I. Daily Meals in an Assyrian Temple

11In order to understand banquets performed inside the Assyrian temples, one must first step back and look at a few premises which were at the very foundation of Mesopotamian religion.

12The daily cult in a Mesopotamian temple focused on the maintenance and care of the god or goddess who dwelt there: he (or she) was present through a statue that epitomised his (her) figure, and that needed to be treated with every possible care to ensure a long-lasting survival of the temple itself and of the people that lived under the gods’ protection. Every day, first-quality products of the fields and herds administrated under the temple and royal authority were delivered to the Neo-Assyrian shrines, to accomplish different functions: some of them were meant to feed administrators, priests, and workers of the structures, while others were destined to the gods’ ceremonial meals.

13Literary texts written in Sumerian and Akkadian clearly show that, according to the Near Eastern perception, humankind was created by gods and was allowed to live and thrive on the earth provided that it supported, maintained, and honoured the supernatural beings. It has been demonstrated15 that three myths in particular expressed this belief: Enki and Ninmah, Atrahasis, and Enûma Eliš. In all these literary works, it is explicitly stated that men were born in order to free the gods from the toil of farming, a duty they originally had to perform in order to ensure their own sustenance. This presupposition however also implied that, from the moment of the creation of mankind onwards, gods were totally reliant on it: its destruction would have meant a return to the original, hard-working situation that was simply unconceivable. Thus, men and divinities were intermingled, complementary beings.16

14We can understand then why ritual texts from every age and every region of the ancient Near East were very keen on providing all the instructions for a perfect execution of those activities in temples that were directed to the care of the gods—including washing, clothing, entertaining with singing and music, and clearly also feeding.

15Although thousands of cuneiform tablets were written from the third millennium BC onwards concerning the appropriate time, quantity, quality, and procedure with regard to the presentation of food offerings to the gods, not many of them explicitly refer to banquets or shared meals consumed during or after these rites. In the 20th volume of the State Archives of Assyria series, only nine out of a total of fifty-five royal ritual texts explicitly mention the eating of food together with, or in the presence of, the gods.17 This scarce first corpus can however be extended thanks to other kinds of documents, and more information on ceremonial meals can be gathered from Neo-Assyrian letters and reports, and also from royal inscriptions.

16The terms commonly used to refer to the daily meals eaten by gods were naptanu and qerētu:18 regular repasts were prepared and served by priests sometimes with the assistance of the king or other high-status individuals. According to the written sources known to us, the usual sequence of acts to be performed on the occasion of a divine meal in an Assyrian temple of the first millennium always included the following steps:

1. A table was brought inside the area in which the rite was being performed, and it was placed in front of the image of the divinity; then some preparatory purification rites were carried out.
2. The table was then prepared according to a prescribed arrangement and vessels for liquids and a few foodstuffs were set out.
3. Animals for the sacrifices (in various quantity and species, depending on the specific ritual) were brought in and slaughtered.
4. After the killing of the sacrificial victims, cuts of meat were cooked and served to the god (s), following a particular order which was imposed by each circumstance; meat was accompanied by more food, and libations were performed before and after the repast.
5. At the end of the divine’ meal, all the vessels and recipients were cleared, and the table was removed; then, all the human participants left the holy place, and the god (s) remained alone.

17These were the fundamental phases of a divine repast consumed inside an Assyrian temple, even though a few variants may occur. The texts never clearly describe the proper moments of the divine meals, nor do we understand how gods actually ate: from phase 4 of the above-mentioned list, available accounts always shift directly to phase 5.

18What we know for certain is that once the food had been set on the tables in front of the gods, it assumed a different and special nature. Its consumption normally took place on a high, “horizontal” level, which was that of the single beneficiary god/goddess together with his/her family and court. In fact, all these beings had a supernal essence in common, and were part of the same exclusive group that remained, in the case of these events, clearly separated from the humankind. Men were brought, thus, to a clear perception of their lower status, through their exclusion from the dining table.

19However, different situations also existed where a few privileged men (and in extremely rare cases even the whole population)19 could share the same food and drink together with their deities. On such occasions, men and supernal beings spent some time together and enjoyed the products of the land cultivated by the first, such task having been entrusted to them by the second.

20Even within the closed circle of those who had the honour of sharing food with the deities, the participants were required to go through several cleansing acts before even touching the food that composed the meal.20 The king and/or the other guests did not just receive the leftovers from the gods’ table but were physically present at the meal, at the same time as the divine hosts—and they had to behave accordingly. It is significant that, although a replacement of the figure of the king was sometimes possible for a few Neo-Assyrian rituals, this was not possible in the case of banquets where the ruler’s presence was essential to savour the honour given to him.21

21By reading attentively all the original written sources from this period, one understands that men and gods had similar tastes: considering the ingredients, the variety and quality of the dishes, the cooking techniques, and the overall behavioural code followed during divine repasts, many similarities are evident between these religious events and the high-status, purely human banquets. Almost all possible edible food was included in the group of products offered to gods inside Neo-Assyrian temples: various kinds of bread and other savoury and sweet baked products, cereal-based staples, meat and fish, soups, vegetables and fruit, sweets, beer, wine, and milk. Altogether, the offerings presented for ceremonial and religious occasions do not appear to have presented much difference from the meals consumed by the élite in secular contexts. The only disparity might be found in the abundance of meat and the variety of the cuts offered within the shrines, and that made the divine mess somewhat more luxurious than the human one—certainly extremely distant from the dining table of common people’s every-day life.22

II. State Cult and Major Festive Meals: šākussu ša šarri and tākultu

22An analysis of the original names attributed to religious performances recorded in the Neo-Assyrian corpus of texts certainly helps in the process of understanding how these events were perceived, and what were the specific features considered as crucial for each performance throughout the religious calendar.

23Three rituals in particular were defined by Assyrians in the first millennium BC as “banquets,” using however different words for each feast. They strictly belonged to the cultural and religious environment of that specific historical period, and through well-defined religious acts they expressed some of the most profound cultural and social beliefs of those individuals who performed them.

24The šākussu ša šarri, literally the “meal of the king,” was served on the occasion of the sacred marriage of Nabû and Tašmetum.23 Assyrian letters sent to the kings Esarhaddon and Aššurbanipal show that this ceremony took place every year, at the beginning of the month Ayyaru (from the 3rd to the 11th day) in Kalkhu. Several other written sources24 mention the same kind of festival but for other divine pairs, performed in various Assyrian cities in different months.

25During this festive period, and in particular on the 5th day of Ayyaru, an elite group of people headed by the temple administrator could enjoy a communal meal—on condition that each diner brought his own food. Apparently, being present was considered as the most fundamental element of the feast: the richness of the menu that was served to guests was less significant.

lú.šáman.^┎lá^┒. meš ša udu. siskur-šú
i-ba-áš-šú-u-ni ep-pa-aš
ša 1 qa ak-li-šú ú-še-el-la-a
ina é ^dag e-kal25

Of the apprentices, whoever has
an offering to present will do so,
and whoever brings one portion of food
may eat it in the temple of Nabû.

26Focus was placed on the act of eating together in the courtyard of the holy shrine, along with the gods—who simultaneously consumed their food a few meters away, in the privacy of their bedroom.

27One text in particular, which is also the only one that explicitly records the term šākussu, provides a little more information about the delicate moment of the meal:

ud.5. kam ša-ku-su ša lugal
ú-šá-ku-lu ^lúḫa-za-nu uš-šab
sag. du ur. maḫ ^gištal-la-ak-ku
ana é. gal ub-bu-lu26

On the fifth day, they will serve
the royal banquet. The “inspector” will attend.
They will bring the lion-head rhyton
and a tallakku-object to the Palace.

28Prestigious vessels were used for these events :27 special lion-head shaped cups appear not only in texts pertaining to religious or ceremonial events, but also in administrative accounts28—witnessing, thus, their widespread use at the king’s court, as confirmed by the iconographic sources and the archaeological evidence found in royal residences of Assyrian capital cities. These rhytons were brought to the king’s court after the meal, placed on the carriers29 that had been used to set up the food during the ceremony: this fact attests once again the connections between temple and palace.

29Even though no other explicit descriptions of shared meals are extant, some direct clues (to begin with the lists of offerings delivered for the celebrations) suggest that a banquet, eaten by the king’s family and by the community of worshippers, was a common feature for sacred marriages of other divine couples, dwelling in different Assyrian shrines. Interestingly, also the purpose of such religious performances was explicitly mentioned in written sources: they were carried out “for the sake of the life of the crown prince”30 and for the health of the king’s other sons.31

30The term šākussu, a Neo-Assyrian spelling of the Akkadian term šūkultu, is quite an unusual one. Derived from the Š-stem of the verbal root akālu ( “to eat”),32 it was mostly used in Middle-Assyrian time: as for the first millennium, it appears only once, in the source mentioned above. Its use in administrative texts and the fact that in this case each participant had to provide his own ration of bread, indicate an original sense of “food” more than of “meal,” as it is in effect reported in the dictionaries.

31Another term, known from a larger number of original sources (administrative accounts, royal inscriptions, ritual texts), shows a similar etymology: it is the word tākultu, also derived from the verb akālu but with the preformative ta- applied to the G-stem, which was used to refer to abstract nouns.33 Its basic meaning was thus “meal”: as such it was used in secular contexts (mostly letters and royal inscriptions) to describe feasts celebrated by the Assyrian king together with his officials and soldiers. When applied to a religious festival, however, the word referred to a major state ritual.34

32The main source permitting knowledge of this event is also the only ritual text that explicitly mentions tākultu together with the name of the ruler who sponsored it, in the final invocation:

a-na ta-di-ni
šá ta-kúl-ti an-ni-ti
^┎a^┒-na ^man.šár-idim-dingir. meš
^┎ku^┒-ru-ub an.šár35

The one who provides
this meal,
Aššur-etel-ilani,
bless, oh Aššur!

33The tablet that conveys these lines (VAT 10126)36 is surely Assyrian: its language shows some clues that are ascribable to the Middle-Assyrian dialect; it was found in Assyria and depicts a ritual to be performed in the temple of Aššur, in the capital city. A few linguistic indications suggest a date for its original drafting that goes back to the Middle-Assyrian period (i.e. 15th–11th centuries BC); however, it is very likely that the origin of this text went further back in time.

34Although its name clearly refers to the aspect of food consumption, VAT 10126 contains only scanty references to offerings or to the act of feeding the gods. This ritual opened with a long invocation to the gods (ll. i 1–6), who were invited to take part in the ceremony and gathered to attend a toast, as the insistent repetition of the imperative form “šitî” (“drink!”) attests. After this introduction, a long list of divine names and other divinised elements is recorded, starting with gods and architectural elements belonging to the city of Aššur (ll. i 7–ii 48) followed by physical and geographical elements of the land of Assyria (ll. iii 2–37). Finally, a long prayer was pronounced (ll. iii 48–iv 27), asking for the blessing of the gods upon the Assyrian ruler.

35Geographical and architectural elements of the land of Aššur were also mentioned37 in a universal assembly that took an even more cosmic character with reference to time (day, month, and year were in fact invoked as well), which extended the validity of this rite throughout the year.

36It is remarkable that gods—not only the anthropomorphic supernal beings, but also images of kings, doors, rooms and courtyards of temples, architectural elements of the city of Aššur together with other natural elements38—were invited to drink, but there was no matching invitation to eat. However, food certainly accompanied libations and toasts, as it is inferable from a passage included in the final section of the text:

šá ta-kúl-ta ši-a-ti
e-pu-šu ninda. meš u a. meš
a-na dingir. meš sum-nu-ni
ar-ka ma-a’-da ra-ap-šá
a-na i-tap-pu-li di-na-niš-šú39

To him, who performs this tākultu-meal
and gives bread and water to the gods,
give (them) back to him long, copious
and wide!

37The allusion to bread and water was the typical “defective writing” that indicated the consumption of a full meal—also used in literary texts. A few lines after the ones just quoted, one finds the requests presented by men as an exchange for the rich meal served to the gods’ assembly: a long reign, health and longevity, priesthood and power for the Assyrian ruler. The deities were also asked to grant rewards to those who attended the whole service: grain, silver, bariku-salt for their food, and oil for their lamps.40 This prayer seems to prove the presence of an audience witnessing the clearing of the tākultu: surely priests and temple personnel were part of the audience but probably also representatives of the social elite.

38Its etymology—the fact that the term tākultu was originally used to identify food stocked in order to hold a banquet—and some internal clues scattered within the lines suggest that this ritual should be interpreted as a ritualised meal in which rich provisions, assembled during the year by the Assyrian administration skilfully led by the king himself, were symbolically returned to the gods.

III. Meals “on Demand”: the qerētu-Rituals

39While the šākussu ša šarri and the tākultu were firmly integrated in the yearly schedule, there was another kind of repast savoured within a religious context that did not have a fixed position in the Assyrian calendar. In fact, the written sources discussed below show that its date could be at the organiser’s discretion—even though whoever wished to hold such a meal inside a temple building had to pay attention to the instructions given by the diviners, who consulted the hemerological texts and provided the appropriate date.

40Royal correspondence attests that even the king had to respect such procedure:

ina ugu e-pa-še ša qa-re-e-ti
ša lugal be-lí iš-pur-an-ni
garza il-qí pa-ar-ṣi
ina iti an-ni-e ṭa-ba
ṭa-ba qa-re-e-tú
a-na e-pa-še
ud.13. kám ud.15. kám
ud.17. kám le-pu-šú41

Concerning the arrangement of the banquet
about which the king, my lord, wrote to me,
if he wants to perform the cult
it is favourable in this month;
it is favourable to arrange the banquet.
Let them arrange it on the 13th, 15th,
or the 17th day.

41Qerētu being the name normally used to refer to banquets in official and literary sources, the main feature of this festival must have been to celebrate a shared meal, although its holding, carrying out, list of guests, and general organisation are not clearly described in the text.42

42All the sources at our disposal show that there was one particular feature pertaining to this ritual performance that made it very different from the above-mentioned tākultu: it was always dedicated to a sole god. Its organisation could take place in temples in different cities of the empire, and “personal” qerētu-festivals held for specific divinities are attested for Tašmetu,43 Nabû,44 Nisaba,45 Enlil,46 and Ištar of Arbela.47 Moreover, hemerologies give indications for a few favourable days in which a generic qarīt ili could be performed.48

43In general, original documents give a view on the official aspects of Assyrian cult: written to serve the royal family and the social elite, they essentially record the most important events, which were sponsored by the king and involved most of the temple personnel—entailing great expenditure of sacrificial animals and luxurious food offerings. For the major part, private cultic practices remain unknown, and the little information available is mainly limited to a few magic rites, relating to the most basic human necessities such as seeking for recovery, safeguard for a new-born child, protection from diseases or calamities, and so on. As far as one can gather from a few hints, mostly included in letters, omina and literary texts, common people’s religion did not differ from the state one much, although it was performed on a smaller scale in terms of quantity, and was more modest in terms of the paraphernalia that were used.49

44The practice of offering a meal to a god inside his “house” was so widespread and significant for the Neo-Assyrian religion, that we also find evidence of a kind of qerētu performed on a smaller scale, by private people in temples. These could be set up in various shrines, usually in open spaces (mostly courtyards), with the assistance of priests, and required the disbursement of bread, beer and at least one sheep: at the end of the religious performance, such foodstuffs remained inside the temples, and were distributed among the clergy. Private qerētu-meals must have served very concrete purposes, and were arranged in order to make sure that the organisers were in the proper conditions to present their requests to the gods. Nevertheless, the acceptance of food and drink by the gods somehow forced them to grant to humans their wishes.

45Two letters mentioning banquets arranged by private people interestingly always refer to a married couple as organisers of the event; whereas one of them is quite synthetic and refers just to garments (maybe donated as gifts after the meal),50 the second one provides more details. This long text was sent by the exorcist Urad-Gula to the Assyrian king (possibly Aššurbanipal) in the attempt to rehabilitate his name after having been expelled from the group of scholars working inside the royal court.51 The place and aim of the repast are recorded: the setting chosen was Ištar’s abode in Kalkhu, and the purpose was the request for a progeny:

ina é-kid-mur-ri e-ta-rab qa-re-e-tu e-ta-pa-áš
mí ši-i ta-ad-dal-ḫa-an-ni 5 mu.an.na. meš la-a
mu-ʾa-a-tu la ba-la-ṭu ù dumu-a-a la-áš-šú52

I have visited the Kidmuru temple and arranged a banquet,
and yet my wife has embarrassed me; for five years she has been
neither dead nor alive, and I have no son.

46Private banquets must have been, thus, strictly bound to concrete worries and fears of the common’s daily life, mostly related to health, money, and the family. This hypothesis also seems validated by two ritual texts that provide detailed instructions for the organisation of similar events:53 their concrete daily use is confirmed by their style, which is both prescriptive and descriptive, including pronouns that continuously shift between the second and third person-singular. They were probably drafted because private devotees, just as for rituals involving the ruler, had to follow a severe procedure in order to obtain what they were asking of the gods. They were not allowed to act alone but had to have both cooperation and assistance from the ordinary temple personnel. Priests and singers were always mentioned and they most likely received gifts as payment for their work.

47The reason that urged someone to organise a banquet for a specific god was usually a request for health, thus ritual texts (such as SAA 20, 30) mention the temple of the healing goddess, Gula, as the chosen place for its performance. The three main performers appearing are the “master of the banquet” (en—qa-ri-te), the “officiant” (en—garza), and at least one priest (lú.sanga): they all actively took part in the cult, performing offerings and presenting gifts to the deity, in exactly the same way as during ritual meals organised by the king. One text (SAA 20, 31) clearly proves that a singer (lú.nar) accompanied the whole performance with litanies and cultic songs, and also that the one who offered the whole meal (en—udu. siskur), was personally and physically involved.

48The ritual took place in the morning and the dishes presented for a “private” qerētu-meal were rather repetitive and affordable by all. Even though the list of ingredients may seem quite long,54 a closer look reveals their simplicity: they included salt, flour, loaves of bread, oil, fruit, honey, and barley, with wine, and beer as beverages. Meat is also mentioned, but the cuts and the species listed in these two rituals are far off from the luxury products presented at rituals carried out under the king’s sponsoring. In one text, a single sheep sufficed (SAA 20, 30), four spring lambs and five ducks were also mentioned. One very interesting detail is represented by a clause reported in one tablet, which refers to the possible social status of the offerer:

šum-ma nun šu-ú tu. [gur₄]. mušen a-na ma-aq-lu-te i-qa-lu
šum-ma muš-ke-nu šu-ú šà-bi udu. nitá i-qa-lu55

If he is a nobleman, he burns a turtledove as a burnt offering.
If he is a commoner, he burns the heart of a ram.

49Thus, everyone—be he a wealthy, influential man or a poor individual— could get closer to the gods by means of a shared repast. The consumption of food and drink by the men involved in this ritual performance is confirmed by various passages in which someone “gives to drink”56 the contents of various vessels to another participant.

50Finally, the apotropaic nature of these events is reflected in the acts carried out by the cultic performers, all aiming at ensuring physical and moral purity: humans and gods repeatedly washed their hands, the sacrifice was involved in a specific rite during which hands were first brought together and then symbolically released, the singer invoked the gods with hymns that called them “the strongest one,” “judge of the world,” “dispeller of darkness”57—while Gula was asked to give the devotee well-being, life, fame and offspring, and to walk behind him, as a protection.

IV. How Did Gods Eat?

51We know that some men were granted the privilege of eating while toasting with one or more gods, having entered, with all the indispensable preventative measures, inside their holy homes. Although these humans certainly enjoyed and ate the food set on the table, one may legitimately ask what happened to the elaborate dishes and lavish food and drink that was donated to the gods—or, rather, to the gods’ statues.

52The act of feeding the deities undoubtedly remained the most important purpose of every-day divine meals in ancient Mesopotamia throughout the history of the region; however, despite all the written sources at our disposal from the beginning of the third up to the end of the first millennium BC, we still do not know if and how the temple personnel maintained the fiction that divine meals were consumed by the statues of the gods. But was it a fiction in the first place? Did those people really believe that some inanimate icons could “take life” and truly consume a whole meal composed by several courses and first-quality beer and wine?

53Not one Neo-Assyrian text, nor any other Mesopotamian written source dating to any other historical period, provide a clear answer about how gods could effectively eat their meals. The question is not a purely modern query; one already finds traces of such issue in ancient times, and a first, quite fictional answer is preserved in the 14th chapter of the Biblical book of Daniel, known with the name Bel and the Dragon.58 Here, the clash between two opposite visions is depicted: on the one side, there is the traditional and apparently quite naïve belief instigated by the clergy which even misleads the king Cyrus. On the other side, one finds the wise and realistic perspective expressed by the prophet Daniel which prevails:

When the king asked him “Why do you not adore Bel?” Daniel replied: “Because I worship not idols made with hands, but only the living God who made heaven and earth and has dominion over all mankind.” Then the king continued: “You do not think Bel is a living god? Do you not see how much he eats and drinks every day?” Daniel began to laugh. “Do not be deceived, O king,” he said: “it is only clay inside and bronze outside; it has never taken any food or drink.”59

54According to this account, the seventy priests serving in Babylon within the temple of the god Marduk (called Bel according to the Biblical tradition) entered the most secret room of the shrine through a hidden door each night and, together with their families, consumed all the food offerings left there by the king. The words pronounced by Cyrus prove that Babylonian gods (together with their Near Eastern “colleagues”) were believed to really ingest the delicacies that were presented to them.60

55Although the histories included in the account of Bel and the Dragon must be considered in the light of their historical background—they were certainly written with the purpose of rejecting idolatry—, this particular parable may also be considered as a later attempt to answer a question that resounded for a few generations. Apparently, the practice of hiding the gods from human eyes during the ritual of the divine meal arose only from the Neo- and Late-Babylonian periods onwards (that is to say, from the 6th century BC), when curtains were used to enable priests to remove the trays placed before the divine emblems and statues.61 There are not as many references to curtains in the Neo-Assyrian texts, even though a few hints suggest that they were already in use in the 7th century; however, it is noteworthy to mention that divine meals never took place behind curtains in the earlier period.62

56Gods partook of meals through the physical presence of their icons and statues, and in order to be able to enjoy food and drink, they had to go through two specific rituals, designated as “mouth-washing” (mīs pî) and “mouth-opening” (pīt pî).63 During the first one, various fragrant substances (honey, ghee, cedar, and cypress) were applied to the mouth and nose of the divine emblems, so as to sensitise them and enable them to eat and smell. The second ritual was performed with water enhanced with various purifying agents, and aimed at achieving the cleanness required for the following religious stages.64

57The centrality of the “mouth-washing” and “mouth-opening” rituals within the frame of religious meals is attested by the formulas pronounced by the priest who performed them; one incantation is particularly explicit in this respect, stating that:

[ṣa^!-lam^!] an-nu-u ina la pi-it pi-i qut-ri-in-na ul iṣ-ṣi-in a-ka-la ul ik-kal me-e ul i-šat65

This statue without its mouth opened cannot smell incense, cannot eat food, or drink water.

58Thanks to a set of well-defined and religiously justified cultural practices, not only statues representing anthropomorphic beings but also non-humanlike ones could be enabled to accept, enjoy and taste the food humans offered them.66 This particular moment, i.e. the favourable receiving of the offerings, was what really mattered to the ancient Near Eastern devotees. There was no need to hide the fact that edibles did not really “disappear” in the stomachs of their gods but were instead redistributed among members of the royal family or of the local clergy;67 what really counted was that the whole event would trigger a series of causes and effects which had tangible outcomes on those who performed the ritual.

59The anthropologist A. Gell has convincingly suggested that commensality must be considered as a tool for recognising the role of non-human entities within the human and social universe. The Neo-Assyrian idea of agency was, in turn, tightly bound to the concept of causation: serving food to an inanimate being had sense because it prompted a causal sequence, which had an evident effect on human life :68

Should we say that the object is animate not because we attribute biological life to it, but subjectivity/intentionality, which is something quite different? […] It is surely irrational, or at least strange, to speak to, to offer food to, dress and bathe a mere piece of sculpture, rather than a living breathing human being. And so it is: those who do these things are just as aware of the “strangeness” of their behaviour as we are, but they also hold, which we do not, that the cult of the idol is religiously efficacious, and will result in beneficial consequences for themselves and the masters they serve in their capacity as priests.69

60In his work, the scholar has not explicitly mentioned ancient Mesopotamia, but discusses similar Egyptian religious practice:

Receiving food offerings is how the Egyptian gods ate their food. This is not to say that the act of feeding the god by placing an offering before it is not symbolic in the sense of “meaningful”, but the “meaning” stemmed from the real (causal) outcome of this act of feeding; the god was no longer hungry. The essence of idolatry is that it permits real physical interactions to take place between persons and divinities. To treat such interactions as “symbolic” is to miss the point.70

61Gods themselves described in very bodily terms their meals: a reprimand addressed to Esarhaddon, for example, records an explicit and compelling request made by the goddess Ištar:

[at]-^┎ta^┒ a-na a-a-ši mi-nu ta-di-na [a]-^┎ka^┒-li ša qa-ri-te
^┎la^┒- [áš-šú] ša ak la é—dingir
^┎ak^┒- [ka]-^┎li^┒ a-ka-li
ak-^┎ka-li^┒ ka-a-si
ma-a ina pa-ni a-da-gal
igi.2 ina ugu-ḫi ak-tar-ar
ma-a ket-tu-ma 1 (bán) a-kal a-ṣu-di
1 (bán) dug.ma-si-tú ša kaš dùg.ga
ke-in ú.ur-qí a-ku-su
la-áš-ši-a ina pi-ia la-áš-kun
lu-mal-li ka-a-su ina ugu-ḫi la-as-si
la-la-a-a lu-tir-ra71

[As for yo]u, what have you given to me?
[There is no fo]od for my banquet,
as if there were no temple;
I [am depri]ved of my fo] od,
I am d [ep]rived of my cup!
I am waiting for them,
I have cast my eye upon them.
Verily, establish a seah of bowl food
and a one-seah flagon of sweet beer!
Let me take and put in my mouth
vegetables and soup,
let me fill the cup and drink from it,
let me restore my charms!

V. Conclusion

62Divine meals eaten daily in shrines scattered all over the land of the Neo-Assyrian empire were admittedly consumed by the gods alone: they aimed at underlining the differences between deities and men, showing respect and acceptance of the status quo while laying at the same time the foundations of a reciprocal relation. However, written sources from this period show that there certainly were also a few instances in which men were invited to such meals, as guests of the gods. These events, limited and restricted to privileged individuals, were considered extremely significant and transmitted to their protagonists and to their audiences a powerful message.

63Human and divine worlds were indissolubly interrelated, and continuously exercised an influence on one another.72 Banquets held within a ceremonial context and in religious spaces maintained an evident civic character and showed frequent references to royalty. The Neo-Assyrian ruler was always at the centre of the stage, playing the leading role as provider, main performer, and highest-status guest of such meals, and it was upon him that the blessings of the gods were directed. Similarly to what happened in literary texts, also in real life one of the main outcome of repasts set up inside the holy shrines was the discussing and determining of someone’s good fate, in particular towards the one (s) who provided the delicacies donated to the gods.

64Moreover, in first millennium Assyria, rituals could be—and indeed were—used by the central administration, within the wider frame of royal propaganda: these events were in fact an occasion to display the position of the king at the apex of the social pyramid—that is to say, as near to the divine realm as possible.

65The qerētu-ritual occurs just once in later Hellenistic sources but the tākultu is not attested at all.73 This fact, together with the evidence that the expression šākussu ša šarri is attested exclusively in this period, prove beyond any doubt the profound Assyrian nature of these events, and their tight connections with the cultural environment in which they were performed. They can be considered by all means as one of the most sophisticated expressions of the intertwined system that linked the Neo-Assyrian religion to the central state.74

66Rituals use a multisensorial language to reach different audiences, and have a strong social impact on the human group that performs or attends them.75 In first-millennium Assyria, gods might choose to be the exclusive beneficiaries of all the food presented as offerings in their shrines, or else they could invite, on their turn, human beings to sit at their mess.76 In such cases, men could feel and appreciate the approval of their deities, living thus for a while the illusion of being their equals—since, anthropologically speaking, sharing the same food means sharing the same life.77

67The rituals discussed in these pages were real moments of commensality: they implied physical interaction among partakers, who acknowledged themselves as hosts or guests of the event. Banquets and other shared meals eaten by men and gods, together, within a religious sphere, were clearly intended to create a special link between all participants, be they human or “super”-human.

Abbreviations

68K. = Kuyunjik (Museum siglum of the British Museum in London).

69KAR = E. Ebeling, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur religiösen Inhalts, vol. I–II, Leipzig, 1919–1923.

70ND = Field numbers of tablets excavated at Nimrud.

71SAA 3 = A. Livingstone, Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea, State Archives of Assyria 3, Helsinki, 1989.

72SAA 7 = F.M. Fales, J.N. Postgate, Imperial Administrative Records, vol. I: Palace and Temple Administration, State Archives of Assyria 7, Helsinki, 1992.

73SAA 9 = S. Parpola, Assyrian Prophecies, State Archives of Assyria 9, Helsinki, 1997.

74SAA 10 = S. Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars, State Archives of Assyria 10, Helsinki, 1993.

75SAA 13 = S.W. Cole, P. Machinist, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Priests to Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, State Archives of Assyria 13, Helsinki, 1998.

76SAA 20 = S. Parpola, Royal Rituals and Cultic Texts, State Archives of Assyria 20, Helsinki, 2017.

77STT = O. Gurney, J. Finkelstein, The Sultantepe Tablets, vols. I–II, London, 1957–1964.

78VAT = Vorderasiatische Abteilung. Tontafeln (Museum siglum of the Vorderasiatisches Museum, Berlin)