possessions stand in direct relation to their importance and role in the social and
ideological network of the city. Those goddesses who boasted of a cult-place in the
king’s palace were apparently linked to royalty. Those who displayed, in their own
temple, the lama-god, were directly connected with the king’s well-being and those
who guarded his symbols of power were in charge of the exercising of his power.
Those who possessed their own administrative buildings or farms seem to have been
economically independent. All of them fulfilled functions for sections of the population
other than the ruling one.
When looking at the personnel engaged in the various temples, it is noteworthy
that we see a division of men and women. For example, in Nippur’s Inanna-Ishtar
temple, men and women working in the mills had separate rooms. When men and
women had clearly separate religious activities, this would indicate that such a division
would also have been practised in secular life. We may, however, not jump to the
conclusion that in Mesopotamia a discrimination against women was accepted. It is
particularly notable that some of the goddesses had a very powerful position. It is true
that some major gods had rather insignificant spouses, but also the opposite is true.
The husband of the healing goddess Ninisinna is usually taken to be Pabilsag, who
already in early times replaced Ningirsu and later Ninurta as her husband. During
the second millennium BChe is encountered as husband to other healing goddesses.
The husband of Ninhursaga (the king’s wet-nurse) is the rather pale Shulpa’e whose
role is difficult to reconstruct in myths and hymns. In addition, the equal division of
power between Enlil and Ninlil does not support the idea of a society with widespread
discrimination against women – at least not in the upper class.
A shining example of of women’s power is Inanna-Ishtar. Her personality is so
sparkling and many-sided that a male companion automatically shrinks in her shadow.
Her function in the king’s legitimation is proof of the perceived necessity to grant
power to a female deity. Inanna-Ishtar’s legendary adventures and her control of the
fertility of the whole country are indications that the female principle at times occupied
centre stage.
It can also be noted that when gods and goddesses are depicted as being wedded
to one another, very rarely are we confronted with divine children. The kinship terms
father, mother, brother, sister and child are frequently used in legends and hymns,
but it would be misleading to interpret such terms in a strict genealogical sense. It
is to be assumed that these kinship terms are used metaphorically, indicating a certain
hierarchy among the gods.
CONCLUSIONIn this chapter we have begun with the assumption that the realms beyond our
physical world are a reflection of the total of human experiences. During the third,
second and first millennia BC, Mesopotamia had a complex society, bound together
through an intricate net of relationships. Cities could only exist by virtue of an
administrative apparatus that was hierarchically maintained. That is why the world
of the deities was also hierarchical and complex.
We have also noted that the gods do not present an exact mirror image of human
beings: they live in an ideal world, they do not toil. Indeed, it is clearly stated in
— The role and function of goddesses in Mesopotamia —