DOCSLIB.ORG

Tradition and Change in the Beliefs at Assur, Nineveh and Nisibis Between 300 Bc and Ad 300

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tradition and Change in the Beliefs at Assur, Nineveh and Nisibis Between 300 Bc and Ad 300 tradition and change in the beliefs 193 TRADITION AND CHANGE IN THE BELIEFS AT ASSUR, NINEVEH AND NISIBIS BETWEEN 300 BC AND AD 300 PETER W. HAIDER The objective of this study is to demonstrate the variety of local reli- gious life in North-Mesopotamia during the Hellenistic and Parthian or Roman times. As examples of the interplay between ‘local’ and ‘introduced’ religious aspects, I choose three towns in that region, Assur, Nineveh and Nisibis, which had all played a distinctive role in the Assyrian period. Despite the fact that they were located rela- tively close to each other, the development of their religious culture in the Hellenistic and Roman periods went in different directions. Assur We start with Assur, the old Assyrian metropolis, where we find not only many inscriptions, but also some ruins of the sanctuaries of the Hellenistic and Roman periods. After the fall and the destruction of the city in 612 BC, the Babylonians rebuilt parts of the town on a much smaller scale. Within the old residential and cultic centre, only two small structures which followed a Babylonian plan were con- structed within the southern forecourt of the old sanctuary of Assur.1 After the Parthian conquest of Mesopotamia, Assur came to life again. According to W. Andrae, it was possible to distinguish three phases of building activity in the city. The first phase, the most pros- perous one, might have been ended by an attack by Trajan in AD 1 Andrae and Lenzen (1933), p.2-3 and p.71-2, pl.2; Haller and Andrae (1955), p.81; Andrae (1977), p.237-40 and p.251-2, fig.216-7. A decline of the city took place during the Achaemenid and Hellenistic periods, see Oates (1968), p.61-2. Barnett (1963), p.25, thought that the city of Kainai, mentioned by Xenophon (Anab. 2.4.28) ought to be identified with Tigrit and not with Assur, as Andrae and Lenzen (1933), p.2, and Andrae (1938), p.248, tried to prove. 194 peter haider 116, and the second, poorer phase by the destruction of the city by Septimius Severus in AD 198.2 The most important religious buildings of Parthian Assur are grouped at the highest point of the town, between the ruins of the old Enlil-Assur ziggurat and the Tigris. These buildings and their inscriptions provide evidence for both change and continuity. The new sanctuaries of Parthian type were dedicated to both old and new gods, and were built over the ruins of the old temple of Assur. Even the festival house of Assyrian times, to the north of the town, was rebuilt during the Parthian period, exactly following its old plan. None of the other buildings which certainly were temples were recon- structed, and Parthian houses and kilns were erected there into a layer of debris. Andrae suggested that the principal ziggurat func- tioned as a citadel, perhaps with the residence of the satrap on its summit, though now totally vanished.3 However, it seems not only more natural that the ziggurat retained its religious function, as did the ziggurats of Anu and Eanna in Uruk, the ziggurat of Nabu in Borsippa and the ziggurat of Enlil in Nippur4, but there is actual positive evidence of cultic life in a temple on top of the ziggurat in Assur.5 Temple N and temple A The Babylonian conquerors had built two small and simple temples at the southwest corner of the forecourt of the sanctuary of the god Assur.6 The simplest one is the so-called ‘temple N’. It consisted only of one broad room, with a cult niche in the rear wall and a base for the cult statue in front of it.7 This building does not seem to have 2 Andrae and Lenzen (1933), p.2-3, p.58 and p.60. The discussion of the strati- fication by Schlumberger (1970), p.113-5, is not founded on good evidence. 3 Andrae and Lenzen (1933), p.6-7; Andrae (1938), p.250 and p.255-6, fig.227. 4 On Uruk, see Downey (1988), p.15-20 and p.33-5; on Borsippa, see ibid., p.15. For the latest findings about the ziggurat of Nabu at Borsippa, after twenty years of research, see Allinger-Csollich (1991), p.383-499; id. (1996), p.19-59 and p.216-20; id. (1998), p.95-330; Fick (2001), p.73-6, fig.7 (burial of two high dignitaries with priestly function). 5 See below, with n.46-7. 6 Andrae (1904), p.38-52, fig.4-7; Haller and Andrae (1955), p.81, pl.4-5; Andrae (1938), p.218, fig.216; Downey (1988), p.149-50, fig.66. 7 Andrae (1904), p.38 and p.43-4, fig.4,7; Haller and Andrae (1955), p.81; Andrae (1938), p.238-9, fig.216..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Exploring Four Empires of Mesopotamia Chapter 6 Exploring Four Empires of Mesopotamia
    Chapter 6 Exploring Four Empires of Mesopotamia Chapter 6 Exploring Four Empires of Mesopotamia What were the most important achievements of the IVlesopotamian empires? 6.1 Introduction Ancient Sumer flourished in Mesopotamia between 3500 and 2300 B.C.E. In this chapter, you will discover what happened to the Sumerians and who ruled Mesopotamia after them. The city-states of ancient Sumer were like small independent countries. They often fought over land and water rights. They never united into one group. Their lack of unity left them open to attacks by stronger groups. This timeline shows four empires About 2300 B.C.E., the Akkadians (uh-KAY-dee-unz) con- that ruled Mesopotamia during a quered Sumer. This group made the Sumerian city-states a part period of almost 1800 years. of an empire. An empire is a large territory where groups Four Empires of Mesopotamia of people are ruled by a Akkadian Empire About 2300-2100 B.C.E Assyrian Empire About 900-612 B.C.E single leader or government. Groups like the Akkadians first conquer and then rule ^ BAeVLONIft other lands. EQYPT-< /• ARABIA-J , " """""" ••'«-... \ In this chapter, you will learn about four empires 2500 B.C.E. \0 B.C.E. 1500 B.C.E. 1000 B.C.E. / 500 B.C.E. that rose up in Mesopotamia between 2300 and 539 B.C.E. They were the Akkadian - SYRIA ASSVRIA ^YRIA ASSYHIA Empire, the Babylonian ^ BWYLONtA _ (bah-buh-LOH-nyuhn) ' ^\ EGVPT > /. ARABMJ -"V Empire, the Assyrian (uh-SIR-ee-un) Empire, and Babylonian Empire Aboutl792-1595 B.C.E Neo-Babylonian Empire About 605-539 B.C.E the Neo-Babylonian Empire.
    [Show full text]
  • KARUS on the FRONTIERS of the NEO-ASSYRIAN EMPIRE I Shigeo
    KARUS ON THE FRONTIERS OF THE NEO-ASSYRIAN EMPIRE I Shigeo YAMADA * The paper discusses the evidence for the harbors, trading posts, and/or administrative centers called karu in Neo-Assyrian documentary sources, especially those constructed on the frontiers of the Assyrian empire during the ninth to seventh centuries Be. New Assyrian cities on the frontiers were often given names that stress the glory and strength of Assyrian kings and gods. Kar-X, i.e., "Quay of X" (X = a royal/divine name), is one of the main types. Names of this sort, given to cities of administrative significance, were probably chosen to show that the Assyrians were ready to enhance the local economy. An exhaustive examination of the evidence relating to cities named Kar-X and those called karu or bit-kar; on the western frontiers illustrates the advance of Assyrian colonization and trade control, which eventually spread over the entire region of the eastern Mediterranean. The Assyrian kiirus on the frontiers served to secure local trading activities according to agreements between the Assyrian king and local rulers and traders, while representing first and foremost the interest of the former party. The official in charge of the kiiru(s), the rab-kari, appears to have worked as a royal deputy, directly responsible for the revenue of the royal house from two main sources: (1) taxes imposed on merchandise and merchants passing through the trade center(s) under his control, and (2) tribute exacted from countries of vassal status. He thus played a significant role in Assyrian exploitation of economic resources from areas beyond the jurisdiction of the Assyrian provincial government.
    [Show full text]
  • In Accordance with the Words of the Stele: Evidence for Old Assyrian Legislation
    Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 70 Issue 4 Symposium on Ancient Law, Economics & Society Part I: The Development of Law in Classical and Early Medieval Europe / Article 15 Symposium on Ancient Law, Economics & Society Part I: The Development of Law in the Ancient Near East June 1995 In Accordance with the Words of the Stele: Evidence for Old Assyrian Legislation Klaas R. Veenhof Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Klaas R. Veenhof, In Accordance with the Words of the Stele: Evidence for Old Assyrian Legislation, 70 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 1717 (1995). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol70/iss4/15 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. "IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WORDS OF THE STELE": EVIDENCE FOR OLD ASSYRIAN LEGISLATION KLAAS R. VEENHOF* INTRODUCTION Ancient Mesopotamia is generally known as the country that pro- duced the world's earliest law codes, written in cuneiform script. The oldest code, written in the Sumerian language, goes back to before 2000 B.c., while several others, written in Sumerian or Babylonian, date to the first centuries of the second millennium B.C. All of the codes, however, come from the southern part of the country. Conse- quently, Assyria, which is located in the north, thusfar has not yielded such a composition.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat)
    World Heritage Scanned Nomination File Name: 1130.pdf UNESCO Region: ASIA AND THE PACIFIC __________________________________________________________________________________________________ SITE NAME: Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) DATE OF INSCRIPTION: 5th July 2003 STATE PARTY: IRAK CRITERIA: C (iii)(iv) DECISION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE: Excerpt from the Report of the 27th Session of the World Heritage Committee Criterion iii: Founded in the 3rd millennium BCE, the most important role of Ashur was from the 14th to 9th century BCE when it was the first capital of the Assyrian empire. Ashur was also the religious capital of Assyrians, and the place for crowning and burial of its kings. Criterion iv: The excavated remains of the public and residential buildings of Ashur provide an outstanding record of the evolution of building practice from the Sumerian and Akkadian period through the Assyrian empire, as well as including the short revival during the Parthian period. BRIEF DESCRIPTIONS The ancient city of Ashur is located on the Tigris River in northern Mesopotamia in a specific geo-ecological zone, at the borderline between rain-fed and irrigation agriculture. The city dates back to the 3rd millennium BC. From the 14th to the 9th centuries BC it was the first capital of the Assyrian Empire, a city-state and trading platform of international importance. It also served as the religious capital of the Assyrians, associated with the god Ashur. The city was destroyed by the Babylonians, but revived during the Parthian period in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. Inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger: 2003 Threats to the Site: Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger at the 27th session of the World Heritage Committee simultaneously with its inscription on the World Heritage List.
    [Show full text]
  • Remembrance at Assur: the Case of the Dated Aramaic Memorials
    REMEMBRANCE AT ASSUR: THE CASE OF THE DATED ARAMAIC MEMORIALS Alasdair livingstone And women still prayed to Juno For sons as brave and bold As he who held the bridge In the brave days of old.1 In a paper presented at The Assyrian National Convention in Los Angeles in 1999 Simo Parpola stated: Distinctively Assyrian names are also found in later Aramaic and Greek texts from Assur, Hatra, Dura-Europus and Palmyra, and continue to be attested until the beginning of the Sassanian Period. These names are recognizable from the Assyrian divine names invoked in them; but whereas earlier the other name elements were predominantly Akkadian, they are now exclusively Aramaic. This coupled with the Aramaic script and language of the texts shows that the Assyrians of these later times no longer spoke Akkadian as their mother tongue. In all other respects, however, they continued the traditions of the imperial period; the temple of Ashur was restored in the second century AD ; and the stelae of the local rulers resemble those of Assyrian kings in the imperial period. It is also worth pointing out that many of the Aramaic names occurring in the post- empire inscriptions and graffiti from Assur are already attested in imperial texts from the same site that are 800 years older.2 The purpose of this contribution is to examine a collection of the graffiti referred to by Parpola from the point of view of the Assyrian cultic calendar. The relevant texts are edited in fully vocalised form and translated into German by K. Beyer (1998: 11–25) correcting and bringing up to date the previous editions of B.
    [Show full text]
  • Assyria - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia 11/5/09 12:28 PM
    Assyria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 11/5/09 12:28 PM Assyria From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Ancient Assyria was a civilization centered on the Upper Tigris river, in Mesopotamia Mesopotamia (Iraq), that came to rule regional empires a number of times in history. It was named for its original capital, the ancient city of Assur (Akkadian: Aššur; Arabic: .(Atur ݏݏݏݏ ,Ašur ݏݏݏݏ :Aššûr, Aramaic אַשור :Aššûr; Hebrew ﺃﺷﻮﺭ The term Assyria can also refer to the geographic region or heartland where these empires were centered. During the Old Assyrian period (20th to 15th c. BCE, Assur controlled much of Euphrates · Tigris Upper Mesopotamia. In the Middle Assyrian period (15th to 10th c. BCE), its Sumer influence waned and was subsequently regained in a series of conquests. The Neo- Eridu · Kish · Uruk · Ur Lagash · Nippur · Ngirsu Assyrian Empire of the Early Iron Age (911 – 612 BCE) expanded further, and Elam under Ashurbanipal (r. 668 – 627 BCE) for a few decades controlled all of the Susa Fertile Crescent, as well as Egypt, before succumbing to Neo-Babylonian and Akkadian Empire Median expansion, which were in turn conquered by the Persian Empire. Akkad · Mari Amorites Isin · Larsa Contents Babylonia Babylon · Chaldea 1 Early history Assyria Assur · Nimrud 2 Old Assyrian city-states and kingdoms Dur-Sharrukin · Nineveh 2.1 City state of Ashur Hittites · Kassites 2.2 Kingdom of Shamshi-Adad I Ararat / Mitanni 2.3 Assyria reduced to vassal states Chronology 3 Middle Assyrian period Mesopotamia 3.1 Ashur-uballit I Sumer (king list)
    [Show full text]
  • THE ASSUR-NINEVEH-ARBELA TRIANGLE Central Assyria in the Neo-Assyrian Period
    HEIDELBERGER STUDIEN ZUM ALTEN ORIENT – BAND 14 BETWEEN THE CULTURES THE CENTRAL TIGRIS REGION FROM THE 3RD TO THE 1ST MILLENNIUM BC Conference at Heidelberg January 22nd – 24th, 2009 edited by PETER A. MIGLUS & SIMONE MÜHL 2011 HEIDELBERGER ORIENTVERLAG THE ASSUR-NINEVEH-ARBELA TRIANGLE Central Assyria in the Neo-Assyrian Period Karen Radner (London)* A recent study by Mark Altaweel on settlement and land use of the area between the Lesser Zab in the south, Eski Mossul in the north, Wadi Tharthar and Jebel Sheikh Ibrahim in the west, and Jebel Qara Chauq and the Khazir River in the east defi ned this region as the Assyrian heartland (Altaweel 2008a, 6). But to any Assyrian of the Middle or Neo-Assyrian period, the traditional homelands of Assyria certainly stretched much further to the east and included the city of Arbela (modern Erbil). In this contribution, I will focus on the roughly triangular area east of the Tigris and north of the Lesser Zab and southwest of the mountain barrier where Taurus and Zagros meet. The area constitutes the core of the lands that were under the continuous rule of the Assyrian kings from the 14th to the 7th century BC (Radner 2006-08, 45-48). Unlike the regions west of the Tigris, this area was unaffected by the loss of territory to the newly forming Aramaean states in the 11th century BC and there was consequently no need for Adad-nerari II (911–891 BC) and his successors to re-establish control, once they undertook to restore Assyria’s old borders.
    [Show full text]
  • Parthian Mesopotamia
    The dialogue induced by this event originated a process of cultural interaction and led to the creation of a com- mon language that characterized the artistic production for centuries, but the ancient Mesopotamian tradition can be considered as the basis of the complex culture of the region at least until the turn of the common era. Literary and archaeological evidence indicates that this tradition revived after Alexander with the full support of the Seleucid sovereigns – the heirs of the Macedonian conqueror who presented themselves as kings of Babylon PARTHIAN (Sharru Babili), as well as Basileis, and displayed a pro- pitious attitude to local customs –,w1 but its persistence MESOPOTAMIA seems attested well after the Parthian conquest. Extensive layers of occupation, dating to the Hellenistic and Parthian periods, show that ancient Mesopotamian * cities such as Babylon, Uruk, Assur and Borsippa con- Vito Messina tinued to exist as important religious and administrative centres, while ruins of large buildings in the same sites indicate that traditional sanctuaries, built or restored under the direct patronage of the Seleucids, were still in use during the entire Parthian period.2 At Uruk, the main centre of South Mesopotamia, at least The culture of Parthian Mesopotamia is the result of two monumental sanctuaries were built by local gover- mutual contributions and interrelations originated long nors, with the support of Antiochus III, following the before the beginnings of the Parthian period, which traditional Babylonian layout: the Bit Resh, including traditionally spans from the conquest of Mithradates I, the temple dedicated to Anu and Antum, which was in 140-141 BC, to the rise of the Sasanian dynasty, erected close to the ziqqurrat already dedicated to Anu in in AD 224.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat), Iraq (C 1130)
    Report on the Joint World Heritage Centre-ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Mission to Ashur (Qal’at Sherqat), Iraq (C 1130) 5 to 9 June 2011 The Ziggurat of Ashur TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. BACKGROUND TO THE MISSION • Inscription history • Criteria and World Heritage values • Examination of the State of Conservation by the World Heritage Committee and its Bureau • Terms of reference of the mission 2. NATIONAL POLICY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTY • Protection area legislation • Institutional framework • Management structure • Response to the recognition of values under international treaties and programmes (Word Heritage, Biosphere Reserve designation) 3. IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF ISSUES • Assessment of properties maintenance based on the values of the site at the time of inscription on the World Heritage List • Management • Factors affecting the property 4. ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE SITE 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6. ANNEXES Annex 1. Terms of reference Annex 2. Itinerary and programme of the mission Annex 3. Composition of mission team ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The mission objectives could not have been achieved without the continued support, guidance and full involvement of all institutions, entities and their representatives that have been encountered in Iraq and the UNESCO Iraq office in Amman for assisting in the preparation and facilitation of the mission. I particularly want to acknowledge the following persons for their decisive role that they have played for the success of this mission: UNESCO World heritage Center: • Ms. Veronique Dauge, Chief of Unit, Arab States UNESCO Iraq office in Amman: • Ms. Teneishvili Tamara, Culture Programme Specialist for Iraq, Jordan and Syria • Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Counter-Texts, Commentaries, and Adaptations: Politically Motivated Responses to the Babylonian Epic of Creation in Mesopotamia, the Biblical World, and Elsewhere*
    Counter-texts, Commentaries, and Adaptations Counter-texts, Commentaries, and Adaptations: Politically Motivated Responses to the Babylonian Epic of Creation in Mesopotamia, the Biblical World, and Elsewhere* Eckart FRAHM** Enπma eli, the Babylonian epic of creation, was the most influential Mesopotamian religious text of the first millennium BCE. This article discusses how the epic was read, re-interpreted, and revised during the period from 900 BCE to AD 500, both within and outside Mesopotamia. The Assyrian version of the epic, and various Assyrian commentaries on the text, receive particular attention. The article argues that the Erra epic and parts of the Primeval History of the Bible represent counter-texts written in response to the ideological challenges posed by Enπma eli, and that war and peace were factors that determined to a significant extent how the Babylonians and other people of the ancient world approached the epic. Keywords: myth, Enπma eli, reception history, creation, Primeval History, Genesis I. Introduction A widely held opinion, put forward with particular vigor by Carl Jung and Karl Kerényi,1 claims that myth expresses something eternal and unchangeable, that it possesses certain archetypal qualities. Such a view seems not completely unwarranted. After all, if myths were meaningful only to the societies that produced them, then why would we still care for ancient Greek stories about the Olympian gods, or the Mesopotamian Gilgame epic, a tale that had been completely forgotten for almost 2000 years? Surely these narratives have certain timeless qualities. And yet, it would be foolish to assume that myths, and the basic ideas they express, do not also age over time, that they need not be revised when political, economic, and cultural transformations occur.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Mesopotamian Religion and Mythology Selected Essays by W.G. Lambert
    EDITED BY A.R. GEORGE AND T.M. OSHIMA Ancient Mesopotamian Religion and Mythology Selected Essays by W.G. Lambert ! Table of Contents Preface and Acknowledgements ..................................................................................... V List of Permissions ....................................................................................................... IX List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................. XIII Introduction by A.R. George ........................................................................................ 1 I: Introductory Considerations ................................................................................. 9 Morals in Mesopotamia ................................................................................................. 11 Ancient Mesopotamian Gods: Superstition, Philosophy, Theology ............................. 28 II: The Gods of Ancient Mesopotamia ................................................................ 37 The Historical Development of the Mesopotamian Pantheon: A Study in Sophisticated Polytheism ............................................................................ 39 Goddesses in the Pantheon: A Reflection of Women in Society? ................................. 49 The Mesopotamian Background of the Hurrian Pantheon ............................................ 56 The Pantheon of Mari .................................................................................................... 62 The
    [Show full text]
  • Diglossia and the Neo-Assyrian Empire's Akkadian and Aramaic
    L.C. Jonker, A. Berlejung & I. Cornelius (eds). Multilingualism in Ancient Contexts: Perspectives from Ancient Near Eastern and Early Christian Contexts. Stellenbosch: African Sun Media Multilingualism in Ancient Contexts in Ancient Multilingualism remains a thorny issue in many contexts, be it cultural, political, or educational. Debates and discourses on this issue in contexts of diversity (particularly in multicultural societies, but also in immigration situations) are often conducted with present-day communicational and educational needs in mind, or with political and identity agendas. This is nothing new. There are a vast number of witnesses from the ancient West-Asian and Mediterranean world attesting to the same debates in long past societies. Could an investigation into the linguistic landscapes of ancient societies shed any light on our present-day debates and discourses? This volume suggests Multilingualism that this is indeed the case. In fourteen chapters, written and visual sources of the ancient world are investigated and explored by scholars, specialising in those fields of study, to engage in an interdisciplinary discourse with modern-day debates about multilingualism. A final chapter – by in Ancient an expert in language in education – responds critically to the contributions in the book to open avenues for further interdisciplinary engagement – together with contemporary linguists and educationists – on the matter of multilingualism. and Early Christian Contexts Eastern Near Ancient from Perspectives Contexts Perspectives from Ancient Near Eastern and Early Christian Contexts I. Cornelius I. Cornelius A. Berlejung & L.C. Jonker, ( EDS ) EDITORS Louis C. Jonker ISBN 978-1-991201-16-4 Angelika Berlejung Izak Cornelius 9 781991 201164 https://doi.org/10.52779/9781991201171/09 Copyright 2021 African Sun Media and the editors L.C.
    [Show full text]