Michael B. Hundley The God Collectors: Hittite Conceptions of the Divine DOI 10.1515/aofo-2014-0014 Abstract: Building on an earlier article on Mesopotamian conceptions of the divine (Hundley 2013a), this piece turns to the complex world of Hittite deities and offers a synthetic analysis with Mesopotamia as a conversation partner. While many commonalities emerge, the Hittite divine world is also distinct in important ways. Most notably, while Mesopotamian gods, especially Marduk and Assur and before them Enlil and Ninurta, tend to collect attributes, the Hittites themselves collect gods, proudly boasting of the thousand gods of Ḫatti. Likewise, Hittite deities tend to overlap without redundancy, such that each overlapping (weather) god is an independent actor with an essential role to play, whose absence could signal the dissolution of order. The article also posits various modern analogs like franchises, which although imperfect, help the modern mind to grasp the ancient complexity. Keywords: Hittites Gods, Mesopotamian Gods, Divinity, Deification, Ancient Near Eastern Panthea, Anthro- pomorphism In a previous article, I addressed conceptions of divinity in ancient Mesopotamia (Hundley 2013a). The present contribution examines the divine world of the Hittites, which has generally been viewed as an offshoot of Mesopotamian religion with little to distinguish itself. However, upon closer inspection Hittite religion is unique and remarkably rich. Since its contribution to ancient Near Eastern conceptions of the divine comes into sharper focus by situating it alongside Mesopotamian perspectives, we will examine the Hittite data with a view toward the Mesopotamian. An analysis of Hittite conceptions of the divine is an especially convoluted endeavor. Hittite religion is an amalgam of the beliefs of many different cultures. In fact, the Hittites themselves—i.e., “the Indo-Europeans who began to settle in central Anatolia in the second half of the 3 rd millennium—added little from their inherited Indo-European religion” to the indigenous Hattic religion, which they co-opted and incorporated into their own. 1 Luwian religious tradition also played a formative role (Hutter 2003; Beckman 2002–2005: 311). In addition, from the 15 th century the influence of Hurrian and Syrian (and Mesopotamian mediated through Hurrian) 2 religious beliefs became especially influential (Hutter 1997: 77–78; Beckman 2002–2005: 309–311). 3 As an ever-shifting amalgam, no survey presents an accurate picture of “Hittite” religion at all times and in all places, nor can it confidently claim to capture all the complexity at any one time or in any Michael B. Hundley: Syracuse University, 501 Hall of Languages, Syracuse, NY 13244, E ˗ Mail: mbhundley10@gmail.com Note: I would like to thank the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation for providing me the time and resources to write this article and Jared Miller for his helpful comments on an earlier draft. All shortcomings of course are my own. Bibliographical abbreviations follow those of CHD, CAD, RlA and SBL. 1 Hutter (1997: 77); see also Beckman (2002–2005: 309–311). Regarding ancestral Indo-European religious tradition, see, e.g., Watkins (1995: 247–251). Regarding the adopted Hattic tradition, see, e.g., Klinger (1996: 129–197). 2 See regarding the mediated Mesopotamian religion, e.g., the prominence of Ištar in Beckman (1998: 1–10); see further Güterbock (1958: 237–245; 1978: 125–139). 3 Hurrian language and culture were prominent in the 2 nd millennium in Syria and Anatolia and especially exerted influence on the Hittites with the decline of the kingdom of Mitanni in the 14 th century (possibly ruled by an Indo-Aryan elite). Regarding Hurrian beliefs, see, e.g.,Trémouille (1999: 277–291); see also Haas (1978: 59–69); Wilhelm (1982: 69–81); Archi (1998: 39–44; 2002: 21–33). Altorientalische Forschungen 2014; 41(2): 176–200 Authenticated | mbhundley10@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 9/24/15 2:40 AM