How better understanding of ritual practices can help the comprehension of religious feelings
Ritual practices are not easy to be understood, even if when written material is known. On one hand the official practices can be better known than private ones, because the ancient texts concern practices in the temples, not in the houses. On the other, ritual practices are very different from one community to another one, and also they are different in the different moments and in the special goals they want to get. A tentative analysis from furniture, objects and iconography could give some lights for understanding rituals better.1 Furniture and objects found in temples or in houses could give some indications about how people move inside of the temple enclosure, where and how rituals were executed, which elements are necessary for making the rituals. Iconographical sources demonstrate the existence of rituals of which nothing has been left, so nothing could be supposed, but they concern official religion, not private one.2 On the other, ritual practices are very different from one community to another, and also they are different in the different moments and in the special goals they want to get.
This paper will deal first with the possibilities of reconstructing rituals from different sources, then with the tentative comprehension of human spirituality. There were three problems hidden in my subject matter: 1) how to have an adequate understanding of official religious rites, 2) how to reconstruct private beliefs, and 3) how to link both.
In literature it is often asserted that official religion is far from personal beliefs.3 I wanted to test this hypothesis. Private beliefs as spirituality do not come directly from rituals, even if the belief in rituals corresponds to a certain type of behaviour and meaning of life. What is under research here is human needs, human explanations of life’s difficulties and human responses to these difficulties.
Introduction
I thus attempt to consider four kinds of sources to understand both official religion and private thinking: furniture, objects, iconography and written data.4 The study of the, long forgotten, placement and characteristics of fittings and objects constitutes a very important element in reconstruction of rituals. Iconographical sources come, for the most part, from official objects, but popular objects are often spiritually charged, and respond to specific needs of people. They can thus offer some insights into the mental sphere and the human religious needs and sometimes reflect ritual acts.5 Texts contribute further to our understanding of rituals, sometimes in a very descriptive manner, sometimes less so.
There is not room here to present a full analysis, so this paper will focus on three points: 1) the importance of an analysis a multi-disciplinary approaches: archaeological, iconographical as well as textual, 2) the differences between modern and ancient perceptions of the sacred and lastly 3) the conclusion that there is no separation between official religion and private beliefs.
For the first point, one limitation is that we have lost the gestures and words that accompanied rituals in which formal words and gestures were normally stereotyped and specified for each occasion to attain specific goals and enhance the sense of participating in a community. In addition, our perception of ancient religious architecture is limited by the loss, removal or decay of artefacts, tapestry, and colours, as well as that of music, sounds and odours. For example, only the imprints of human and animal feet remain on the floor of the Oval Temple in Khafajah.
Official rites
Furniture
The analysis of fittings and objects from the Oval Temple in Khafajah allows the reconstruction of people movements within the temple as they carried out their rituals. Before studying the placement of artefacts one must also observe their structure because modern words are not enough to suggest ancient reality. For example, the definition of “altars” in Khafajah suggests different structures,6 most of which probably supported a divine statue, although some were “altars empty”.7 And those supporting a statue had others functions, those of table offerings and of libations (Fig. 15.1). This is demonstrated by the fact that all altars have a projection that is too low to sit on, but large enough to support some kinds of offerings. Some altars preserved vessels at their corners,8 so they received different kinds of liquids; I would suggest water in the open vessels or oil, wine or beer in closed vessels.9 Some altars have a stripe and an asphalt coating10 on the small frontal projection, intended perhaps for blood sacrifice. The functions of these so-called altars imply several rituals: adoration, prostration and praying before the statue, making libations of different liquids, giving offerings and perhaps others. An incorrect interpretation of fittings would prevent an understanding of rituals.
Fig. 15.1: Example of a Khafagjah’s altar with vessels (Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, fig. 37).
From their functions and position furniture can help in reconstructing how people moved in temple and which rites were practised. For example, in the great court of the Oval Temple (Fig. 15.2) I propose11 to identify the south-west corner of the court, which is without fittings,12 as a place where people entered and as a rubbish dump (probably of organic materials because of the yellow-grey colour, perhaps indicating animal sacrifices). The north-west and north-east corners, with a great number of square and large artefacts, a well and a large basin, indicate areas for rituals concerning water and for support points. So, a) the room L 44:7 coated with asphalt seems to have played a part in these water rituals (it is not a granary); and b) the northern rooms, full of objects like maces, statues, nails, etc., served to house objects used in rituals, not to store but to keep them arranged; one such room (N 45: 1–2) had an oven. In the middle of the court a line of 11 rectangular artefacts is considered as the basis for a colonnade13 – distant 2 m, built on a same axis – and is perhaps a kind of barrier to limit access to the south part of the court only to people having performed water rituals in the northern part. Only after these rituals were people sufficiently “purified” to enter the most sacred part of the temple (the south part) where either they could ascend the ziqqurat or go to the court altar.14 The south-west area has five rooms (K 45:6, K 46:5 and 4, L 46:4 and 5) characterised by a unique entry from the courtyard and full of bowls and sickles but empty of statues or sacred objects.15 These rooms served as working places perhaps for food preparation. This part also gives entry to the open air altar and so to performance of rituals before the divine image (adoration, prostration and praying in front of the statue, making libations of different liquids, giving offerings). The south-east corner was the entrance to the ziqqurat, and was concerned with cultic acts. An analysis of all artefacts of temples discovered until now – which exceeds the limits of this paper – will allow the discovery of new rituals and perhaps open a new interpretation of artefacts.
The court of the big temple was used for rituals but also for other activities that, according to our modern point of view, are pagan, but nevertheless considered sacred by ancient people: economical and “domestic”. If these activities appear clearer in the Sin and Oval Temples in Khafajah because of the number of items of furniture and objects found there, it is only the analysis of objects that could help in reconstructing the economic and religious activities held in the temple of Nintu, where only one oven was found: too little to understand rites and activities. All objects found here16 consist of three types: cultic objects like statues, maces, stone vessels; utilitarian objects like weights, bone tools, sickle, kiln, spindle whorl; and objects of different functions (shells, beads, clay models, pins, pendants, seals, amulets).17 In spite of the great variety of economic activities revealed by these objects (agriculture, weaving, flour production, food cooking), the predominance of cultic objects versus utilitarian attests that cultic activity was more important than economic. So, the proportion of objects could also be interesting in a study intended for a general comprehension of use of space. The objects of different function found in the Nintu court temple consist of either offerings, or perhaps of objects of fashion, lost in the temple during the performance of the different activities.
Iconography
Several steles, seals, votive plaques and reliefs concern ritual acts. Rituals represented are often libations and introduction scenes, sometimes processions accompanied by music, seldom sacrifices of animals or other rituals that are difficult to understand. The clearest act is libation, attested in steles, votive plaques, Enheduanna discs, cylinder seals and Neo-Assyrian bas reliefs.18 A man standing in front of the god is pouring liquid from a small spouted jar into a high vessel, with flaring sides (Fig. 15.3). The discovery of spouted vessels in the temple areas will constitute a good manner to judge rituals performed there.
Fig. 15.3: Detail of Ur-Nammu’s stele (Börker Klähn 1982, pl. 39).
The appreciation of gestures and actions from iconographical sources is meaningful but often difficult to understand. For example, there were different kinds of hand gestures used in approaching the god – hands crossed at the height of the chest, the right over the left; one hand raised; two hands raised at the height of the mouth – but their significance is still debated.19
Private spirituality
In the second part of the paper I suggest a new way of research in checking the presence of a spirituality, of private religious beliefs. For this, analysis of texts, objects and iconography of clay production found in houses is very important.
Iconography from objects
Several objects found in houses shed some light on human needs and questions about life, and sometimes they can even help to picture ritual procedures. One of the main reasons for making figures and plaques depicting generalised human forms relates to the imaginary world sustained by “existential” life questions and needs; in other words, the spiritual world. Thus, when clay objects found in houses present figures wearing horned crowns,20 symbol of divinity, it is clear these are divine images and the cultic value of the clay object cannot be dismissed. Other clay items are more difficult to be judged as having a spiritual or religious purpose, because of their complexity and of our loss of understanding of cultural and spiritual ancient mentality (Fig. 15.4). But these subjects appear only in what can be called “popular production”, not in the official production; the idea of grouping different kinds of divine/supernatural beings in popular production, and of combining human and animal characteristics in a single being, suggests a perception of a world where everything is due to supernatural beings and where man has to protect himself as well as possible, calling on spiritual beings to do so.21
Objects
Sometimes objects can also provide information about ritual procedure. This is the case, for example, of the clay reproduction of the entrance to a temple, reproduced in a threedimensional model (Fig. 15.5), in two dimensional plaques, and on the back of chariots or chairs. In a recent article I presented a study of their significance and the ritual actions they imply:22 if offerings could be inserted into a three-dimensional model, the god figurine could be taken out, making the sanctuary more attractive, whereas the rectangular plaque does not allow such a broad spectrum of actions. In a two-dimensional plaque, ritual acts must be more limited, because one could only touch the surface of the god or the temple but not surround him/it or insert offerings: the more likely actions were prayers and homage. Models of chairs or of other objects are either two- or threedimensional sculptures: one cannot perform the same actions as in three-dimensional models, but one can do more than one can in front of rectangular plaques. Other cultic rituals performed in houses are confirmed by the discovery of clay offering tables in a domestic context as, for example, those of Nuzi, one in the shape of a glazed ring supporting at least five cups, one in the shape of an animal supporting a vessel.23 I do not think that there was really what can be called a “chapel” (asirtum) in a houses if we talk about the largest room in the house and if we believe that it was used only for performing rituals.24 Perhaps one part of the house, used for other actions, was also intended for occasionally performing rites. The performance of the kispum ritual in dwellings is another example of a form of spirituality:25 it consists of several actions: break the bread, sacrifice an animal (male sheep, bird, other), “call the name” of dead people and anoint a table of oil. None of these acts leaves remains (except occasional animal bones) but they all involve hands and voices in their execution: anointing a table, sacrificing an animal, breaking the bread, calling. In this last case, it is worth mentioning the strong power of words because only their pronunciation serves to recreate the life of the dead. Ludlul bel Nemeqi increases our understanding of funerary rituals: in a passage in tablet II (l.114–5; Lambert 1996, 46) there is a reference to the existence of a grave and of paraphernalia ready to be used widely before a real danger of death arises, so it must have been common place to think about one’s own death and to prepare oneself for it within the limits of one’s own wealth.
Fig. 15.4: Clay object endowed with spiritual aim (Barrelet 1968, n. 818).
Fig. 15.5: Three-dimensional model in clay reproducing the entrance of a temple (Reuther 1926, taf. 7 a).
Textual data
Texts attest to the existence of several entities responsible for human life, like a guardian spirit, a personal god, dead people, as well as principal gods, sedu (spirits), lamassu (guardians), apart from evil’s spirits.26 According to textual sources, humans had several rituals available for all life situations – for constructions, inauguration of cities, religious practices, recording kings’ actions – indeed all moments of human common life: birth, marriage, illnesses, death. All difficult situations can be resolved by rituals performed either directly by believers without a priest (Ludlul bel nemeqi ivth tablet; Lambert 1996, 58–61): in this case one can distinguish between acts with the voice (prayers and supplications, calling the gods) and acts with the body (kiss the foot of god, place incense before the statue, present an offering or gift or cumulated donations, make libations). Sometimes rituals were performed by believers with the help of a specialised priest (Ludlul bel nemeqi, ivth tablet; Lambert 1996, 58–61): take omens, make purification rituals, sacrifice animals. So one can say that Mesopotamian life attitude is “magic” in the sense that everything happening is attributed to spirits27 and so they can believe that words and acts could impact on reality, or as Foster said “few cultures are so rich in demonic lore as the Mesopotamians”.28 This is very far away from modern society, and also gives us also the perception of a constant feeling of worry among ancient Mesopotamians. A passage of the Ludlul bel nemeqi (tablet iv, l.79–90; Lambert 1996, 60–61) can give an idea of the research of positive queries: the entrances of Esagila are called from human aspirations, like prosperity, guardian spirit, well-being, “release from guilt”, worship, pure water, exuberance. Mesopotamian people felt, more than we do today, the need for a divine presence in their lives, for respecting rituals, for acts and words to protect their lives. The implication is that of a population stressed by death, illness and all hazards, but above all having a strong trust in gods. Ludlul bel Nemeqi provides the correct behaviour a man must adopt before the gods (tablet ii, l.12–32; Lambert 1996, 38–41), that is: 1) to prostrate himself and bow down, 2) to supplicate and pray, 3) to perform rites on holy days (take a part in the divine procession, give reverence to the gods, pray, assist in the king’s prayers and in the procession accompanying music); 4) to talk to people about reverence and worship, 5) to invoke his god before eating, to make offerings; 6) to swear respectfully a solemn oath before his god.
Final remarks
At the end of this paper, after having demonstrated the importance of an analysis with several points of view, I would like to stress the differences existing between our perception of the sacred and that of ancient people – our modern view being rationalistic and too far away from nature, that of ancients being animistic and magic.
Lastly I do not think that official religion is far away from popular and private beliefs. This distinction is typically modern, not ancient: people seem to be as equally involved in official celebrations as in more familiar or personal ones, and now I tend to follow an opposite direction: I think that people did not distinguish between official and popular because it did not matter for them, the importance was that all was made by gods, spirits, guardians, and that correct behaviour was a basis, even though insufficient, to elude dangerous situations. Participations in official processions, calling great gods, praying to them, presenting them with offerings and gifts, examining omens in their name, were tasks performed by all common men having good behaviour and respecting gods So there was no separation from the official religion, only different kinds of adoration, submission, and acceptance of human life. On the other hand, even the king not only had to take part in official rituals, but he also had to perform for himself and for his life private rituals as a common human.29
Notes
1 Winter 1999; 2000; 2008. Battini forthcoming a
2 There is, however, an iconographical source of some popular objects (see section IIa).
3 For example Bottéro 1985; 1989; 56–59; Foster 1993, 35; Matsushima 1993.
4 I analysed also grave deposits, but data are less revealing about rites. It is better perhaps to analyse graves (cf. Valentini 2011), but I had not here the time.
5 Battini, forthcoming b.
6 Battini, forthcoming a; Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, 42, 55, 63–64, 82, 93–95; Delougaz 1940, 40–41, 80.
7 Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, photos n.37 and 38.
8 Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, 40–42 (Sin VI), 100 (Nintu III), 81–82 (Nintu V), 111 (0 43 level VIII).
9 Oil is often cited in text referring to rituals. In the exorcist’s list of books, there is probably one concerning oil (Bottéro 1985, 67). Beer was often used in rituals (Bottéro 1985, 179).
10 Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, 93–95.
11 Cf. Battini forthcoming a
12 Delougaz 1940, 37.
13 Delougaz 1940, 61–63.
14 Delougaz 1940, 61–64.
15 Delougaz 1940, 25–27.
16 Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, 79–101.
17 Cf. Battini, forthcoming a.
18 Börker Klähn 1982; Boese, 1971; Collon 1982; 1987.
19 Salutation (Gordon 1938, 10 and 18; Buchanan 1981, 253; Bergamini 1987, 44–45), adoration (Buchanan 1981, 191, 210, Legrain 1925, 196–197, 203), deference (Parrot 1954, 24–27, 47), supplication (Bergamini 1987, 47, Parrot 1954, 25–27), intercession (Gordon 1939, 9, Mazzoni 1972, 417).
20 For example Barrelet 1964, n. 509–514, 554–564, 623–625, 717, 784 bis, 787–789, 791–793; Legrain 1930, n. 98; van Buren 1931, n. 100–103, 27, 130, 132.
21 Abusch 2002, Abusch T. and van der Toorn K. 1999; Cunningham 1999; Bottéro 1985; 1987; 1987–1990.
22 Battini, forthcoming b with references.
23 Starr 1937, pl.115 A.
24 On the contrary see van der Toorn 2008, 26–27.
25 Of family religion according to van der Toorn 2008, 21, p. 26.
26 The bibliography is very rich. See for example Abusch 1987–1990; 2002; Cunningham 1997; Maul 1994; Geller 1985; 2007; Wiggerman 1983; 1986; 1992; Caplice 1974; Reiner 1960; Lambert 1974; 1996. For the gods of the house see: van der Toorn 1996; 2008; Scurlock 2003; Stol 2003; Groneberg 1986.
27 I take here the significance of “magic” from Goff 1963, 162–163.
28 Foster 1993, 34. See also Abusch 2002; Abusch T. and van der Toorn K. 1999; Cunningham 1999; Bottéro 1987; 1987–1990; Limet 1986, 67–90; Kinnier-Wilson 1965, 289–298.
29 Cf. royal dedication of small and inscribed objects, like beads, eye-stone, cylinder seals, pendants, stones, similar to those of common people, and especially similar in aim – the protection of the human life – even if richer in material choice.
Bibliography
Abusch, T. (1987–1990) Maqlû. Reallexikon der Assyriologie 7, 346–351.
Abusch, T. (2002) Mesopotamian Witchcraft. Winona Lake IN, Eisenbrauns.
Abusch, T. and van der Toorn, K. (eds) (1999) Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretive Perspectives. Groningen, Styx.
Barrelet, M.-Th. (1968) Figurines et reliefs en terre cuite de la Mésopotamie antique. Paris.
Battini, L. (forthcoming a) Les temples protodynastiques de Khafadjé: approche fonctionnelle. In A. Gutsfeld and P. Villard (eds) Prêtres et sanctuaries. Actes du colloque de Clermont-Ferrand 18–19 juin 2005. Hossenberg.
Battini, L. (forthcoming b) L’épiphanie divine en Mésopotamie à travers les terres cuites. Akkadica.
Bergamini, G. (1987) Sigillo a cilindro. Glittica mesopotamica dai Sumeri agli Assiri, Milano.
Boese, J. (1971) Altmesopotamische Weihplatten. Berlin.
Börker Klähn, J. (1982) Altvorderasiatische Bildstelen. Mainz.
Bottéro, J. (1985) Mythes et rites de Babylone. Paris.
Bottéro, J. (1989) Lorsque les dieux fesaient l’homme. Paris.
Bottéro, J. (1987–1990) Magie. Reallexikon der Assyriologie 7, 228–231.
Bottéro, J. (1987) Mésopotamie, l’écriture, la raison et les dieux. Paris.
Caplice, R. (1974) An Apotropaïon against Fungus. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 54, 344–349.
Collon, D. (1987) First Impression of Cylinder Seals. London.
Collon, D. (1982) Catalogue of the Western Asiatic Seals in the British Museum. Cylinder Seals II. Akkadian, Post-Akkadian, Ur III Periods. London.
Cunningham, G. (1997) Deliever me from Evil Mesopotamian Incantations 2500–1500. Winona Lake IN.
Cunningham, G. (1999) Religion and Magic Approaches and Theories. Winona Lake IN
Delougaz, P. (1940) The Oval Temple in Khafagiah. Chicago.
Delougaz, P. and Lloyd, S. (1942) Pre-Sargonid Temples in the Diyala Region. Chicago.
Ebeling, E. (1938) Dämonen. Reallexikon der Assyriologie 2, 107–113.
Foster, B. R. (1993) Before the Muses, Ann Arbor.
Geller, M. J. (1985) Forerunners to Udug-Hul Sumerian Exorcistic Incantations. Winona Lake IN.
Geller, M. J. (2007) Evil Demons Canonical Utukku- Lemnu-tu Incantations. Winona Lake IN.
Goff, B. L. (1963) Symbols of Prehistoric Mesopotamia. New Haven and London.
Gordon, C. H. (1939) Western Asiatic Seal in the Walters Art Gallery. Iraq 6, 3–34.
Groneberg, B. (1986) Eine Einführungsszene in der altbabylonische Literatur Bemerkung zum personalischen Gott. In K. Hecker and W. Sommerfeld (eds), Keilschriftliche Literaturen, 93–108. Munster.
Hamilton, N. (1996) Can We Interpret Figurines? Cambridge Archaeological Journal 6/2, 281–307.
Kinnier-Wilson, J. (1965) An Introduction to Babylonian Psychiatry. Assyriological Studies 16, Güterbock H. G. and Jacobsen Th.(eds), Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on His Seventy-fifth Birthday, April 21, 1963, Chicago, 1965. 16, 289–298.
Lambert, W. G. (1996) Babylonian Wisdom Literature. Winona Lake IN.
Lambert, W. G. (1974) DINGIR.ŠA.DIB.BA Incantations. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 33, 267–322.
Legrain, L. 1925, The Culture of the Babylonians from Their Seals in the Collections of the Museum. Philadelphia.
Legrain, L. 1930 Terra-Cottas from Nippur, Publications of the Babylonian Section Ser. 16, Philadelphia, Univ Museum Pubns.
Limet, H. (1986) Croyances, superstitions et débuts de la science en Mésopotamie ancienne. Oikumene 5, 67–90.
Matsushima, E. (ed) (1993) Official Cult and Private Religion. Heidelberg.
Maul, S. M. (1994) Zukunftsbewältigung eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Löserituale (Namburbi). Mainz am Rhein.
Mazzoni, S. (1972) Sigilli cilindrici dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli. Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli 32, 417–451
Moortgat, A. (1940) Vorderasiatische Rollsiegel, Berlin.
Opificius, R. (1961) Das altbabylonische Terrakottarelief. Berlin.
Parrot, A. (1954) Glyptique mésopotamienne. Fouilles de Lagash (Tello) et de Larsa (Senkereh), 1931–1933. Paris.
Porada, E. (1948) Corpus of Ancient Near Eastern Seals in North American Collection, Pierpont Morgan Library. Washington DC.
Reiner E., (1960) Plague Amulet and House Blessings. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 19, 148–155.
Reuther, O. (1926) Die Innenstadt von Babylon (Merkes). Berlin.
Scurlock, J. A. (2003) Ancient Mesopotamian House Gods. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religion 3, 99–106.
Starr, R. F. S. (1937) Nuzi. Report on the Excavations at Yorgan Tepa near Kirkuk, Iraq. Vol. II Plates. Massachusetts.
Stol, M. (2003) Die Heiligtum einer Familie. In W. Sallaberger, K. Volk K. and A Zgoll (eds) Literatur, Politik und Rech in Mesopotamien, 293–300. Wiesbaden.
Valentini, S. (2011) Burials and Funerary Practice. In M. Lebeau (ed.) Associated Regional Chronologies for the Ancient Near East and the Eastern Mediterranean. Jezirah, 261–275. Turnhout.
van Buren, E. (1930) Clay Figurines of Babylonia and Assyria. New Haven.
Van der Toorn, K. (2008) Family Religion in Second Millennium West Asia (Mesopotamia, Emar, Nuzi. In J. Bodel and S. M. Olyan (eds) Household and Family Religion in Antiquity, 20–36. Malden/Oxford.
Wiggermann, F. A. M. (1983) Exit Talim! Studies in Babylonian Demonology. Jaarbericht ex Oriente Lux 27, 90–105.
Wiggermann, F. A. M. (1986) Babylonian Prophylactic Figures: the Ritual Texts. Amsterdam.
Wiggermann, F. A. M. (1992) Mesopotamian Protective Spirits: the Ritual Texts. Groningen.
Winter, I. (1999) Reading Ritual in the Archaeological Record: Deposition Pattern and Function of two Artifact Types from the Royal Cemetery of Ur. In H. Kühne, R. Bernbeck and K. Bartl (eds) Fluchtpunkt Uruk: Archäologische Einheit aus methodischen Veilfalt. Aufsätze für Hans J. Nissen, 229–256. Espelkamp.
Winter, I. (2000) Opening the Eyes and Opening the Mouth: The Utility of Comparing Images in Worship in India and the Ancient Near East. In M. W. Meister (ed.) Ethnography and Personhood: Notes from the Field, 129–162. Jaipur/New Delhi.
Winter, I. (2010) On Art in the Ancient Near East. Leiden/Boston.