The first speaker, Dr. Matthew Ong, examined the metaphors for the emotions of deities found in hymns of praise and petition, such as Ludlul. In Ludlul, the god Marduk is described through metaphors in contrasting emotional states: he is angry and wrathful, but his anger relents, and his mood becomes merciful. However, these metaphors never describe Marduk himself as being affected by emotion. When his wrath is described as being “like a storm-wind in the steppe”, it is not Marduk who is battered by the winds, but the human petitioner. The divinity never loses control of himself.
Ong analyzes this in light of the five-point model of emotion by Zoltán Kövecses. In this model, a cause triggers an emotional response that the person seeks to control, and if control is lost, a behavioral response results. This is not a model of emotion itself but rather of the way we conceptualize emotion. Typically, metaphors for emotion focus on either the cause of the emotion or its effect on the subject. For example, the metaphor “their behavior repelled me” describes the cause of an emotion, while “I was seized with emotion” describes its effect on the subject.
In the context of Ludlul and similar hymns, Ong suggests modifying the model by adding a sixth step, “effect on humans”. This sixth step is the focus of externally directed metaphors, where anger floods and blows not at the angry god—who is the subject—but at humans. The difference is significant because, according to Mesopotamian theology, one is not supposed to talk about gods being moved by external forces like emotions. By focusing metaphors on the effect of divine emotions on humans, scribes remained compliant with theological constraints.
Hymns like Ludlul are exceptional in the richness of their metaphors for divine emotions. The metaphors are used as part of “divine enumerative description”, a genre convention in which the scribe successively describes all facets of a divinity. While these facets were part of common scribal knowledge, it was up to the skill and the discretion of the scribe whether to present them through common tropes or creative metaphors, as seen in Ludlul. At the same time, the scribe had to heed the theological limitations on how deities could be described.
The second speaker, Prof. Jutta Jokiranta, demonstrated a possible framework for combining cognitive and cultural approaches to ritual. Ritual studies have traditionally focused on macro-level analysis, emphasizing societal and group dimensions while paying less attention to the level of the individual. Jokiranta introduced several cognitive theories of ritual that could help bridge this gap.
The theories of Pascal Boyer and Pierre Liénard see ritual as having four cognitive underpinnings: the normative scripting of actions; the signaling of coalitional identity, affiliation, and cohesiveness; expectations of magical causation; and ritualized behavior. None of these underpinnings are necessary, but they might contribute to the success of certain cultural rituals.
People have been found to exhibit more ritualized behavior when experiencing emotional, goal-driven, or social deficits—that is to say, when they are experiencing anxiety. There are several possible processes through which rituals regulate emotions, performance, and social connections, therefore reducing anxiety. For example, rituals might block unwanted thoughts, satisfy a need for order, or create a feeling of social cohesion. These processes are related to the cognitive underpinnings laid out above. It can be further hypothesized that less structured rituals are less effective at reducing anxiety because they employ fewer of these processes.
Jokiranta used two examples from ancient texts to illustrate these ideas. The first was an example of ritual regulating emotions, as seen in biblical purity rituals. Biblical studies scholarship has already discussed these rituals from the perspective of evolved feelings of disgust, but Jokiranta argues that the emotion of disgust alone does not explain everything found in the purity rules. Purification rituals served to manage the anxiety arising from unseen threats, thus bringing the participants satisfaction. Her second example was circumcision as a form of regulating performance. Considering the significance of circumcision as a covenant identity marker, it is surprising how little the process was ritualized in the Hellenistic era. There were, however, some guidelines for performing the ritual correctly. For example, in Jubilees, circumcision is only valid if performed within the timeframe of eight days from birth.