Religion

by: Charles J. Schmidt
 * Religion in the Uruk Period**

The fourth millennium BCE was an important time in human history. Known as the Uruk period, it is characterized by the emergence of many cultural developments such as the first cities, the rise of urban centers and the invention of writing, all culminating with the rise of a complex society and the formation of the state complete with hierarchical structure and division of labor (Van de Mieroop 1997:19). In this paper, I will examine the role and function of religion during the fourth millennium and will argue that Mesopotamian religion during this time was characterized by a metaphorical view of the gods as providers and that the religious institution, specifically the temple organization, was a center of administration and economic redistribution. For the purposes of this paper I will be highlighting the city of Uruk and the Eanna temple complex as a case study for my argument as Uruk is the only Late Uruk period city that has been extensively excavated (Yoffee 2005:54).


 * __Uruk__**

Uruk (known as Erech in the Bible and Warka today), is located on the banks of the Euphrates river in Mesopotamia’s southernmost region. This urban site is what the greater culture of the Uruk period derives its name (Nemet-Nejat 1998:19). In the early fifth millennium (around 4800 BCE), the village that would eventually become the city-state of Uruk grew around cultic compounds that were prototypes for what would later become its temples (Beaulieu 2007:165; McIntosh 2005:65). During the fourth millennium, southern Mesopotamia went through a population explosion and experienced a development in agriculture that created more stability in terms of permanent residence, thus allowing Uruk to become the most densely settled region in the Near East (Yoffee 2005:54; McIntosh 2005:62; Van de Mieroop 1997:27). Social stratification and social classes emerged from agricultural development and along with it, the rise of a need for organized exchange and dispersion of goods by the institution of an overseeing authority (27). However, like all new forms of authority, an ideological foundation or legitimization was needed in order to become established and convince the citizenry and surrounding farms in participation in return for future rewards. This legitimizing ideology was supplied by religion (Van de Mieroop 2004:24). Religion provided a system where agricultural resources were given to a god or goddess and in turn, these goods were redistributed to the people through the temple, which was the house of the deity (24). Mesopotamian understanding of the divine during the fourth millennium was characterized by the concept that the gods are the //real// rulers of the land and the community. The priesthood, it was believed, were their intermediary agents here on earth, and thus were the first social class to control authoritative duties (Beaulieu 2007:166). Thorkild Jacobsen (1976) points out that there are three main religious metaphors that can be found in Mesopotamian religion through the ages. These are the gods as providers and natural phenomena of economic importance, the gods as rulers, and the gods as parents (1976). Each of these distinctive “phases” roughly corresponds to a millennium and reflect the “hopes and fears” of their times (21). The notion of temples existing only as religious institutions is a false projection of modern concepts of religion upon the early temples of Mesopotamia. Van de Mieroop (1997) explains that “[n]o urban settlement is possible without an agricultural base to support a dense population. Agricultural resources needed to be extracted form the country side by an authority, and religion provided that authority” (22). I happen to agree with him. Mesopotamian temples did not serve the purpose(s) that our modern churches do today. They were more of economic institutions rather than religious by being places of redistribution and storage. Through the ideology of religious practice, agricultural contributions were portrayed as offerings to the deity and the distribution of these “gifts” were viewed as divine rewards (Van de Mieroop 1997:217). Temples in Mesopotamia were usually built in the center of the city. They were the largest and tallest structures and were constructed mostly out of mud bricks with the facades and walls being elaborately decorated (Nemet-Nejat 1998:187). During the enormous expansion that occurred during the Uruk period, the temples grew along with the population, not only in size as they were added on to over time, but also in influence as they became the center of worship and economic activity not only for those living within the city, but for the neighboring settlements as well. (McIntosh 2005:61). A new class of specialist was needed as a result of the temple’s role in the collection and redistribution of goods. This specialist was the administrator. The economy became so complex as a direct result of specialized labor that it needed to be regulated. However, the vast majority of people remained farmers and fishermen and lived in the neighboring communities outside of the city and provided part of their income to it. Those who were members of the temple organization as well as specialized laborers depended upon the produce from the farmers for their survival (Van de Mieroop, 2004:27). The temple provided the means for distributing the food and other goods to the greater society. This group that was affiliated with the temple organization was further stratified. At the very top of this hierarchy is an individual whom scholars have come to call a “priest-king”. He is given this name because it appears that he derived his power from his role and association with the temple organization (Bottero 2001:57). So what about specific temple organizations from the Uruk period? What might be found at these sites that lend credence to the claim that religion bolstered the economic system of ancient Mesopotamia? For this I will turn my attention specifically to the Eanna precinct. The Eanna (“House of Heaven”) temple precinct was composed of several buildings during the Uruk period and is located in the city of Uruk. Of these buildings are workshops, shrines, administrative buildings and perhaps even priestly residences. Archaeological excavations have even revealed subterranean buildings that are believed to be storehouses for food. (McIntosh 2005:65). These finds suggest a very close relationship between the economy and the religious organization. By collecting tribute and agricultural resources, the temple precinct was able to store surpluses of food for redistribution as well as produce many of the goods made by specialized laborers that had their workshops located on the grounds. In essence, the temple precinct was the focal point for all of Uruk and bound the entire region together economically.
 * The Temple Organization**

Excavations in the area surrounding the temple precinct have uncovered written tablets – known as Uruk IV tablets – that date to around 3300 to 3100 BCE, or the period known as the Late Uruk (McIntosh 2005:64). Although not fully deciphered, they are apparently recorded quantities of animals and grain that passed through the hands of the administration (Yoffee 2005:54). These tablets provide us with further evidence that social administrative organization was centered on the temple (McIntosh 2005:65). In fact, many of the archaic texts that are found in Uruk during the fourth millennium are identified as offering lists to the goddess Inanna (Beaulieu 2007:165). This appears to be clear evidence for the temple functioning as an administrative center and controlling the economic realm of ancient Mesopotamia. During this time, each individual town center worshipped local deities, the vast majority being fertility goddesses, such as Inanna, who ensured the prosperity of the community (Beaulieu 2007:166).

Although a system of redistribution of fixed rations were given to dependent laborers in the third millennium, it is likely that this system found its beginnings in the Late Uruk as evidenced by these tablets, which appear to be the antecedents of the Ration Lists of later years (Yoffee 2005:54). Further supporting the idea that standard rations originated from the Uruk period has been the fact that the early cuneiform sign for the term “ration” in the later Ration Lists resembles the beveled-rim bowls that proliferate the late fourth millennium archaeological layers. If this is correct, this furthers suggests that the “emergence of the beveled-rim bowl in the mid-fourth century would attest to a system of grain distribution” already in existence at that time (Van de Mieroop 2004:27).

During the much of the early fourth millennium, the worship of forces in nature predominated Mesopotamian religion and religious expression (Jacobsen 1976:73). The Mesopotamian gods throughout the fourth millennium are representatives of powers that were the basic economic staples of the cities that they presided over (73). An example gods or goddesses being depicted having close relation to the local economy is the Uruk (or Warka) Vase discovered in a deposit of cult objects in Uruk III levels inside the Eanna precinct and is believed to be of a late fourth millennium origin (McIntosh 2005:68; Beaulieu 2007:166). This artifact shows us that the Eanna complex served as a collection site for the produce of the land through offerings to the deity. The surface of this vase contains an elaborate carving of a procession of nude men holding various containers filled with produce. At the end of the procession, near the top, stands a woman – identified as the goddess Inanna by her animal symbol, the lion – who faces the city’s ruler (Van de Mieroop 2004:25; Beaulieu 2007:166; McIntosh 2005:129). The city’s ruler is clearly acting as the intermediary between the realms of the profane and the sacred. Images such as these lead scholars to believe that these intermediaries were probably charismatic leaders and known as “priest-kings” due to their relationship and association with both the political and religious realms of society (Jacobsen 1976: 73). Based upon this artifact Inanna is the goddess of the storehouse, overseeing the economic aspects that relate to human survival for ancient Mesopotamia by the collection of resources and redistributing her gifts the city (73). 
 * The Uruk Vase**
 * Conclusion** :

Religion, more specifically the temple organization, fulfilled the role of economic and administrative oversight through the collection of agricultural produce and redistribution of these goods to the inhabitants of the city, thus providing the infrastructure to support the growing hierarchical structure of society and maintaining the specialized labor classes who were not farmers and fishermen. Religion was used as an ideology to allow such a system to be accepted and integrated into Mesopotamian society. The needs that the religious institution tended to were brought on by the increase in the population during the fourth millennium which was no longer made up of local farmers who could provide for themselves by their own means of production. Thus a system of collection and redistribution was instated to address the growing demands of the world’s first true city.

Bibliography:

Beaulieu, Paul-Alain 2007 “Mesopotamia”. Ancient Religions: Beliefs and Rituals Across the Ancient World. Ed. Sarah Iles Johnson. Cambridge: Harvard U Press Bottero, Jean 2001 Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia. Trans. by Teresa L. Fagan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Jacobsen, Thorkild 1976 The Treasures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion. New Haven: Yale University Press. McIntosh, Jane R. 2005 Ancient Mesopotamia: New Perspectives. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. Nemet-Nejat, Karen R. 1998 Daily Life in Mesopotamia. Westport: Greenwood Press. Van de Mieroop, Marc 1997 The Ancient Mesopotamian City. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 2004 A History of the Ancient Near East. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell. Yoffee, Norman 2005 Myths of the Archaic State: Evolution of the Earliest Cities, States, and Civilizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.