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...
| Главный автор: | |
|---|---|
| Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
| Язык: | Английский |
| Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Загрузка...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Опубликовано: |
Brill
2021
|
| В: |
Journal of ancient Near Eastern religions
Год: 2021, Том: 21, Выпуск: 1, Страницы: 98-129 |
| Нормированные ключевые слова (последовательности): | B
Assyrien
/ Ландшафт (мотив)
/ Святилище (мотив)
/ Assur-Tempel (Assur)
/ История (мотив) 900 до н.э.-609 до н.э.
|
| Индексация IxTheo: | AG Религиозная жизнь BC Религии Древнего Востока |
| Другие ключевые слова: | B
Administration
B Mesopotamia B Royal Ideology B Priests B Религия B Kingship |
| Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Итог: | 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 |
| Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Journal of ancient Near Eastern religions
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15692124-12341320 |