7. Colloquium, München 2009

Tempel im Alten Orient Herausgegeben von Kai Kaniuth, Anne Löhnert, Jared L. Miller, Adelheid Otto, Michael Roaf und Walther Sallaberger

Harrassowitz Verlag

Colloquien der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft Band 7

2013

Harrassowitz Verlag· Wiesbaden

Tempel im Alten Orient 7. Internationales Colloquium

der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 11.-13. Oktober 2009, München Im Auftrag des Vorstands der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft herausgegeben von Kai Kaniuth, Anne Löhnert, Jared L. Miller, Adelheid Otto, Michael Roaf und Walther Sallaberger

2013

Harrassowitz Verlag' Wiesbaden

Die Bände 1-3 der Reihe sind in der Saarländischen Druckerei & Verlag GmbH, Saarwellingen erschienen.

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.dnb.deabrufbar. Bibliographie information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographie data are available in the internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

Informationen zum Verlagsprogramm finden Sie unter http://www.harrassowitz-verlag.de © Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden 2013 Das Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen jeder Art, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und für die Einspeicherung in elektronische Systeme. Gedruckt auf alterungsbeständigem Papier. Druck und Verarbeitung: Memminger MedienCentrum AG Printed in Germany ISSN 1433-7401 ISBN 978-3-447-06774-4

Inhalt Vorwort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII Teilnehmer .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX Vortrags-Programm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI Wilfrid Allinger-Csollich Gedanken über das Aussehen und die Funktion einer Ziqqurrat .. . . . . . 1 Claus Ambos Rituale beim Abriß und Wiederaufbau eines Tempels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Reinhard Bernbeck Religious Revolutions in the Neolithic? “Temples” in Present Discourse and Past Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Jerrold S. Cooper Sex and the Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Margarete van Ess Babylonische Tempel zwischen Ur III- und neubabylonischer Zeit: Zu einigen Aspekten ihrer planerischen Gestaltung und religiösen Konzeption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Frederick Mario Fales The Temple and the Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Uri Gabbay The Performance of Emesal Prayers within the Regular Temple Cult: Content and Ritual Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Susanne Görke Hethitische Rituale im Tempel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Markus Hilgert „Tempelbibliothek“ oder „Tafeldepot“? Zum rezeptionspraktischen Kontext der „Sippar-Bibliothek“ . . . . . . . . . 137 Michael Jursa (Wien) Die babylonische Priesterschaft im ersten Jahrtausend v. Chr. . . . . . . . . 151

VI

 Inhalt

Kristin Kleber The Late Babylonian Temple: Economy, Politics and Cult . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Kay Kohlmeyer Der Tempel des Wettergottes von Aleppo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 Walter Kuntner und Sandra Heinsch Die babylonischen Tempel in der Zeit nach den Chaldäern . . . . . . . . . . . 219 Anne Löhnert Das Bild des Tempels in der sumerischen Literatur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263 Nicolò Marchetti Mesopotamian Early Dynastic Statuary in Context .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 Stefan M. Maul Das Haus des Götterkönigs: Gedanken zur Konzeption überregionaler Heiligtümer im Alten Orient .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Wiebke Meinhold Tempel, Kult und Mythos: Zum Verhältnis von Haupt- und Nebengottheiten in Heiligtümern der Stadt Aššur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325 Andreas Müller-Karpe Einige archäologische sowie archäoastronomische Aspekte hethitischer Sakralbauten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335 Adelheid Otto Gotteshaus und Allerheiligstes in Syrien und Nordmesopotamien während des 2. Jts. v. Chr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 Frances Pinnock Syrian and North Mesopotamian Temples in the Early Bronze Age . . . 385 Shahrokh Razmjou and Michael Roaf Temples and Sacred Places in Persepolis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 Michael Roaf Temples and the Origin of Civilisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 Ingo Schrakamp Die „Sumerische Tempelstadt“ heute: Die sozioökonomische Rolle eines Tempels in frühdynastischer Zeit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 Ursula Seidl Bildschmuck an mesopotamischen Tempeln des 2. Jahrtausends v. Chr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467 Indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489

Vorwort Tempel prägten die altorientalischen Kulturen in mehrfacher Hinsicht entscheidend: Als zentrale Institutionen nahmen sie einen herausragenden Rang in der Gesellschaft ein, als monumentale Baukomplexe bildeten sie die architektonischen Mittelpunkte der Städte. In ihnen konzentrierte sich der religiöse Kult ebenso wie eine gewaltige wirtschaftliche Macht. Einerseits Wohnstätten der Götter waren Tempel auf der anderen Seite stets ihren königlichen Bauherren und Stiftern eng verbunden. Im Laufe der Jahrhunderte änderten sich Aussehen und Aufgaben der Tempel, ebenso treten regionale Unterschiede deutlich hervor. Umso erstaunlicher ist es, dass sich bis zum Zeitpunkt des Colloquiums im Oktober 2009 seit drei Jahrzehnten keine größere Fachtagung von Altorientalisten und Vorderasiatischen Archäologen mehr dem Thema gewidmet hatte. Vorstand und wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft haben deshalb gerne unseren Vorschlag aufgenommen, das 7. Internationale Colloquium der D.O.G. in München diesem Aspekt der altorientalischen Kulturen zu widmen. Die Münchner Tagung sollte eine Bilanz unseres heutigen Kenntnisstandes über Tempel im Alten Orient ziehen und dabei aktuelle Forschungen in den Mittelpunkt stellen. Mit der Auswahl repräsentativer Themen und innovativer Methoden sowie regional und zeitlich weit gestreuter Fallbeispiele waren die Organisatoren bestrebt, den Gedanken des Überblicks nicht einzelnen technischen und fachspezifischen Diskussionen zu opfern. In der Bandbreite der Beiträge zeigt sich eindrucksvoll der methodische Stand der altorientalischen Fächer, die viele ihrer interessantesten Ergebnisse gerade aus der Kombination philologischer und archäologischer Daten ziehen. Der Dank der Herausgeber gilt deshalb in erster Linie den Autoren der hier vorgelegten Beiträge, denn sie haben es verstanden, im Sinne des Colloquiums akribische Detailuntersuchungen in größere Zusammenhänge zu stellen. Die Herausgeber danken zudem Frances Sachs, die organisatorische Aufgaben bei der Tagung und die redaktionelle Bearbeitung des Bandes übernahm; der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München für die Bereitstellung repräsentativer Räumlichkeiten; der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft, der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München sowie den 200 Teilnehmern der Veranstaltung für die Finanzierung des Colloquiums. November 2012 Kai Kaniuth, Anne Löhnert, Jared L. Miller, Adelheid Otto, Michael Roaf, Walther Sallaberger

Teilnehmer des 7. Internationalen Colloquiums der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft in München

Dominik ALEXANDER ● Wilfried ALLINGER-CSOLLICH ● Claus AMBOS ● Martin ARNETH ● Sarah ARNOLD ● Johannes BACH ● Sieglinde BALLOUT ● Klaus BALTZER ● Fruzsina BARTOS ● Solvejg BEILNER ● Angelika BERLEJUNG ● Reinhard BERNBECK ● Nicole BERNDT ● Laura BESL ● Felix BLOCHER ● Benno BRANDT ● Eva CANCIK-KIRSCHBAUM ● Sabine CHRISTIAN ● Jerrold COOPER ● Costanza COPPINI ● Hans Wilhelm DAEHNHARDT ● Gerd DEHM ● Berthold EINWAG ● Margarete VAN ESS ● Mario FALES ● Christoph FINK ● Christoph FINK ● Massimo FORLANINI ● Johannes FRIEDL ● Uri GABBAY ● Johann GEIß ● Martina GELHAAR ● Marcus GOODMAN ● Joan GOODNICK WESTENHOLZ ● Susanne GÖRKE ● Martin GRUBER ● Federico GUISFREDI ● Albertine HAGENBUCHNER-DRESEL ● Simon HALAMA ● Nils HEEßEL ● Michael HEINHOLD ● Susanne HEINHOLD-KRAHMER ● Sandra HEINSCH ● Eva HEISING ● Wilderich HEISING ● Andre HELLER ● Yvonne HELMHOLZ ● Beate HENKE ● Michael HERLES ● Markus HILGERT ● Ingeborg HOFFMANN ● Dietrich HOTZE ● Brenda JUNQUERA-GONZALES ● Michael JURSA ● Kai KANIUTH ● Hans-Christian KARA ● Aiman KARDOSH ● HansJörg KELLNER ● Karlheinz KESSLER ● Kristin KLEBER ● Horst KLENGEL ● Evelyn KLENGEL ● Dörte KÖHLER-SEIBERTH ● Kay KOHLMEYER ● Oliver KÖRBER ● Hans KRETH ● Brigitte KRETH ● Stephan KROLL ● Annette KRÜGER ● Werner KÜHNEMANN ● Walter KUNTNER ● Anna KURMANGALIEV ● Simone LAMANTE ● Gabriele LIEB ● Anne LÖHNERT ● Laura MACHEL ● Dittmar MACHULE ● Oliver MACK ● Nicolò MARCHETTI ● Natascha MATHYSCHOK ● Giovanna MATINI ● Wiebke MEINHOLD ● Michael MELCHIOR ● Henrike MICHELAU ● Jared MILLER ● Christin MÖLLENBECK ● Elisabeth MONAMY ● Seyyare MÜLLER ● Andreas MÜLLER-KARPE ● Wolfram NAGEL ● Hans NEUMANN ● Thomas NEUMANN ● Georg NEUMANN ● Hans Jörg NISSEN ● Astrid NUNN ● Stefan ODZUCK ● Birgül ÖGÜT ● Lieselotte ORTHMANN ● Takayoshi OSHIMA ● Adelheid OTTO ● Gisela PAFFENHOLZ ● Paola PAOLETTI ● Susanne PAULUS ● Olaf PÉDERSÉN ● Marie-Claire PERROUDON ● Margarete PETZUCH ● Sabine PFAFFINGER ● Frances PINNOCK ● Nathalie PINTEA ● Susan POLLOCK ● Simonetta PONCHIA ● Regine PRUZSINSZKY ● Deena RAGAVAN ● Dessa RITTIG ● Michael ROAF ● Horst ROEPENACK ● Elisa ROßBERGER ● Sylvia Maria ROTH ● Frances SACHS ● Walther SALLABERGER

X

 Teilnehmerliste

● Sofia SALO MA ● Kristina SAUER ● Christian SCHATTAUER ● Hans SCHEYHING ● Constanze SCHMIDT-COLINET ● Aaron SCHMITT ● Bernhard SCHNEDEN ● Gudrun SCHNEIDER ● Helga SCHNEIDER-LUDORFF ● Andreas SCHOLZ ● Ingo SCHRAKAMP ● Ingeborg SCHRAMM ● Eva SCHULZ-FLÜGEL ● Peter SCHUSTER ● Sibylla SCHUSTER ● Anais SCHUSTER BRANDIS ● Ursula SEIDL ● Ulrich SEWEKOW ● Birgit SEWEKOW ● Marina SKALETZ ● Klaus SOMMER ● Susanne SONDERMAYER ● Szilvia SÖVEGJARTO ● Diana STEIN ● Piotr STEINKELLER ● Charles STEITLER ● Hans Ulrich STEYMANS ● Petra STIER-GOODMANN ● Bela STIPICH ● Eva STROMMENGER ● Christina TSOUPAROPOULOU ● Edeltraud VOGELSANG ● Frank VOIGT ● Konrad VOLK ● Illya VORONTSOV ● Tanja VUKSANOVIC ● Caroline WAERZEGGERS ● Chi WANG ● Jesper WANGEN ● Ulrike WEINMANN ● Peter WERNER ● Else WIELAND ● Claus WILCKE ● Gernot WILHELM ● Christine WINKELMANN ● Annette ZGOLL

Vortrags-Programm

Sonntag, 11.10.2009 18.00–18.30 Eröffnung des Colloquiums Prof. Dr. Bernd Huber, Präsident der LMU München Prof. Dr. Klaus Vollmer, Dekan der Fakultät für Kulturwissenschaften Prof. Dr. Markus Hilgert, Vorsitzender der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 18.30–19.30 K. Kohlmeyer Der Tempel des Wettergottes von Aleppo

Montag, 12.10.2009 Vorsitz: A. Nunn 09.00–09.30 S. Maul Das Haus des Götterkönigs. Überlegungen zur Konzeption überregionaler Heiligtümer im Alten Orient 09.30–10.00 R. Bernbeck Neolithic Western Asia: ritualized daily life and the lack of sacred spaces 10.00–10.30 M. Roaf Temples and the origin of civilisation Vorsitz: F. Blocher 11.00–11.30 M. van Ess Babylonische Tempel zwischen Ur III- und neubabylonischer Zeit: planerische Gestaltung und religiöse Konzeption 11.30–12.00 C. Ambos Rituale beim Abriss und Wiederaufbau eines Tempels 12.00–12.30 W. Allinger-Csollich Aussehen und Funktion einer Ziqqurrat

XII

 Vortrags-Programm

Vorsitz: J. Klinger 14.00–14.30 U. Seidl Bildschmuck am mesopotamischen Tempel 14.30–15.00 A. Löhnert Das Bild des Tempels in der Literatur 15.00–15.30 M. Hilgert ‚Tempelbibliothek‘ oder ‚Tafeldepot’? Zur soziokulturellen Deutung der ‚Sippar-Bibliothek‘ Vorsitz: K. Volk 16.00–16.30 A. Müller-Karpe Tempel für 1000 Götter. Sakralbauten im Reich der Hethiter 16.30–17.00 F. Pinnock Syrian and North Mesopotamian temples in the Early Bronze Age 17.00–17.30 S. Razmjou/M. Roaf Temples and sacred places in Persepolis

Dienstag, 13.10.2009 Vorsitz: H. Neumann 09.00–09.30 F. M. Fales The temple and the land 09.30–10.00 I. Schrakamp Die sumerische Tempelstadt heute. Die sozial-ökonomische Rolle eines Tempels in Früh-dynastischer Zeit 10.00–10.30 K. Kleber Die Organisation eines Tempels zwischen Politik und Kult. Das Beispiel des neubabylonischen Eanna Vorsitz: R. Pruzsinszky 11.00–11.30 M. Jursa Die babylonische Priesterschaft im ersten Jahrtausend v. Chr.: Versuch einer Synthese 11.30–12.00 A. Otto Formen und Funktionen nordmesopotamischer und syrischer Tempel des 2. Jts. v. Chr.

 Vortrags-Programm

12.00–12.30 W. Kuntner/S. Heinsch Babylonische Tempel nach den Chaldäern Vorsitz: N. Heeßel 14.00–14.30 U. Gabbay The performance of Emesal prayers within the regular temple cult 14.30–15.00 W. Meinhold Tempel, Kult und Mythos: Zum Verhältnis von Haupt- und Nebengottheiten in Heiligtümern der Stadt Assur 15.00–15.30 S. Görke Hethitische Rituale im Tempel Vorsitz: J. Goodnick Westenholz 16.00–16.30 N. Marchetti Mesopotamian statues in context 16.30–17.00 J. Cooper Sex and the city-temple?

XIII

Sex and the Temple Jerrold S. Cooper (Berkeley) The interface of religion and eroticism remains a vexing problem. (Nissinen 2008, 195) Die modernen Vorstellungen von „Tempelprostitution“ und einer „Heiligen Hochzeit“ in Mesopotamien sind stark von den Schilderungen Herodots beeinflusst. Beide Themenbereiche wurden in der Forschung intensiv diskutiert. Die einschlägige Begrifflichkeit (ḫarimūtum) im altbabylonischen Sippar und die Tätigkeit der kezertum-Frauen in Kiš verweisen auf Prostitution, die dem Tempel diente, aber wohl außerhalb stattfand. Die bildlichen Darstellungen sexueller Szenen, die Hinweise auf rituelle Kontexte enthalten können, lassen sich hingegen nicht direkt mit dem Zeugnis der Texte verbinden. Die von der „Götterhochzeit“ zu trennende „Heilige Hochzeit“ zwischen dem König und der Göttin Inana stellt sich hingegen als eine literarisch-metaphorische Darstellung des Verhältnisses des Königs zu seiner Göttin dar, der er für ihre Gunst dem Land gegenüber seine Liebesdienste erweist. The theme “sex and the temple” encompasses the two great topics of sacred sexuality in Mesopotamian studies, “sacred prostitution” and “sacred marriage”, both of which have been treated exhaustively and often in the last decade or so (Rubio 1999; Nissinen 2001; Fritz 2003; Jones 2003; Böck 2004; Lapinviki 2004, 2008; Roth 2006; Cooper 2006; Stark 2006; Budin 2006, 2008; Nissinen and Uro 2008; Pongratz-Leisten 2008; Teppo 2008; Assante 2009; Masetti-Rouault 2009). Sacred prostitution itself has two aspects: 1) the performance of sexual acts as part of the cult by temple personnel; and 2) the performance of sexual acts by temple personnel or others hired by members of the general public, with the proceeds or a part thereof going to the temple. Discussions of sacred prostitution usually begin with the citation of Herodotus I 199: Surely the most disgusting of all Babylonian customs is the following. Once in her life, every woman of the country must sit down in the sanctuary of Aphrodite and have intercourse with a stranger. . . . the majority sit in the sacred precinct of Aphrodite wearing wreaths made of cord on their heads. . . . she may not return home until one of the strangers has tossed silver into her lap

50

Jerrold S. Cooper

and has had intercourse with her outside the sanctuary. When he tosses the silver, he must say, “I call on you in the name of the goddess Mylitta.” (The Assyrians call Aphrodite Mylitta.) . . . the women cannot refuse, and the silver then becomes sacred property. . . . Then, after they have had intercourse and she has thus discharged her duty to the goddess, she returns home. But after this event, no matter how much you give her, she will refuse you.1 Much recent scholarship tends to dismiss this report entirely, and considers the Father of History to be also the Father of Orientalism. That is, Herodotus was denigrating and exoticizing the Oriental other (e.g. Assante 2003; Budin 2008, chap. 4; Massetti-Rouault 2009, 130f.; Frymer-Kenski 1992, 200; Rollinger 1993, 181; Westenholz 1989, 264).2 There is no doubt that Herodotus exoticized the Orient, and his information about Mesopotamia was woefully deficient for an age in which Babylonian civilization still flourished. One cannot help but think that if he really had wanted better information, he could have had it. But Herodotus did not set out simply to denigrate the Babylonians. His description of “the most disgusting” Babylonian custom – sacred prostitution – is preceded by descriptions of two customs which he characterizes as “wise”: the Babylonian marriage market, in which the money gotten for beautiful brides is used as a dowry for ugly ones; and, “the second wisest” custom: the fact that “they do not use physicians.” Curiously, nothing that Assyriology reveals about ancient Mesopotamia corresponds to these “wise” customs, rather the opposite; but there is cuneiform evidence for elements of the “disgusting” custom, sacred prostitution. The Akkadian word for prostitute is ḫarimtu, and the word šamḫatu, literally “voluptuous woman”, is sometimes used also, although it can also be a personal name, best known from Šamḫat, the prostitute who initiated Enkidu in the Gilgameš Epic. Another word associated with ḫarimtu and šamḫatu is kezertu, almost certainly a prostitute as well (Cooper 2006).3 Documents from the archive of the chief lamentation singer at the temple of Ištar-Annunītum in Sippar record sums of money owed by men for the performance of the rite or function of ḫarimūtum, and by women for the performance of the rite of rēdûtum. The former means “prostitution,” and the latter is usually used for the status of a soldier, but here probably means “escort” or “follower.” One text records a woman responsible for both ḫarimūtum and rēdûtum. Whether the men actually act as prostitutes, or, rather, have the right to procure women as prostitutes is unclear, but the income benefits the temple. Another male function was mubabbilūtum, perhaps that of juggler or acrobat, which points to some kind of festival involving both sexuality and entertainment. 1 Cited from the translation of Purvis in Strassler (2007, 107). 2 Arnaud (1973) also considers Herodotus’ account to be wrong, but thinks he was misled by the Babylonians themselves. 3 See now the love charm CUSAS 10 11: 14 (George 2009), where the kezertu is found in an aštammu “tavern,” the traditional haunt of the ḫarimtu.

Sex and the Temple

51

At Old Babylonian Kiš, the kezertum-women were supervised by several foremen, wakil kezrētim, probably belonging to the Nanaya temple. These foremen leased the rights to assign the function and collect the relevant duties to third parties, who in turn assigned the function to a woman and her husband. At Sippar-Amnanum, none of the persons performing ḫarimūtum or rēdûtum appears to do so more than once, and that seems the case also with the women at Kiš who undertake the role of kezertum. Might these one-time-only sexual roles lie behind the account of Herodotus?4 Da Riva/Frahm (1999/2000, 179–181) have pointed to the possibility, closer to Herodotus’s time, that the public ritual at Babylon miming a love triangle between Marduk, his wife Zarpanitum, and Ištar of Babylon, could have created a licentious atmosphere that may have led to reports that inspired Herodotus’s account. They also suggest that the wreaths Herodotus imagines on the waiting women’s heads may be a reflex of the etymology of kezertu (see below).

Fig. 1. Early Dynastic sealings from Ur. Legrain 1936, plates 18 and 20.

The two Old Babylonian cases, from Sippar and Kiš, suggest prostitution that benefited the temple but occurred outside it. The first millennium Babylon ritual involved several days of processions and performance in the street, as well as rites within the temple. Because the ritual tablet is so fragmentary, we do not know whether sexual 4 The ḫarimtu and kezertu are discussed at length by Shehata (2009). She emphasizes that they should not be circumscribed as mere prostitutes, because they were also involved in the cult and musical activity (103). She includes excellent summaries of the Sippar (chap. 9.6.3.1) and Kiš (9.8.4) evidence, but denies that either points to sexual activity. I would disagree, but admit that the available evidence allows both interpretations.

52

Jerrold S. Cooper

acts were committed or mimed, but the violent and obscene lyrics – hideously misnamed “Love Lyrics” by their modern editor – indicate that any acting out would more than justify Herodotus’s label “disgusting.”5 There are also artifacts that point to sex in the temple, or, at least, in a ritual context (Cooper 1975, 265f.). Seal impressions from Early Dynastic Ur (Fig. 1) point to celebratory and, in at least one example, cultic sexuality. The ring staffs and temple façade are quite similar to those pictured in the offering scene on a contemporary stone plaque from Ur (Fig. 2). Two of the Ur sealings recall that the etymological meaning of kezertu is a woman with curled hair,6 and the musician in one sealing reminds us of the close link between music and sexuality exemplified in later representations, such as an often illustrated Old Babylonian terra cotta plaque (Fig. 3), or the notorious lead inlays from Kar Tukulti-Ninurta (Fig. 4). Assante (2007) has made a strong argument that the so-called Phoenician cap worn by a male participant on some of those inlays indicates that they can not be depictions of cultic acts; rather, they depict non-Assyrians, exotic others, performing, she believes, a live sex show for Assyrian elites.

Fig. 2. Early Dynastic limestone plaque from Ur. After Schroer/Keel 2005, 315. 5 Another late ritual involving the temples of Ištar and Nanaya at Babylon (George 2000, 270– 280) depicts female temple personnel making merry in the hallway of Ištar’s temple and tossing aphrodisiac fruit into the various chapels. Yet, we must be careful of what we imagine under the rubric “mime”: At the sacred marriage of Śiva and Mīnkāsī in Madurai, India, two priests play the god and goddess for the marriage’s climax, which, however, consists of the priest playing Śiva tying the sacred marriage necklaces around the neck of the priest playing the goddess (cf. Harman 1989). 6 Or a woman who curls hair? See Cooper (2006, 19).

Sex and the Temple

53

Fig. 3. Old Babylonian terracotta plaque from Larsa. After Winter 1983, Abb. 261.

Fig. 4. Middle Assyrian lead plaques from Assur. After Winter 1983, Abb. 352 and 353.

The textual and iconographic evidence presented so far exemplifies two pitfalls in trying to illustrate cuneiform texts with figurative artifacts: rarely do we find relevant art that is contemporary with the texts we want to illustrate, and rarely do the products of scribe and artisan address the same subject.7 We are loathe to use Early Dynastic and Middle Assyrian imagery to interpret Old Babylonian and Neo-Babylonian ritual, 7 The former is well illustrated by the problem of interpreting Old Akkadian mythological scenes using texts from 500–1500 years later. For the latter, see Cooper (2008).

54

Jerrold S. Cooper

yet the explicit images of public and even cultic sexuality shown here should warn us against assuming that if the Old Babylonian documents just discussed do not explicitly say that the kezertu-women or the people performing ḫarimūtu or rēdûtu are involved in sexual acts, then they were not. We don’t expect that kind of information from those kinds of records, and it is completely legitimate to infer that sexuality is involved, while nevertheless recognizing that other interpretations are possible. Turning from sacred prostitution to sacred marriage, I will now argue in the opposite direction, that just because a text is sexually explicit, it does not necessarily mean that sex was actually taking place. But, as we shall see, that depends on what is really meant by sex. For the sacred marriage, our locus classicus is again Herodotus. In Book I 181f., he describes the ziggurat at Babylon: On top of the highest tower stands a large temple, and within it is a huge bed generously covered with fine blankets . . . no one passes the night there except for one woman, the one whom the god has chosen out of all the native-born women of the land. So say the Chaldaeans, the priests of the god. And these same priests claim – though it sounds incredible to me – that the god himself visits the temple and sleeps on the bed (Strassler 2007, 98). Here, the origin of Herodotus’s report seems to be the marriages regularly celebrated in temples between Babylonian and Assyrian deities and their divine spouses. Those we know best from the first millennium are the marriages of Assur and Mullissu, Marduk and Zarpanitu, Nabû and Tašmetu or Nanaya, as well as Šamaš and Aya, and An and Antu (Lapinviki 2004, 81–91). But there is no suggestion in any cuneiform text that a human played the role of the goddess. Such divine marriages are attested as early as the time of Gudea of Lagaš (ca. 2100 BC), whose statues D, E and G report that Gudea provided the bridal gifts for the marriage of the gods Ningirsu and Ba’u (RIME 3/1). Those bridal gifts continued to be provided under the kings of the Third Dynasty of Ur (ca. 2100–2000 BC), and Ur III documents record as well the delivery of Dumuzi’s bridal gifts for Inana of Zabalam (Sallaberger 1993, 1: 288–291, 359f.). All of the marriages between gods and their consorts, whether third millennium or first, are assumed to involve images or symbols of the gods; there was sex in the temple in the same way as there was divine presence in the temple. The term “divine marriage” is sometimes used to distinguish the unions just discussed from the “sacred marriage”, the sexual union between the king, playing the role of the god Dumuzi, and the goddess Inana.8 Some scholars, myself included (Cooper 1993), have insisted that kings of the Ur III and Isin (ca. 2000–1800) dynasties in the guise of Dumuzi had actual sexual intercourse with a woman representing the goddess. In my own case, I was persuaded by the graphic description of the sexual encounters in the hymns of Šulgi of Ur and Iddin-Dagan of Isin. At about the 8 See Pongratz-Leisten’s (2008, 66f.) convenient distinction between cosmogamy (marriage of heaven and earth), theogamy (divine marriage) and hierogamy (marriage of king and goddess).

Sex and the Temple

55

same time as I was writing my defense of a physical “sacred marriage”, Sweet (1994) was making a very good, and, I would now say, convincing case against it: The question that must now be faced squarely is: do the poetic descriptions of a king uniting with Inanna in sexual intercourse mean that the king really coupled with a female in a ritual that gave substance to his claim to be the spouse of the goddess? And if so, who was the female? (Sweet 1994, 101). Since there is no good answer to Sweet’s second question, it becomes quite problematic to answer the first in the affirmative. As Sweet (1994, 102) reminds us, “Poems should be read as poetry. . . . The poets make explicit what is implicit in the imagery of marriage as a metaphor of the divine-human relationship.” A similar stance has been taken by Böck, who, noting the absence of any mention of a human playing Inana, imagines Iddin-Dagan approaching a statue of the goddess, and asserts that their unions “auf rein metaphorisch-spiritueller Ebene stattfand” (Böck 2004, 20). More recently, Nissinen and Uro have characterized the “divine-human sexual metaphor” as “essentially about relationship rather than sexual acts”, writing that “the sacred marriage ritual itself should be considered... but one way of objectifying” that metaphor (2008, 3). In my 1993 article, I was, I now believe, a victim of the “effect of the real,” that is, the graphic sexuality of the hymns lending credibility to the narrative. But I have been convinced by those who contend that the sex between king and goddess is no more vivid than, say, the description of Šulgi running from Ur to Nippur and back in one day, or, I might add, the description of Eanatum’s divine birth on the Stela of the Vultures. If I do not interpret Šulgi’s athleticism or Eanatum’s pedigree literally, why would I take the sexual play of Šulgi or Iddin-Dagan literally?9 I had committed an error I often rail against in criticisms of others: dismissing the unbelievable passages of a text as metaphor or hyperbole, but accepting what seems possible as true. A hymn of Iddin-Dagan’s successor, Išme-Dagan (Išme-Dagan A), tells us in great detail how, among other things, Enlil appointed him king, how Nintur was his midwife, Uraš his wetnurse, Enki granted him wisdom, Ninurta interceded for him and subdued his enemies and Utu instructed him in legal matters. The sequence ends with Inana taking him to bed. If I don’t think the entire series was acted out with humans taking the place of the gods, then why should I believe that the king made love to a woman playing Inana? Yet this “sacred marriage” – the king and Inana – is different from the divine marriages mentioned earlier. As Jones (2003, 299) has shown, Inana “plays the dominant, masculinized role as she embraces the king . . . the king takes on the role of the goddess, not the god.” This becomes clear when we examine the role of sex in the world of the gods. The culmination of the sexual encounter between the king as Dumuzi and Inana is the blessing the goddess bestows on the king and his nation. 9 But see now Steinkeller (2010), who argues that Šulgi may indeed have made it to Nippur and back in one day!

56

Jerrold S. Cooper

In other theogamies, the goddess is expected to take advantage of her spouse’s postcoital feelings of goodwill to intercede on behalf of king and country.10 But in those other cases, it is the male god who is the more powerful: Ningirsu, Enlil, Assur, Marduk, Nabû, Šamaš, Anu. It is these male gods who are in a position to grant the blessings and powers the king needs, and the function of the goddesses, as Nissinen (2001, 113) puts it, “mirrors the human male-female gender matrix of the patriarchal society.” But Inana-Ištar is both female and a powerful deity, so it is she who must be made compliant and well disposed by her royal lover. There is no intercessor here; the king himself, metaphorically, satisfies the goddess and thereby secures the blessing. To conclude, there probably was real live sex in or in close proximity to the temple, the temple certainly profited from as yet murky sexual activities outside the temple, and the divine inhabitants of the temple had active and beneficial sex lives. But I doubt that any mortal woman ever played the fierce and voluptuous Inana; the king made love to her only in his hymns, and, if he was a very brave king, in his dreams.

References

Arnaud, D. 1973: La prostitution sacrée en Mésopotamie, un mythe historiographique?, RHR 183, 111–115 Assante, J. 2003: From Whores to Hierodules: The Historiographic Invention of Mesopotamian Female Sexual Professionals, in: A. Donahue/M. Fullerton (ed.), Ancient Art and its Historiography. Cambridge, 13–47 Assante, J. 2007: The Lead Inlays of Tukulti-Ninurta I: Pornography as Imperial Strategy, in: J. Cheng/M. Feldman (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Art in Context (Fs. I. Winter). Leiden, 369–407 Assante, J. 2009: Bad Girls and Kinky Boys? The Modern Prostituting of Ištar, her Clergy and her Cults, in: T. Scheer (ed.), Tempelprostitution im Altertum. Fakten und Fiktionen. Oikumene 6. Berlin, 23–54 Böck, B. 2004: Überlegungen zu einem Kultfest der altmesopotamischen Göttin Inanna, Numen 51, 20–46 Budin, S. 2006: Sacred Prostitution in the First Person, in: Faraone/McClure 2006, 77–92 Budin, S. 2008: The Myth of Sacred Prostitution in Antiquity. Cambridge Cooper, J. 1975: Heilige Hochzeit, B. Archäologisch, RlA 4, 259–269 Cooper, J. 1993: Sacred Marriage and Popular Cult in Early Mesopotamia, in: E. Matsushima (ed.), Official Cult and Popular Religion in the Ancient Near East. Heidelberg, 81–96 Cooper, J. 2006: Prostitution, RlA 11, 13–21 Cooper, J. 2008: Incongruent Corpora: Writing and Art in Ancient Iraq, in: P. Taylor (ed.), Iconography without Texts. Warburg Institute Colloquia 13. London, 69–94 Da Riva, R./Frahm, E. 1999/2000: Šamaš-šumu-ukīn, die Herrin von Ninive und das babylonische Königssiegel, AfO 46/47, 156–182 Faraone, C./McClure, L. (ed.) 2006: Prostitutes and Courtesans in the Ancient World. Madison 10 See the discussions in Nissinen (2001) and Pongratz-Leisten (2008).

Sex and the Temple

57

Fritz, M. 2003: Die Götter Dumuzi-Ama’ušumgal’anna und Damu. AOAT 307. Münster Frymer-Kensky, T. 1992: In the Wake of the Goddesses. New York George, A. 2000: Four Temple Rituals from Babylon, in: A. George/I. Finkel (ed.), Wisdom, Gods and Literature (Fs. W.G. Lambert). Winona Lake, 259–299 George, A. 2009: Babylonian Literary Texts in the Schøyen Collection. CUSAS 10. Bethesda Harman, W. 1989: The Sacred Marriage of a Hindu Goddess. Bloomington Jones, P. 2003: Embracing Inana: Legitimation and Mediation in the Ancient Mesopotamian Sacred Marriage Hymn Iddin-Dagan A, JAOS 123, 291–302 Lapinviki, P. 2004: The Sumerian Sacred Marriage. SAAS 15. Helsinki Lapinviki, P. 2008: The Sumerian Sacred Marriage and its Aftermath in Later Sources, in: Nissinen/Uro (ed.), 7–41 Legrain, L. 1936: Archaic Seal-Impressions. Ur Excavations III. London/Philadelphia Masetti-Rouault, M.-G. 2009: Femmes, mythes et cultes dans la culture mésopotamienne ancienne, in: F. Briquel-Chatonnet et al. (ed.), Femmes, cultures et sociétés dans les civilisations méditerranénnes et proche-orientales de l’Antiquité. Topoi Suppl. 10. Paris, 129–144 Nissinen, M. 2001: Akkadian Rituals and Poetry of Divine Love, in: R. Whiting (ed.), Mythology and Mythologies. Melammu Symposia 2. Helsinki, 93–136 Nissinen, M. 2008: Song of Songs and Sacred Marriage, in: Nissinen/Uro (ed.), 173–218 Nissinen, M./Uro, R. (ed.) 2008: Sacred Marriages. The Divine-Human Sexual Metaphor from Sumer to Early Christianity. Winona Lake Pongratz-Leisten, B. 2008: Sacred Marriage and the Transfer of Divine Knowledge: Alliances between the Gods and the King in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: Nissinen/Uro (ed.), 43–73 Rollinger, R. 1993: Herodots babylonischer Logos. Innsbruck Roth, M. 2006: Marriage, Divorce and the Prostitute in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: Faraone/ McClure 2006, 21–39 Rubio, G. 1999: ¿Vírgenes o meretrices? La prostitution sagrada en el Oriente antiguo, Gerión 17, 129–148 Sallaberger, W. 1993: Der kultische Kalender der Ur III-Zeit. UAVA 7. Berlin Schroer, S./Keel, O. 2005: Die Ikonographie Palästinas/Israels und der Alte Orient. Eine Religionsgeschichte in Bildern Band 1: Vom ausgehenden Mesolithikum bis zur Frühbronzezeit. Freibourg Shehata, D. 2009: Musiker und ihr vokales Repertoire. Untersuchungen zu Inhalt und Organisation von Musikerberufen und Liedgattungen in altbabylonischer Zeit. Göttinger Beiträge zum Alten Orient 3. Göttingen Stark, C. 2006: „Kultprostitution“ im Alten Testament? Die Qedeschen der hebräischen Bibel und das Motiv der Hurerei. OBO 221. Fribourg/Göttingen Steinkeller, P. 2010: On the Location of the Towns of Ur-Zababa and Dimat-Enlil and on the Course of the Araḫtum, in: J. Fincke (ed.), Festschrift für Gernot Wilhelm. Dresden, 369–382 Strassler, R. 2007: The Landmark Herodotus. New York Sweet, R. 1994: A New Look at the “Sacred Marriage” in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: E. Robbins/S. Sandahl (ed.), Corolla Torontonensis (Fs. R.M. Smith). Toronto, 85–104 Teppo, S. 2008: Sacred Marriage and the Devotees of Ištar, in: Nissinen/Uro (ed.), 75–92 Westenholz, J. 1989: Tamar, qĕdēšā, qadištu, and Sacred Prostitution in Mesopotamia, Harvard Theological Review 82, 245–265 Winter, U. 1983: Frau und Göttin. OBO 53. Fribourg/Göttingen