Notes to Chapter 18. Representations

Giorgio Buccellati, “When on High…”

August 2023

18.1 Typology
18.2 The "Pagan Idol Artifacts"
18.3 Mesopotamian Icons as Referents
18.4 Biblical Aniconicity

ERRORS in databases:

"Boson1918Assiriologia.d": duplicate bibliography "Boson1918Assiriologia" for site "Akk-lg".
"Bottero1992Reasoning.d": duplicate bibliography "Bottero1992Reasoning" for site "Mes-rel".
"Buccellati1972Teodicea.d": duplicate bibliography "Buccellati1972Teodicea" for site "Mes-lit".
"Cauvin2000Birth.d": duplicate bibliography "Cauvin2000Birth" for site "Mes-rel".
"DMB.d": duplicate bibliography "DMB" for site "Mes-rel".
"Edzard2003Sumerian.d": duplicate bibliography "Edzard2003Sumerian" for site "Mes-rel".
"Oshima2014Sufferers.d": duplicate bibliography "Oshima2014Sufferers" for site "Mes-rel".
"Trinkaus1983Shanidar.d": duplicate bibliography "Trinkaus1983Shanidar" for site "Mes-rel".

18.1 Typology

For an investigation on the gender of divinities in ancient Mesopotamia, see Asher Greve 2013 Goddesses.
– [ Marco De Pietri, June 2020]
For the iconography of cultic images, specifically at Urkesh/Tell Mozan, see Braun Holzinger 2013 Gotterdarstellung.
– [ Marco De Pietri, June 2020]
For the representation of gods in the Ancient Near East, see e.g. Braun Holzinger 2013 Gotterdarstellung. On the same topic, cf. also the RlA.

Further bibliography on the same topic: Herles 2006 Gotterdarstellungen; Spieckermann 2007 Welt; Unger 1926 Gotterbild.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
On the meaning and use of the tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Bible, see supra 6.10.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
For a study of a particular artistic artefact, the trhone of Dagan of Terqa, see Arkhipov 2019 Zimri- Lim.
– [ Jonah Lynch, January 2021]
See Estes 2020 Tree for a brief study of one fascinating representation in ancient Mesopotamia.
– [ Jonah Lynch, January 2021]
See Parpola 1993 Tree for an interesting examination of the tree of life motif in Mesopotamian art.
– [ Jonah Lynch, January 2021]

18.2 The "Pagan Idol Artifacts"

For the iconography of cultic images, specifically at Urkesh/Tell Mozan, see Braun Holzinger 2013 Gotterdarstellung.
– [ Marco De Pietri, June 2020]
For the text of Ps. 135, 15 and Ps. 115, 4, se here and here, respectively.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
For the biblical expression עֲצַבֵּי הַגֹּויִם, **<sup>a</sup>ṣabê haggôyim***, ‘the idols of the people’ (cf. *supra* 18.1 for the reference to Psalms), see [DCH 6, p. 526, עָָצָב, *aṣab, ‘image’](https://4Banks.net/STATIC/PDF/Mes-rel/DCH_Idol.pdf) and DCH 2, pp. 329-334, גּוֹי, gôy, ‘nation’.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
On divine agency, with a particular focus on the gods “eating” the offerings they were offered, see Ermidoro 2019 Ritualized Meals. See also, for a more general study on this topic, Gell 1998 Agency.
– [ Stefania Ermidoro, November 2020]
See: Kaufmann 1951 Idolatry. This analysis and critique of Biblical studies examines questions surrounding where exactly in Biblical scripture do criticisms of polytheism exist, and what opinions can be extrapolated therefrom. It also lays out the definitions of idolatry and paganism in their biblical context.
– [ Iman Nagy, December 2020]
Pyrke holds a contrasting view to the comment in her examination of the socio-religious role of myths and epics, arguing that ” Despite a rigid hierarchy in favor of the divine, these relationships are frequently close, involving strong emotional bonds. The human/divine connection is not solely beneficial to either party, but reciprocal and often mutually rewarding.” See: Pyrke 2016 Religion Humanity
– [ Iman Nagy, December 2020]

18.3 Mesopotamian Icons as Referents

The dramas studied by Jacobsen represent the development of a primitive cult into a representational, “archaic” religion, especially visible in the example of sacred marriage: “representation rather than action by all; …and consonant with the anthropomorphic view, the desired benefits are sought through psychological and social motivation, not by becoming the power and as it doing what it should do. We have moved from magic to a psychological theurgy.” (p. 68) In this stage, instead of the entire population participating in the action, as in Javanese fertility rituals, the king and his partner act for the whole of society, and the “powers with which they identify are personified, well-defined anthropomorph gods acting within a sociomorph pattern, that of marriage.” (p. 69). He further suggests that the older material describes the masculine god as the giver, and the female as receiving, while later texts interpret the goddess as source, and the god as receiver. See Jacobsen 1975 Religious Drama.
– [ Jonah Lynch, March 2020]
For the iconography of cultic images, specifically at Urkesh/Tell Mozan, see Braun Holzinger 2013 Gotterdarstellung.
– [ Marco De Pietri, June 2020]
For gods’ symbols and attributes in Mesopotamia, see the RlA.

Further bibliography on the same topic: Unger 1926 Gottersymbol.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
For anthropomorphism in Mesopotamia, see the RlA.

Further bibliography on Mesopotamian anthropomorphism vs. Biblical aniconicity: Ornan 2005 Triumph.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
The sacralization of statues in Mesopotamia is also exemplified by the Ritual of Washing and Opening of the Mouth (pīt pī and mīs pī), performed on a new statue before its setting into the temple, to provide it with a sacral value.

A wide bibliography on this topic is offered on the RlA, p. 585.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
For the god Enlil, see here.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
On the god Erra, see here.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
About the sacred marriage, see the related entry in the RlA.

Cf. also the online paper “Sacred Marriage and Sacred Prostitution in Ancient Mesopotamia” published on History of the NET.

Further bibliography on the same topic: Jones 2003 Embracing; Lapinkivi 2004 Sumerian; Van Buren 1944 Sacred Marriage.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
On the goddess Inanna, see here.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
On the god Dumuzi, see here.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
For mythological texts regarding Inanna and Dumuzi, see e.g. ETCSL c. 1.4.1.3, transliteration and translation. Many solemn hymns were also composed in honour of Inanna and Dumuzi: see e.g. ETCSL c. 4.08.01-4.08.32.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
On anthropomorphic conceptions and representations of divine beings see Machinist 2014 Anthropomorphism.
– [ Stefania Ermidoro, November 2020]
On sacred marriage in Mesopotamia see Pongratz- Leisten 2008 Marriage, in which the author reviews the concept of hieros gamos in Assyriological studies.
– [ Stefania Ermidoro, November 2020]
For an analysis on the Biblical perception of idolatry and an overview of scholarly treatment on the matter, see Faur 1978 Biblical Idolatry
– [ Iman Nagy, December 2020]
See Herles 2006 Gotterdarstellungen for different ways of representing gods in ancient Mesopotamia.
– [ Jonah Lynch, January 2021]
See Nadali 2013 Ritual Art for an investigation of visual arts in Mesopotamian religious ritual.
– [ Jonah Lynch, January 2021]

18.4 Biblical Aniconicity

Frequent prophetic plaints in the Bible attest that notwithstanding the law, iconography existed and was common. Specific and significant evidence is found in the vase found at Kuntillet Ajrud which depics «Yahweh and his asherah ». See commentary in Smith 2001 Origins. See also Buccellati chapter 15.4.
– [ Jonah Lynch, March 2020]
On God’s jealousy in the Bible, see supra 7.11.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
For the passage about the creation of man ‘in God’s image’, see Gen. 1, 26 and Gen. 1, 28.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
For the Hebrew expression בְּצַלְמֵנוּ, b^eṣalme-nu (‘in our image’) and כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ, kid^emûtē-nu (‘as our icon’), related to the two Hebrew terms צֶלֶם, ṣelem, ‘image’ and דְמוּת, d^emût, ‘icon’, see respectively DCH 7, p. 127 and DCH 2, p. 449.

For the Akkadian term ṣalmu, ‘image’ (= Hebrew צֶלֶם, ṣelem), see CAD 16 = Ṣ, pp. 78-86.

Noteworthy is the differentiated use of ṣelem, ‘image’ (in a positive way, speaking about God), vs. עָָצָב, `aṣab, ‘image’ (in a negative, pejorative sense, referred to foreign people); cf. supra 18.2.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
«The archaeological evidence confirms this in a very explicit way, and the most famous case is that of the representations on a vase found in Kuntillet Ajrud in the Sinai peninsula, where anthropomorphic figures are accompanied by the designations of “Yahweh of Samaria and his asherah” and “Yahweh of Teman and his asherah,” the term asherah referring either to an iconic object or to the female companion of the male deity» (G. Buccellati, Chapter 18, Section 4).

On the figure of asherah, see the related entry on the Jewish Encyclopedia. See also Becking 2001 Only; cf. also Wiggins 2007 Asherah.

About the Kuntillet Ajrud’s vase and its interpretation, see e.g. Merlo 1994 Asherah.
– [ Marco De Pietri, September 2020]
On the question of Yahweh’s consort, his “asherah”, see Becking 2001 Only.
– [ Jonah Lynch, January 2021]
See Merlo 1994 Asherah on the issue of Yahweh’s Asherah.
– [ Jonah Lynch, January 2021]
See Ornan 2005 Triumph on the historical origins of the biblical ban on images.
– [ Jonah Lynch, January 2021]