-
V: Have Horn, Will Travel: The Journeys of Mesopotamian Deities
- Wilfrid Laurier University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
V Have Horn,WillTravel: The Journeys of Mesopotamian Deities Karljürgen G.Feuerherm WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY Travel in the ancient Mediterranean world was often associated with honouring the gods in some fashion or other. Most of the chapters in this volume focus on the Hellenistic and Roman worlds, as well as Judeans and followers of Jesus within those worlds. In this chapter, I want to focus on a cultural phenomenon that is somewhat farther removed geographically and whose expression –– while surviving in later centuries –– finds its roots several millennia before the common era. Also, the discussion here diverges from the others in that it involves the travel of gods or goddesses , rather than humans, albeit in the physical rather than the mythological realm. In the Mesopotamian world view, deities were believed to travel not only in tales but also in the day-to-day world. This took place in a much more real sense than we might be inclined to suppose, given our cultural notions regarding what deities will and will not do.1 This will become clearer when we examine the Mesopotamian conception of deity more closely. 83 The Mesopotamian Conception of Deity The deities who from time to time or place to place comprised the Mesopotamian pantheon represented at their root concretizations of the Mesopotamian experience of the environment. Their activities and interrelationships were then described for the most part mythologically in anthropomorphic terms. Thus,An/Anu2 represented the heavens, Enlil the power of the air, Iškur/Adad the storm, Utu/Šamaš the sun, Nanna/Sîn in like manner the moon, and so on. Over time, these deities also became associated with abstract metaphysical concepts beyond the immediately environmental: Enlil, for example, whose influence was most critical in Mesopotamian life, became associated with destiny and fate and was, in the early period, considered the effective ruler of the gods, while Utu/ Šamaš, by virtue of being able to bring light to darkness and see all, became responsible for divine justice.3 Given the origin of their development, the gods and goddesses of Mesopotamia were cosmologically located. But anthropomorphism invites physical representation, so that deities were represented by cult images, which were then made resident in “houses” (Sumerian “e”;Akkadian “bītu[m]”) of their own, or what we would call temples. Though any given deity was generally worshipped in a variety of locales, in practice each tended to have one major cult centre and associated temple where the deity was considered to be “at home.” Some major deities, home cult centres, and temples (based on George 1993) Temple Name Deity Home City Sumerian English An/Anu Uruk Eanna House of Heaven Enlil Nippur Ekur House, Mountain Enki/Ea Eridu Eabzu Apsû-house Nanna–Suena /Sîn Ur Ekišnugal Alabaster House Utu/Šamaš Larsa, Sipparb Ebabbar Shining House Asarluḫi/Marduk Babylon Esagil House whose Top is High Nabû Borsippa Ezidac True House a This deity is sometimes known as Nanna, sometimes as Suen (Akkadianized at a later date as Sin), and sometimes as both. b Utu/Šamaš had two main temples rather than one as well as lesser ones in other locations. c Originally, this was a temple of Marduk (under the name Tutu). Nabu also had a cella by this name in the temple of Marduk in Babylon. 84 H O N O U R I N G T H E G O D S [44.205.5.65] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 15:07 GMT) H AV E H O R N, W I L L T R AV E L / F E U E R H E R M 85 When attempting to discern the Mesopotamian attitude toward cult images, we must distance ourselves from two points of view that might arise in light of modern cultural formations in the West. First, we should avoid assuming that images were used in much the same way as, say, icons of saints in certain Christian traditions. The natural response by members of such traditions to those who would accuse them of idolatry on the basis of, for example, Leviticus 26:1,4 is presumably that these images are representative or symbolic and thus not to be confused with “idols,” which are objects of worship in and of themselves. As we shall soon see, there is much more behind the Mesopotamian use of images than symbolism or mere representation. The second problem relates to the charge found in Jeremiah 10:3–15, Habakkuk 2...