>It is the shared conviction of most of today’s historians of religion, anthropologists, and biblical and Near Eastern scholars, that the prophetic performance is typically associated with a specific state of mind variably called ecstasy, trance, or possession. [...] > >The characteristic features of the prophetic performance can be described from the point of view of the one who performs, indicating the specific state of her or his body and mind during the performance. The words trance and ecstasy, the meanings of which largely overlap in scholarly language, refer to “forms of behavior deviating from what is normal in the wakeful state and possessing specific cultural significance, typical features being an altered grasp of reality and the self-concept, with the intensity of change ranging from slight modifications to a complete loss of consciousness.” Of the same behavior, also the word possession can be used, but whereas trance/ecstasy refers to the psycho-physiological state of the performer, possession is a “cultural theory that explains how contact takes place between the supernatural and natural worlds”; that is, an explanation of the ecstasy as a state of being possessed by an external, usually superhuman, agent. This presupposes the audience’s interpretation of the ecstatic behavior as being due to divine intervention, such an interpretation belonging to a cross-cultural cognitive architecture of human mind. Some scholars would use the related word inspiration as a form of possession implying the belief that “the god/spirit/power remains outside the human body, being satisfied with resting upon it while seizing and subduing the soul of the personality without taking its place.” [...] > >A widely-used category that describes the characteristic behavior is the altered state of consciousness, which can be used for both the psycho-physiological state of the performer and its cultural interpretation. [...] > >The standard prophetic designations in the Akkadian language, muḫḫûm/ muḫḫūtum (masc./fem., Old Babylonian) and maḫḫû/maḫḫūtu (masc./fem., Neo-Assyrian), are derived from the Akkadian verb maḫû “to become crazy, to go into a frenzy.” This verb is used for people who go out of their wits, or, at least, behave in unexpected ways, and it is also used for a highly emotional performance. The reflexive N-stem of maḫû repeatedly refers to prophetic performances, presumably indicating the condition in which the prophets received and transmitted divine words and suggesting that the characteristic behavior associated with the prophets appeared as a kind of “madness” in the eyes of those who witnessed them. [...] > >The expression denoting the altered state of consciousness is šanû ṭēmu, which means “to change one’s consciousness.” This phrase is used in a prophetic context in a Hellenistic text to be discussed later in this section, but it is also known from Enuma eliš, where its subject is Tiamat who is being compared to a prophet: “She became like a prophet, she changed her consciousness.” The word ṭēmu means, among other things, “reason” and “intelligence,” and with the verb šanû it either denotes changing one’s mind or becoming mad; hence, the expression šanû ṭēmu offers a semantic equivalent to the verb maḫû, giving an even better idea of what is thought to happen when a prophet acquires the proper state of mind: his consciousness is changed. [...] > >Moving from Mesopotamia to the West Semitic milieu, we can return to the long-known event that Wenamon the Egyptian reported to have happened to him in the Phoenician city of Byblos. In this assumed locus classicus of the “Canaanite” background of the “Israelite” prophecy, Wenamon relates that when the ruler of Byblos, who had repelled him and told him to leave the harbor, was offering to his gods, > >>the god (Amon) seized a great seer from among his great seers, and he caused him to be in an ecstatic state, and he said to him: “Bring up the god! Bring the messenger who bears him! It is Amon who has sent him. He is the one who has caused that he come.” > >Whatever “really” happened in Byblos, Wenamon’s report tells us how an Egyptian writer would have interpreted a prophetic performance, and the way he does it is compatible in every respect with the cuneiform evidence he could not possibly have been familiar with. This speaks for a common, long-term Near Eastern understanding of divine–human communication by means of prophetic activity. > >While the texts discussed so far demonstrate that prophetic performances were commonly associated with a characteristic behavior in different parts of the ancient Near East, there are virtually no descriptions in the above mentioned sources to indicate how the required state of mind was achieved and what actually happened when the prophets prophesied. An intriguing hint at the prophets’ behavior is given by the Middle Babylonian “Righteous Sufferer” text found at Ugarit and dating roughly to the same period as the Report of Wenamon. In this text, the distressed speaker says that his brothers “bathe in their blood like prophets (kīma maḫḫê).” This brings into mind the association of the prophets with people like *assinnu* and *kurgarrû*...whose ritual performances included battle scenes and has also been interpreted as involving self-mutilation. > >A further indication of a possible method of achieving the state of mind required for prophesying in a completely different context can be found in the letter of Queen Šibtu of Mari to her husband: > >>Concerning the campaign my lord is planning, I gave drink to male and female persons to inquire about signs.... > >The same divinatory technique is mentioned also in another letter of Šibtu. Well imaginable as it would be, it is not certain whether the drink is alcoholic or otherwise intoxicating; in any case, the men and women in question are affected by it (or by the hospitality of Šibtu) to the extent that they utter the inquired oracles. (Nissinen, *Ancient Prophecy*, pgs. 171*ff*)