(divine–human), and theogomic (divine–divine) unions. This variability of definition
makes the Sacred Marriage a suspect empirical concept.
The present study begins, therefore, by setting aside the mega-category of “sacred
marriage.” If the term is to be retained, it needs to be used more judiciously, not as a
category that encompasses every union conceivably possessing a sacral character but
as a familiar name for a uniquely Mesopotamian institution whose native referent
has been hard to pin down, namely, the poorly understood relationship between
Mesopotamian rulers and the goddess Inanna. The sections that follow examine, in
turn: 1 ) previously identified texts that reference a marital union between ruler and
goddess; 2 ) frames of reference provided by images and equipment; and 3 ) additional
texts indicated by the material evidence.THE TRADITIONAL CANON
Royal inscriptions provide a stream of contemporary attestation, from the Early
Dynastic down to the Neo-Sumerian era, that the concept of a marital union between
the king and Inanna was a fixture of early Mesopotamian kingship. The inscriptions
do not tell us how such unions were achieved, but they proclaim a tradition that was
official and public. The earliest text, the legend on the ED III seal of Mesannepada of
Ur, reads: Mesannepada lugal Kisˇ dam nu-gig“Mesannepada, king of Kish, spouse of
the nu-gig.” The nu-gigwho is named in superior relation to this ruler was not his
everyday wife but Inanna (Marchesi 2004 : 178 n. 145 ), referenced by a title connoting
holiness and non-normative gender that has no modern equivalent. The inscription on
the Stele of the Vultures names Eannatum as the dam ki-ag 2 dInanna-(ka)-ke 4 “beloved
spouse of Inanna” and elaborates that “Inanna, because she loved him, gave to him the
kingship of Kish and the ensi-ship of Lagash” (Sefati 1998 : 32 ). The goddess Inanna
named in these royal inscriptions was the morning and evening star (Venus). This
major figure in the Sumerian pantheon encompassed polarities such as love/war and
male/female who possessed the power to invert opposites. Her worship is attested in
the earliest texts from Uruk (the literature on Inanna is extensive; for a spectrum see
NIN: Journal for Gender Studies in Antiquity 2000 ).
Opinion has been divided as to whether the ED inscriptions prove the practice of
the Sacred Marriage in the third millennium or whether titles such as “beloved of
Inanna” are merely honorific. The tradition of designating the ruler as the “beloved” or
“spouse” of Inanna continued from the Akkadian to the Isin-Larsa dynasties (see Sefati
1998 : 32 , 38 ; Westenholz 2000 : 81 – 82 ; Lapinkivi 2008 : 20 ), but in the Ur III and Isin-
Larsa periods, different genres supplement the inscriptions. Compositions that allude
to a sexual union between Inanna and the ruler include the royal hymns of Ur-Namma,
Sˇulgi, Sˇu-Suen, Iddin-dagan, and Isˇme-dagan, as well as several generic compositions
(Sefati 1998 ). When specified, the encounter between the ruler and goddess often takes
place at the door of the Gipar storehouse on the occasion of the New Year. The hymns
supply descriptive details, mentioning processions with cultic personnel, banquets, and
gifts presented to the goddess, and the bathing and adornment of the principals. The
hymns that have attracted the most attention, Sˇulgi Xand Iddin-dagan A, describe the
goddess reveling in being bathed and sexually pleasured by the ruler. Other hymns
(which describe the goddess with epithets such as “the wet ground,” “the channel with
sparkling streams,” and “the true plant who mates with the shepherd”) have impressed
some reviewers as not very erotic (Frymer-Kensky 2000 : 91 ).
–– Kathleen McCaffrey ––