Nadav Na’aman, «The Israelite-Judahite Struggle for the Patrimony of Ancient Israel», Vol. 91 (2010) 1-23
The article addresses the controversial issue of the formation of "biblical Israel" in biblical historiography. It begins by presenting the political-cultural struggle between Assyria and Babylonia in the second and first millennia BCE, in part over
the question of ownership of the cultural patrimony of ancient Mesopotamia. It goes on to examine relations between Judah and Israel and compares them to those between Assyria and Babylonia. It then suggests that the adoption of the Israelite
identity by Judah, which took place during the reign of Josiah as part in his cultic reform, was motivated by the desire to take possession of the highly prestigious heritage of Israel, which had remained vacant since that kingdom’s annexation by
Assyria in 720 BCE.
7
THE ISRAELITE-JUDAHITE STRUGGLE
As early as the third millennium BCE, the city of Nippur held the
supreme religious position in Mesopotamia. Its god, Enlil, was
worshipped as the supreme deity in the Sumerian pantheon, and the
city was seen as the place where the gods assembled to take
important decisions. Rulers seeking supreme power in Mesopotamia
claimed that they were favoured by the god Enlil. Nippur bore the
epithet Dur-anki — “the bond of heaven and earth/underworld†—
and was regarded as the centre of the universe 16. The concept of the
“ navel of the world†refers to the “sacred hill†(DU6.KÙ) — a
primeval hill which formed the nucleus from where all things
originated, and was the bond linking heaven and earth. This axis
mundi was the site of Ekur, the temple of Enlil in Nippur 17.
With the rise of Babylon as Babylonia’s political capital in the
first half of the second millennium BCE, Nippur maintained its
supreme religious status, and the god Enlil continued to head the
Mesopotamian pantheon. Hammurabi’s conquests (c. 1728-1686)
made Babylon the centre of a great kingdom, and his victories
raised the status of Marduk, the local god of Babylon. But this
promotion features mainly in contemporary royal inscriptions of
Babylon, while documents from the Old Babylonian period show
that Marduk did not occupy a prominent position at that time in the
Sumerian-Babylonian pantheon 18. Babylon’s political dominance of
W. G . LAMBERT , “Nippur in Ancient Ideologyâ€, Nippur in the
16
C e n t e n n i a l . Papers Read at the XXXVe R e n c o n t r e Assyriologique
Internationale, (ed. M. DEJONG ELLIS) (Philadelphia, PA 1992) 119-120;
J.G. WESTENHOLZ, “The Theological Foundation of the City, the Capital City
and Babylonâ€, Capital Cities. Urban Planning and Spiritual Dimensions.
Proceedings of the Symposium Held on May 27-29, 1996, Jerusalem,
Israel, (ed. J.G. WESTENHOLZ) (Jerusalem 1996) 45-46; S.W. COLE, Nippur in
Late Assyrian Times c. 755-612 BC (SAAS 4 ; Helsinki 1996) 7-12;
W. SALLABERGER, “Nippur als religiöses Zentrum Mesopotamiens im
historischen Wandelâ€, Die orientalische Stadt. Kontinuität, Wandel, Bruch. 1.
I n t e r n a t i o n a l e s Colloquium der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft (ed.
G. Wilhelm) (Saarbrücken 1997) 147-168.
S.M. MAUL, “Die altorientalische Hauptstadt – Abbild und Nabel der
17
Welt â€, Die orientalische Stadt (ed. G. WILHELM) 114-122; A.R. GEORGE,
“ ‘Bond of the Lands’: Babylon, the Cosmic Capitalâ€, ibid., 128-133.
For the rise of Marduk to the top of the Babylonian pantheon, see
18
W. SOMMERFELD, Der Aufstieg Marduks. Die Stellung Marduks in der
babylonischen Religion des zweiten Jahrtausends v. Chr. (AOAT 213 ; Kevelaer
– Neukirchen-Vluyn 1982); idem, “Mardukâ€, RLA 7 (1987-1990) 360-370;