Despite its importance in Sumerian art, the palm vase libation is not mentioned in
any hymn or myth. The omission is odd because the prominence of this image implies
a fundamental duty of kingship. The visual repertoire of Neo-Sumerian royalty
includes scenes of processions, sacrifices, musical performances, and building activities.
However, on royal monuments with a single scene, the palm vase libation is the choice
of subject, as on two uninscribed royal stelae from Nippur and Susa, stylistically dated
to Ur III or shortly thereafter (Van Buren 1952 : 438 ; Harper et al. 1992 : 169 – 171 ). The
palm vase libation is performed twice by Ur-Namma in Register II of Side A of the
Stele of Ur-Namma (Figure 11. 1 ) and the same act is depicted somewhere outdoors on
Side B. Seals associated with rulers also feature this scene (Delaporte 1920 : 13 , T. 110 ;
Winter 1987 a: 67 , 78 ; Nagel et al. 2005 : 259 – 252 , figs. 217 , 231 , 233 ; Suter 2010 : 338 ,
fig. 316 ). The seal impression of a priest named Lugal-Engardu, for example, which
references the ruler Amar-Suen as the “beloved of Inanna,” depicts a figure in the cap
and robe of the monarch, pouring double streams onto a palm vase. Inanna stands on
the other side, extending the rod and ring toward the vase.
Little has been written about the palm watering scene. Elizabeth van Buren ( 1954 :
228 – 229 ) proposed a mimetic rain-making ceremony performed before deities whose
help was solicited, but most analysts have viewed the libation as an offering. However,
several considerations indicate that the palm vase libation is a more complex activity
than a drink offering. If the depicted act is an offering, why does the vase usually
contain a palm? The unnaturally tiny palm cannot be a real fruiting tree. The palm’s
unnatural symmetry and its high center of gravity suggest an object fabricated from a
stiff but light substance such as wood. The importance of this object is indicated by
its placement at the center of the composition, where it interrupts the line of sight
between the ruler and the god.
The watering of an artificial tree seems more explicable when notice is taken of the
allusive character of the ritual equipment. The cylindrical shape of the Ur III pouring
vessel and the double entendre of water/semen (both ain the Sumerian language) are
suggestive of insemination. The palm’s overall shape, an erect middle element above
and between two droopy fruit bulbs, is also evocative, although the image poses a
contradiction: the sex of the stylized palm is feminine but its form is masculine. The
rationale for the tree-vase comes into focus if one considers that vessels often symbolize
wombs (Drower 1956 : 3 ; Dasen and Ducaté-Paarmann 2006 ), while Inanna, a deity
whose behavior and dress is outwardly masculine despite her biological femaleness, is
consistently associated with the palm in Mesopotamian architecture, art, and texts.
Inanna’s association with the palm is also semantic since her name (usually translated
as nin-anak“Lady of Heaven”) is homonymous with nin-annak“Lady of the Date
Clusters” (Jacobsen 1976 : 36 ; Abusch 2000 : 23 ).
The visual and semantic connotations of the ritual equipment and the promi-
nence of this scene in royal Sumerian art suggest that what has been understood as a
drink offering is actually a symbolic ceremony that simulates intercourse, a ritual
sometimes witnessed or enabled by the city’s divine patron. The womb-vases, per-
sonalized by palms, would not merely have symbolized Inanna. They would have
functioned as her epiphany, enabling her to manifest and personally delight in the
attentions of the ruler. In a few cases, particularly at Lagash, texts allude to rulers
marrying a goddess other than Inanna (Westenholz 2000 : 81 – 82 ). This deviation in
the textual record is matched by a similar deviation in the visual testimony; for
–– The Sumerian sacred marriage ––