Both Mesopotamians and Egyptians used religious authorities to legitimize their rule. This is understandable, considering that in ancient time, concepts of religions were deeply entrenched amongst the locals, as with many other civilizations in antiquity. However, there must be distinction made between the divinity endowed on the human kings in authority in Egypt and Mesopotamia.
It must be highlighted that in Egypt,“official history began with dynasties of "gods, demigods, and spirits of the dead" who preceded the first mortal rulers” (Murname). Therefore, kingship in Egypt itself was innately associated with divine power. Consider that “the symbol of the falcon god Horus …… as an image of kingship throughout Egyptian history” was used to imply the ruler's official nature as the divine "Horus of the Palace" (Murname). Menes, who was attributed to being the first to unify Eygpt probably derived his name from Amun, the leading god and divine ancestor of the New Kingdom pharaohs. This conveniently serves as a powerful justification of his kingship, being the unique son of god designated by the higher divine authority to rule over the land, and whose powers must not be belittled. Menes was not alone in using divine authority to consolidate his power. Amenhotep IV of Dynasty 19, took over the kingship of an Egypt that was heavily inclined towards the cult of Amun. However, he advocated for the cult of Aten instead, of which reason still baffles us, and changed his name to Akhenaten- "He Who Is Effective for Aten". Once again, this illustrates the importance of having a religious divine authority as a strong back up for power play.
On the other hand, in Mesopotamia, amongst the different city states arose one king, who was usually empowered by his performance in wars. The rising of an empire in Mesopotamia was not seen so much as an endowment on a particular human being as in Egypt, but since there were evidence of “earlier local oligarchies before” (Murname) empire rule began, kingship was perhaps seen more as a credit to a war leader’s ability to unify the country. Thus, it is no surprise that these Mesopotamian kings were revered as gods only after their death. I offer my interpretation: Only after completion of his contribution as a leader to his empire, does a king deserve to be exalted as a divine god.
However, in later times of Mesopotamia, Naram-sin and his successors started to self-deify themselves even while they were living. Perhaps Naram-Sin craved for recognition or perhaps he was truly a brilliant leader worthy of that, but what stands out is that, the divine authority once again is seen as the ultimate authority of control over any kingship. This is also supported by Shulgi’s move to build a temple to exalt the power of divine kings and temple households were not only political landmarks, but economic forts for safe distribution of rations to Mesopotamians. The power of divine authority is indeed, despite their difference in embodiment, equal in both Egypt and Mesopotamian civilizations after all.One of my hist for middle east reflection essay. My bio Prof, Ken, has a strong interest in the Middle East region as well, and we talked so much in lab today. Amazing memory he's got! On my way back home I took the same bus as Mikyung and I discovered shes married!!!!!!!
Quote of the day: you have done a great job of submerging yourself in the lab ~ Ken
Lol. I laughed at Ken and said he made it sound as though I was drowning in it. haha.
