This
terracotta plaque was discovered by Sir Leonard Woolley during the 1923 – 1924
archaeological expedition in Diqdiqqeh (a suburb in the city of Ur). The plaque
is dated in the Old Babylonian period (2000 – 1600 BC). Woolley describes
it as a “Figurine. Light clay: moulded. Female figure in flounced skirt.” See
the original record at UrOnline.
I suggest
she is not just a “female figure,” she is a prostitute - because she is shown cupping her breasts. As described on a separate page, this is the universal
gesture of a Babylonian prostitute.
I further
suggest, for reasons that I will later explain, she is not just an ordinary prostitute, she is a “temple prostitute.”
This is Leon
Legrain’s notecard. Legrain was Woolley’s epigrapher (the translator of ancient
inscriptions) during the early expeditions at Ur (1924 – 1926).
There has been a lot of discussion and speculation about Babylonian temple prostitutes, but everyone naturally assumed there weren't any pictures of them.
Ironically, this portrait of a temple prostitute was discovered almost 100 years ago, and it's not the only one.
Before
proceeding, first it is necessary to give some background information:
“Sacred” prostitute
In Babylonia,
the temples of Inanna were the centers of “sacred prostitution.” Inanna was the
goddess of lust and war. It may be difficult for a modern reader to comprehend,
but prostitutes were actually employed in her temple to serve the goddess by
servicing men. Presumably, any fees that were collected were used for the maintenance of the temple.
The first time
the western world heard of this peculiar institution was from Herodotus, the Greek
historian (ca. 484 – 425 BC). In The Histories, he writes:
“Every woman
born in the country must once in her life go and sit down in the precinct of
Venus [Inanna, also known as Ishtar], and there consort with a stranger…. A
woman who has once taken her seat is not allowed to return home till one of the
strangers throws a silver coin into her lap, and takes her with him beyond the
holy ground…. The silver coin maybe of any size…. The woman
goes with the first man who throws her money, and rejects no one. When she has
gone with him, and so satisfied the goddess, she returns home, and from that
time forth no gift however great will prevail with her. Such of the women.... who are ugly have to stay a long time before they can fulfil the law. Some have
waited three or four years in the precinct.”
The story is,
of course, ridiculous. It’s absurd to think that all the fathers and mothers of
Babylonia consented to the prostitution of their beloved daughters. Herodotus related this story to emphasize the superiority of the Greeks compared to the
decadent Orientals and to justify the war between the Greeks and
the Babylonians.
The
implausibility of the story has prompted some modern scholars to doubt the
existence of temple prostitutes. However, although it didn't involve all Babylonian women, there is ample evidence in Babylonian art
and literature that confirms the practice of sacred prostitution (see Babylonian
Prostitutes).
There is plenty of archaeological evidence as well.
Temple prostitutes
To set the
record straight …
This
woman is a prostitute because she is semi-nude, she is wearing jewelry, and she is cupping her breasts. The woman is often ascribed to be Inanna, but she
isn’t. She has none of the identifying attributes of Inanna.
She is actually a temple prostitute, one of many. Note the distinctive hairstyle.
This is
Inanna. She is identifiable by her wings and her weapons, by the horned helmet
and the flounced dress of a goddess, and by the Star of Venus. She is also sometimes
shown with her looped standard, not to mention the lion, her "animal familiar."
Inanna herself
is sometimes portrayed as a prostitute.
Here, she is shown
nude except for her jewelry, just like other Babylonian prostitutes.
Here she cups her breasts like a common prostitute.
But in both
cases, she is still recognizable as Inanna because of her wings and her helmet.
This
woman is sometimes identified as Ishtar or Astarte, two other manifestations of Inanna.
… and all of
these women are commonly labeled as Inanna/Ishtar/Astarte. However, none of them have the identifying
features of a goddess.
I suggest the women are prostitutes.
To be more
precise, I further suggest they are "temple prostitutes."
Notice that
all the women are slightly different in the size and shape of their bodies. Their faces are also different. However, they all wear the same panties, the
same kind of jewelry, and they have the same distinctive hairstyle. All of
them are “in uniform.”
Prostitutes
in brothels and taverns, and the prostitutes on city streets, didn’t all dress the same way. They didn’t wear the same hairdo.
These women
are identifiable as prostitutes because they are semi-nude, wearing jewelry, and they are cupping their
breasts. They are identifiable specifically as temple prostitutes because of the uniformity of their apparel, their jewelry, and their hairstyle.
They are not goddesses.
These statues were found in Susa, which is an Elamite city.
They are from a later period (1500 - 1100 BC, allegedly). I suggest they are Babylonian,
either stolen from Babylon as plunder and booty, or taken to Elam by the
Babylonians themselves during periods of Babylonian occupation.
The statues are not Elamite. If they were, it would imply that
the Elamites also practiced temple prostitution, but there is absolutely no
evidence of this. The Elamites had a different religion. On the other hand, the Babylonians
had several temples in Elam.
Temple
prostitutes in the Old Babylonian period (circa 2000 – 1600 BC)
Woolley discovered this statue in Diqdiqqeh. It is dated in the Old Babylonian
period. His note describes it as a “Terracotta relief. Draped female
figure, standing, with hands to breasts: elaborate coiffure but no head
ornaments. Complete and in good
condition.”
The woman is
wearing a shawl that covers her shoulders down to the middle of her upper arms. The shawl has a high collar. She is adorned with bracelets and a necklace. She wears a "wrap around dress." The vertical border is shown on the right. Her clothes were probably brightly colored.
The top of
the dress is just under the breasts. The dress has several horizontal rows with
herringbone patterns. There are vertical lines above a thick hem, which is either
rolled or cuffed.
Does the
dress look familiar?
It is the same dress that is worn by the woman at the top of the page:
I suggest
these women are temple prostitutes because they are cupping their breasts, they wear the same dress and jewelry, and they have the same elaborate hairstyle.
The temple prostitutes
that were discussed earlier are semi-nude, the way they looked inside the temple. They wore clothes in public, of course.
I suggest
the above picture shows us the clothes worn by Babylonian temple prostitutes when they appeared outside the temple, probably during ceremonial occasions.
It has been thousands of years since anyone knew what they looked like.
See 
See 