본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

고대 메소포타미아의 신왕사상

Divine Kingship in Ancient Mesopotamia

배철현
한국서양고대역사문화학회 (THE KOREAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE WESTERN ANCIENT HISTORY AND CULTURE)|2009.06|서양고대사연구 (The Journal of Classical Studies)|제24호|pp. 35-66|DOI 10.20975/jcskor.2009..24.35

0

조회

0

다운로드

13

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

메소포타미아(Mesopotamia)영웅숭배(Hero Worship)지배자숭배(Ruler Worship)‘엔’(EN)‘루갈’(LUGAL)‘샤룸’(Sharrum)길가메쉬(Gilgamesh)나람신(Naram-Sin)함무라비(Hammurabi)
주제분류역사학

초록

Unlike ancient Egypt, ancient Mesopotamians did not regard their kings as divine. Divine kingship in Mesopotamia should be analyzed in the specific historical contexts. Divine kingship was introduced by Shulgi, the second ruler in Ur III dynasty to strengthen his imperialistic ambitions. Mesoptamian kingship is sacred but under special historical circumstances. Rather, it is illuminating to trace various terminologies concerning ‘king’: EN, LUGAL and sharum. EN seems originally to have been used to designate a high priest or priestess of a Sumerian city-state’s patron-deity. It is the original title of the ruler of Uruk. In [Gilgamesh Epic], Gilgamesh is a typical EN with dual functions: hieros and heroic. He can be a high priest as well as a charismatic military leader under emergency. In [Victory Stele of Naram-Sin], the Akkadian sovereign is LUGAL. He wears a conical helmet with horns - a symbol traditionally the privilege of the gods - and is armed with a large bow and an axe. This victorious ascension chiseled in stone thus celebrates a sovereign who considers himself on an equal footing with the gods. In official inscriptions, Naram-Sin’s name was therefore preceded with a divine determinative. He pushed back the frontiers of the empire farther than they had ever been, from Ebla in Syria to Susa in Elam, and led his army “where no other king had gone before him.” He now appears as a universal monarch, as proclaimed by his official title “King of the Four Regions” - namely, of the whole world. [Code of Hammurabi] describes Hammurabi as ‘sharrum’ who was selected by General Assembly of gods in order to demonstrate justice within the land and to improve the welfare of the people. There is nothing divine in Hammurabi, except he was endowed the power of ruling people on behalf of gods.

Abstract

Unlike ancient Egypt, ancient Mesopotamians did not regard their kings as divine. Divine kingship in Mesopotamia should be analyzed in the specific historical contexts. Divine kingship was introduced by Shulgi, the second ruler in Ur III dynasty to strengthen his imperialistic ambitions. Mesoptamian kingship is sacred but under special historical circumstances. Rather, it is illuminating to trace various terminologies concerning ‘king’: EN, LUGAL and sharum. EN seems originally to have been used to designate a high priest or priestess of a Sumerian city-state’s patron-deity. It is the original title of the ruler of Uruk. In [Gilgamesh Epic], Gilgamesh is a typical EN with dual functions: hieros and heroic. He can be a high priest as well as a charismatic military leader under emergency. In [Victory Stele of Naram-Sin], the Akkadian sovereign is LUGAL. He wears a conical helmet with horns - a symbol traditionally the privilege of the gods - and is armed with a large bow and an axe. This victorious ascension chiseled in stone thus celebrates a sovereign who considers himself on an equal footing with the gods. In official inscriptions, Naram-Sin’s name was therefore preceded with a divine determinative. He pushed back the frontiers of the empire farther than they had ever been, from Ebla in Syria to Susa in Elam, and led his army “where no other king had gone before him.” He now appears as a universal monarch, as proclaimed by his official title “King of the Four Regions” - namely, of the whole world. [Code of Hammurabi] describes Hammurabi as ‘sharrum’ who was selected by General Assembly of gods in order to demonstrate justice within the land and to improve the welfare of the people. There is nothing divine in Hammurabi, except he was endowed the power of ruling people on behalf of gods.

참고문헌 (45)

  1. L. de Heusch, "Form of Sacralized Power in Africa, in: The Character of Kingship" (2005), Berg
  2. Henri Frankfort, "Kingship and the Gods: A Study of Ancient Eastern Religion as the Integration of Society and Nature" (1948), University of Chicago Press
  3. Norman Yoffee, "Myths of the Archaic State: Evolution of the Earliest Cities, States, and Civilizations" (2004), Cambridge Press
  4. H. Spencer, "The Study of Sociology", pp.30~37 (1894)
  5. G. W. F. Hegel, "The Philosophy of History, tr. R. S. Hartman, Liberal of Liberal Arts", pp.39~40 (1953), Bobbs Merrill
  6. S. Hook, "The Hero in History", pp.154~ (1955), Beacon Press
  7. J. Pelikan, "Jesus through the Centuries" (1921), Yale University Press
  8. A. Schweizer, "The Quest of the Historical Jesus, tr. W. Montgomery" (1961), Macmillan
  9. C. W. Whitman, "The Heroic Paradox", pp.21~22 (1982), Cornell University Press
  10. E. B. Taylor, "Primitive Culture, 1st. ed vol. I", pp.254~255 (1871), Murray
  11. Johann Georg von Hahn, "History of Prose Fiction" (1888), Bell
  12. A. Nutt, "The Aryan Expulsion and Return Formula in the Folk and Hero Tales of the Celts", Folk lore Record, 1, pp.1~44 (1881)
  13. V. Propp, "Morphology of the Folktale 2nd. ed." (1968), University of Texas Press
  14. O. Rank, "The Myth of the Birth of the Hero" (1914), Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease Publishing
  15. S. Freud, "The Interpretation of Dreams", pp.436~ (1929), Harcourt
  16. J. Campbell, "The Hero with a Thousand Faces, 2nd ed" (1972), Princeton University Press
  17. L. Raglan, "The Hero" (1936), Methuen
  18. "Death and Rebirth" (1945), Watts
  19. "The Origins of Religion" (1949), Watts
  20. Dwight W. Young, "The Incredible Regnal Spans of Kish I in the Sumerian King List", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 50, pp.23~35 (1991)
  21. Piotr Michalowski, "History as Charter: Some Observations on the Sumerian King List", Journal of the American Oriental Society, 103(1), pp.237~248 (1983)
  22. M. B. Rowton, "The Date of the Sumerian King List", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 19, pp.156~162 (1960)
  23. William W. Hallo, "The Limits of Skepticism", Journal of the American Oriental Society, 110, pp.187~199 (1990)
  24. Th. Jacobsen, "Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 2, pp.159~172 (1943)
  25. C. Miguel, "Reading Gilgameš", Aula Orientalis, (17-18), pp.179~189 (1999)
  26. J. S. Cooper, "Gilgamesh and Akka: A Review Article", Journal of Cuneiform Studies, 33, pp.224~239 (1987)
  27. D. Katz, "Gilgames and Akka: Was Uruk Ruled by Two Assembles?", Revue d'Assyriologie et d'Archeologie orientale, 81, pp.105~114 (1987)
  28. H. L. J. Vanstiphout, "Towards a Reading of “Gilgamesh And Agga", Aula Orientalis, 5, pp.129~141 (1987)
  29. B. Alster, "The Mythology of Mourning", Acta Sumerologica, 5, pp.1~16 (1983)
  30. A. Cavigneaux, "La fin de Gilgameš, Enkidu et les Enfres d'après les manuscrits d'Ur et de Meturan (Textes de Tell Haddad VIII)", Iraq, (62) (2000)
  31. A. Geroge, "The Epic of Gilgamesh. The Babylonian Epic Poem and Other Texts in Akkadian and Sumerian", pp.175~195 (1999), Allen Lane The Penguin Press
  32. A. Shaffer, "Sumerian Sources of Tablet XII of the Epic of Gilgamesh", 석사, pp.1963
  33. C. Wilcke, "Kollationene zu den sumerischen literarischen Texten aus Nippur in der Hilprecht Sammlung Jena", pp.19~21 (1976), Akademie-Verlag
  34. W. H. Ph. Roemer, "Das sumerische Kurzepos ‘Bilgamesh und Akka’, Alter Orient und Altes Testament 209.I" (1980), Verlag Butzon & Bercker
  35. D. Katz, "Gilgamesh and Akka. Library of Oriental Texts. 1" (1993), Styx Publications
  36. A. Cavigneaux, "Gilgameš et la Mort. Texts de Tell Haddad VI, avec un appendice sur les textes funéraires sumériens, in: Cuneiform Monographs, 19" (2000), Styx Publications
  37. S. N. Kramer, "The Death of Gilgamesh", Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 94, pp.2~12 (1944)
  38. A. Cavigneaux, "Gilgameš et Taureau de Ciel (Šul󰠏mè󰠏kam): Textes des Tell Haddad IV", Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale, 87, pp.97~129 (1993)
  39. C. Wilcke, "Politische Opposition nach sumerischen Quellen: der Konflikt zwischen Königtum und RatSBVersammlung. Literaturwerke als politische Tendenzschriften, in: In La voix de l'opposition en Mésopotamie. Colloque organisé par l'Institut des Hautes Études de Belgique, 19 et 20 mars 1973", pp.37~65 (1973), Institut des Hautes Études de Belgique
  40. Benjamin R. Foster, "The Sargonic Victory Stele from Tello", Iraq, 47, pp.17~36 (1985)
  41. Agge Westenhotz, "The World View of Sargonic Officials, in: Il pimo impero universale: Structture, ideologia, tradizioni", pp.143~163 (1993)
  42. J.A. Brinkman, "Appendix: Mesopotamian Chronology of the Historical Period, in: Ancient Mesopotamian: Portrait of a Dead Civiliztion, by. A. Leo Oppenheim", pp.336~348 (1964), University of Chicago
  43. I. Winter, "Sex, Rhetoric and Public Movement: The Alluring Body of the Male Ruler in Mesopotamia, in: Aspects of Bureaucracy in the Ancient Near East", pp.11~26 (1996), University of Cambridge Press
  44. W. Lambert, "Kingship in Ancient Mesopotamia(King and Messiah in Israel and the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar)", Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement, (270), pp.54~70 (1998), Sheffield Academic Press
  45. M.E.J. Richardson, "Hammurabi’s Laws: Text, Translation and Glossary", pp.27~ (2000), Scheffield Academic Press

관련 논문AI추천

수메르 우루-이님기나 법과 히브리법의 사회정의의 고찰이종근한국구약학회 · 구약논단2008 · 제14권 제2호서양고대세계의 개인숭배김경현한국서양고대역사문화학회 · 서양고대사연구2010 · 제26호이집트 신왕사상의 기원과 발전김성한국서양고대역사문화학회 · 서양고대사연구2009 · 제24호고대 페니키아의 정신세계김영진한국서양고대역사문화학회 · 서양고대사연구2009 · 제24호카시트 바빌로니아 시대의 왕정에 대한 연구강승일한국서양고대역사문화학회 · 서양고대사연구2010 · 제27호고대 메소포타미아의 성창제도강승일한국서양고대역사문화학회 · 서양고대사연구2009 · 제25호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (10건)

이집트 신왕사상의 기원과 발전김성pp. 7-34기원전 8-7세기 신-앗시리아 문헌에 나타난 모압(Moab)의 사회-역사적 상황 연구장대규pp. 67-98고대 페니키아의 정신세계김영진pp. 99-130고대 그리스의 헤라클레스 영웅숭배오흥식pp. 131-166테세우스 영웅숭배와 고대 아테네 정치최자영pp. 167-204
원문 보기