Veyne's question, did the Greeks believe in their myths?22, is answered in the negative as soon as the concept of 'myth' is thought of In fact, no one
Greek myths were an important part of the education of Greek citizens The myths were often The gods could exercise their powers on one another and on
Furthermore, this antique mythology is considered as the body of myths concerning the gods, goddesses, heroes and other mythical heroes related to the Greek
But how and when did such elements make their way to the Greek world? greater precision the relationship between mythology and ritual practice in the
Another point of contention in speaking of Greek myth and religion is that these are posed here is the same for anyone who would study a foreign religion what it came to in practice, for contingent cultural reasons: the great body of Greek
and other ritual practices, sanctuaries, temples and temple functionaries, laws and But how and when did such elements make their way to the Greek world? central to any investigation: (l) myths, rituals, and cults; (2) the vehicles of cultural
PDF document for free
- PDF document for free
![[PDF] Greek Religion and the Ancient Near East - University of Washington](https://pdfprof.com/EN_PDFV2/Docs/PDF_5/78098_5Noegel50_BCGR2007.pdf.jpg "[PDF] Greek Religion and the Ancient Near East - University of Washington")
78098_5Noegel50_BCGR2007.pdf
Prof.ScottB.Noegel
Chair,Dept.ofNearEasternLanguagesandCivilization
UniversityofWashington.
"GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast."
FirstPublishedin:
DanielOgden,ed.
TheBlackwellCompaniontoGreekReligion
London:Blackwell(2006),21-37.
CHAPTERONE
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast
ScottB.Noegel
Infact,thenamesofnearlyallthegodscarnetoHellasfromEgypt.ForIamconvinced byinquirythattheyhavecornefromforeignparts,andIbelievethattheycamechiefly fromEgypt. (Herodotus,2.50.1,ca.450Be) ThehistoricalrelationshipbetweenGreekreligionandtheancientNearEastisone thatscholarshavepondered,investigated,anddebatedformanyyears.Approachesto thesubjecthaverangedfronithemerelysuggestivetothefiercelypolemical.Atthe heartofthesubjectisaquestionofculturalinfluence;thatistosay,whetherstriking similaritiesinthetextual,artistic,andarchaeologicalremainsconstituteevidencefor NearEasterninfluenceonGreekcultureorwhetheronecanaccountforaffinitiesby seeing'themasindependentdevelopments.Itisintothislargercontextofcultural influencethatonemustplacediscussionsofGreekreligionandtheancientNearEast. Intheiroutwardforms,atleast,Aegeanreligionsappearverysimilartothoseinthe NearEast.Inboth,forexample,onefindscultimages,altarsandsacrifices,libations andotherritualpractices,sanctuaries,templesandtemplefunctionaries,lawsand ethics,prayer,hymns,incantations,curses,culticdancing,festivals,divination, ecstasy,seers,andoracles.Othersharedfeaturesincludetheexistenceofdivinities anddemonsofbothgenders,anassociationofgodswithcosmicregions,notionsof thesacred,andconceptsofpollution,purification,andatonement.However,since onecanfindthesefeaturesinreligioustraditionsthathadnocontactwiththeAegean ortheNearEastitispossiblethattheyrepresentindependentdevelopments.Onthe otherhand,theirpresenceelsewheredoesnotnecessarilyruleoutthepossibilitythat theyaretheresultofculturalinfluence.Assomeclassicistshavepointedout,Near Easterninfluenceisthemostlikelyexplanationforsomeelements-certainpurifica- tionrituals,thesacrificialuseofscapegoats,andfoundationdeposits-tonamejusta f~w.ButhowandwhendidsuchelementsmaketheirwaytotheGreekworld?Such questionsarenoteasilyanswered. Forcenturies,questionsofinfluencewereintimatelyboundupwithperspectivesof privilege.Scholarshipofthelatenineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturiesoftentookit forgrantedthat"Greece"wasthefontofwesterncivilization.InformedbyRomantic
22ScottB.Noegel
nationalismand,inpart,bytheracismassociatedwithit,itunderstoodthe"genius" ofGreekcivilizationasmarkingtheendofantiquityandthestartofa"miracle" that"anticipatedtheEnlightenmentbybreakingwithmyth,tradition,andpuerile superstitiontoachieveacriticalviewofreligion"(Lincoln2004:658).TheNearEast representedallthatwas"barbarian"and"pagan."Consequently,lookingeastward forevidenceofcontactandinfluenceremainedalargelyperipheralenterprise.Afew scholarsofferedchallengestothedominantparadigm(Astour1965;Berard1902-3; Brown1898;Farnell1911;Gordon1956,1962,1966,1967;Wirth1921),buttheir workswentlargelyunnoticedbyclassicists.Recentdecadeshaveseenthisparadigm shift,butithasnotshiftedwithoutagooddealofcontroversyanddisciplinary polemic(Bernal1987,1990,1991,2001;Lefkowitz1996a,1996b). Today,itisfairtosaythataconsensusviewamongclassicistsandNearEastern scholarsadmitsofsomeEast-to-Westinfluence.Yetvitalquestionsremain.How muchandwhatkindofinfluencearewespeakingof?Howearlydoesthisinfluence occur?Andhowdoesonedifferentiateevidenceformerecontactfromevidencefor influence?Responsestothesequestionshavebeenhotlydebated,andtypicallythey havefallenalongdisciplinarylines,withclassicistsseeingNearEasterninfluenceas largelyintermittentuntilthelatearchaicandclassicalperiods(Burkert1992,2004,
2005a;Scheid2004)andNearEasternscholars(andafewclassicists:Morris1992,
2001;Walcot1966;West1995,1997)pushingforgreaterinfluenceandearlierdates
(Burstein1996;DalleyandReyes1998a;Naveh1973;Redford1992;Talon2001). Influenceinbothdirectionsisgenerallyacceptedforthehellenisticperiodandlater (Kuhrt1995;Linssen2004).. ThequestionofNearEasterninfluencewouldappeartobedifficultenoughto answerwereitnotforaseriesofmorerecentchallengesthathavecomefromavariety ofdisciplines.Anthropologists,forexample,havedrawnattentiontothemodern westernbiasesthatinformtheveryquestionofinfluence.Historiansofreligionask whatismeantby"influence"inaworldofconstantmutualcontactandexchange. Classiciststooarenowurgingustoconsiderwhatpreconditionsmakeanycultural exchangeapossibilityandtodefinewithgreaterrigorthemodalitiesoftransmission inbothdirections(Johnston1999a;Raaflaub2000).Otherscholarsquestion whetheronecanlegitimatelyspeakabout"religion"inculturesthatpossessno correspondingwordforit.Indeed,somewonderwhetheranyproposedtaxonomy forreligioncanaccountforitsinherentdiversityandpluralityofforms,orwhether anytaxonomycanbefreefromideology(Smith2004:169,171-2,179).Termslike "cult,""sacrifice,"and"ritual,"whosedefinitionshadlongbeentakenforgranted, havenowbecomefocalpointsfortheoreticaldebateandredefinition(Bremmer
2004;Burkert1983;Girard1977;HubertandMauss1964;Rappaport1979;
Smith2004:145-59;Versnel1993:16-89).
Thelabel"NearEast"alsohasbecomeincreasinglyproblematicforsomescholars whendiscussingreligion.Foronething,thephrasemasksunderasinglerubric dozensofdiversepeoplesandcultures.Thoughthereissomeheuristicutility individingtheNearEastintoseveralculturalzones,scholarsfinditextremely difficulttospeakgenerallyof"religion"inEgypt,Syro-Canaan,Israel,Anatolia,or Mesopotamiaalone,eachofwhichpossessedcountlessreligionsofinfinitevarietyat family,village,andstatelevels(Hornung1971;Morenz1973;Oppenheim1977; J.Smith2003;Zevit2001).Moreover,implicitintheclassification"NearEast"isa
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast23
geographicalperspectivethatcanbedefinedonlybyitsrelationtotheWest.Thus,for someithasbecomeproblematicatbestand"orientalist"atworst(Said1978).For similarreasons,manyclassicistshavebeguntoavoidemployingtheanachronistic term"Greek"whendiscussingthemanydisparateAegeanculturesofantiquityand optinsteadformorelocalizedandaccuratetermssuchas"Athenian,""Spartan," andthelike. Givensuchdifficulties,scholarstypicallyhaveapproachedthesubjectof"Greek religionandtheancientNearEilst"inoneofthreeoverlappingways,eachofwhich dependsonthescholar'sdefinitionofreligionandviewconcerningthegeneral comparabilityofreligioustraditions.Thefirstapproachexaminesthesubjectby remainingattentivetotheparticulartimes,places,andculturalcontextsofeach religionunderinvestigation.ItaimstoidentifYcasesinwhichspecificreligious practicesandbeliefsareadopted,adapted,andtransformedwhenculturescome intocontact(Brown1995,2000,2001;Dotan2003;Faraone1993,1995,2002; Frankfurter1998;Noegel1998,2004;Toorn1985,1997).Thesecondapproach adoptsamoreholisticandcomparativevantage,andseekstoascertainwhethera comparativeenterpriseisjustifiedbyidentifYingtrends,issues,andfeaturesthatunite thevariousreligionsofthe"Mediterraneanworld"(Graf2004b;D.P.Wright
2004a).Thethirdapproachseesvalueincomparingthevariousreligionsofthe
worldregardlessoftheirhistoricalandculturalcontexts.Itisinterestedlessin identifYingcasesofinfluenceandexchangethaninremovingthestudyofallreligions fromtheirrelativeacademicisolation(Eliade1959,r'969;Mondi1990). Regardlessofwhichapproachoneadopts,thosepursuingthestudyof"Greek religionandtheancientNearEast"mustconsignthemselvestosortingthroughand interpretinganunwieldyandthornymassoftextual,artistic,andarchaeological evidence.Itis,ofcourse,impossibletotreatsuchavastarrayofinformation adequatelyhere.Therefore,Ishallfocusthediscussiononfourproblemsthatare centraltoanyinvestigation:(l)myths,rituals,andcults;(2)thevehiclesofcultural transmission;(3)sharedtaxonomiesandtheproblemofculturalexchange;and (4)monotheisms,monolatries,henotheisms,andpolytheisms.
Myths,Rituals,andCults
Itisnotsurprisingthatsomemythologicaltraditionsshouldhavecrossedgeographic andculturalboundaries.Mterall,theancientworldwashighlycosmopolitan,inter- active,andmultilingual(Sasson2005).Somemythswerewidelyknowninantiquity. TheepicofGilgamesh,forexample,wastranslatedintoanumberoflanguages. CuneiformtabletsdiscoveredatAmarnainEgyptthatdatetothefourteenthcentury BCrevealtheirscribestohavebeenacquaintedwithanumberofMesopotamian mythologicaltraditions,includingthoseofAdapa,Nergal,andEreshkigal.They alsoofferdirectevidenceforclosecontactsbetweenEgypt,Mesopotamia,Crete, Cyprus,Anatolia,andthecity-statesofSyro-Canaan.Thoughthetabletsrecordno correspondencewithMycenaeitislikelythatperishablematerialsnowlost,like papyrus,leather,andwood,alsoservedasmediaforcorrespondence.Indeed,evi- denceforMycenae'sinternationalcontactscomesfromacacheofMesopotamian cylindersealsdiscoveredatThebes(Porada1981)andfromtheverywordforEgypt 24
ScottB.Noegel
inMycenaeanGreek(a-i-ku-pu-ti-jo,laterGreekAigyptos),whichderivesfromthe Egyptianwordsf;wt-k3-ptJ;(lit."TempleofPtah")appliedmetonymicallytoallof
Egypt.
Intheearlypartofthelastcenturyclassicistspointedtotheexistenceofanumber ofparallelsbetweenAegeanmythologiesandthosefoundinbiblical,Egyptian,and Mesopotamiantexts(Brown1898;Frazer1921),butoftenthesecomparisonslacked methodologicalsophisticationandreliedtooheavilyuponbroadthematicsimilar- ities.Morerecentstudiesdemonstrateagreaterawarenessofthelimitsofthe comparativemethod,butalsoagreaterappreciationforwhatsharedmythological elementsimply(ordonotimply)aboutinterculturalcontactandthediffusionof ideas(Burkert1987b;Graf2004a;N.Marinatos2001;Mondi1990;Penglase1994;
West1995,1997).
TheworksofHesiodandHomer,inparticular,havebeenbroughtintoclose dialoguewiththegreatepicsofAnatolia,Mesopotamia,Syro-Canaan,and,less often,Egypt(Bachvarova2002,2005;Langdon1990;N.Marinatos2001;Noegel
2002,2005a).Itisnowappropriatetospeakofan"Asiaticmythologicalkoine"and
itsformativeimpactontheAegeanliteraturesoftheBronzeandIronAges(Graf
2004a;cf."Aegeankoine"inBurkert1985,1992,but"NearEastern-Aegean
culturalcommunity[koiner'inBurkert2005a:291). Suchakoine,scholarssuggest,explainstheparallelsthatexistbetweenAegeanand NearEasternmythologicalconceptionsconcerningcreation,cosmology,thegods, humankind,death,andtheafterlife(Astour1998;West1995).Insomecases,the mythologicalparallelsaresogeographicallyandtemporallywidespreadthatanyeffort totracetheirwestwardmovementwithprecisionisimpossible.Suchisthecasewith thestoryoftheworlddeluge.ItisattestedinanumberofSumerian,Akkadian, Greek,andIndiansources,andofcourseinthebiblicalstoryofNoah(Genesis6-9). Anotheristhatofabattlebetweenagodorheroandmany-headedserpentrepre- sentingchaos.OnefindsthisthemeinmythologicaltextsfromAnatolia,Egypt, Ugarit,andIsrael(Isaiah27:1;Psalms74:12-14).Itsappearanceinavarietyof Greekmyths,includingthoseofHeraclesandJasonandtheArgonauts(Watkins
1994),clearlyrepresentseasterninfluenceeventhoughtheexactpathoftransmissioncannotbeknown.
Insomecasestheparallelsappeartobesoclosethattheysuggestliteraryborrow- ing.Forexample,theHittitemythofthe"KingshipofHeaven"involvestheviolent severingofHeaven'spenisinawaythatrecallsthecastrationofUranusinHesiod's Theogony.AlsoreminiscentoftheTheogonyistheHittite"SongofUllikumi"inwhich aweather-goddefeatsausurperdeityinawayremarkablysimilartothemannerin whichZeusdefeatsTyphon(Burkert2005a:295-6). Mesopotamianmythsalsohaveprovidedanumberofconspicuousparallels.Some oftheclosesthavebeenthosethatconnectHesiod'sTheogonyandtheBabylonian creationstoryEnilmaElish.Bothtexts,forexample,describehowthecommingling oftheSkyandtheEarthresultedinthebirthofthegods.Othercloseparallelsinclude thosethatlinkportionsoftheIliadandtheOdysseywiththeAtrahasisepicand theepicofGilgamesh(Abusch2001;Burkert1991,1992:88-93,2005a;Rollinger
1996;West1997).Well-knownexamplesofthelatterincludethesimilarities
betweenAchilles'speechtohisdeadfriendPatroclusandGilgamesh'sspeechtohis deceasedcomradeEnkidu.Alsoremarkableareparallelsthatconnecttheaccountof
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast25
Gilgamesh'srefusalofIshtar'ssexualadvancestoHomer'streatmentofAphrodite andAnchises.Theevidenceforliteraryborrowingthatthesemotifsandthematic parallelsprovide,andtherearemanymorethancanbeelaborateduponhere,is bolsteredbyadditionalsimilaritiesinstyleandcompositionalstructure(Morris
1997).Therecannolongerbeanydoubtthatatleastsomeoftheseparallelsare
theresultofcontactwiththeNearEast. Nevertheless,thoughstriking,thevalueofsuchparallelsforthecomparativestudy ofAegeanandNearEasternreligionsremainsdifficulttogauge.Muchdependson howonedefinesmyth(orepic:Edmunds2005)anditsrelationtoritualandrhecult. Inpreviousyears,ancientmythologiesweregenerallyunderstoodasscriptsforritual performancesthatservedtoensurefertilityandthecontinuanceoftheagricultural cycle(Hooke1933;Malinowski1926).Inspiringthismodel,inpart,wastheknow- ledgethatEmlmaElishwasrecitedonthefourthdayoftheBabylonianNewYear (akitu)festival(Bi.'dmead2002).TheHittitestoryofthecombatbetweenthe weather-godandtheserpentIlluyankasimilarlyinformsusthatitwasrecitedduring. theHatticNewYear(purulli)festival(Beckman2005:257).Suchtextsandtheir proposedpurposeshavehistoricallybeenusedastemplatesforunderstandingthe functionofAegeanmythologicaltexts. Mostscholarstodaywouldconsideritnaivetoascribetoallculturessucha relationshipbetweenmythsandrituals.Therearesimplytoomanyculturaldiffer- encesthatinformthemeaningofbothmythandritual.ItisclearthatAegeanpeoples didnotconsidertheTheogonyortheIliadandOdyssey"sacredtexts"inthesameway thatMesopotamiansunderstoodEmlmaElish(Hultgard2004),eveniflaterGreek writersdidconsiderthemformativefordefiningthehellenicpantheon(Herodotus
2.53).WealsohavenoevidencethatAegeanmythologicaltextswereeverenactedor
recitedduringculticevents,andevenifoneconcedesthatsomeAegeanmythsplayed sucharole(e.g.,HomericHymntoApollo),itisprobablethattheirrelationshipto thecultwasunderstooddifferentlyinMesopotamia(Lambert1968).Fewscholars oftheNearEastmaintaintodaythatEnlimaElishandtheaccountofIlluyanka scriptedtheritualeventsoftheirrespectiveNewYearfestivals.Nevertheless,most dounderstandMesopotamianmythsandritualstobetightlyconnected,inthatthe mythsservedasaliturgicalmeansofreifyingthecosmologicalimportanceoftheritual events.Theypointoutthatevenwhenritualtextsinvokemythologicalreferences theydosoonlytoestablishdivineprecedent.Suchevidencesuggeststhatthe relationshipbetweenmythsandritualsmayhavebeencloserinMesopotamiaand
AnatoliathanintheAegeanworld.
What,then,istherelationshipbetweenAegeanmythsandrituals?Scholarshave hadanextremelydifficulttimeansweringthisquestion(Fontenrose1966).Oneof thereasonsforthisisthatthedescriptionsofreligiousritualsfoundintheHomeric epicsarehighlystylizedandthereforedonotresembletheactualritualpracticesof anyhistoricalperiod.Therearesomeexceptionstothis,suchasthemanticpraxis depictedintheso-called"BookoftheDead"(Odyssey11),whichsharesaffinities withHittitenecromancyrituals(Steiner1971).Butonthewhole,Homer'streat- mentofritualstendstobegeneralized.Inaddition,theHomericepicsweresowell knownthattheycouldhaveinfluencedthewaysinwhichlaterritualswereper- formed,andthewaysinwhichartistsandphilosophersimaginedreligion(Mikalson
2004b:211).
26ScottB.Noegel
AnotherreasonwhyestablishingtherelationshipbetweenAegeanmythsand ritualshasprovensodifficultisthatthereappearstobelittleagreementamongst scholarsastohowtodefineritual(Bremmer2004;Versnel1993:16-89).Inspiredby avarietyoftheoreticalperspectives(e.g.,structuralist,psychological,sociological, ideological),manynewwaysforunderstandingthemeaningandoriginsofmythalso haveemerged(Burkert1983,1985;Csapo2005;Graf2004a).Regardlessofone's methodologicalapproach,itseemsfairlyobvioustomostscholarsthatsomestruc- turalaffinitiesexistbetweenmythsandritualsgenerally.Nevertheless,itappearsthat theonlysafegeneralizationaboutmythisthatitoftenservesanapologeticfunction providingbeliefsystems,andthusritualpractices,withdivinelysanctionedetiologies (Graf2004a). AllthismakesitextremelydifficulttousecomparativeAegeanandNearEastern mythology~sevidenceforthediffusionofreligioustraditions.Certainlycultic diffusionmustliebehindmanyoftheparallels,butuntilscholarscanclaritywith greaterprecisiontherelationshipbetweenmythologyandritualpracticeintheNear EastandintheAegeanworld,wemustseeNearEasternmythologyprimarilyasa stimulustotheGreekpoetictraditionand,accordingtosomescholars,evento philosophy(Thomas2004;West1995:41-2).
TheVehiclesofCulturalTransmission
Anotherproblemthatremainscentraltotheinvestigationof"Greekreligionandthe ancientNearEast"isthatofthevehiclesofculturaltransmission.Simplyput,how werereligiousideasandpracticestransmittedfromthecivilizationsoftheNearEast totheAegean?Andwhotransmittedthem?Asonemightimagine,manyfactors, includingtradeandcommerce,warfare,migration,exile,foreignemployment,reli- giousfestivals,anddiplomacy,arelikelytohavecreatedcontextsforexchange(Dalley
1998).Unfortunately,thetextual,artistic,andarchaeologicalevidenceistoofrag-
mentarytoprovideadetailedpictureofhowthesefactorsenabledreligiousexchange ineachhistoricalperiod.Nevertheless,itdoesallowustorecognizetheimportance ofallofthemthroughoutthehistoryoftheAegeanworld.Evenacursorysurveyof theevidencerevealsalonghistoryofnearlyconstantinternationalexchangebyland andsea(Astour1995;Bass1995),whichislikelytohavestimulatedexchangeamong theregion'sdiversereligioustraditions. Itisgenerallyrecognizedthat,duringtheBronzeAge,theMinoancivilizationof Creteplayedaformativeroleinshapingtheculturalcontoursofwhatwaslaterto becomeMycenaeanGreece(Burkert1985:19-22).However,itisalsoknownthat theMinoancivilizationwasitselfgreatlyshapedbycontactswithEgyptandwiththe civilizationsoftheeasternMediterranean,includingMesopotamia(Cline1987,
1991,1994;N.Marinatos1993;Redford1992:242-3).Inearlyscholarship,Minoan
religionwastypicallyreferredtoasa"primitive"formof"fertilityworship"that focusedprimarilyona"GreatMotherGoddess."Today,however,scholarsseethe Minoanreligioussystemasfarmorecomplex,resemblingthesophisticatedcultsof theNearEast(Marinatos1993). Yetdespiteinternationalinfluences,MinoanCretewasnotacarboncopyof NearEasternpolities.ItdidnotrepresentNearEasterncultureanymorethanit
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast27
represented"thefirsthighEuropeanculture"(Burkert2005a:292).Itwasanisland cultureofitsownmakinganditwashighlyinfluential.Wonderfullypreserved MinoanfrescoesontheislandofThera,forexample,demonstratetheextentof theirpresenceintheregionanddepicttheirtravelstoNorthMrica(S.Marinatos
1973).ThepalacewallsoftheHyksoscapitalofAvaris(Telel-Daba')inthesixteenth
centuryBCrevealthepresenceofMinoanartisans(Marinatos1998),asdopalace reliefsatMari,onthemid-Euphrates,QatnainSyria,andTelKabriinIsrael. ThematerialcultureofMycenae,fromitsvaultedtombstoitsmountainsanctu- aries,givesconclusiveevidencefortheimprintofCretanreligioustraditions-so muchsothatmanyclassicistsfinditdifficulttodifferentiateMinoanreligionfrom thatofMycenae.Nevertheless,onemustrelyentirelyupontheartisticandarchaeo- logicalrecordofCreteinordertounderstandMinoanreligion.Noonehasyetbeen abletodecipherconvincinglytheMinoanscriptsinusefrom1850to1450BC(i.e., Cretanhieroglyphic,LinearA,andCypro-Minoan).LinearB,thescriptinuseafter thethirteenthcenturyBC,wasusedtorecordanearlyformofGreek.Aperiodof intermittentdestructionseparatesLinearBfromtheearlierscripts.Nevertheless,the apparentruptureandchangeofscriptdonotcorrelatetomassivechangesinMinoan culture,formanyaspectsoftheso-called"Minoan-Mycenaeanreligion"appearto havesurvivedthetransition(Nilsson1950).DespiteaninfluxofMycenaeansettlers afterthisperiod,MinoancultureremaineddistinctivelyMinoan(Knapp1995:1442). WhilemuchattentionhasfocusedonCrete,inpartowingtoitslaterconnections tomainlandMycenae,theMediterraneanarchaeologicalrecordatteststoamuch largernetworkofmaritimepowersduringtheBronzeAge. TheEgyptianshadenjoyedalongandubiquitouspresenceontheMediterranean. Egypt'sclosecommercialandculturalconnectionstoSyria,especiallythecityof Byblos,meantthatithadtoprotectitsintereststhere.Theconflictsthatensued betweenEgyptandtheHittitekingdomduringthefourteenthtothirteenthcentur- iesBCareafittingdemonstrationofEgypt'sprotectiveinterestintheLevant.Not onlyweresomeEgyptians(probablymerchants)livinginvariouscitiesofSyriaand theLevant,aswellasonCyprus,someAegeanpeoples(alsoprobablymerchants) werelivinginEgypt(Dothan1995:1273).Theretheydoubtlesswereexposedto
Egyptianreligiouspracticesandbeliefs.
MycenaeanwaresfoundattheseaportofUgarit(modernRasShamra,inSyria) showthatexchangesbetweenMycenaeansandthepeoplesoftheeasternedgesof theMediterraneanwerecloseandfrequent(Langdon1989).Ongoingtradewith MycenaewouldhaveprovidedopportunitiesfortheintroductionofSyria'smany gods(infactUgariticofferinglistsnamemorethanonehundredgods:D.P.Wright
2004b:174).AsillustratedbytheBronzeAgeshipwreckdiscoveredatUluBurun
offthecoastofsouthernTurkey,thepeoplesofSyro-Canaanwerelongengagedin thetransportofcargofromEgypttoMesopotamia,Cyprus,theLevant,and theAegean(Bass1989).Suchacontextofferednumerousoccasionsforcultural exchange. BronzeAgeCypruswasalsoacosmopolitanplace.ThereisevidenceforHittites, Semites,Hurrians,Egyptians,andAegeanpeoplesalllivingontheisland.Becauseof itsproximitytotheSyriancoast,itsmaterialcultureappearstohavesharedmorein commonwiththelandstotheEast.Nevertheless,becauseitwasavitalsourceof copper,itscontactsreachedfarWestaswell.ThoughourknowledgeofBronzeAge 28
ScottB.Noegel
Cypriotereligionsisscant,thesettlementofsomanydiversepeoplesmusthave broughtmanydifferenttraditionsintocontact. ThesumtotalofevidencemakesitclearthattheBronzeAgeMediterraneanwasfar moreinteractivethanisoftenportrayedintextbooks.Indeed,wemustenvisionitasa maritimeworldinwhichpeoplefromCrete,Cyprus,Sardinia,Rhodes,Thera,the city-statesofSyriaandtheLevant,and,ofcourse,Egyptenjoyedstrongcommercial andculturalties.Itissafetoassumethatwhenthesepeoplestooktothewaterthey tooktheirreligioustraditionsalongwiththem(Brody1998). Ofcourse,seatradewasnottheonlymeansofculturaltransmissionduringthe BronzeAge.Religiousfestivals,knownespeciallyfromAnatolia,alsoprovided opportunitiesforcontactbetweenHurrian,Hittite,andAegeanbards,performers, andculticpersonnel(Bachvarovaforthcoming).Suchfestivalsaccompaniedthe transportofdivinestatuesfromoneregiontoanother.Thetwobronze"smiting gods"foundattheMycenaeansiteofPhylakopionMelosmaybeplacedintothis context.TheMycenaeansalsoimportedanAnatoliangoddess,whomtheycalled "PotniaAswiya."Evidencesuggeststhatherculticofficialsandritualsaccompanied her(Bachvarovaforthcoming;Morris2001).ThoughHittitereligionappearstohave synthesizedHatticandHurriantraditions(McMahon1995:1983),itmustbekeptin mindthatscribeswhowroteAkkadianhadlonglivedatHattushaandhadpromoted Mesopotamianlearningthere(Beckman1983).SinceAkkadianeducationconsisted oflearningtheepicreligioustexts,wemayseeAnatoliaasaconduitforthewestward movementofMesopotamianreligiousideasaswell. Asaconsequenceofthecatastrophesthatledto,orresultedfrom,theinvasionsof the"SeaPeoples,"palacelifeiIJ.theMediterraneancametoanabruptendinthe twelfthcenturyBC,plungingtheAegeanworldintoa"darkage"(Sandars1978).It is,ofcourse,"dark"onlytousbecausenexttonothingsurvivesfromthisperiodthat mightshedlightonit-writtenrecords,forexample,appeartovanish.Nevertheless, archaeologicalfindsfoundoncertainsitesontheperipheryofEgyptianandNeo- HittitecontrolshowthatcontactsbetweentheAegeanandAnatolia(especially Lydia)andSyriawerenotcutoffentirelyandthat,thoughradicallyaltered,inter- nationalmaritimetradedidnotcease(Muhly2003;Sherratt2003). ItisintothiscontextthatwemustplacethecoastalpeoplesofSyro-Canaan (especiallyTyre,Sidon,andByblos),whomGreektexts(butnonativesources) refertoas"Phoenicians"(Burstein1996;Stern2003).Theirubiquitousmaritime, mercantile,andcolonialactivitiesmadethemenormouslyinfluentialthroughoutthe Mediterraneanworld(Noegel200Sb).AlreadybytheendofthetwelfthcenturyBC, therulersofTyreandSidon,oftenwithAssyrianencouragement,hadre-established thetradinglinksthatonceconnectedtheAegeanworldtothecitiesoftheEast (Frankenstein1979).Buttheirexpansiondidnotstopthere.Intheyearsthat followed,TyreextendeditspresenceprimarilyinasoutherndirectionintoPalestine andNorthAfrica,thoughTyrianenclavesarealsoinevidenceatCarthageandCyprus andfurthernorthatCarchemish.Sidon,ontheotherhand,movednorthinto Anatolia,Cilicia,Aramaea,andAssyria,andwesttoCrete,Cyprus,Sardinia,Sicily, andSpain.ContactsbetweenPhoenicianandAegeancenterswereclearlyveryclose sinceearlyinthisperiodGreekspeakersadoptedandadaptedthePhoenicianalphabet (Naveh1973),althoughpossiblythroughAramaeanintermediaries.Asdemonstrated bydedicatoryinscriptionsdevotedtothegoddessAstarteofSidoninSpainandI~ Ij iI i
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast29
Cyprus,thereligionsofthedistinctivePhoeniciancity-statesweretransportedwith them(Ribichini1999;Stern2003). AnotherresultoftheupheavalsofthetwelfthcenturyBCwasthesettlementin CanaanofthePhilistines.Textual,artistic,andarchaeologicalevidenceshowsthatthe PhilistineswereAegeaninorigin(Dothan1995;d.Morris2003).Theyarelistedand depicted,forexample,alongwithanumberofothers,asoneofthe"SeaPeoples,"on reliefsatthemortuarytempleofRamessesIII(1187-1156BC)atMedinetHabu. Thereliefsdepictpharaoh'svictoryoverthemduringanavalbattlefoughtonEgypt's coast.Additionaldocumentsinformusthatafterthewarthe"SeaPeoples"settled ontheLevantinecoast.ExcavationsatPhilistinesites,especiallyAshdod,Ekron,and TelQasile,showthemtohavebeenhighlyadvanced,especiallyinfarming,building, metallurgy,andtheproductionofoliveoil.TheirreligiouscultsincludedAegean, Canaanite,Cypriot,andEgyptianelements.Adedicatoryinscriptiontoagoddess (perhapsnamedPotnia)foundatEkronandwritteninalocallyadaptedPhoenician- typescriptsimilarlyillustratesthecomplexcultureofthePhilistines(Noegel2005c). Thecultandinscriptionalsodemonstratehowmutuallyinfluentialintercultural contactwasearlyinthesecondmillennium. FromtheeighthcenturyBC,aperiodcoincidingwitha"renaissance"of"Greek religion"(Mikalson2004b:212),peoplesoftheAegeancameintoincreasingcontact withAssyrianswhentheAssyriankingTilglath-PileserIII(744-727BC)expanded hispresencenorthward,defeatingthekingdomofUrartu,andwestward,taking controlofByblosandTyre(Rollinger2001).Shortlyaftertheseconquests,the city-stafesofSyriainformedtheAssyriankingthattheywereunderattackbyapeople theycalled"Ionians"(whomsomescholarsseeasamoregeneralreferencetothe peoplesofEuboea,Athens,Samos,andNaxos[Burkert1992:13]).Tilglath-Pileser Ill'sexpansionistpolicieswerecontinuedbyhissuccessorsShalmaneserV(726-722 BC)andSargonII(721-705BC).ThelatterseizedcontroloftheHittitecity-states ofCarchemish,Cilicia,andZinjirliinthelateeighthcenturyBC,causingthekingsof PaphosandSalamisinCyprustorecognizehissuzeraintyandsendgifts. IntheearlyseventhcenturyBCtheAssyriankingSennacherib(704-681BC) defeatedtheIoniansinadecisivenavalbattle.Soonafterwards,however,contact continuedthroughtheAssyrianroyalhouseanditsambassadors(Parpola2003),as wellasmerchants,artisans,andotherswhowereeagertomaintainAssyrian hegemonyandentrepreneurialinterestsintheregion.Aftersecuringhispowerin theregion,Sennacheribinstitutedapolicyofencouragingforeigntradeandsettle- mentonlandsthathehadthoroughlyannexed(Lafranchi2000).Thispolicy extendedhisreachdeepintotheAegean.BerossustellsusthatSennacheribeven inscribedhisachievementsonbronzestatuesandplacedtheminAthensinatemple especiallyconstructedforthem(DalleyandReyes1998a:98).Thoughwecannot confirmthereference,thediscoveryofMesopotamianbronzestatuesattemplesin Athens,Delphi,Olympia,Rhodes,andSamosarguesinfavorofitscredibility (Curtis1994). AlittlemorethanagenerationafterSennacherib,whentheAssyriankingAssur- banipal(669-627BC)alliedwithLydiaagainsttheCimmerians,heprotectedhis ambitionsintheregionbymaintainingtheroyalroadconnectingNinevehtoSardis. ThisroadprovidedtheAssyriancourtwithadirectconduittochannelitspolitical, military,andculturalinfluencestowesternAnatolia,andbyextensiontothecoastal
30ScottB.Noegel
statesofIonia.Itisintothiscontextofexchangebetweenroyalcourtsthatsome scholarsplacetheinfluenceofAkkadianreligiousliteratureupontheHomericepics (Rollinger1996). OtherscholarscreditperipateticNearEasternartisans(Gordon1956),seers, andpurificationpriests(Burkert1992)withdisseminatingtheirsacred,"magical," andmedicaltraditions(Thomas2004)(andciteHomericreferencestoitinerant seersandbardsinsupport,e.g.,Odyssey17.383-5).Thus,itisduringthisperiodof increasedaccess(ca.theeighthtoseventhcenturiesBC)thattheMesopotamian protectivedeitiesgalluandlamastuwereintroducedtotheGreek-speakingworld, becomingthedemonsGalloandLamia(West1991).ImagesofGilgameshand EnkiduslayingHumbaba,theguardianoftheCedarForest,similarlybegantoinspire depictionsofPerseuskillingtheGorgon.ApotropaicmasksofHumbaba'sfrighten- ingfacealsoappearinAegeandomesticsettingsatthistime(Faraone1992).The Aegeanpracticeofextispicy,alongwiththatofauguryfrombirds,lecanomancy,and certain"magical"practicesallappeartohavebeenimportedfromtheNearEast duringthisperiod(Bmkert1992:41-52;DalleyandReyes1998a:100-1;Faraone
1993,1995,2002).Theexistenceofmigrantseersandbardsmayprovideaback-
groundforunderstandingtheetymologicalconnectionbetweentheGreekword temenos"sacredprecinct"andtheAkkadiantemmenu"boundarymarker,foundation deposit,templeplatform"(West1997:36).Italsoallowsustounderstandwhymany Greekmusicalinstruments,aswellastheso-called"Pythagorean"systemoftuning, haveMesopotamianorigins(Yamauchi1967).Nevertheless,itisprobablethat suchfigureshadenjoyedagreatdealofinfluencealreadyduringtheBronzeAge (Bachvarovaforthcoming). Still,culturalexchangebetweenthecitiesoftheAegeanandMesopotamiawas verycloseduringthelatearchaicandclassicalperiods.Insomecases,theevidence forexchangeappearstogowellbeyondtheorbitsofcourtiersandmigrantseers. OnenotableexampleistheworshipofHeraatSamos,whichhadaparticularly Mesopotamianlook.DiscoveredtherewereAssyrianbronzevotivefigurinesofa manatprayerwithhishandonadog.Theuseofdogimagesandsacreddog cemeteriesatSamoscloselyresemblesthecultofGulatheBabyloniangoddessof healingwhoseimagewasacanine(Burkert1992:17-19,75-9).Alsodiscoveredat Samoswasabronzemufpussudragon,acreatureassociatedwiththeBabyloniancult ofMarduk.TheannualcuIticprocessionofHeraalsoinvolvedritualbathingand clothingofthedivinestatuesimilartothatpracticedatBabylonduringtheNew Yearfestival(DalleyandReyes1998a:98).JusthowHera'scultonSamosacquired theseMesopotamiantrappingsisunknown.Somehavesuggestedtheinfluenceof travelingAssyrianmerchantsorGreekmercenariesreturningfromBabylon(Burkert
1992:77),butthecombinedevidencesuggestsamorecontinuedMesopotamian
stimulus. EvidenceforNearEasterninfluenceintheAegeanworldaftertheseventhcentury BCbecomesincreasinglyobviousandisrarelydebated.Internationalaffairs,espe- ciallywars,closethegapbetweeneastandwest.Aegeanmercenariescanbefoundin Egyptian,Levantine,andMesopotamianarmies,butwedonotknowwhattheir religionswere.ShiftingalliancesinthesixthcenturyBC,causedinpartbythethreat ofBabylonianpower,broughtCyprusandCyrenetotheaidofEgypt.TheMediter- raneanworldwasbecomingsmaller.Ionianmerchantsandcraftsmenwerelivingin
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast31
Babylonandapparentlymarryingamongthelocalpopulation(Coldstream1993). ItisaroundthistimethatthePresocraticphilosophers(e.g.,PythagorasofSamos, PherecydesofSyros,andThalesofMiletos)werebecomingfamiliarwithBabylonian scienceandmythology(DalleyandReyes1998a:104). LaterstillwhenPersiaemergedasaworldpower,wefindBabylonallyingwith Sparta,anddespitetheeventualwarthatensuedbetweentheGreekcity-statesand Persia,east-westcontactsofallkindsonlyincreased.Forsometime,thesecontacts werehostile.Forexample,whentheIoniansburnedthetempleofKubabainSardis, thePersianIcingslaunchedaseriesofcounterattacksonGreeksanctuariesthatlasted fornearlytwodecades(Mikalson2004b:217).Nevertheless,weeventuallyfind GreeksworlcinginPersia,eveninpositionsofhighstatus.Greekartisansbegan toadoptartisticstylesthattheythoughtofasPersian,eventhoughthestyleswere inoriginBabylonian(DalleyandReyes1998b:108-9).Itisduringthisperiod ofintimatecontactthattheGreekworldbecameawareofthereligionsofPersia, includingZoroastrianism(deJong1997).BythefifthcenturyBCNearEastern mythologiesweretopicsofdiscussionamongAtheniansophists(DalleyandReyes
1998b:llO-ll).
BythelatefourthcenturyBC,inthehellenisticperiod,culturalinfluencesand religiouspracticesweremovingfluidlyinalldirections(Scheid2004).Alexander's conquestofBabylonresultedindirectnationaltieswithMacedoniaandthesteady flowofknowledgeofBabyloniancustomsandbeliefstothewest.Alexanderandhis SeleucidsuccessorsallowedMesopotamiancitiestoexistastheyhadforcenturies, andevenparticipatedintheirreligiousfestivals,includingtheBabylonianNewYear, wherepresumablytheywouldhavebeenexposedtoBabylonianreligiouscustoms andtextualtraditionssuchasthatofEnilmaElish. Alexander'ssuccessorsinEgypt,thePtolemies,lavishedsupportuponEgyptian temples(Finnestad1997)andfullypromotedtheworshipofEgyptiangods,espe- ciallyArnun-Re.Theyevenportrayedthemselvesontemplewallsinpharaonicdress asHorusincarnate(Koenen1993).Egyptianinfluencesappeartohavebeengreater onhellenisticreligionthanhellenismwasonEgyptianreligion.Zeuswasidentified withArnunandwasdepictedwiththephysicalattributesofArnun-Re,includinghis ram'shornsandsolardisk.PtolemaiceffortstointroducethefigureofSarapis,onthe otherhand,didnotmeettheinterestsoftheEgyptians,whopreferredtheirlong- standingsolarcultsofIsis,Osiris,Horus,andAmun-Re(Fraser1972:1.274;Morenz
1973:246).
ThecityofAlexandriabecameahotbedofinterculturalexchange,whereGreek speakerslivedsidebysidewithJewsandEgyptians.Theirreligioustraditionscame intofrequentcontactandconflict(Fraser1972:1.24-76,189-301;Gruen1998,
2000).Alexandriantombsillustratethesymbioticrelationshipbetweenhellenistic
andEgyptianreligioustraditions(Venit2002).Alexandrianliteraryactivitysimilarly incorporatesEgyptianreligioustastes(Noegel2004;Stephens2003).Egyptian religionsalsospreadtotheAegean.InthehellenisticperiodthecultsofIsis, Horus,andOsiriswereratherwidespreadthroughouttheMediterraneanworld (Johnston2004a:104-5;Mikalson2005:202).AculttoArnunhadalreadybeen establishedinAthensacenturyearlier. ThoughthelatterperiodsofAegeanhistoryarebetterdocumentedthantheearlier periods,theaggregateimpactoftheevidencesuggeststhatthevehiclesofcultural
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast33
ScholarsoftheNearEasthavesuggestedthatthetranslationofgods'namesmay becomparedtotheearlierMesopotamianpracticeoflistingdivinenamesinone language(e.g.,Sumerian)alongwiththeirequivalentsinanotherlanguage(e.g., Akkadian,Hurrian,Kassite,Hittite,Elamite)andbriefdescriptionsoftheirfunction (Civil1995:2312).Listingssuchas"An=Anum"and"An=Anumsaameli"are typicallydiscussedinthiscontext.Thelexicalpracticeissometimesdescribedas havingitsoriginsininternationallaw,specificallytheneedtoinvokegodsofequal rankinoaths(Assmann2004:24-5).Thecustomisattestedinsacrednarrativesas well.WefinditinthebiblicalstoryofAbraham,whoswearsanoathtotheCaananite kingofSaleminthenameof"Yahweh-EIMostHigh,"asopposedtotheking's"EI
MostHigh"(Genesis14:19-23).
Nevertheless,wecannotattributethispurposetoalldivinesynonymlists,because someofthemofferlinguisticequivalentsforSumeriandivinenamesatatimewhen
Sumerianwasnolongerspoken(e.g.,"An
=Anum"datesto1300-1100BC). Thus,ithardlycouldhaverepresentedcontemporaryritualpracticeamongthe population.Inaddition,manyofthegodsofMesopotamiahadlongbornemultiple names.Insomecasesthismakesitdifficulttotellifthelistsaresimplyprovidinga rosterofagod'slesser-knownnames.Moreoverthevariouslistshadverydifferent purposesandhistories."An=Anum,"forexample,servestocodifytheknown divinenamesinconjunctionwithcontemporaryknowledgeandtomapouttheir genealogicalrelationshipstoothergods,whereastheshorterlist"Anu =Anumsa ameli"notonlyassociatesgodsofsimilarfunction,itabsorbsminorgodsintomajor ones.Italsoassociatesanumberofimportantgodsoflongstanding(e.g.,Enlil,Sin, andNabu)withthenewlypromotedBabyloniangodMarduk(asitdoesalsowith Ea),thusmakingthemsubordinatetohim(Lambert1975).Thelists,therefore, servenotsimplytoequateoreventocodify,butalsotoestablishaquasi-henotheistic divineorderthatwaspromulgatedbytheroyalhouse.Thelistsaredocumentsof politicalasmuchasreligiousimport.Nevertheless,theircomparativevaluefor understandingthehellenisticpracticeofinterpretatioislimited. Anotherwayofexplainingthehellenisticpracticeofinterpretatiohasbeento compareitwiththeEgyptiancustomofjoiningdivinenamessuchasAmun-Re orRe-Harakhty.Yetthisalsoisnotexactlyaparallelpracticebecausethenames donotrepresenttranslations.NeitheroftheEgyptiandeitiescomprisingjoint nameswasregardedasforeign,anddespiteappearances,no"hybridity"isimplied. Eachdeityretaineditsindividuality;thefirstnamestoodforagodwith"cuitic/local dimension,"thesecondtorthe"cosmic"or"translocal"manifestationofthatgod (Assmann2004:25).Therefore,whiletheEgyptianpracticemayshedlighton thephenomenonofdualdivinenamessuchasYahweh-ElohiminGenesis2-3or Kothar-wa-IjasisatUgarit(cf.Xella1990),itdoeslittletohelpusunderstandthe processofinterpretatio. Moreover,agooddealofevidencesuggeststhatpeoplesoftheNearEastunder- stoodtheirowngodstobedistinctfromthoseinotherlands.TheHittites inparticularresistedeffortstoequatetheirowngodswiththoseofothers,even thoughtheydeliberatelyimportedgodsintotheirpantheonfromelsewhere.Asa resultthemembersoftheirpantheongrewinnumberuntiltheHittitesthemselves referredtotheirpantl1eonascontaining"thousandsofgods."Theirgod-listsname numerousdivinities,butkeeptheirplacesoforigindistinct.Thefewinstancesin 32
ScottB.Noegel
transmissionwereascomplexintheBronzeAgeastheywereattheendofthefirst millenniumBe.Itisclearthatmultipleopportunitiesfortheexchangeofreligious ideasexistedatalltimes,evenifourunderstandingofthemisbetterforsomeperiods thanothers.Nevertheless,whilewemayobtainsomeinsightintothecontextsand mechanismsofexchange,ourinabilitytoprovideanythingbutthebroadhistorical contoursoftheprocessesofreligiousexchangeremainsacentralproblemforscholars.
SharedTaxonomiesandtheProblem
ofCulturalExchange Historiansofreligionhavelongbeenoccupiedwiththestudyofwhatoccurswhen religionscomeintocontact.Butonlyinrecentdecadeshaveclassicistsandscholarsof theancientNearEastbeguntoengageindialoguewiththemandtheirworks.This dialoguehasallowedtherespectivedisciplinestorecognizethatfewbeliefsand practicesareadoptedorassimilatedwithoutadaptationandthatnoreligioustradition isresistanttochangeorexistsinavacuum.Ofcourse,whenreligionscomeinto contactsomeelementsareseenastooforeign.Ritual,forexample,tendstobe conservativebynature;thesmallestchanges,whetherinstitutedfromwithinor imposedfromtheoutside,oftenprovokeanxietiesandfearofidentitylossinprac- titioners.Ontheotherhand,religiouspracticesthatappeartoosimilaralsocause problemsofidentity(Smith2004:230-302).Thusitisextremelyimportantto accountforculturalborrowings,especiallyinmattersofreligiousbeliefandpractice, bypostulatingtheexistenceofsharedtaxonomies(waysofclassifYingtheworld)and thepreconditionsthatmakeadoptionpossible(Raaflaub2000:60-4).Defining andexplainingthesetaxonomiesandpreconditionsisacomplicatedendeavorthat posesanumberofdifficulties.Illustratingthesedifficultiesparticularlywellisthe hellenisticpracticeofequatingGreekandNearEasterngods. Duringthehellenisticperiod,Hellenesbegantoequatethegodsofforeignlands withtheirownnativedeitiesinaprocessoftenreferredtobyscholarsasinterpretatio or"translation."AHellenecould,withoutanyapparenttheologicaldilemma,wor- shipanyforeigngodthatmostcloselyresembledhisownnativedeity.Thus,Apollo wasidentifiedwithBaal,ZeuswithAmun,AphroditewithIshtar,ArtemiswithAnat, DemeterwithIsis,andsoon.Inthepasttheseequationswereseenasevidenceofthe impactofhellenisminforeignlands.However,recentscholarshavepointedoutthat suchequationsarefoundonlyinGreeksources,notNearEasternones,makingthem unlikelyrepresentationsofhellenization(Oelsner2002:189-90).Ofcourse,thisdoes notmeanthattheydonotrepresentanefforttospreadhellenicculture,onlythat theydonotrepresentthesuccessfulresultofsuchaneffort. Othershaveseenthesetranslationsasevidencefor"syncretism"or"hybridity," thatis,thefusionofAegeanandNearEasternreligions.However,neither"syncre- tism"nor"hybridity"offersaparticularlyusefulmodelforunderstandingthe processofinterpretatio,andnotjustbecauseoftheirtaintedcolonialhistories (Graf2004a:10).Neithermodelhelpsustoascertaintheprocessesthatunderlie suchequations,andsoneitherisabletoprovideanythingbutacharacterizationof thephenomenon.
34ScottB.Noegel
whichthelistsmakeapparentequationsbetweenonegodandanotherhavebeen showntorepresentstateeffortstobolsterHurrianelementsintheHittitepantheon (Collins2004). ThepeoplesoftheNearEastnotonlyregardedtheirowngodsasdistinctbutalso thoseoftheirneighbors.ThuswhentheHittitekingMurshiliII(ca.1350BC) sufferedamedicalattackthatresultedinaninabilitytospeak,hispriestssuggested thathesummonthegodsofLesbosandMycenaetohealhim(Morris2001:428). Compare2Kings1,whereAhaziahseekshelpfromBaal,and2Kings5,where NaamanseekshelpfromYahweh.Inaddition,anaccompanyingoracleassertsthat thesegodsweretobeworshipedinaccordancewiththeirnativecustoms(Bachvarova forthcoming).Certainly,hadsuchequationsbeenpossible,MurshiliIIcouldhave requestedthehelpofadeitywithsimilarskillsfromhisownpantheon. Greekspeakerssimilarlyrespectedthepowerofforeigndeitiesintheirnativelands. Theyalsoappeartohavemaintainedtheindividualityoftheirowngodsonforeign soileventhoughseveraloftheirowngods(e.g.,Adonis,Aphrodite,Apollo,Meter) appeartohaveforeignorigins(Burkert1985:176-9).Discoveriesdatingtothe hellenisticperiodgiveadditionalevidencefortheindividualityofforeigndeities evenintheGreek-speakingworld.AnaltarfoundontheislandofKos,inscribedin bothGreekandAramaic,isdedicatedtoBel,thegodofPalmyra.Similarly,abilingual GreekandPhoenicianinscriptionfoundatthePiraeusinAthensisdedicatedto Nergal.Greek"magical"papyridatingtotheRomanperiodalsoinvokenumerous Egyptian,Levantine,andMesopotamiangodsindividuallybyname,regardlessof whethertheyaccordthemsimilarstatus.Therefore,despitetheexistenceofgod-lists andhyphenateddivinenames,evidencesuggeststhatAegeanandNearEasterngods continuedtomaintaintheirindividuality. Evenifweaccepttheproposedparallelsasexplanationsforthehellenisticpractice, theissueofsharedtaxonomyremains.WedonotknowwhatcriteriaHellenes consideredwhenlinkingtheirnativegodstonon-nativenames.Wasittheirperceived functions,attributes,cosmologicalassociations,ortheirrelativeranksintheir respectivepantheons?WouldsuchequationshavefunctionedalsoinAegeanlands? Andifso,whywereHellenesdrawntotheworshipofforeigngods(e.g.,Isis,Horus, Osiris)ontheirownsoil?Wasitbecausetheywerenottiedtotheeconomicand nationalisticinterestsoftheAegeancity-statesinwhichtheytookroot?Andhowdid such"translations"accountforlocalvariationswithinpantheons?Exactlywhose pantheonwasbeingequated?NearEastdivinehierarchiesoftensignificantlydiffered fromlocaletolocaleandfromoneeratoanother.Evenwhengodsofthesamename wereworshipedindifferentplaces(e.g.,Baal/BelorIshtar/Astarte)theircultsand relationshipstotheirpantheonscouldbeverydifferent.ThusatSidon,thegoddess AstartewaspairedwithEshmun,atTyreshewasMelqart'swife,butatCarthage Baal-HamonwascoupledwithTinit.Suchlocalvariationsunderscorethedifficulties thatmusthavebeenpresentalreadyinantiquitywithmakingclearequations betweenAegeanandNearEasterndeities. Thepracticeofinterpretatiooffersjustonedemonstrationofthedifficulties scholarsfacewhentryingtoascertainthepreconditionsthatmakethetransmission ofreligiousideaspossible.Thesedifficultiesareonlycompoundedwhenweconsider thateveryelementthatenteredAegeanreligionfromtheNearEastmusthavebeen facilitatedbyitsownsetofsocial,economic,political,andhistoricalpreconditions.
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast35
Monotheisms,Monolatries,Henotheisms,
andPolytheisms IfonereadsearlyworksonancientNearEasternreligiononeoftenfindsrather "blackandwhite"descriptionsofancientbeliefsystems.Typically,onefindsmono- theism,thebeliefinandworshipofonegod,starklycontrastedwithpolytheism,the beliefinandworshipofmanygods.Representingmonotheism,ofcourse,wasancient Israel.Representingpolytheismwasessentiallyeveryothercultureofantiquity.In addition,polytheismandmonotheismoftenwereportrayedasexistinginanevolu- tionaryrelationshiptooneanother,withmonotheism(hencealsoJudaismand eventuallyChristianity)representingtheratheruniqueendofthelineand,conse- quently,themoremorallyandethicallyadvancedofthetwosystems. Recentdecades,however,haveseenmajorchangesinthewayscholarsthinkabout ancientNearEasternreligions.AncientIsrael,forone,isnowseenasalargely polytheisticsociety(Zevit2001),whoseearlyreligioushistorywasmarkedbymon- olatry,theworshipofonegod,butbeliefintheexistenceofmany(Rendsburg1995). OnlyduringandaftertheBabylonianexile(586BC)didasmallcircleofJudahite elitesmaintainabsolutemonotheism,perhapsundertheinfluenceofZoroastrianism. Moreover,aswenowknow,pre-exilicIsraelitereligionsalsowereinfluencedbySyro- CanaaniteandAssyriantraditions(Mullen1980;M.Smith1990,2001,2003;Stern
2003).EarlyeffortstoaccountforIsraelitemonotheismbyattributingittothe
influenceoftheEgyptianpharaohAkhenaten(Freud1939)have,forthemost part,beenabandoned. OurunderstandingofEgyptianandMesopotamianpolytheismalsohasbecome moresophisticated(Hornung1971;Lambert1975).Farfromdefiningthesebelief systemsmerelyastheworshipofmanygods,scholarsarenowreferringtothemas typesof"complexpolytheism"orhenotheism,inwhichmany(evenall)godscanbe containedin,conceivedas,orrepresentedbyasinglegod.Oftenthisgodisbelieved tobethecreatoroftheothersandstandsatthetopofawell-developedhierarchy.But thisisnotalwaysthecase.InEgypt,forexample,theword"god"intheabstract (n!.r)couldrefertoanygodthatonewasaddressingataparticulartime,andthat god,regardlessofhisorherrankinthepantheon,couldsimultaneouslystandinfor othersinvokedbythesupplicant.Inessence,agodcouldbeonethingandalso another.Godsalsocouldberepresentedinmultipleways(e.g.,anthropomorphically zoomorphically,orsymbolically)withouttheologicalcompromise.ThusThoth,the patrongodofthescribesand"magic,"couldberepresentedasahumanfigurewith theheadofanibisorasadivinebaboonevenifitwasbelievedthathehadmortal origins(Hodge2004).Inaddition,throughouttheNearEastancientsmadeno distinctionbetweenagodandthephysicalpropertiesorphenomenathatagod embodied(e.g.,sun,moon,wind). TheseaspectsofNearEasternpolytheism/henotheismcomplicatethewaywe thinkaboutthewestwarddiffusionofNearEasterncultspreciselybecausethey raisequestionsoftaxonomy.Again,thetopicofinterpretatioillustratesthiswell. Whatdoesitmean,forexample,forHellenesinEgypttoequateZeuswithAmun, andnotwithRe,whenAmuninhisnativesystemcanrepresenttheculticandlocal
36ScottB.Noegel
manifestationofReand/orallotherEgyptiangods?DidHellenesknowthisordid theyposittheirequationsbasedsolelyonasuperficialunderstandingoftheAmun cult?Andiftheunderstandingissuperficial,thentheprocessofinterpretatiocan hardlyrepresenttheactualculticpracticesofHellenesonforeignsoil.Iftheywere awareofthesubtletiesofindigenousformsofworship,the~whatdoesthistellus aboutthenatureoftheirownbeliefsystem(s)?Inwhatwayswerethedifferences betweenhellenisticpolytheismandEgyptianhenotheismmediated?Somehave attemptedtocontextualizetheprocessofinterpretatiobysuggestingthatthehellen- isticperiodwasatimeinwhichindividualgodsandgoddesseswerebeingincreasingly relegatedtorelativisticnotionsoftheuniversalityofdivinity.Thelateantique developmentofabeliefinauniversalHighestBeing(Greekhypsistos)whoembodies allothergods(nativeandforeign)issometimesseenashavingstemmedfromthe practiceofinterpretatio,andtobesurethenamebywhichonecallsagodappearsto havebeenirrelevanttosomeGreeksandRomans(Assmann2004:27).Somehave understoodthebeliefinaHighestBeingasamovetowardsmonotheism(Mikalson
2005:202).Othershavesuggestedthatittallieswithattemptstocreategreater
politicalunity(Fowden1993).Nevertheless,thedevelopmentalrelationshipbetween hypsistosandinterpretatioisbynomeanscertain,anditremainstobearticulated howabeliefinahypsistosdiffersfromthevarioushenotheisticsystemsoftheancient
NearEast.
Iftheprocessofinterpretatio(orperhapsthecontemporarystudyofit)obscures anything,itisthefactthatnotallpolytheistic/henotheisticsystemsarethesame.In somecasesthedifferencesmaybeasprofoundasthosethatdistinguishonecontem- poraryformofmonotheismfromanother.EvenareligioussystemlikeZoroastrian- ism,whichisoftenlabeled"dualist,"defiesourabilitytoapplythislabelconsistently. Itssacredtexts(theAvestas)maybereadassupportingmonotheism,dualism,and evenpolytheism(Stausberg2004:204). Moreover,eachofthegodsinanypolytheisticorhenotheisticsystemexistsnotina vacuum,butinanongoingdialecticalrelationshiptothelargerpantheon.Thegods' relationshipstooneanotherinpartdefinethem.IntheNearEasttheserelationships areprimarilykinship-based(i.e.,godsarefathers,mothers,husbands,wives,sons, daughters),buttheyarenotallidenticalineverylocale.ThegoddessesofAnatolia, forexample,appeartohaveenjoyedequalstatuswithgods.ThustheHittitesoften addressedtheirprayerstothedaughtersofgodswhowereexpectedtointercedeon theirbehalf(Hoffner1995:566-77).Inaddition,divinekinshiprelationsarecon- textualizedbysocialstructuresthatmirrorthepoliticalsystemsinwhichthereligions exist,whethermonarchies(Israel,Mesopotamia,Anatolia)ordemocracies(Athens). Nevertheless,somesocialstructures,suchasthedivineassembly,appearindifTerent politicalsystems(Ugarit,Mesopotamia,Athens).Untilscholarsfactorintotheir comparisonsthesubtledifferencesthatexistbetweenancientpolytheisms/henothe- isms,ourabilitytoascertainwhatpreconditionsenabledanyhellenistic"translation" willremainlimited. "GreekreligionandtheancientNearEast"isacomplexsubject.Whileclassicists andscholarsoftheNearEasthavealreadyshedanincredibleamountoflightonthe subject,futureresearchersarestillleftwithmanypuzzlestosolve.Ourinabilityto definetherelationshipbetweenmythsandritualsmakesitdifficulttodetermineits relativevalueforthecomparativestudyofNearEasternandAegeanreligions.The
GreekReligionandtheAncientNearEast37
difficultiesinestablishingtheexactvehiclesfortheexchangeofreligiousideas, especiallyasonemovesintothemoreremotepast,providelittlemorethanplausible modelsfortransmission.Further,theever-growinglistofparallelsbetweenAegean andNearEasterntextsandreligiouspracticesonlyunderscorestheneedtoestablish whatsharedtaxonomiesandconditionsmadetheirtransmissionpossible.Moreover, thecomplexandoftensubtledifferencesthatdistinguishonepolytheisticorhenothe- istreligionfromanothermakesuchaninvestigationfarmoredifficult.Thefour problemssurveyedaboveonlyscratchthesurfacewhenitcomestothedifficulties thatconfrontscholarsengagedinthecomparativestudyofancientMediterranean religions.Nevertheless,itisingrapplingwithsuchchallengesthatscholarshipmoves forward.Indeed,asarchaeologistscontinuetounearthnewfindsandastextual researchonthetopiccontinues,weshallbeinabetterpositiontotacklesuch challenges,especiallyifwedosowithinterdisciplinarydialogueandgoals.
GUIDETOFURTHERREADING
Forgeneraldiscussionsofthissubject,seeAdkinsandAdkins1996,BlackandGreen1992, HalloandYounger1997-2002,KeelandUehlinger1998,Toorn,Horst,andBecking1999. ForAnatoliaseeD.P.Wright2004a;forEgypt,Assmann2004,Hornung1971,Kakosy1995, Velde2003;forIsrael,Collins2004,Niditch1997;forSyro-Canaan,Caquot1980,Toorn
1995,D.P.Wright2004b;forMesopotamia,Beaulieu2004,Bottero1992,2001,Lambert
1968,1975,Livingstone1997,Wiggermann1995.
Greek Mythology Documents PDF, PPT , Doc