Iron Age Deities in Word, Image, and Name: Correlating Epigraphic, Iconographic, and Onomastic Evidence for the Ammonite God*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Joel S. Burnett Joel S. Burnett Baylor University Department of Religion One Bear Place 97284 1311 South 5th Street Waco, TX 76798- 7284 e-mail: [email protected] Iron Age Deities in Word, Image, and Name: Correlating Epigraphic, Iconographic, and Onomastic Evidence for the Ammonite God* For the study of Iron Age religion in Jordan, per- religious evidence, anthroponyms belong primarily sonal names offer an important source of informa- to the realm of family or personal religion (Albertz tion, especially given the scarcity of other forms 1978), and yet they also reflect broader social and of textual evidence (Bartlett 1989: 187-228; Mat- political dynamics (Tigay 1986; Albertz 1978: 49- tingly 1989; Israel 1990; Aufrecht 1999a). Among 76; Callaway 1999). What is more, while personal the onomastica of the Iron Age southern Levant, names seem to offer the most obvious information the Ammonite names pose an intriguing dilemma. as an indication of deities worshiped by a popula- While inscriptions and biblical texts indicate that tion, this correlation is a complex one and so names the chief Ammonite god was Milkom (e.g., 1 Kgs need to be studied in relationship to other kinds of 11:5, 33; 2 Kgs 23:13), the overwhelming majority religious evidence (Pardee 1988: 119-122; Smith of Ammonite theophoric personal names instead 2002: 4-5). feature the divine element ) ̉1 (Aufrecht 1999b: In keeping with these aspects of onomastic reli- 156-59). Based on this fact, some scholars have gious evidence, there is a need for further discussion concluded that the Ammonites’ leading deity was that incorporates all relevant evidence categories not Milkom but El (Daviau and Dion 1994; Au- for identifying any leading god of the Ammonites. frecht 1999b: 159-60; though cf. Aufrecht 2003: Unto that end, the following discussion brings the 139, note 3). Others discount the personal name onomastic evidence into relationship with other ep- evidence as uncertain and look to the other textual igraphic and iconographic evidence from Jordan. sources mentioning Milkom (Hübner 1992: 256). The remarks that follow are offered as one effort to- Still others have suggested that El and Milkom, or ward correlating the various categories of available their aspects, have been combined in some fashion onomastic, epigraphic, and iconographic evidence (Tigay 1986: 19-20 and note 60; Lemaire 1994). bearing on the question, and refining the analysis Any further advance in the discussion of the Am- pertaining to it. As the discussion will show, view- monite dilemma will require accounting for a few ing the various evidence categories together in this basic aspects of West Semitic theophoric personal way gives new support for understanding onomas- names as religious evidence. As scholarship has af- tic) ̉1 and epigraphic Milkom as referring to the firmed and reaffirmed, personal names typically do same Ammonite god. not reference the specific cult, myth, or theology of a particular god or goddess but rather convey fairly 1. Ammonite Statuary: The Persona of the Roy- generic expressions of trust, hope, thanksgiving, al God and praise that could apply to various deities (Ca- Surviving artistic evidence from ancient Ammon quot 1962: 256; Tigay 1986: 5-7; cf. Fowler 1988; is marked by a relative abundance of statuary and cf. further Barr 1990; Roberts 1990). Moreover, as sculpture in the round (Dornemann 1983: 153- ∗ This article is based on a paper presented at Crossing Jordan: 10th offering numerous suggestions that have improved it. Thanks are International Conference on the History and Archaeology of Jor- also due to Delayne Vaughn and David Melvin for research as- dan (10th ICHAJ) May 2007 in Washington, D.C. I wish to thank sistance in producing both the earlier research and the finished Walter E. Aufrecht, Larry G. Herr, Christopher A. Rollston, and form of the article. Of course, any errors and all positions taken Kenton L. Sparks for reading earlier drafts of the article and for remain my own. -153- JOEL S. BURNETT 163). The Ammonite statuary includes a series of that the Ammonites believed in the deification of items that have figured into scholarly discussions their deceased kings. of the identity of the Ammonite god, namely, de- In determining the status of the figures depicted pictions of a figure wearing a form of the Egyptian in the Ammonite statuary, the factor privileging ’atef crown (Abou Assaf 1980: 34-36, 57-58, 77- the greatest amount of evidence is the broader sig- 79; Younker 1994: 308-310; LaBianca and Younk- nificance of the Egyptian ’atef crown. While the er 1995: 410). That evidence includes a number ’atef crown is sometimes included in portrayals of stone statues and statue heads recovered from of other Egyptian deities, it is associated primar- ‘Ammån and its environs (Abou Assaf 1980: 21- ily with Osiris (ANEP, No. 573; Horn 1973: 174 24, 70-71 and Tafeln I-V; Dornemann 1983: 156- and notes 16- 18; Daviau and Dion 1994: 160). As 157; ‘Amr 1990; Dabrowski 1997), along with two an elaboration on the white crown of Upper Egypt, similarly-styled heads from clay figurines—one, the ’atef crown is distinguished by the two ostrich a clay figurine with painted beard and moustache feathers flanking the crown at the sides—in effect, from the Amman Citadel (described in Zayadine et a doubling of the curled feather of Maat, against al. 1989: 362) and the other, a plaque figurine dis- which the heart of the deceased is weighed before covered at Tall Jåwå (Daviau and Dion 1994).1 Osiris in the otherworldly judgment described in Whether these statue heads represent a human or “the Book of Going Forth By Day” (i.e., the Book divine figure has been a matter of scholarly debate. of the Dead) and in accompanying pictorial scenes, In his study of Ammonite statuary, A. Abou Assaf sometimes along with the depiction of “two Maats” compares the stone heads with the yr˙‘zr statue looking on in the final judgment scene (see Gardin- (CAI 43), which was discovered in the same find as er 1957: 504; Helck 1980: especially 1112; Wyatt one of the ’atef-crowned statues (Barnett 1951: 34- 1983: 276 note 21; Faulkner and Andrews 1985: 35 and Plates X-XI; About Assaf 1980: 25-27, 78 27-35). In short, the ’atef crown is emblematic of and Tafel IX). As Abou Assaf suggests, the use of Osiris’ role as otherworldly judge and king over the the less elaborate headband in the yr˙‘zr statue to realm of the dead. Accordingly, in Egyptian myth depict a prominent human subject, most likely the and art Osiris stands as the ultimate ruler of human Ammonite king (see, e.g., Zayadine 1974: 135-36), destiny and personifies the ideal of timeless royalty may indicate that by comparison the full crown de- beyond the corruptibility of earthly existence (see, notes a figure of yet higher status, that is, a deity e.g., Griffiths 2001). Osiris’ persona and symbol- (Abou Assaf 1980: 78). On the other hand, the sim- ism as a royal god are thus fitting for the depiction ilar posture, dress, and bare feet in both the yr˙‘zr of prominent deities within the realm of ancient statue and the two complete ’atef-crowned statues Egypt’s political and cultural influence. might suggest that the latter also depict the human Accordingly, the ’atef crown appears in various king (see Barnett 1951: 34; Horn 1973: 179-80).2 artistic depictions of West Semitic deities associ- Accordingly, based on these aspects of the Ammo- ated with divine or human kingship in Syria-Pal- nite statuary alone, one might think in terms of two estine during the Late Bronze and Iron Ages (Horn different modes of artistic representation of the hu- 1973: 173-75; Abou Assaf 1980: 77-79; Daviau and man king—a more austere image of royal dignity Dion 1994: 160-61). From Late Bronze Ugarit, re- in the ’atef-crowned figures and a more approach- liefs and bronze sculpture show an enthroned god, able royal persona in the yr˙‘zr statue. A brilliant usually understood to be the senior head of the pan- suggestion by Zayadine is that the ’atef crown is theon El, wearing the ’atef crown (Schaeffer 1966: reserved for a deceased, deified king and that the 7-8, Fig. 3 and Pl. II; Wyatt 1983). The goddess yr˙‘zr statue represents the living, mortal king Anat, who is identified at Ugarit as “the mistress (Zayadine 1991: 50). Intriguing as this suggestion of kingship, the mistress of dominion, the mistress may be, more evidence would be needed to show of the high heavens” (b‘lt mlk b‘lt drkt b‘lt ©mm rmm 1 Two male clay figurine heads from Tallal-‘Umayrπ include a head- depicting the crown of the human king in connection with 2 Sam dress with ridges similar to those of the Tall Jåwå head, but these 12:30 and 1 Chr 20:2, though acknowledging the ’atef-crown’s lack the side feathers of the ’atef crown (see below) and, as Dab- widespread role in the depiction of non-Egyptian goddesses and rowski suggests, probably belonged to rider-on-horse figures (see gods, does not adequately account for its meaning as a divine sym- Dabrowski 1997: 343-348 and figs. 18.14-18.18). bol across that range of comparative artistic evidence (see the dis- 2 Horn’s interpretation of the ’atef-crowned Ammonite statues as cussion below; Horn 1973; see Abou Assaf 1980: 76). -154- IRON AGE DEITIES IN WORD, IMAGE, AND NAME KTU 1.108 6-7), appears enthroned and wearing the the ability to connect Osiris’ royal iconography in ’atef crown in stelae and sculpture from Egypt and the form of the ’atef crown at Ras Shamra with the Palestine (ANEP, no.