistress of the high heavens" (
b’lt šmm rmm) and "the mistress of the
kpṯ" (
b’lt kpṯ), whose enumeration is a poetic parallelism and is meant to highlight the position and authority of the goddess in the local pantheon. The
mlk-drkt word pair is also known from other poetic contexts. It has also been suggested that the parallelism of the terms
drkt and
šmm rmm might be reflected in the names
Derketo and
Semiramis known from
late antique sources. Gebhard J. Selz remarks that despite one of these epithet associating her with the heavens, Anat was never regarded as an
astral deity. Rahmouni suggests the word
kpṯ is most likely a cognate of Akkadian
kupšu, a type of
headdress which is also mentioned in divine epithets. Gregorio del Olmo Lete instead argues that its probable meaning is "
firmament", based on the parallel with
šmm rmm, and that its Akkadian cognate would be
kabāsu, "to trample." Rahmouni argues the latter proposal is improbable because parallel epithets do not need to be semantically analogous, and additionally because Ugaritic
ṯ typically corresponds to Akkadian
š, not
s, making both the translation and the proposed cognate difficult to accept. This view is also supported by Dennis Pardee, who additionally remarks that Anat's association with the
kpṯ, which he vocalizes as
kupṯu, might mirror her link to the
atef crown in
Egyptian sources.
Worship In an offering list described as "Sacrifice to the gods of Mount Saphon," which possibly documents rites which took place over the course of the two months following the
winter solstice,
‘Iba’latu and
Ḫiyyāru (roughly corresponding to the period between the 21st of December and the 20th of February according to Dennis Pardee), Anat is the recipient of rams, similar to many other deities listed, such as
Shapshu,
Arsay,
Išḫara and
Kinnaru. Another ritual text mentions the sacrifice of multiple bulls and rams to Anat. Additionally, a
burnt offering of a bull and a ram to "Anat of
Ṣaphon" is singled out near the end of the tablet. Anat of Saphon receives the same offering according to another source, listing the sacrifices made to her, as well as
Ilib,
El,
Baal and
Pidray, in the temple of Baal. In the same source she is also the recipient of a bull and a ram as a peace offering, in this passage appearing alongside Ilib, two Baals (of Ugarit and of
Aleppo),
Yarikh, Pidray and
Dadmiš. In an entry ritual (an
Amorite practice well known from Mari) of
Ashtart, which took place over the course of multiple days, Anat received the snout and neck of an unidentified animal following the offerings of gold and silver to Shapash, Yarikh and
Gaṯaru on the second day. However, there is no indication that the label
Gaṯarūma (which appears to describe the other three deities) also applied to her. Seventeen individuals bearing
theophoric names invoking Anat have been identified in known Ugaritic texts, one among them being a king of nearby
Siyannu. This makes her the second most popular goddess in that regard after Shapash, present in the names of sixty-six individuals. The element
ʾilat ("goddess;" attested as an epithet of both Athirat and Anat) occurs more often, with a total of twenty-two attestations, but it is not certain if it refers to a specific deity. At the same time, Wilfred H. van Soldt remarked that Anat appears in theophoric names much less frequently than her importance in myths would indicate.
Hurrian ritual texts Anat is also present in
Hurrian offering lists from
Ugarit, according to
Daniel Schwemer, possibly because she had no close equivalent among the
Hurrian deities, unlike other well-attested members of the local pantheon. In one of them, she receives a ram after
Aštabi (a warrior god) and
Šimige (the sun god). In another similar list she is instead preceded by
Nupatik. She also appears in a Hurrian ritual dealing with the
anointing of deities, which otherwise only mentions members of the Hurrian pantheon. Texts from Ugarit attesting to the worship of Ugaritic deities such as Anat, alongside Hurrian ones, have been argued to indicate that the two traditions functionally merged and that the religious life of the city was "
transcultural."
Attested and proposed associations with other deities It is agreed that a close connection existed between Anat and
Baal, but its nature continues to be disputed. Past scholarship is commonly criticized for speculation about her presumed status as his wife. No evidence exists for a spousal relationship between Anat and any other deity in the Ugaritic texts, while possible indications of sexual relations with other deities, or lack of them, are not interpreted uniformly. Daniel Schwemer accepts the possibility that individual texts might allude to sexual encounters between Baal and Anat, but concludes that the weather god "did not have a wife in any real sense." Mark Smith argues that while there is no direct evidence for these two deities being viewed as a couple in the Ugaritic texts, the matter should be left open due to the scarcity of sources and possible evidence from other Northwest Semitic-speaking areas (postdating the period covered by the Ugaritic corpus) and Egypt, though a skeptical approach should be retained. Regardless of Anat's relation to Baal, there is no evidence that she was ever regarded as the mother of his daughters attested in Ugartic tradition (
Pidray,
Tallay and
Arsay). Ugaritic texts also refer to Anat to as Baal's sister, though Aicha Rahmouni notes that it has been called into question if they were envisioned as biologically related. She points out that there is evidence, including an epithet directly referring to that relation, that Baal was regarded as the son of
Dagan, who never occurs in association with Anat. She is consistently called a daughter of
El instead, with Athirat being presumed to be her mother. If the disputed role of Baal and Anat as lovers is accepted, the words "sister" and "brother" might be used in a figurative sense to refer to them in that capacity. It is also possible that all members of the Ugaritic pantheon were referred to as siblings in a less direct sense, as members of a single social group.
Ashtart frequently appears in Ugaritic texts alongside Anat, and the pairing of these two goddesses has been described as "fairly standard." An
incantation against
snakebite refers to them together as Anat-wa-Ashtart and states that both of them resided on the mountain Inbubu (
inbb), otherwise associated only with Anat, while Ashtart was instead believed to dwell in
Mari. Another similar text similarly invokes them together, after the pairs Baal and Dagan and
Yarikh and
Resheph. The importance of Ashtart is considered secondary compared to Anat in these sources and in the broader corpus of Ugaritic texts. However, Dennis Pardee stresses that while closely associated, the goddesses were not fused together. The
trilingual Sumero-
Hurro-Ugaritic version of the
Weidner god list from Ugarit treats Anat, whose name is repeated in both of the latter columns, as analogous to the
Mesopotamian god Saĝkud, who belonged to the circle of either
Ninurta or
Anu. The name of this deity might be derived from an ordinary Sumerian noun, which possibly referred to a type of official, specifically a
tax collector. Modern researchers often compare Anat to deities such as the Mesopotamian
Inanna and
Annunitum and the Hurrian
Šauška. However,
Jo Ann Hackett critically evaluated presenting the character of Anat and Inanna as identical. It has been suggested that Ba’alat Bahatīma, "lady of the houses" (or "of the temple," "of the palace"), might be an epithet of Anat. However, it has also been proposed that she was a distinct deity. The meaning of the name was possibly analogous to Mesopotamian
Belet Ekallim. Ba’alat Bahatīma might have also been a title of a different Ugaritic goddess, possibly Pidray or Athirat. A further deity sometimes argued to be identical with Anat is Rahmay, known from KTU 1.23, a myth about
Shahar and
Shalim. However, evidence in favor of this theory is absent from any known Ugaritic texts. A minor deity named
ṯmq, who might correspond to Mesopotamian
Sumuqan, is described as "warrior of Anat" (
mhr ‘nt) in two passages.
Mythology Anat appears in multiple Ugaritic myths, where she is typically portrayed as the main ally of
Baal. Theodore J. Lewis based on these texts has characterized her as "without doubt the most vivid of the Ugaritic goddesses."
Baal Cycle Anat is portrayed in her usual role in the
Baal Cycle, a well known Ugaritic narrative poem preserved on the tablets KTU 1.1–6. Sometimes, labels such as
Baal-Anat cycle are used to refer to this work. Anat is first mentioned when
El summons her to perform a ritual whose precise character is uncertain, but which according to John Gibson might have been meant to prevent her from actively supporting Baal. Later, when
Yam, Baal's rival for the position of
king of the gods, sends his messengers to the divine assembly, Anat and
Ashtart prevent the weather god from harming them. She seizes his right hand (KTU 1.2 I 40), while the other goddess - seizes his left hand. This passage is one of the multiple identified examples of poetic
parallelism, employing the names of Anat and Ashart side by side. Subsequently Anat appears in the section of the story focused on Baal striving to be granted a permission to have a palace built for himself. She apparently confronts a human army in a passage which remains poorly understood. Afterwards, the
messengers of Baal, Gapnu (also spelled Gupan) and Ugar, approach her, which makes her worried if a new enemy is challenging Baal's authority, prompting her to recall battles she took part in previously (KTU 1.3 III 36 - 47). Among the enemies she lists are Yam, listed twice (once under his main name and once as Nahar),
Tunnanu (a
sea serpent), further serpentine sea monsters (
bṯn ‘qltn, "the twisting serpent" and
šlyṭ d šb ‘t r’ašm, "the dominant one who has seven heads"), Arsh (
‘arš; possibly also a sea monster), Atik (
‘tk, the "
calf of El" or alternatively the "divine calf," Ḏabību (
ḏbb; described as a daughter of El and presumed to be demonic in character), and Ishatu ('
išt, flame, a female demon described as dog-like, possibly representing a concept analogous to dogs of individual deities known from Mesopotamian god lists such as
An = Anum). Wayne T. Pitard points out that the inclusion of Yam among Anat's defeated adversaries is difficult to explain, as a well known section of the narrative focuses on Baal, rather than her, defeating the
sea god. According to Pitard, the reference might indicate the existence of a separate tradition which is otherwise not preserved in known texts. After learning that the source of Baal's anguish is not a new enemy but the lack of his own dwelling, Anat disrespectfully attempts to pressure El to grant Baal the permission to have a palace built for himself (KTU 1.3 V 27–32). She fails in this effort. Subsequently she assists the latter god in convincing
Athirat to act as a mediator on his behalf. On the way to the sea shore where Athirat can be found, they apparently discuss an event during which Baal was dishonored in some way, possibly by Yam. The details are unclear and parts of the text are missing. When Athirat notices that they are approaching, she reacts with fear or anger (KTU 1.4 II.12–21); the scene has been summarized as "a stereotyped response to bad news." However, her mood improves when she realizes that Anat and Baal bear gifts for her, and do not intend to smite her or any other deities. Anat asks her on Baal's behalf to implore El to grant the permission she was herself unsuccessful at obtaining earlier (KTU 1.4 III 33-36). She then seemingly joins Athirat and her servant
Qodesh-wa-Amrur in their journey to El's dwelling. This interpretation has been questioned in the past, but the fact that Anat knows about the decision before Baal and later relays it to him is regarded as evidence in its favor. It is still possible that Anat is not present when the verdict itself is pronounced by El. After Baal's death at the hands of
Mot, Anat mourns him. She also shows concern about the fate of the people (KTU 1.6 I 6).
Shapash, the sun goddess, is the first to notice her despair when she discovers the body of Baal, and helps her bring the deceased weather god to
Mount Saphon for his burial. Afterwards, Anat announces Baal's death to El, who decides that it will be necessary to appoint a substitute king. She also remarks that the situation will make Athirat rejoice (KTU 1.6 I 39-43), either due to the presumed antagonism between her and Baal or because she will be able to display her authority by appointing a different god to fill his place. The surviving sections pose a problem for interpreters, as apparently even though Anat has previously buried Baal, she is actively looking for him afterwards. It has been suggested that she only buried a substitute, rather than the real Baal. When the story resumes after the coronation of a temporary king,
Attar, followed by a large lacuna (estimated to be around 30 lines), Anat threatens Mot. She kills him, and subsequently threshes his remain with a blade,
winnows them with a
sieve, burns them in a fire, grinds them with a
millstone, and finally scatters them for birds to eat. It has been argued that this scene reflected an annual agricultural ritual. According to John Gibson this is unlikely, as Anat's actions are simply meant to illustrate that the destruction of Mot was complete and thorough. In a later section of the myth, when El learns in a dream that Baal is alive, he tells Anat to call Shapash to look for him. The sun goddess reassures Anat that she will try to find him, and receives a blessing in return. The rest of the column is missing. In the final surviving fragment of the text, which establishes that Baal gained El's favor and his position was no longer threatened, Anat is mentioned by Mot (
resurrected after their earlier confrontation)), who complains to the weather god about his treatment at her hands.
Epic of Aqhat Another long Ugaritic narrative work, the
Epic of Aqhat (KTU 1.17-19), also features Anat, though for the most part it focuses on humans rather than gods. Many details of the plot are uncertain due to the state of preservation of the tablets. The eponymous character is the son of a legendary king,
Danel. At an early point in the narrative, Danel's son receives a bow from the craftsman god
Kothar-wa-Khasis. Anat apparently desires to obtain it and asks the human to give it to her, but she is rebuked. It is not clear if Aqhat's reaction to her demand (
ht tṣdn tỉnṯt; KTU 1.17 VI 40) should be interpreted as a question ("now do womenfolk hunt?") or an ironic remark ("now womenfolk hunt!"). Anat demands permission to punish him for what she perceives as impiety from El, which the senior god grants her. She invites Aqhat to a hunt, but in secret she orders a certain Yatipan (described as a "
Sutean warrior") to kill him. However, as a result of his assault the bow is broken, which enrages Anat further. Aqhat's body is subsequently devoured by
birds of prey, and unnamed messengers inform Danel that Anat is complicit in his disappearance. The rest of the narrative apparently deals with Aqhat's burial and the revenge of his sister Pughat against Yatipan, who at one point mistakes her for Anat and starts boasting about his recent endeavors. Surviving fragments indicate that Anat herself does not face repercussions.
Other myths Due to the presence of the word
btlt, which is a very common epithet of Anat, it has been proposed that a verse from
Epic of Keret (KTU 1.15 II 27) refers to her as a
wetnurse of Yaṣṣib, the eponymous king's son, but the name of the goddess is only a restoration of a lacuna. In the past, it was proposed that Shapash or one of the
Kotharat might be meant instead. Steve A. Wiggins calls the evidence mustered in favor of the former view "compelling," and notes that the only problem is the lack of other texts where the sun goddess is described as a
btlt. The same composition is also one of the texts attesting that Anat was regarded as beautiful. Comparisons to her appearance could be employed to praise the beauty of literary characters, in this case Huray, a mortal princess. The term usually employed to highlight this quality of Anat is
n’mt, a superlative form of
n’m, which can mean "good" or "beautiful" depending on context. This term was also applied to the moon god
Yarikh (
n’mn ‘lm, "most handsome of the gods;"
n’mn is the masculine form of the same word). Anat appears alongside
Ashtart in KTU 1.114. During a banquet organized by El, Yarikh, who in this composition behaves like a dog, possibly due to engaging in
alcohol consumption, receives pieces of meat from her and Ashtart. The goddesses are subsequently rebuked by a nameless servant of El, who complains that they offer choice cuts of meat to a dog. Anat and Ashtart are also referenced again in one of the final lines of the tablet. According to Mark Smith's interpretation,. the reference presumably indicates that they are seeking the ingredients needed to cure El's
hangover caused by his drunkenness. The drunkenness is described in the same myth. ==Egyptian reception==