Potnia’s Participants: Considering the Gala, Assinnu, and Kurgarrû in an Aegean Context

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review of “Potnia’s Participants”

There are many wonderful aspects of this piece, marked especially by a willingness to consider cross-cultural comparanda and to think afresh about Aegean imagery and meaning. The author has put together a solid bibliography and is clearly in control of the primary source material. While I liked very much the look to the east, I am not quite convinced that in the case of these monkeys it really helps us understand what exactly they are doing on the walls of Xeste 3.

I wonder if the author might have found even more compelling and potentially enlightening material in Egypt. Surely that rich lode for this kind of imagery and thought would have yielded some valuable returns. And those interconnections are at that period rather stronger than they are with greater Mesop, so far as we know.  

And finally, is the woman up on her dais actually a Potnia? Or is she possibly someone else, with other roles at Thera? I’ve never been entirely happy with her Great Goddess label, but certainly the author has plenty of company in thinking of her that way.

Some specific remarks, not in order:

Watch how you refer to Inanna/Ishtar. She is Ishtar at Mari! I would suggest reading the RLA entry for this goddess, which will have all kinds of references beyond Harris.

The most recent Lob der Istar is Wasserman and Streck’s edition, I would absolutely use that, since it is a real advance in the text.

Egyptian texts with imagery aren’t explanatory, more’s the pity.

The comparison between the Investiture and the Grandstand is something I had never thought of before, and I liked it. But on different readings of the possible spatial meaning of the Investiture with respect to the palace layout, see Yasin al-Khalesi, Court of the Palms, and Margueron 2014.

On Mesop music and rituals, glad you read Mirelman. While you’re at it, take a look at some of the other articles in that collection of articles (EEAW). You will also find lots of good material in Dumbrill and Finkel, ICONEA 2008.

I was a bit alarmed at the bull-headed lyre being Shamash, but maybe I misunderstood you. See Lawergren’s article in ICONEA.

Spycket, Iraq 60 (1998) on musician monkeys.

You might also give some rod and ring refs, again RLA entry will be good. Not at all certain what is what with those items.

Jo Day on crocuses, 2 long articles, can’t put my hand on their refs at the moment, sorry

n. 11, make sure reader knows it’s Z-L who went to Ugarit, not the man of Crete (you do say this later, but it’s a bit unclear here)

line 313, why necessarily derived from Mesop presentation scenes?

How about Foster’s ideas about the Xeste 3 monkey faces showing age transitioning, and why they do so? Would those fit into your argument at all?

In sum, this is a project that definitely merits publication, with the author’s consideration of these additional points and sources. It is always exciting and thought-provoking to see colleagues taking new looks at well-known material. Thank you for thinking of me as a peer reviewer.  

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very interesting and convincing article that provides a valuable contribution to the study of Aegean iconography and religion. 

Page 1 line 5: comma after “Thera”

Line 8 remove: “once”

Line 12: capitalise “Room”

Line 28: un-capitalise “ancient”

Line 34: capitalise “Room” and all instances of saying “Room 2” or other rooms in Xeste 3

Page 3 line 71: “Tell El Dab’a”

Line 81: Maybe be a bit more specific about where the fresco is located. The fresco painting of the Investiture Scene (2.4 x 1.8m) was situated on the south wall of Inner Court 106, known as “The Court of the Palm”, immediately west of the doorway leading into the Throne Room (Room 64).

Line 83: Do you mean the recessed doorway? In the fresco, the upper and lower scenes in the central panel are separated by a row of six lines, thought to represent the actual stairway of Sanctuary 66. The central panel is also bordered by a frame consisting of six lines that probably correspond to the recessive indented doorway of the sanctuary. Parrot 1958, 132, Pls. XXVII–XXXI. Actually 11 stairs, and the 2 recessions on each side of the doorway in conjunction with the facade and stairway walls make up 6 surfaces.

Line 84: the poles might be stylised, artificial trees

Line 87: lamassu?

Page 4, footnote 9: “Not least of which include passages about Zimri-Lim’s participation in a festival of Ishtar (Inanna) at Mari (Zeigler 2007, 55–64), and texts from the Mari archives that attest to Zimri-Lim meeting and trading with individuals from Crete (Foster 2017).” It seems that the second part of this footnote, “texts from the Mari archives that attest to Zimri-Lim meeting and trading with individuals from Crete (Foster 2017).” Would be more suited to footnote the sentence at lines at 103 – 105.

Page 12, line 304: “…unlike the those of the other animals…”

Page 15, footnote 30: don’t need to capitalise “ancient” Egypt

Page 16, footnote 31: don’t need to capitalise “ancient”

Page 17, footnote 34: don’t need to capitalise “ancient” – and any other instances of this.

Page 19, line 596: see Stephanie Budin, Gender in the Ancient Near East (Routledge 2023), especially 173 – 246, for a recent in-depth, critical examination of gender bending in the ANE. Also her book The Myth of Sacred Prostitution in Antiquity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Review of here https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2009/2009.04.28/

Page 21, line 674: “…that Zimri-Lim participated festivals…” ADD “in” = “…that Zimri-Lim participated in festivals…”

Page 24, line 739: Aegaeum NEOTEROS is edited by Robert Laffineur and Brent Davis (not Tom Palaima).

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx