Sex and the Temple

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