Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities

Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities BILLIE JEAN COLLINS In a letter dating sometime toward the end of the fifteenth century B.C.E., a young scribe in Hattusa sent a greeting by letter to his father and mother who lived in the frontier town of Tapikka, as follows: May the thousand gods give you life. May they hold you in their embrace and protect you. May they give you life, health, peace, long years, the love ( ) of the gods, benevolence ( ) of the gods and a joyful soul. Whatever you ask of the gods, may they give it to you.1 This blessing expresses the hope of every individual living in the Hatti lands, from king to peasant farmer, for a life filled with divine blessing. Whether an individual obtained a blessed existence in this life depended entirely on the good will of the gods, and that good will, in turn, depended entirely on the actions of the individual in question. Divine Wrath The thousand gods that the Hittites invoked in their blessings, who bore witness to their treaties, and upon whom the well-being of the land and its inhabitants depended, were the product of a centuries-long process of territorial expansion and assimilation. As the Hittite state grew, it absorbed the gods of the Hattians, Palaians, Luwians, and Hurrians. Polytheism by definition precludes religious dogma and orthodoxy, and the religion promoted by and for the Hittite ruling elite reflects the expansiveness inherent in such a system. 2 At the head of this impressive pantheon were the Storm-God of Hatti and the Sun-Goddess of Arinna. With the Hurriani1 ALP, S., Hethitische Keilschrifttafeln aus , TTKY VI.34, Ankara, no.81, 5–15. 2 See, e.g., BECKMAN, G., How Religion Was Done, in: Snell, D. C. (ed.), Blackwell Companion to the Ancient Near East, London 2005, 344. 68 Billie Jean Collins zation of the ruling elite in the empire period, this divine pair became identified with Teshub and Hebat, who are represented in relief greeting one another in the main chamber of the open-air sanctuary adjacent to the Hittite capital, called today. Although individual kings favored the cults of select deities (and vice versa), at no time in Hittite history can we detect any hints of a burgeoning monalatry, henotheism, or monotheism, as has been proposed for Mesopotoamia and Egypt. The Hittites cared for all the deities who fell under their geographical jurisdiction even if not all were incorporated into their official pantheon.3 The thoughts and motivations of all of these deities were a mystery to the humans in their charges, but there was no doubt that they could at times be unforgiving and vengeful. The Hattian myths of the Old Kingdom period (ca. 1650–1400 B.C.E.) articulate this divine anger in the physical withdrawal of the deity from his or her place in the cosmos and the resulting loss of abundance and fertility: [The Storm-God of Heaven set out toward the steppe], the meadow, [and the moor(?). He carried off plenty, prosperity, and Abundance. The Storm-God departed], and barley [and wheat] no longer [ripened. Cattle, sheep], and humans did not [become pregnant]. And those who [were pregnant did not give birth] from that time. § [The mountains] dried up. [The trees] dried up. And the shoots(?) [did not come forth. The pastures] dried up. The springs dried up.4 Rituals were performed to appease the angry deity and restore him to his place in the cosmos, and with him, the cosmic balance: The Storm-God’s wrath, [his soul and body] were stifled [like kindling wood. Just as they burn] these [pieces of kindling wood], may the Storm-God’s anger and wrath, [sin and sullenness] burn up in the same way. The Storm-God’s wrath, his soul and body, are a blazing fire. And just as this fire [is extinguished, so may] his anger, wrath, and sullennes [be extinguished in the same way].5 Within Hurrian mythic traditions, concerns about divine anger and punishment are articulated differently. The most recent addition to the collection of Hurro-Hittite myths is the Song of Release, a Middle Hittiteperiod wisdom text that was composed in Hurrian and translated into Hittite. The composition falls into four distinct parts, beginning with a proemium that introduces the divine subjects of the piece. Following the proemium are a series of seven parables each with a moral, such as the importance of loving one’s homeland, being satisfied with what one has, honoring one’s parents, fulfilling one’s duty, and so on. There follows an 3 SINGER, I., ‘The Thousand Gods of Hatti’. The Limits of an Expanding Pantheon, in: Alon, I. / Gruenwald, I. / Singer, I. (eds.), Concepts of the Other in Near Eastern Religions, IOS 14; Leiden 1994, 81–102. 4 HOFFNER Jr., H. A., Hittite Myths, SBLWAW 2, Atlanta 21998, 21. 5 HOFFNER, Hittite Myths, 22. Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities 69 incomplete description of a feast in the palace of Allani, goddess of the Underworld, at which Teshub, the Hurrian storm-god is the guest of honor. The composition concludes with an allegory situated in the Syrian city of Ebla, in which its king, Megi, unsuccessfully beseeches the city council to release its war captives. The council refuses despite Teshub’s threats of divine retribution. The poem thus serves as an aetiology for the destruction of Ebla, which in fact occurred historically during the Syrian campaigns of Hattusili I and Mursili I in the seventeenth century B.C.E.6 The disparate elements of the composition are thus connected by the common theme of defining what is good and right behavior (in this case, obedience to the king), culminating in Teshub’s punishment of Ebla and its unworthy citizens. But the gods were not always vengeful. As Itamar Singer notes, in the idyllic past, as in the hoped-for future, they were merciful and well disposed towards men:7 O gods, my lords! Since ages past you have been inclined towards [men] and [not] abandoned mankind. And mankind [became] populous and your divine servants [were] numerous. They always set up for the gods, [my] lords, offering bread and libation.8 Mursili II, who authored this prayer sometime in the last quarter of the fourteenth century, notes, however, that the gods have been inconsistent in their support in more recent historical times: O gods, my lords, you have turned your back on mankind. All of a sudden, in the time of my grandfather Hatti was oppressed, and it became [devastated] by the enemy. Mankind was [reduced in number] by plague, and your [servants] were reduced in number. And among you, [gods], my lords, [one had no] temple, and [the temple] of another [fell into ruin]. Whoever [served] before a god perished, and [your] rites [were neglected]. [No] one performed [them] for you. [But] when my [father] became king, [you], O gods, my lords, stood behind him. He resettled the [depopulated] lands. [And for you], O gods, my lords, in whatever temple there were no [objects], or whatever image of god had been destroyed, my father restored what he could, though what he could not, he did not restore. O gods, my lords, you never before oppressed my father, and you never before oppressed me. But now you have oppressed me.9 The oppression to which Mursili II refers is the plague that devasted Hatti for the first two decades of his reign. Through oracular investigation, Mursili succeeded in narrowing down the causes of the divine anger that brought about the plague to a handful of possibilities, each of them attributable to his father Suppiluliuma. One of these offenses was the 6 HAAS, V. / WEGNER, I., Baugrube und Fundament, IstMitt 43, 1993, 57. SINGER, I., Hittite Prayers, SBLWAW 11, Atlanta 2002, 15. 8 SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 13, § 3, 65. 9 SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 13, §§ 3–4, 65. 7 70 Billie Jean Collins murder of Suppiluliuma’s brother Tudhaliya, an act that had cleared the way for Suppiluliuma to ascend the throne of Hatti: Because you, O gods, my lords, [have] taken vengeance for the blood of Tudhaliya, those who killed Tudhaliya [have made] restitution for the blood. But this bloodshed is finished in Hatti again: Hatti too has already made restitution for it. Since it has now come upon me as well, I will also make restitution for it from my household, with restitution and a propitiatory gift. So may the soul of the gods, my lords, again be appeased. May the gods, my lords, again be well disposed toward me, and let me elicit your pity. May you listen to me to what I plead before you. I have [not] done any evil. Of those who sinned and did the evil, no one of that day is still here. They have already died off. But because the affair of my father has come upon me, I am giving you, O gods, my lords, a propitiatory gift on account of the plague of the land, and I am making restitution. I am making restitution to you with a propitiatory gift and reparation. May you gods, my lords, again [have] mercy on me, and let me elicit your pity. 10 As the personification of the Hittite state, the king was directly accountable for any divine disfavor that brought adversity to Hatti, and so the state administration effectively functioned in large part to maintain the balance between the human and divine worlds. Prayers offered to the gods by the kings and other members of the royal house provided one means of communication with the gods and often served as a justification or defense before them. Thus, Arnuwanda I and Asmunikal (fourteenth century BCE) appealed to the Sun-Goddess to spare Hatti from the ravages of the Kaska. They are innocent of any wrongdoing and do not deserve the punishment she has meted out: Only Hatti is a true, pure land for you gods, and only in the land of Hatti do we repeatedly give you pure, great, fine sacrifices. Only in the land of Hatti do we establish respect for you gods. § Only you gods know by your divine spirit that no one had ever taken care of your temples as we have. § No [one] had ever shown more reverence to your [rites(?)]; no one had ever taken care of your divine goods – silver and gold rhyta, and garments – as we have.11 In return for their divine favor, the gods received sustenance and care from the king and his subjects beyond what they could hope for in any other land; thus when the gods withhold their favor from Hatti, it ultimately backfires on them, as Mursili II takes pains to point out: Because Hatti has been oppressed by the plague, it has been reduced in size. [And those makers of offering bread and libation pourers who used to prepare] the offering bread and the libation for the gods, my lords, [since Hatti] has been severely oppressed by [the plague], [they have died] from the plague. [The plague] does not subside at all, and they continue to die, [even those] few [makers of offering bread] and libation pourers [who 10 11 SINGER Hittite Prayers, no. 12, § 8, 63. SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 5, §§ 2'–4', 41. Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities 71 still remain will die, and nobody will prepare] for you offering bread and libation any longer.12 In his prayer to the Sun-Goddess, Mursili II reminds the gods that they are operating counter to their own interests and that they need to turn their anger/vengeance away from Hatti and toward its enemies, those who do not respect and care for the gods with the same level of piety. It is they who deserve divine punishment: O gods, [again] have pity on the land of Hatti. On the one hand it is oppressed with the plague, [and on the other] it is oppressed by hostility. The protectorates which are round about, Mittanni and [Arzawa], are all in conflict, and they do not respect [the gods]. They have transgressed the oath of the gods, and they wish to despoil the temples of the gods. May this become an additional (reason) for the gods’ vengeance. Turn the plague, the hostility, the famine, and the severe fever towards Mittanni and Arzawa.13 Loss of family, military defeat, and agricultural failure are the three punishments the gods regularly meted out to humanity. The royal predecessors of Telipinu in the sixteenth century, who were less than stellar models of kingship, each allegedly suffered significant setbacks in these areas. Regarding Ammuna, who obtained the kingship through patricide, Telipinu wrote: When Ammuna became king, the gods sought (revenge for) the blood of his father Zidanta, and [they caused] him, (along with) the fields, vineyards, cattle and sheep in his hands to [fail (?)]…. Wherever (his) troops went on campaign, they did not come back successfully. 14 These same misfortunes are the focus of the curses in the treaty agreements that the Hittite kings concluded with their vassals. The Oath Deities were responsible for guaranteeing that the conditions of the treaty were met by both parties. Those who failed to do so were faced with the threat of disaster, and the more worrisome the enemy, the more elaborate the curses. Whereas Suppiluliuma’s (ca. 1350–1320 B.C.E.) treaty with Aziru of Amurru threatened the vassal with his own destruction along with that of his family, lands, and possessions, in a treaty of the same Hittite king with Shattiwaza of Mittanni, it is further stipulated that the gods of the oath will draw you out like malt from its husk. As one does not get a plant from stony ground (?), so you, together with any other wife whom you might take (in place of my daughter), and you Hurrians, together with your wives, your sons, and your land, shall thus have no progeny. And these gods, who are lords of the oath, shall allot you poverty and destitution. And you, Shattiwaza – they shall overthrow your throne. And you, Shattiwaza – these oath gods shall snap you off like a reed, together with your land. Your 12 SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 12, § 8, 63. SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 8, § 7, 52. 14 Cf.: The Proclamation of Telipinu, transl.: van den Hout, Th., COS 1.76, § 20, § 21, 195–96. 13 72 Billie Jean Collins name and your progeny by any other wife whom you might take shall be eradicated from the earth. And you, Shattiwaza, together with your land, because of not delivering goodness and recovery (?) among the Hurrians – you(!) shall be eradicated. The ground shall be ice, so that you will slip. The ground of your land shall be a marsh of …, so that you will certainly sink and be unable to cross. You, Shattiwaza, and the Hurrians shall be the enemies of the Thousands Gods. They shall defeat you.15 A text of Instructions for the Temple Personnel provides insight into this idea of divine vengeance encompassing not only the individual but all that he holds dear: When the servant stands before his master, he (is) washed. He has clothed (himself) in clean (clothes). He gives him (his master) either to eat or to drink. Since the master eats and drinks, (in) his spirit he (is) relaxed. He is favorably inclined toward him (the servant). When he (is) solicitous (?), his master does not find fault (with him). Is the mind of the god somehow different? If the servant at some point angers his master, either they kill him or they injure his nose, eyes, and ears. Or his master seizes him together with his wife, his children, his brother, his sister, his in-laws, and his family, whether his master's male or female slave. They may only call him over. They may do nothing to him. If ever he dies, he does not die alone. His family is also included with him. The message is that a human stands answerable before the gods in the same way that a slave is answerable to his master and must expect similar treatment: If, however, someone angers the mind of a god, does the god seek it (revenge) only from him alone? Does he not seek it from his wife, [his children,] his descendants, his family, his male and female servants, his cattle, his sheep and his grain? He utterly destroys him with everything. Be very afraid of a god’s word for your own sake.16 Nevertheless, such collateral damage did not always sit well with those on the receiving end of divine wrath. Mursili II complained that it is not right to punish the many for the sins of the few: Whoever is a cause of rage and anger to the gods, and whoever is not respectful to the gods, let not the good ones perish with the evil ones. Whether it is a single town, a single house, or a single person, O gods, destroy only that one! [Look upon] Hatti [with pity, and give the evil plague to other lands.]17 15 BECKMAN, G., Hittite Diplomatic Texts, Writings from the Ancient World, vol. 7, Atlanta 1996 (21999), 48. 16 Instructions to Priests and Temple Officials, transl.: McMahon, G., COS 1.83, §§ 2–3, 217–18. 17 SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 8, § 10, 53. Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities 73 Divine Mercy The preoccupation with divine wrath in Hittite literature is mitigated somewhat by sometimes dramatic displays of beneficence and mercy. These instances were governed to a large extent by two abstract divine concepts, rightness (d ) and providence, or divine justice ( ), that helped to define the relations between gods and humans. The term “right, acceptable, permitted” and its inverse “wrong, unacceptable, not permitted” identified what was considered appropriate and civilized, that is, normative, behavior in Hittite society.18 Like , was bestowed by the gods; thus it has to do with divine law as distinguished from human law, and, in religious contexts, with the sacred as opposed to the profane. An act that is not will surely fail just as behaving will ensure success. In some cases, oracles were performed to determine from the gods what actions were or not . As Yoram Cohen notes: Maintaining behavior which was correct or acceptable was not only a duty performed by humans for the sake of the gods’ satisfaction or appeasement. The gods themselves had a role to play. They legitimized the social conduct among humans, allowing relations to be amongst one another.19 In the context of the treaties, the Oath Deities constitute the necessary for normative relations between humans; that is, they have the ability to provide or withhold the that will ensure the peace between the parties.20 Where circumscribed human behavior, “divine providence,” made possible the correct functioning of the world through the divine promise of order, justice, and balance. Already in Hattusili I’s Annals, dating to the seventeenth century, the Sun-Goddess was said to “run before” the king in battle, ensuring his victory, but in the Old Kingdom, the notion of divine guidance – of the intervention of the divine in human affairs – is not pronounced. Humans were accountable for their own actions and their own successes or failures. In Telipinu’s Proclamation, dating to ca. 1500 B.C.E., divine judgment of Ammuna and other “failed” kings was more implied than stated. In the empire period, however, divine causality in historical events is much more in evidence. The gods are manifest in history, intervening to ensure victory or defeat. In 18 See COHEN, Y., The Image of the ‘Other’ and Hittite Historiography, in: T. Abusch (ed.) et al., Historiography in the Cuneiform World, Bethesda (Md), 113–29; ibid., Taboos and Prohibitions in Hittite Society, THeth 24; Heidelberg 2002. 19 COHEN, Taboos and Prohibitions, 39. 20 COHEN, Taboos and Prohibitions, 31, 41. 74 Billie Jean Collins addition to “running before” the king, the deity’s intervention might take the form of a thunderbolt striking the enemy king to his knees: When I had gone and when I had arrived in Lawasha, the victorious Storm-God, My Lord, showed his divine power by sending a bolt of lightning. My troops saw the lightning bolt and the land of Arzawa saw it. The lightning bolt went and struck Arzawa. It struck Apasa, the city of Uhhaziti. Uhhaziti fell on his knees and became ill. When Uhhaziti became ill, he did not then come against me for battle, but sent his son (PiyamaLAMMA) with infantry and horse troops against me.21 The exhibition of divine favor could be equally dramatic, as when the deity Hashameli made Mursili II and his men invisible to the enemy. 22 In all these cases, however, history was not shaped by the gods directly, but by the actions of men and whether they were pleasing or displeasing to the gods. A deity might send a plague, but only if the king, through his own actions, has drawn down divine wrath upon himself.23 In addition to the support of the gods of the official pantheon, the kings of the empire period (that is, the fourteenth and thirteenth centuries B.C.E.) also enjoyed the protection of a personal deity. In monumental reliefs as well as on seals, the personal deity is sometimes shown protectively embracing his king, as Sharruma embraces Tudhaliya IV at Yazılıkaya. Muwatalli II’s prayer to his personal deity, the Storm-God of Lightning, credits the deity with giving him refuge. Similarly, Hattusili III credits Shaushga of Samuha with taking him by the hand and giving him kingship over the land: “Let me proclaim the divine providence ( ) of Shaushga (of Samuha),” he declares in his Apology. “Let humanity hear it!”24 In this text, we also find the notion of divine vindication of the just cause of the victor; it was the goddess Shaushga through her divine providence ( ) who judged the outcome of the civil war between Hattusili III and his nephew. When Hattusili III was a young man, the goddess took him by the hand. The language by which Hattusili III describes the goddess’ patronage is consistent and leaves no doubt about his special status: (=Shaushga), My Lady, took me to her in every respect. Whenever illness befell me, sick as I was, I looked on (it) as the goddess’ providence. The goddess, My Lady, held me by the hand in every respect. But, since I was a man divinely provided for, since I walked before the gods in divine providence, I never did an evil thing against man. You goddess, My Lady, always take me to you in every respect, wasn’t it? The goddess, My Lady, never passed me over in time of fear, she never let me down before the enemy, nor 21 The Ten Year Annals of Great King Muršili II of atti, transl.: Beal, R. H., COS 2.16, 85. 22 KBo 4.4 iii 33–34, KUB 19.37 iii 16–18, CTH 61.II. 23 HOFFNER JR., H. A., Histories and Historians of the Ancient Near East. The Hittites, OrNS 49, 1980, 327–28. 24 KUB 1.1 i 5–6, CTH 81. Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities 75 did she ever let me down before my opponent in court (or) before (my) enviers: whether it (concerned) an enemy’s word or <the word> of an opponent or some word from the palace, it was , My Lady, who held (her) mantle over me in every respect, took me to her in every respect. My Lady, who held her mantle over me in every respect, took me to her in every respect. , My Lady, put my enemies and enviers at my mercy and I finished them off. 25 Through the gods showed not only their favor and their beneficence, but also, it seems, their intentions. When Hattusili was still young, the goddess had sent a dream to Hattusili’s father, Mursili II, in which she said: “‘For Hattusili the years (are) short…. Hand him over to me, and let him be my priest, so he (will) live.’”26 The goddess’ plan for Hattusili III is spelled out in more than one dream sent to his wife Puduhepa in which she promises him the kingship of Hatti. Jan Assman makes a distinction between the historia sacra of Judeo-Christian tradition, which encompasses the idea of a divine plan in history, and polytheistic systems, in which history was just a field of possible interventions by the gods, favorable or punitive.27 The role of the goddess in Hattusili’s life, suggests, however, that a divine plan was at work in Hittite history. 28 Coping with Divine Wrath: Oracles, Offerings, and Prayers As we have seen, divine wrath was the natural consequence of human sin, and the sinner’s only hope of absolution was to communicate with the gods to ascertain the reasons for their anger and to determine what restitution was required. Ultimately, the acknowledgment of the sin, even for the innocent, was a necessary prerequisite for redemption, but as Mursili II reveals, that was not always so easy to do: “[Now] may my god open his innermost soul to me with all his heart, and may he tell me my sins, so that I may acknowledge them.”29 The gods did make this information available by means of signs that could be read using a variety of divinatory techniques. Sin, even if committed unwittingly (“So it happens that people always sin” … (and) “it so happens that the father’s sin comes upon his son”30), could bring on divine wrath and identifying what went wrong often required considerable oracular detective work. In pleading for the gods to reveal the source of their 25 Apology of Hattusili III, transl.: van den Hout, Th., COS 1.77, § 4, 200. Ibid., § 3. 27 ASSMANN, J., Monotheism and Polytheism, in: Johnston, S. I. (ed.), Religions of the Ancient World. A Guide, Cambridge (Mass.) 2004, 21. 28 See also HOFFNER, Histories and Historians, 329. 29 SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 4a, § 6', 32. 30 SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 11, § 8, 59. 26 76 Billie Jean Collins anger, Mursili II lists the means by which they might reveal their “innermost souls”: If people have been dying because of some other reason, then let me either see it in a dream, or let it be established through an oracle, or let a man of god declare it, or, according to what I instructed all the priests, they shall regularly sleep holy. O Storm-God of Hatti, save my life! Let the gods, my lords, show me their divine power! Let someone see it in a dream. Let the reason for which people have been dying be discovered.31 Thus, very often, oracular investigations were conducted not for advice on what future action to take, but for the purpose of determining the source of divine anger or impurity. In these cases, the diviner would set about first to establish the identity of the deity who was causing the particular problem, then to determine the reason for his or her anger, and finally to ascertain what restitution was required to satisfy the deity. In one particularly well-preserved inquiry, the diviners set about isolating the various offenses that have set off the deity and the recompense required to appease him. Among the latter it is ascertained that the deity would like a sumptuous garment: Have you, O deity, sought something with a sumptuous garment for yourself? (If so), let the duck oracle be favorable. Favorable. Should they proceed to give (a gift) with gold, precious stones, and a sumptuous garment to the deity? Ditto. Let the duck oracle be favorable. Unfavorable. Should they proceed to give (a gift) with a sumptuous garment and a person to the deity? Ditto. Let the duck oracle be favorable. Unfavorable. In regard to the fact that a (gift) with a sumptuous garment was ascertained – should they proceed to give one garment to the deity? Ditto. Let the duck oracle be favorable. Unfavorable. Should they give one garment and one cowl? Ditto. Let the duck oracle be favorable. Unfavorable. Should they give one garment, one cowl, and a woman’s -garment? Ditto. Let the duck oracle be favorable. Favorable.32 As is evident in this example, settling on the nature and amount of the restitution constituted something approaching a negotiation, since the deity had to be satisfied with the offering. In another inquiry, the god Pirwa, for example, is asked by oracle whether he found the king’s offering acceptable: “if you, o god, have accepted the offering, [will] you then turn [(your) eyes to]wards My Majesty in benevolence?”33 Nor was the petitioner above bribing the gods. Queen Puduhepa, for example, vowed to 31 SINGER, Hittite Prayers, no. 11, § 11, 60. Excerpt from an Oracle Report, transl.: Beckman, G., COS 1.78, 206. 33 KBo 16.98 iii 14'–15', transl.: van den Hout, Th., The Purity of Kingship. An Edition of CTH 569 and Related Hittite Oracle Inquiries of Tuthaliya IV, DMOA 25; Leiden 1998, 103. 32 Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities 77 bestow gifts on the goddess Lelwani if she would give health and long life to her husband Hattusili III. Acting properly (that is, -) with regard to the cult is the most effective means of averting divine wrath. In a fourteenth-century plea by a worshipper to a deity, the plaintiff asks to be rewarded for his piety with the deity’s benevolence: “Behold, this is the tribute for you. I have worshipped you correctly ( -), and I have provided a substitute sacrifice for you. Subsequently, do not bring calamities upon me!”34 As Yoram Cohen notes, “By acting , the worshipper creates a balanced and beneficial reciprocal relationship between himself and the deity, maintaining the basic equation of do ut des.”35 Moreover, should the deity find the offerings acceptable ( ), there is an implied positive result for the worshipper; the god is obligated to reciprocate. Where oracles and offerings failed, prayers offered an additional means by which the kings could plead their case before the gods. The personal prayers of the empire period (fourteenth and thirteenth centuries) sought divine intervention in specific situations resulting from the anger of a particular deity. A prayer might include an invocation for attracting the god’s presence through words and ritual acts ( ), a hymn of praise, adulation, and adoration ( ), and a petition for divine favor ( ). The most common element in a Hittite personal prayer, however, was the “plea” or , a juridical term referring to a defense or self-justification against an accusation, and thus royal prayers served as a formal defense presented on behalf of the king in a legal proceding before the Divine Court. In his discussion of monotheism and polytheism, Jan Assman notes of the latter that: It is possible to neglect [the gods], to break one of their specific taboos, to miss the correct performance of their rites, but it is impossible to either enter or leave a relationship which is always already established, into which we are born, and which is never the matter of a personal decision.36 Through oracles, offerings, and prayers, humans and gods were able to bare their “innermost souls” to one another, and thereby to take positive steps to ensure that this inescapable relationship remained a beneficial one for both deity and man. 34 1270/z; tr. COHEN, Taboos and Prohibitions, 35. COHEN, Taboos and Prohibitions, 37. 36 ASSMANN, Monotheism and Polytheism, 19. 35