Let Praise of Aššur Not Be Forgotten: Temple Heterarchies and the Limits of Royal Patronage in the Neo-Assyrian Empire

Abstract Understanding how the numerous temples in the Neo-Assyrian Empire situated themselves within the imperial network is challenging, largely because of a bias in the official sources towards a few temples, especially that of Aššur. Revealing the relationships between the less-attested temples...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of ancient Near Eastern religions
1. VerfasserIn: Zaia, Shana (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Brill 2021
In: Journal of ancient Near Eastern religions
Jahr: 2021, Band: 21, Heft: 1, Seiten: 98-129
normierte Schlagwort(-folgen):B Assyrien / Landschaft / Heiligtum / Assur-Tempel (Assur) / Geschichte 900 v. Chr.-609 v. Chr.
RelBib Classification:AG Religiöses Leben; materielle Religion
BC Altorientalische Religionen
weitere Schlagwörter:B Administration
B Mesopotamia
B Royal Ideology
B Priests
B Religion
B Kingship
Online Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Understanding how the numerous temples in the Neo-Assyrian Empire situated themselves within the imperial network is challenging, largely because of a bias in the official sources towards a few temples, especially that of Aššur. Revealing the relationships between the less-attested temples necessitates not only moving beyond the top of the hierarchy but also doing away with hierarchies almost entirely, as they both limit the possible connections and are impossible to build for the majority of known temples. Because there are myriad ways of organizing temples relative to one another, this paper proposes heterarchies as a more effective framework for understanding the changing dynamics of cultic landscapes. This study uses royal patronage (or its absence) as its barometer, establishing a typology that ranges from temples operating entirely independently of imperial support to those that actively seek it, and demonstrating how heterarchies can expose different perspectives of power, status, and affinities amongst institutions. Ultimately, a heterarchical approach shows that the relationships established by royal patronage were not straightforward, homogenous, or stable, and that the ways in which temple and state interacted with one another affected both “vertical” and “horizontal” positioning of temples within the cultic landscape of the empire.
ISSN:1569-2124
Enthält:Enthalten in: Journal of ancient Near Eastern religions
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/15692124-12341320