While chaos might be well suited for raiding and pillaging, my world is to be in a sedentary setting. Indeed, chaos, in the true spirit of the term, seems to run counter to what a sedentary society would strive for. To paraphrase Mackenzie:
Local deities tended to have a strong affiliation with the pragmatic, things that mattered to the subsistence of the citizens: fertility, agriculture, and so forth
The worldbuilding context is providing a narrative for a longstanding deity of chaos for a city-state: specifically, supplanting a Tiamat cult in a city-state that would be contemporaneous with Ur (roughly around its zenith, perhaps 2000 bce, some flexibility is afforded here). While some hypothesize that legacy deities were subsumed by newer iterations, as was possibly the case between the legacy cult of Abzu and the newer cult of Enki, most of the archaeological evidence points to Tiamat playing an antagonistic role (see Marduk vs Tiamat in the Enuma Elish).
Question
The challenge before us is not necessarily to dispute where the archaeological evidence falls but rather piece together a mosaic of how a chaos cult needs to evolve and operate in a manner that is consistent with what we know about the needs of ancient Mesopotamian peoples. Given the immutables:
- The cult is chaos 'true-to-spirit'
- The society is sedentary
and given flexibility among wealth, environmental and sociological factors, is it possible to devise a scientific approach that is historically consistent, that explains the incentive to uphold a chaotic Tiamat cult/institution?