SCHOOLS OF ORIENTAL STUDIES AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN HISTORIOGRAPHY
MELAMMU SYMPOSIA IV
SCHOOLS OF ORIENTAL STUDIES AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN HISTORIOGRAPHY Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Symposium of the Assyrian and Babylonian Intellectual Heritage Project Held in Ravenna, Italy, October 17-21, 2001 Edited by A. PANAINO A. PIRAS
UNIVERSITÀ DI BOLOGNA & ISIAO MILANO 2004
FOREWORD
T
he Fourth Annual Symposium of the M ELAMMU Project held in Ravenna (October 13th-17th 2001), one month after 11th September, was a very special event and not only from a scientific point of view, as on the one hand it was an important occasion to put together scholars engaged in different fields of research in a friendly and warm context of collaboration and debate and on the other hand it was a crucial moment for reflections and considerations about the humane side of this cultural project and its peculiar target, beyond scientific and academic researches, to promote dialogue among different cultures, languages and frames of mind. The results of those debates during this Conference caused the general assembly to decree the foundation of the “International Association for Intercultural Studies of the M ELAMMU Project” that was officially and legally established and provided with its own statutes in those days, as already documented in the Proceedings of the Third M ELAMMU Symposium (Milano 2002, pp. 257-264). The Fourth M ELAMMU Symposium of Ravenna, whose subject was “Schools of Oriental Studies and the Development of Modern Historiography,” was organized with the important support of the Assyrian American National Federation and the partnership of the “Alma Mater Studiorum – University of Bologna,” more specifically its Office of International Relationships, the Faculty of Preservation of the Cultural Heritage and the Department of Histories and Methods for the Preservation of the Cultural Heritage, the latter two being located in Ravenna, where the sessions took place. We also would like to thank the Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente (IsIAO) and its President, Professor Gherardo Gnoli, the Fondazione Flaminia and the Municipality of Ravenna for their precious collaboration; it is also our pleasure to mention here Dr. Claudia Leurini for her efficient activity in the organizing management of the Conference and Col. Ermanno Calderoni for his kind help too. The editors are also pleased to express their deep gratitude to Dr. Gian Pietro Basello and to Dr. Federica Crabu (“L’Orientale” University, Naples) for their informatic competence and skilfullness in tidying this fourth volume of proceedings of the M ELAMMU Symposium for pubblication.
Ravenna, June 2004
Antonio Panaino
Andrea Piras
“Alma Mater Studiorum – University of Bologna”
v
C ONTENTS
CONTENTS
F OREWORD – Antonio Panaino & Andrea Piras
.......................................
v
Symposium Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii List of Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
xi
G. P. B ASELLO , Elam between Assyriology and Iranian Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
W. B URKERT , Gyges to Croesus: Historiography between Herodotus and Cuneiform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 A. C ARILE , Political Thought in Byzantium as Seen by 20th Century Historians . . . 53 E. C AVALLINI , From Mazzarino until Today: Italian Studies between East and West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 S. M. C HIODI , Eracle tra Oriente e Occidente . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 S. D E M EIS , A Modern Approach to Assyrian-Babylonian Astronomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 R. N. F RYE , Truth and Lies in Ancient Iranian History
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
A. G ARIBOLDI , Monete dell’Iran preislamico dal Medagliere del Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna: catalogo e considerazioni in margine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 K. K ARTTUNEN , Expansion of Oriental Studies in the Early 19th Century . . . . . . . . . . 161 B. A. L EVINE , The Jewish Ketūbbāh as a ‘Dialogue Document’: The Continuity of a Cuneiform Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 E. Y. O DISHO , Assyrian (Aramaic): A Recent Model for its Maintenance and Revitalization
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
P. O GNIBENE , The Ossetic Studies in 17th and 18th Centuries: from the Travel Notes to the First Ossetic Grammars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 A. P ANAINO , Trends and Problems concerning the Mutual Relations between Iranian Pre-Islamic and Jewish Cultures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 S. P ARPOLA , Back to Delitzsch and Jeremias: The Relevance of the Pan-Babylonian School to the M ELAMMU Project . . . . . . . . . . 237 A. P IRAS , Mesopotamian Sacred Marriage and Pre-Islamic Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 M. V IDALE , Growing in a Foreign World: For a History of the “Meluhha Villages” in Mesopotamia in the 3rd Millennium BC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 J. G. W ESTENHOLZ , The Good Shepherd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 A. A NNUS , S. P ARPOLA & R. M. W HITING , The M ELAMMU Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Addresses of the Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
vii
B ASELLO
G IAN P IETRO B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
Napoli
Elam between Assyriology and Iranian Studies Mais ce que l’esprit humain a créé, l’esprit humain peut le déterrer, le retirer de l’oubli de la tombe, quand même son œuvre aurait été ensevelie pendant des milliers d’années 1
Saith Darius the King: tuvam k , haya aparam im m dipim patip s hi, taya man k tam v navat m !uv m, m taya draugam maniy hai. Thou who shalt hereafter read this inscription, let that which has been done by me convince thee; do not thou think it a lie. 2
Are modern historians convinced by Darius’ words? What is your opinion about Gaum ta and Bardiya, Smerdis and Cometes 3 ? In any case we are neither ancient Persians nor subjected to them, neither friends nor enemies. We are not directly involved in Darius’ message and royal propaganda. We cannot read the Bisotun inscription the way we read today’s newspaper, neither can we understand its text as its ancient composers did. 4 We lost the context, so at most we can appreciate the monumental environment as art and skilful deed of ancient men. Otherwise we have to study it, try1
Oppert 1851: 256. DB OP IV 41-43 (§56). Phonetic transcription according to Schmitt 1991: 69; translation according to Kent 1953: 131. 3 “Among the classical authors, only one, Justin, applies the name Cometes to Gaum ta (1.9.7)” (Briant 2001: 334), “mais le mage de ce nom (Cométès), chargé par Cambyse lui-même de mettre à mort le vrai Smerdis, pousse sur le trône son frère Oropastès!” (Briant 1996: 112). 4 Rossi 1981, especially pp. 187-191 (§§ 6.1-2). See also Cardona 1981: 178-179. 5 For example, Predari 1842: 1; Rawlinson 1876: 19; 2
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
ing to reconstruct ancient history, ideology and society, but, since there are square meters of inscriptions, furthermore trilingual, the first step was, and still partly is, to reconstruct ancient writings and languages. Did Darius foresee all that? Well, I think he was so aware of the greatness and freshness of his political establishment that he knew that its memory would have survived its fall. However, modern historiography is something unexpected to ancient peoples. From an internal point of view, it is usually said that Oriental studies were born in the Middle Ages from the study of the holy scriptures, 5 which were not only history or art, but first of all object of faith. It was the Bible which preserved the name of most ancient Eastern civilizations from complete oblivion. Then the 17th and 18th centuries came, and it was the age of the long journeys to the East which brought back accounts of fabulous ruins and mysterious scripts. 6 Later on, De Gubernatis 1876: 18, 21 and following pages; Guidi 1935: 538. Cf. Said 1995; Schwab 1984. 6 See Sancisi-Weerdenburg & Drijvers 1991. About the Italian traveller Pietro della Valle, see more recently Invernizzi 2001 and Vitalone 2003. According to Hinz & Koch 1987: 1332, the first drawings of Elamite texts were published in de Bruyn 1711 and Chardin 1711; Teloni 1903: 32 referred only to the latter; the inscription in Chardin 1711 is DPa according to Hinz & Koch, DPc according to Giovinazzo 1990 and Hachard & Hourcade 1999: 162 (“the first copy of one of the Persepolis inscriptions of Darius”). About Jean Chardin, see Emerson 1992. 1
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
in the 19th century, the first pioneering archaeological excavations began. 7 In the meanwhile, the trilingual Achaemenid inscriptions from Persepolis and Bisotun attracted the attention of Orientalists. As soon as the inscriptions became an object of study, the scholars’ first need was to find a name 8 for the languages. So, long before understanding them, the three 9 languages were sorted out according to the top-bottom order in which they generally appear on the walls of Persepolis, followed by such labels as ‘column, kind, range, species’ in English, 10 ‘Gattung, Art, Columne’ in German, 11 ‘colonne, sorte, type, système, espèce’ in French 12 and ‘genere, maniera’ in Italian. 13 Saith again Darius the King: ada xšn s hi, adatai azd bav ti: P rsahy martiyahy d"rai štiš par gm ta.
Then shalt thou know, then shall it become known to thee: the spear of a Persian man has gone forth far. 14
When Darius ordered to write that, he certainly did not imagine that not only his spear, but also the stylus of his scribes would have gone forth far, so far in space and time that by writing the Babylonian version of his inscriptions, he had put a seed which would give birth to our Assyriology at the beginning of the 19th century AD. Not satisfied, having ordered to write the inscriptions in Old Persian, too, 2500 years ago he contributed, together with the compilers of the Avesta corpus, to the birth of Iranian studies. 15 What about the remaining version? Which academic subject did it originate?
A Name for Elam At the very beginning of the deciphering adventure, when G.F. Grotefend, N.L. Westergaard and F. de Saulcy 16 wrote about the language of the so-called second kind, they did not know they were
dealing with Elamite. They named it ‘Median.’ In this section I would like to elucidate why Elamite was called ‘Median’ and how ‘Median’ became today’s Elamite. In a wider perspective, the
7
225 and 242, quoted in Teloni 1923: 230). 14 DNa OP 43-46 (§4). Phonetic transcription according to Schmitt 2000: 29; translation according to Kent 1953: 138. 15 According to Gignoux 1999: 167a (Iranian studies in France), Eugène Burnouf (1801-1852) was “the founder of Iranian linguistics.” The deciphering of the Old Persian cuneiform script was completed in 1851 by Oppert, who identified the sign l(a) (Schmitt 1999: 534a; Lecoq 1997: 28). Schmitt 1999: 530a (Iranian studies in German): “The first Iranist in the literal sense of the term was Friedrich Carl Andreas (1846-1930), professor of Western Asiatic philology at the University of Göttingen from 1903 to 1920.” See also Pagliaro 1935. 16 The first scholars who dealt with Elamite are: Westergaard, de Saulcy and then Norris (Oppert 1876: 136; also 1879: p. VII); Westergaard, de Saulcy, Norris and Oppert (Lenormant 1877: 217);
See Gran-Aymerich 1998 for a detailed account. Cf. Genesis 2,19-20; see also Cardona 1982: 7. 9 According to Weisbach 1890: 5, Niebuhr (1778) “erkannte [.] zuerst die 3 Arten der Inschriften”; see also Rossi 1985: 191-192. 10 For example, ‘column’ in Norris 1855; ‘species’ in Westergaard 1844. Also ‘idiom’ in Sayce 1874. 11 For example, ‘Columne’ in Winkler 1896. 12 For example, ‘colonne’ and ‘sorte’ in Scheil 1909: 528; ‘systême’ in Lenormant 1875: 314 and 316; ‘espèce’ in Oppert 1856: 173. Also ‘écriture’ in Löwenstern 1850a and 1850b. 13 For example, ‘genere’ in Finzi 1872: 2-3; Teloni 1903: 29-35; Teloni 1930: 37; ‘maniera’ in Teloni 1903: 32 and 1930: 37; Basevi 1850: 246. Luzzatto, already in 1848, preferred ‘persiano,’ ‘medo’ and ‘babilonese’ (Luzzatto 1848: 466-467). Jannelli similarly wrote in Latin about “scriptura cuneoformis Chaldaeorum, Medorum et Persarum” (Jannelli 1830: 8
2
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
focus is on the link between a written language and its name, 17 and the people who spoke it. As soon as the language of the first kind was connected to the language of Avesta, which was known since the second half of the 18th century and supposed at that time to be located in Bactria, 18 it was named (Old) Persian and therefore located in Persia. Then the languages of the second and third kinds could be related to “the neighbouring countries of ancient Media and Susiana.” 19 As to the language of the second kind, the name ‘Median’ was preferred, even if the Danish scholar Niels Ludvig Westergaard (1815-1878), was aware that by so doing, he disregarded the testimony of Strabo 20 “who plainly tells us that the Medes and Persians spoke nearly one and the same language.” 21 It was in 1844, and Westergaard referred to Rawlinson as an ‘oriental scholar.’ 22
In 1846, sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson (1810-1895), although not worried at all by Strabo’s wording, emphasized the Scythic character of this language. According to Rawlinson, the name ‘Median’ had been assigned to this language on a ground which was “irrespective of all internal evidences.” 23 In fact, “in many of the essential characteristics of language, the so-called Median organization is of the Scythic type.” 24 However, he conceded that “the Scythic or quasi-Scythic character which it presents should be recognised as a secondary development”25 because only the Median, i.e. the language of a people “admitted to a certain degree of participation in the political rights of the Persians,” 26 could precede the ancient and revered Babylonian language on the inscriptions. The great number of Old Persian loan words attested in Achaemenid Elamite misled Rawlinson. However, he was perfectly
Westergaard (1845) and then Norris, Oppert, later Weissbach (1890) (Furlani 1929: 4); Grotefend, Westergaard, Hincks and de Saulcy (Teloni 1930: 37, ‘Il secondo genere di Persepoli’); Westergaard (Lecoq 1997: 28); Westergaard and Norris (Schmitt 1999: 541b). According to Teloni (1903: 32), “gli studi più importanti intorno al [secondo] «genere» medesimo furono editi dal Westergaard (1845), dall’Hincks (1848) tanto segnalatosi nelle ricerche assire, da De Saulcy (1850), Oppert (1851-52), Holtzmann (1862-65), Fr. Lenormant (1871), Sayce (1874), Delattre (1883), Weissbach and Foy (1890 e sgg.).” As Luzzatto wrote, Westergaard was a “dotto indianista” (Luzzatto 1848: 467). 17 On this topic throughout the article, see the relevant contributions in Rossi 1981, especially pp. 152153 (§2.3) with footnote 37, also p. 163 (§4.1.1.2), and Rossi 1984, especially p. 39, footnote 2. 18 Westergaard 1844: 272. 19 Westergaard 1844: 272. 20 Strabo, !"#$%&'(), XV 2,8 (cited in Weisbach 1890: 11 and, as “XV, II, 14,” in Delattre 1883: 5, footnote 3): *+!(,!-.!,%'/ 01/ ,23.24%/ ,56/ 7$'%.56 489$'/ 48$2:6/ ,'.;6/ (%?./ (%
22
Together with Lassen (Westergaard 1844: 273). See also Rawlinson 1846: 29: “[...] excite the astonishment of Orientalists [...].” The OED attests the word ‘Orientalist’ since 1779-1781 (“The great Orientalist, Dr. [Edward] Pocock [(1604-1691)]” from “Johnson L.P., Smith Wks. II. 465”). 23 Rawlinson 1846: 33: “[...] the people to whose tongue it was appropriated must have constituted, under the Achæmenian dynasty, one of the great divisions of the Persian empire; and as we also find the tablets upon which it is engraved occupying a middle place, either in actual position or in relative convenience, between the original and vernacular records on the one side, and the Semitic transcripts on the other, we may further argue that this great popular division was inferior to the native and then dominant Persian, but superior to the conquered Babylonian. An indication of so plausible and direct a nature immediately leads us to the Medes, who, although a subject race, were admitted, it is well-known, under the Achæmenians to a certain degree of participation in the political rights of the Persians; and it is, I imagine, on such grounds only, irrespective of all internal evidence, that by general consent the name of Median is now assigned to the writing in question.” 24 Rawlinson 1846: 34. 25 Rawlinson 1846: 36. 26 Rawlinson 1846: 33 (quoted in footnote 23).
3
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
right when he tried to express in detail the contrary hypothesis. 27 Moreover, his continuous efforts to arrange each hypothesis on the background of a plausible historical scenery is noteworthy. In 1855, Edwin Norris (1795-1872), publishing the text of the second kind of the Bisotun inscription, referred to it as the ‘Scythic version,’ dropping the name ‘Median.’ 28 The Scythians were supposed to be a Turanian people, i.e. neither Indo-European nor Semitic, 29 scattered on wide lands but very influen-
tial in Media. 30 In fact, we have to recollect “that Media was constantly exposed to irruptions from the northward, that for twenty-eight years during the reign of Cyaxares it was under a Scythic yoke.” 31 Its language should have been “of that class which has been denominated Tartar, Scythic, Tschudish or Mongolian.” 32 Jules Oppert (1825-1905) explains to us what had happened: in 1852 he suggested to employ the name ‘Scythic’ because of Strabo and because Median proper names (like Deiokes 33 or Ecbatana) could be
27 Rawlinson 1846: 37 (translated in French in Delattre 1883: 8): “But if, on the other hand, the language of the inscriptions should be fundamentally Scythic, and the departure from that type should be the effect of an intercourse with Arian or Semitic nations, then I believe we must reject the possible attribution to the Medes of the centre columns of the trilingual tablets. In that case, it would become a question of considerable embarassment to what constituent portion of the Persian empire they might belong. We should be obliged, in fact, in order to resolve the difficulty, either to suppose the Scythic and Arian colonization of Persia to have taken place simultaneously; or we might consider the Persian immigration to be of a comparatively recent date, and we might assign the inscriptions in question to the aboriginal race, who under the new empire had lost their political individuality, but to whom, as they still continued to constitute the great mass of the population of the country, it was thought proper to address a transcript of the national records in their vernacular and only intellegible dialect” (“[...] et celle d’une immigration récente des Aryens en Perse. Dans le dernier cas on rapporterait le texte du milieu à une race aborigène, laquelle, malgré la perte de son existence politique sous le nouvel empire, continuait à former le gros de la population du pays, et paraissait digne [of the second place!] d’avoir à son usage une version des monuments nationaux dans sa propre langue, la seule qu’elle comprit”). This hypothesis was accepted in Norris 1855: 3. 28 Norris 1855. 29 Oppert 1879: 3 (quoted below at footnote 184); Elliot 1876: 54. The common characteristic of this great family is agglutination (Elliot 1876: 54; see Sayce 1874: 465 for a reference to Elamite as “an agglutinative idiom”). Cf. Delattre 1883: 22: “Or ce terme [touraniennes] est une qualification indéterminée, sous laquelle on comprend toutes les langues de l’Europe et de l’Asie, abstraction faite du chinois et de ses dialectes, qui n’appartiennent ni au groupe indo-européen ni au groupe sémitique. Ainsi le trait
principal qui fait des langues touraniennes une classe à part, est tout négatif; les marques communes d’un caractère positif sont en petit nombre et d’un vague désespérant.” See also the address of the Turanian section (Elliot 1876) and the paper by Hunfalvy (1876) at the 2nd International Congress of Orientalists. From this point of view, the statement “Jean Vincent Scheil (1858-1940), an Assyriologist, [...] was the first to identify the Elamite language as nonSemitic” (Gignoux 1999: 168a) seems a little hasty. 30 Delattre 1883: 7. See also Oppert 1856: 180: “Les Perses placent ce système toujours avant celui des Chaldéens, qui pourtant avaient été encore naguère très-puissants, et dont l’importance scientifique a survécu même à l’empire de Cyrus. Les Achéménides eurent donc quelque raison spéciale pour donner à l’écriture scythique la préséance sur le système babylonien, et puisqu’on n’en peut guère chercher le motif dans une puissance qui n’existait plus alors, il faut le trouver dans l’ancienneté de Touran, qui n’était pas un mystère pour les vainqueurs ariens.” Cf. Genito 1986: 38, footnote 56. 31 Rawlinson 1846: 36 according to Herodotus, M>,2$-%'N I 106 (also IV 12); see also Oppert 1879: 3 and Weisbach 1890: 11. Cf. Frye 1984: 72. 32 Norris 1855: 2. See also the references to: Tartarian and Turkish in Rawlinson 1846: 35 (cf. Lecoq 1997: 29: “C’est une langue de type agglutinant, comme le turc”); Georgian and Armenian in Rawlinson 1846: 36, footnote 1; “d’origine tatare” in Oppert 1856: 171, footnote 1; Turco-Tartaric and Mongolian in Lenormant 1877: 217; “finno-tatarisch („turanisch“)” in Weisbach 1890: 11. De Saulcy 1849: 211: “2° Que de l’idiome médique il est resté des traces évidentes dans le zend, dans le persan moderne, dans le turk, dans le kurde, dans le mongol, dans l’arménien, dans le géorgien et dans la langue des Tsiganes; 3° Que le turk, plus que les autres langues congénères, présente des débris fort reconnaissables de l’ancienne langue des Mèdes.” 33 See also Weisbach 1890: 19-20.
4
B ASELLO
interpreted as Aryan. Thus, it was not possible that the language of the second kind, which appeared as non-Aryan, could have been Median. 34 Afterwards Oppert changed his opinion and clearly analyzed his ‘error’: in 1879 he realized that language is only one element in the ethnic composition of a people and that he was previously affected by the idea that the language was the criterion of races. 35 Here he was right but he was always late 36 : in 1883 Alphonse Delattre (1841-1928) was aware that Scythians are Indo-Europeans, even if partly Turanians. 37 So in the meanwhile, François Lenormant (1837-1883) wrote:
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
remontant à l’antiquité, le seul contemporain de l’idiome des premiers Chaldéens. 39
le caractère touranien de cette langue, sa parenté avec les idiomes turcs et ougrofinnois, ne fait plus question pour personne; après les travaux de Westergaard, de M. de Saulcy, de Norris, de M. Oppert et de M. Mordtmann, ce fait capital n’est plus contesté, comme l’est encore le touranisme de l’accadien [i.e. Sumerian language 38 ]. Le proto-médique est donc le seul langage de la famille touranienne dont on possède des documents écrits
Here Elamite, called ‘Protomedic,’ was considered “l’ancien parler des habitants anté-aryens de la Médie, conservé vivant au temps des Achéménides at admis par ceux-ci à l’honneur d’être compté parmi les langues officielles de leur chancellerie.” 40 Archibald Henry Sayce (18451933) employed this name, 41 too, but he had in mind a concept of the Medes which was slightly different, as we shall see. 42 However, it should be remembered that Norris in 1855 and then R. Caldwell in his comparative grammar of the Dravidian languages (1856) noticed that ‘Scythic’ resembles Tamil, since “there is no distinction made between surd and sonant consonants at the beginning of a word, and in the middle of a word the same consonant must have been pronounced as a sonant when single and a surd when double” 43 (this orthographic device was already known by Westergaard 44 ). Caldwell referred to ‘Scythian
Oppert 1879: 2-3. Oppert 1879: 3-4. See also Delattre 1883: 14. 36 Lecoq 1997: 29: “Il n’y a plus guère que Jules Oppert pour s’obstiner à appeler encore, en 1879, cette langue le «médique».” 37 Delattre 1883: 22-23 (citing Rawlinson G. 1858). Cf. Spiegel 1881: 148, footnote 4. 38 Cf. Teloni 1903: 24-26, ‘§10. «La questione sumerica».’ Regarding the ‘question sumérienne’ towards the quest for the right name of the language of the second kind, see the comparison at a glance in Scheil 1909: 527. Sayce (1874: 466) regarded ‘Accadian’ as “the Sanskrit of the Turanian family, and consequently the future starting-point of Turanian philology.” As Furlani emphasized, Lenormant is considered as “uno degli iniziatori degli studi sumeri” (Furlani 1928: 60). 39 Lenormant 1875: 313; see also p. 454, ‘première division’ of the ‘classment des langues touraniennes sur les bases du systême de Castrén,’ where the ‘Groupe médo-susien’ comprehends the ‘Protomède’ and the ‘Susien’ (the latter splitted into ‘dialecte de
Suse’ and ‘dialecte des Cissiens’). Comparisons between Elamite and Sumerian words are listed in Lenormant 1874b: 317-318 (Protomedic) and 1875: 314-316 (Protomedic and Susian). 40 Lenormant 1875: 313. 41 Sayce 1890. Cf. Oppert 1879: 11: “[...] le nom de Proto-Médique, mais ce barbarisme ne peut alléguer aucune raison pour son excuse. Le proto-médique serait plutôt le Zend ou le Perse.” 42 Sayce 1874: 466 (cited below); see also the following page discussing Lenormant’s thesis. 43 Norris 1855: 6-7; quoted also in McAlpin 1981: 13. See also Caldwell 1856: 43-45 corresponding to 1913: 66, no. 2. 44 Westergaard 1844: 431-432. On this subject, E. Reiner (1969: 111-116) in 1966 (the grammatical sketch was written in 1960 but the addenda were appended in 1966, as Reiner herself notes on p. 54) accepted Paper’s conclusions (Paper 1955: 7-8, §2.7) who in turn referred to Weisbach 1890: 31. So in Kha!ikjan 1998: 6 (§2.1), ‘According to Reiner...,’ a lot of history is inevitably lost!
34 35
5
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
languages’ as a group 45 and, reporting the opinion of Oppert and Norris, he attached the ‘language of the tablets’ 46 to this stock as a link between Dravidian languages with the Scytian group – that is, Turanian. More recently, the linguistic kin between Dravidian languages and Elamite has been supported by I.M. D’jakonov, D.W. McAlpin and is taken for granted by M. Kha!ikjan. 47 Both Rawlinson and Norris thought that the ‘Scythic’ writing was not used before the time of Cyrus the Great. 48 The breakthrough was therefore the discovery of other Elamite – as we call them now – texts not related to the Achaemenid dynasty far away from Persia: in 1859 W.K. Loftus published the lithographic facsimiles 49 of the inscriptions by Middle Elamite kings (Šutrukids dynasty, c. 1210-1100 BC 50 ) excavated in the acropolis of Susa from 1851 on-
wards. 51 In 1862, Andreas David Mordtmann (1811-1879) preferred the name ‘susisch’ because Rawlinson had said that some inscriptions written in a language like that of the second kind were found in Susiana. 52 I think that Mordtmann referred to the M lam"r rock inscriptions (c. 160 km east of Susa) mentioned by Rawlinson as inscriptions of Elymais, even if to Rawlinson this ‘Elymæan group’ was a development of the third kind of writing of the Achaemenid inscriptions. 53 In fact it had already been noticed by de Saulcy that the second kind of writing derives from the Babylonian cuneiform script. 54 However, Mordtmann correctly distinguished between writing and language, and he was the first 55 to recognize that the inscriptions from Susa were in the same language of the second kind of Bisotun and Persepolis. 56
45
52
Caldwell 1913: 61 and following pages, passim. ‘Language of the second series of tablets,’ (Caldwell 1913: 65), ‘language of the second Behistun tablets’ (Caldwell 1913: 77), ‘Behistun tablets’ only (Caldwell 1913: 68), ‘language of the Scythian tablets of Behistun’ (Caldwell 1913: 49). See also McAlpin 1981: 14: “Dravidianists have generally missed the reference, since Caldwell referred to Elamite only as ‘the language of the tablets’.” Cf. ‘trilingual tablets’ in Rawlinson 1846: 37; also ‘tablets’ on p. 33. 47 D’jakonov 1967; McAlpin 1981; Kha!ikjan 1998: 3 (§2.3). See also Sorrentino 1988. Cf. the short review of McAlpin 1981 in Vallat 1982. 48 Rawlinson 1846: 38; Norris 1855: 2. 49 Loftus 1859. About the publishing year, see the remark in Curtis 1993: 34; 1852 seems too early with respect to the discovery (see Curtis 1993: 6, regarding some Achaemenid inscriptions also published there). However Loftus died in 1858, being born in 1821. A list of the published inscriptions is in Hinz & Koch 1987: 1334, ‘1852’; see also Curtis 1993: 31-32. 50 As a reference framework for Elamite history throughout this article, see Vallat 1998. 51 Curtis 1993: 2 (also Curtis 1997: 37, 40 and 4344); Gran-Aymerich 1998: 189: “[...] sondages à Suse en 1851 et 1852-1853.” A short mention is in de Mecquenem 1980: 2 (related to 1853-1854): “il vit sur les flancs de la butte principale une grosse pierre basaltique, couverte de caractères scythiques.” 46
6
Mordtmann 1862: 21-22: “[...] Es stehen also die 3 Völker, in deren Sprachen die Inschriften abgefasst sind, voran, und zwar genau in der Reihenfolge der Inschriften. Da nun ausserdem Rawlinson sagt, dass die in Susiana aufgefundenen Keilinschriften eine Sprache enthalten, die ihm mit unserer hier behandelten viele Aehnlichkeit zu haben scheint, so werde ich mich von jetzt an des Namens ‘susisch’ für die Sprache der zweiten Gattung Keilschrift bedienen”; 1870: 7-8. See also Foy 1898: 119, footnote 1. Lecoq 1997: 29. 53 Rawlinson 1846: 21 and 27-28. Rawlinson wrote that “up to the present time, the public are I believe altogether unacquainted” with these inscriptions, since they were described for the first time in Layard 1846 (1841 according to Scheil 1910: 569) and afterwards published in Layard 1851. See also Weissbach 1891: 120-121; Hinz 1962: 105-106; König 1965, pp. 20-22, nos. 75 and 76; Calmeyer 1988. 54 De Saulcy 1849: 212, no. 8; Oppert 1876: 136. Cf. Rawlinson 1846: 28. 55 Scheil 1909: 530. 56 See also Sayce 1885. Cf. Oppert 1879: 15 and Oppert 1876: 136: “Le susien présente, comme nous l’avons dit, un langage très-ressemblant au médoscythique ou médique, de manière à ce qu’on ait même cru à l’identité de ces deux idiomes. On a même voulu donner au second système des inscriptions trilingues le nom d’élamite. Une étude superficielle du susien démontre déjà qu’il est impossible de
B ASELLO
Apart from Mordtmann, the name ‘Susian’ was only applied to nonAchaemenid Elamite inscriptions, as appears from the following excerpt by Sayce dated 1874 57 : But besides the Accadian and an allied Babylonian idiom, which chiefly differed from Accadian by preferring m to b, ma to ba (“ille”), &c., we have fragments of at least three Susianian dialects, more or less related to the second Akhæmenian. These are the languages of the inscriptions copied by Mr. Layard at Mal-Amir, of the Cassi or Kossæans, who conquered Chaldæa under Khammuragas [Hammurapi 58 ], and established a dynasty there which lasted to the 13th century B.C., and above all, of the Susians, or Susianians proper, who had their seat at Shushan. The only writer, so far as I know, who has as yet worked at these languages, is M. Fr. Lenormant. He has not only published all the Susian inscriptions at present known in Europe, but has also, in his admirable work on “La Magie chez les Chaldéens” (pp. 315-326), done much towards the elucidation of them. 59
which is in the district ( '" # (& ) * ) of Elam,” 62 all pointed to Elam, but these clever scholars did not know Elam yet, as we understand it today. Notwithstanding, already in 1614, in a map from The historie of the world by sir Walter Raleigh (1552?-1618), they could find the caption “Elam. The eldest sonn of Sem possest the regions of Persia and therfore were those nations first called Elamites.” 63 The right, even if not the last, suggestion came in 1874 from young 64 Sayce: Its [of the second Akhæmenian language] prominent position, the care taken by the engraver, 65 the occurrence of inscriptions in it unaccompanied by Persian or Greek texts, all show that it must have been the vernacular of the lower classes who inhabited the country in which the monuments of the Persian kings were erected – in other words, of the Medes. 66 [...] At the same time, the name itself, as a geographical or national title, does not seem to have become known before the 9th century B.C., [...] and many indications lead me to think that it was not the Turanian natives but the Aryan emigrants who are really meant. At any rate, it was the latter who are designated Medes by the classical writers; and on this account, while fully allowing with the French school that the language of the second Akhæmenian texts belonged to the aborigines of Media, I prefer to call it Elamite, as less likely to lead to ambiguity and misconception. 67
In fact Lenormant had been the first one to publish the drawings of 25 ‘inscriptions indigènes de Suse et de la Susiane,’ 60 mainly taken from the facsimiles by Loftus. 61 Since in a vision prophet Daniel saw himself “in the citadel ( !" # $% & ) of Susa,
l’expliquer par le médique seul, et cela tranche la question de l’identité.” The designation ‘médoscythique’ was used in connection with the language ‘casdo-scythique’ (‘casdo’ for ‘Chaldean,’ see Oppert 1857: 137, footnote 1; note also the association with Turanian people), i.e. another language of the supposed ‘scythic’ family (Oppert 1879: 6), the Sumerian. 57 See, for instance, Oppert 1876a and Quentin 1891. 58 The cuneiform sign bi/pí has the value gaš/kaš, too. 59 Sayce 1874: 466. 60 Lenormant 1875: 315. 61 Lenormant 1874a, nos. 31-55 (from Loftus 1859 except for nos. 36, 40, 41 and 44-50).
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
Daniel 8,2. Cited also in Löwenstern 1850b: 692. See also Rossi 2003b: 682. 63 Map between pp. 178 and 179; quoted in OED, ‘Elamite.’ 64 Oppert 1879: 11. 65 On this feature, cf. the conclusion by Jannelli (1830; see below, ‘Elamite studies in Italy’) reported in Teloni 1923: 230: “Pensa lo Jannelli che, essendo la scrittura cuneiforme accuratissima nelle sue forme, nitida e perspicua, dovesse venire adoperata ad esprimere cose solenni (sacre).” 66 Sayce 1874: 466. 67 Sayce 1874: 467. 62
7
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
Elam was identified with Susiana through Elymais, 68 but it involved a wider geographical perspective. 69 However, this designation gained general consent later on, 70 since in those early days Elam was slightly different from what it is today: Oppert rejected this hypothesis because the name ‘Elam’ implied a Semitic colouring which was alien to what he called Median, 71 indirectly reminding us that Elam is probably a name given by the Semitic peoples of Mesopotamia, and thence Elamite is an ethnonym devised by foreigners; moreover “the exiguous plight of Susiana could not justify for its language the honour to precede the language of Ninive among Persian kings.” 72 It was still an issue of glory! 73 ‘Anšan’ was certainly a more glorious concept: it precedes Susa in the Middle Elamite (Šutrukid) titulary ‘King of Anšan and of Susa,’ while Cyrus the Great called himself ‘king of Anšan’ (šàr URU An-šá-an). 74 Rejecting the name ‘Susian’ on the basis of the same considerations Oppert made, 75 Delattre 76 ascribed the language of the second kind to the inhabitants of Anšan, related to Susians and to their language (i.e. Mid-
dle and Neo-Elamite), but inspired by Persian thoughts and attitudes. Considering another ethnic dualism in Elam, Jean Vincent Scheil (1858-1940) splitted written documentation in ‘textes élamites-sémitiques’ and ‘élamites-anzanites,’ 77 the first group represented by texts in Akkadian, the second being related to the other, non-Semitic and prominent, element of the Elamite kingdom:
68
given to an agglutinative idiom”); Lenormant 1875: 313; Delattre 1883: 6. 74 Cyrus Cylinder from Babylonia (CB), §§ 4 and 7; cuneiform text published in Schaudig 2001: 550-556 (firstly published in Rawlinson 1884); see also Eilers 1974 and the translation in Lecoq 1997: 181-185. See also Frye 1984: 90, and Potts 1999: 309. Cf. the seal in late Neo-Elamite style which bears the name of Kurash (Cyrus I), the Anshanite, son of Teispes (Stronach 1997: 40-41; Potts 1999: 340-341). 75 Delattre 1883: 18. 76 Delattre 1883: 44. 77 See André-Salvini 1997: 116-119: “Il [Scheil] reconnaît donc dans le concept historique d’Elam une entité géographique et politique”; also Scheil 1910: 564. Cf. Stolper 1992: 256. 78 Scheil 1909: 534 quoting Scheil 1901, ‘AvantPropos.’
Oppert 1879: 11. Lecoq 1997: 29: “Sayce préfère le terme «élamite», qui finira par l’emporter, puisque cette langue a couvert un domaine bien plus vaste que celui de la ville de Suse.” Cf. Scheil 1909: 532-533: “Encore un coup, si, appelé à dénommer une chose, on le fait d’après les lieux où elle existe, il convient de préférer le lieu où elle existe proprement et exclusivement. Plusieurs races et plusieurs langues pouvaient se couvrir du nom d’élamite, qui cesse dès lors d’ètre spécifique. Les motifs qui font condamner le choix du terme susien font également récuser celui d’élamite.” See also André-Salvini 1997: 116. 70 Rossi 1981: 152-153, footnote 37, and Lecoq 1997: 29. 71 Oppert 1879: 11 and 15. 72 Oppert 1879: 16. 73 This was a recurring issue: see Sayce 1874: 465 (“the place of honour next to the Persian legend was 69
8
Le dualisme ethnique en Élam est un fait certain. A ce dualisme correspondent sous les plus grands règnes, dans le protocole royal, le nom double de AnzanSuse, et dans la littérature, deux sortes de documents. Une partie de ces documents est manifestement sémitique et peut se dénommer d’après le dernier élément marqué dans le protocole royal, c’est-à-dire de Suse, qui fut précisément par ses origines une ville de Sémites, dans une région où prédomina sans doute toujours le génie sémitique. Si, à ce titre, nos inscriptions sémitiques d’Élam sont proprement des inscriptions susiennes, il nous reste, pour dénommer l’autre catégorie de textes, le premier élément ethnique du protocole royal, c’est-à-dire Anzan. Nous appellerons donc anzanite la nouvelle série de documents. 78
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
Moreover, regarding Anzanian as imported to Susa, he prefigured the relevant discoveries of the Persepolis and the Tall-i Maly n archives. 79 By that time, it was only a name issue: the content, the meaning which that label pointed to, was rightly identified. In the meantime, Assyriology was not only born, but it was also well grown, 80 since Delattre referred naturally to Rawlinson as a “savant assyriologue,” 81 while in the 9th International Congress of Orientalists held in 1892 there was a specific session devoted to Assyriology. 82 These are the titles of some of the essays dealing with Elamite published between 1890 and 1892: at first an apparently neutral F.H. Weissbach with Die Achämenideninschriften zweiter Art (in which he proposed ‘neususisch’ for
Achaemenid Elamite 83 ) followed by Anzanische Inschriften und Vorarbeiten zu ihrer Entzifferung 84 (devoted to Middle Elamite royal inscriptions); Zu den altsusischen Inschriften by H. Winkler and Elamitische Eigennamen. Ein Beitrag zur Erklärung der elamitischen Inschriften by P. Jensen 85 ; A. Quentin referred to some ‘textes susiens’ while Sayce wrote about Amardian or ‘Protomedic’ Tablets in the British Museum. 86 The latter title needs further explanations. Unfortunately Sayce, after suggesting ‘Elamite,’ concluded that “it is possible, indeed, that the most correct designation of the language would be Amardian,” 87 a name derived from the classical authors. 88 This is remarkable because, since we have seen the foreign designation ‘Elam’ before, it was an en-
79
as the first, but Oppert “has a right to claim the paternity of Assyrian science” (Rawlinson 1876: 21). Also Lecoq 1997: 28: “Mais c’est Rawlinson qui, en 1851, avec la publication de la version «assyro-babylonienne» de Bisotun, fonde vraiment une nouvelle science, l’assyriologie, dont on connaît le prodigieux développement.” Cf. Daniels 1995: 85b, in which the credit is given to Hincks. The OED attests the word ‘Assyriology’ since 1828 (“N.Amer.Rev. CXXVII. 157”) but ‘Assyriologist’ later, in 1865 (“Reader 4 Mar. 250/3”). 82 Sayce 1892: 169. The addresses presented at the International Congresses of Orientalists are particularly pertaining to the history of studies; Said made reference to them, too (Said 2001: 208 and 258, quoting from an essay written by R.N. Cust in 1897). 83 Weisbach 1890: 24. 84 Weissbach 1891. Scheil 1909: 534: “Weissbach l’avait proposé [le terme de anzanite] autrefois, sans le fonder beaucoup en raison, à cause de la pénurie de textes de cette catégorie, à l’époque où il publiait die Anzanischen Inschriften. Il l’a abandonné depuis en faveur du terme élamite.” 85 Winkler 1891 and Jensen 1892. Jensen was not appallingly uncertain between ‘Elamitisch’ and ‘Elamisch’ as can result from the title given in Hinz & Koch 1987: 1337, ‘1892.’ 86 Quentin 1891 and Sayce 1890. 87 Sayce 1874: 467. 88 In particular Strabo, !"#$%&'(); see other references (Stephanus Byzantinus, Pomponius Mela and Pliny) in Andreas 1894, column 1729.
In the thirties and seventies of the last century respectively. See also Scheil 1910: 573: “Le sol de l’Élam, si libéral en découvertes, nous produira sans doute dans l’avenir une ample moisson de ces modestes et indispensables documents [les documents juridiques et de comptabilité].” 80 Note that the lecture given by Oppert at the 1st International Congress of Orientalists (Oppert 1876) is entitled Rapport sur les progrès du déchiffrement des Écritures Cunéiformes but in the running headers it is shortened as Rapport sur les progrès de l’Assyriologie! See also Castellino 1971: 34: “Premesso questo richiamo agli assiriologi antilettera, possiamo venire ai tempi a noi vicini [from Teloni onward; see below], quando l’assiriologia, ormai nata, si era assestata con diritto di cittadinanza nel mondo della scienza.” 81 Delattre 1883: 8. Rawlinson is regarded as one of the founder of Assyriology: together with Oppert in Sayce 1892: 169; “La storia delle ricerche assire, che ancora non è fatta esattamente, definirà un giorno qualche disputa per la priorità di questa o quella scoperta: certamente però non potrà togliere a Henry Rawlinson, Edward Hincks, Jules Oppert [called ‘vecchi maestri’ on p. VII] la gloria di aver fondato scientificamente anche [besides that of the second kind] l’interpretazione del terzo genere persepolitano” (Teloni 1903: 33); “La decifrazione della terza specie di iscrizioni, di quelle scritte in babilonese, è dovuta a H.C. Rawlinson, il quale può chiamarsi veramente il padre dell’assiriologia” (Furlani 1929: 4). Rawlinson himself considered Hincks and Norris
9
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
deavour to catch the self-designation 89 of the people who spoke this language. The list of countries in paragraph 6 of Darius’ Bisotun inscription was well-known because, being a list of proper names, it was very useful to decipher the script. It was already noticed by Norris in 1855 that “the only peculiar name found attached to any place or province of Persia is the one attributed to Susiana; every other name is rendered by a Persian word, often corrupted, but still Persian; while Susiana is called neither by its Greek name (Elymais, I think), nor by the Semitic term Elam, nor the Arian Uwaja,” and “the only people known by an indigenous name in a language are likely to have been the people who spoke that language.” 90 In addition to this peculiarity, since the first and third countries correspond to the languages of the first and third kinds, it could also be that the second country in the list was the one in which the language of the second kind was spoken. 91 And this is still right. But
the name of the second country was wrongly read Afarti or Habirdi 92 rather than Hatamtip. 93 Therefore Norris guessed a connection between this Afarti and the Amardi, a people which, according to Strabo, 94 bordered with Persians (this association was supported by the comparison of the Old Persian name Bardiya with the corresponding Greek name Smerdis). Working on this odd hypothesis, Sayce also recognized the M lam"r inscriptions 95 and the so-called letters from Ninive as Amardian, 96 both of which are actually Elamite. This discussion came to an end in 1905 when Scheil showed the correct reading of the name of the second country. 97 Therefore in 1911 Franz Heinrich Weissbach (1865-1944) transliterated Ha-tam-tup and translated Elam, being aware that Elam was a Semitic designation. 98 With regards to names as labels, Georg Hüsing (1869-1930), while preferring the reading Halpirti, employed ‘Elamisches’ as the name for the language. 99
89
Susiana and Persis” (Norris 1855: 4); “Nearchus says that there were four predatory tribes and that of these the Mardi were situated next to the Persians; the Uxii and Elymaei next to the Mardi and the Susians; and the Cossaei next to the Medians” (Jones 1928: 309); “Nearco dice che i popoli briganti sono quattro: i Mardoi, che confinavano con i Persiani, gli Ouxioi e gli Elymaioi con questi e con gli abitanti di Susa, i Kossaioi con i Medi” (Nicolai & Traina 2000: 169, and footnote 188). On the writings \4%$02' and @)$02', both attested several times in Strabo, see Andreas 1894, column 1732. 95 Sayce 1885. Sayce regarded wrongly AŠA-a-pír (which is probably the name given to the country of M lam"r inscriptions) as Habirdi. Cf. Andreas 1894, column 1832. See also Hinz & Koch 1987: 15, ‘h.aa-pír,’ ‘h.a-a-pír-ra’ and variants; Vallat 1993: 26-27, ‘Ayapir.’ In König 1965 it is referred to as AŠa-a-tam5. 96 They were actually rediscovered in the British Museum. The first fragments were published in Sayce 1890, followed by Weissbach 1900; see Vallat 1998a for an updated reference. 97 Scheil 1905. See also Weissbach 1913: 292 and following pages; Weissbach 1931, column 1649, no. 3. 98 Weissbach 1911: 10 and 11, footnote ‘§6 b).’ 99 Hüsing 1906b; cf. for instance with Hüsing 1906a.
Cardona 1982: 7 and also p. 15. Norris 1855: 4 (cited in Andreas 1894, column 1731 and Oppert 1879: 16). Cf. also Mordtmann 1862: 21-22 and Oppert 1879: 12. Actually, also the 19th country, Gand ra, is written differently in the Elamite and Babylonian versions. 91 Mordtmann 1862: 21-22 and 1870: 7-8. 92 Afarti: Norris 1855; Mordtmann 1862: 47 (Afardi) and 1870: 7-8. Hapirti: Oppert 1879: 114. See Andreas 1894, columns 1731-1732, for a full list and discussion; note that Andreas was not concerned with the name to be assigned to the language of the second kind, he only wanted to demonstrate that the name Amardoi was not attested in Achaemenid or Susian (i.e. Neo-Elamite M lam"r) inscriptions (Andreas 1894, column 1732, around line 50). 93 Ha(l)tamti in Vallat 1993: 90-93; ha-tam5-tup in Grillot-Susini & alii 1993; Hatamtip in Hallock 1969: 694. About sign tam5: Mordtmann 1862: 38, no. 80; Steve 1992, no. 393/227. 94 Strabo, !"#$%&'(), XI XIII,6 (“lib. XI. cap. xiii. sec. 3, 6” according to Norris 1855: 4):/ O8%$926/ 08 &P>'N/ ,!,,)$"./Q.,"./ JR>,$'(?./ *S.?.N/ T./ @)$02' 41./ =8$>%'6/ +$2>!9!U6/ V>%.N/ W3X'2'/ 01/ (%< YJ:4%U2'/ ,2Z,2'6/ ,!/ (%-2'6N/ [2>>%U2'/ 01 @A02'6. This passage is not clear: “settled between 90
10
B ASELLO
In the end, who was the first scholar proposing ‘Elamite’? According to the comprehensive Bibliographie by W. Hinz & H. Koch, in 1874 Sayce “erwägt erstmals die Bezeichnung ‘elamitisch,’ gibt sie aber für ‘amardisch’.” 100 A small doubt arises skimming through a report printed in 1876 but given as a lecture in 1873 at the 1st International Congress of Orientalists, where Oppert said that “on a même voulu donner au second système des inscriptions trilingues le nom d’élamite.” 101 Actually Sayce was perhaps the first who put the word ‘Elam’ in the title, since in 1850 Isidore Löwenstern (1810-1858 or 1859) did not dare to entitle his article ‘Remarques sur la deuxième écriture de Persépolis’ more explicitly. Its first lines deserve a full quotation: S’il était de mode de nos jours d’employer le style moins réservé des savants du dernier siècle, je changerais mon titre en celui de: Mémoire dans lequel on prouve, que la deuxième écriture de Persépolis, dite mède, est celle du peuple primitif de la Perse, les Élamites. Ce serait imiter de Guignes, qui avait in-
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
titulé un célèbre opuscole: Mémoire dans lequel on prouve que les Chinois sont une colonie égyptienne. Mais quand on n’est point prince de la science, comme l’illustre historien des Huns et des Tartares, il est bien mieux d’adopter des allures moins altières et de se contenter de soumettre humblement ses idées dans le texte. 102
‘Élamite’ as the name of the language was consequently used in the last pages of the article, which was enriched by a lot of references to contemporary and classical authors and by a strong confidence in the Bible. Moreover, according to the final ‘note de l’éditeur,’ the first French cuneiform font was employed there; it was made by A. Lucas and property of the author. 103 However, although the alleged title is correct as a statement, by guessing the name Löwenstern missed its meaning: arguing against the name ‘Median,’ 104 he deemed to have found Semitic elements in Elamite; then finding the same elements in Pahlavi (misled by heterograms), he assumed a relaxed connection between them. 105
Elamite Studies in Italy The first scholar in Italy who dealt, even if incidentally, with Elamite was probably Cataldo Jannelli (Brienza, Potenza 1781 – Naples 1841), royal librarian in Naples. Writing in Latin, in 1830
he devoted 67 pages to cuneiform writings, which he called ‘scriptura cuneoformis Chaldaeorum, Medorum et Persarum.’ 106 Jannelli rejected Grotefend’s decipherment because his main assump-
100
105
Hinz & Koch 1987: 1335; also Lecoq 1997: 29. Oppert 1876: 136. The speech does not seem to have been subsequently updated, except for the few words put in the few footnotes, regarding the intervened death of Finzi and the regular chair of Assyriology (see below). 102 Löwenstern 1850b: 687. 103 Löwenstern 1850b: 728. 104 See also Löwenstern 1850a, an open letter to de Saulcy which, rejecting ‘Median,’ did not make further proposals. 101
Löwenstern 1850b: 696 and following pages. Cf. also de Saulcy 1849: 211, no. 2 (affinities with ‘zend’ and ‘persan moderne’). See the progress in Pahlavi studies attested in Finzi 1870b and Darmesteter 1883: I 14-42. 106 Jannelli 1830: lib. II, sect. V, pp. 225-282. On this subject, see the remarkable essay by Teloni (1923: 229-231, ‘Un avversario dimenticato di G. F. Grotefend (1930)’). Regarding Jannelli’s studies on ancient Egypt, see De Salvia 1991.
11
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
tion was that the cuneiform writing “in sacris et mysticis rebus fuisse adhibitam.” 107 On these matters, the first to write in Italian was Filosseno Luzzatto (Trieste 1829, July 10 – 1854, January 25 108 ). In 1848, he published a brief memory on the Bisotun inscriptions, dealing mainly with Old Persian words. 109 Two years later, in an essay written in French and devoted to the Babylonian language, 110 he identified 24 ‘Medic’ signs with Babylonian ones. 111 He must not be confused with his father, the well-known scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (Trieste 1800 – Padua 1865), teacher of Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew in Padua. 112 His Jewish origins 113 and a short life span are the two elements which connect Luzzatto with the first Italian Assyriologist, Felice Finzi (Correggio, Reggio Emilia 1847 – Florence 1872, September 3). At the age of 20, he took a degree in law at the University of Bologna 114 and began his scientific researches as an Ethnologist: he was the editor of the anthropological and ethnological section of the journal Archivio per l’antropologia e la
etnologia edited by Paolo Mantegazza 115 ; a letter by Finzi sending a publication to C.R. Darwin is dated 1871, February 9. 116 From ethnology, his interest for ancient peoples, their origins and the development of races (as understood at that time) grew. 117 Following Oppert’s example in Paris (where a special course of Assyrian language was inaugurated in December 1868 118 ), Finzi taught Lettere e antichità assire at the Regio Istituto di Studii Superiori of Florence since 1869. 119 Despite his young age, Finzi suddenly entered the exclusive club of international Assyriology. In 1870, Oppert presented him to the Société asiatique. 120 Moreover Finzi was the only Italian cited by Oppert in the Rapport sur les progrès du déchiffrement des Écritures Cunéiformes presented at the 1st International Congress of Orientalists held in Paris in 1873: Oppert spoke of him as of a young and promising scholar. 121 Again Finzi was the only Italian who “also joined our band of Assyriologists” according to the address by Rawlinson at the 2nd International Congress of Orientalists held in London
107
report about the excavations in Cyprus (Finzi 1870a). 118 Oppert 1876: 148, and footnote 1. The first chair of Assyriology was created in 1874; see the few lines devoted to this event in Labat 1973: 33, despite Oppert’s fame in his own time. It should be noted that Jules Oppert was German, naturalized French (‘Julius,’ among the German-speaking scholars, in Schmitt 1999: 541; see also Furlani 1935, André-Salvini 1999: 332, Gran-Aymerich 2001 for further references). 119 Amari 1873: p. VI; de Gubernatis 1876: 426, and footnote 1; Furlani 1928: 59, 1929: 14-15 (‘libero docente’) and Furlani 1932a; ‘Finzi Felice,’ in Lessico universale italiano, Roma 1968-1986 (“etnologo e assiriologo, libero docente a Firenze”). Till 1872, Finzi managed to hold three courses (Finzi 1872: p. III, ‘Prefazione,’ dated 1872, March 27; cf. Furlani 1932a: “due corsi liberi”). 120 As results in Journal asiatique, vol. 16 (1870), p. 294: “M. Finfi [sic!], professeur, à Florence, présenté par MM. Mohl et Oppert”; the name was rightly written in the index published in 1872. 121 Oppert 1876: 144.
Jannelli 1830: 225, cited in Teloni 1923: 230. De Gubernatis 1876: 96 and 97. 109 Luzzatto 1848. 110 Luzzatto 1850; see also the critical and (today) odd review by Basevi (a lawyer of Jewish family), written in Italian (Basevi 1850). 111 As written in Weisbach 1890: 7 (no. 27 in the bibliography on p. 3). 112 De Gubernatis 1876: 86-87. See also the story Un letterato ebreo and the related notes by U. Saba (1956). 113 On the origin of Finzi’s family, see Colorni 1983b. 114 Amari 1873: p. VI; Finzi R. 1983: 274. 115 Casati 1934: “filologo ed etnologo, assiriologo. Fondò con Paolo Mantegazza l’Archivio di Etnologia e di Antropologia e fu tra i promotori della Società Orientale in Italia”; Furlani 1932a. 116 Recorded in The Darwin Correspondence Online Database (
), where Finzi appeared as “Ethnologist and Assyriologist.” I ran into this reference by chance and it was my first encounter with Finzi. 117 See for example the ethnological glimpses in the 108
12
B ASELLO
in 1874. 122 Oppert’s omen proved sadly unfulfilled, since Finzi was already dead at the young age of 25, leaving his wife and two sons 123 ; neither did Rawlinson seem to be aware of it two years later. Finzi’s main work is Ricerche per lo studio dell’antichità assira, with an extended introduction on Akkadian language and long sections about Mesopotamian ethnology and religion. 124 M. Amari wrote the following waggish sentence about his work: talchè se il Finzi nella breve sua vita non arrivò all’onore di grande assiriologo, veggiam che s’era messo in via e che lasciò un’opera utile e scoprì qualche fatto nuovo. Così il suo libro fosse scritto in buon italiano! Ma chi mette il piè in questa torre di Babele di tante favelle antiche e moderne e sente suonar all’orecchio ogni altra lingua fuorché la nostra, merita perdono s’egli talvolta la sciupa. Finirà cotesto pericolo, quando la letteratura nazionale risalirà in tanto onore che non ci occorra studiar sempre le scienze in idiomi oltramontani e che un giusto orgoglio ci muova a serbar puro il nostro, ancorché viva e si sviluppi a seconda dell’incivilimento. 125
122
Rawlinson 1876: 21-22. Finzi R. 1983: 274. 124 Finzi 1872. Furlani 1932a: “la prima [in Italy, I would add, but in Furlani 1928: 59-60 Finzi is placed in front of all other authors and followed by Lenormant!] trattazione sistematica della religione babilonese e assira, basata su un’estesa conoscenza di tutta la letteratura sull’argomento”; after so much laud and praise, Furlani concluded: “Per il tempo in cui fu scritto il libro è ottimo; al giorno d’oggi non ha più che pochissimo valore” (Furlani 1928: 60). Cf. Bassi 1899: p. X. 125 Amari 1873: p. VI. 126 De Gubernatis 1876: 426. It is still accessible in the Biblioteca della Facoltà di Lettere e filosofia of the Florence university: “Il fondo, acquistato su richiesta di Pasquale Villari nel luglio 1873, rappresenta il primo esempio di acquisto di una intera raccolta da parte dell’Istituto di Studi superiori. Comprende 250 volumi dal XVI al XIX sec. (di cui 8 cinquecentine) di argomento archeologico, assiriologico e linguistico, e inoltre volumi di particolare interesse 123
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
Finzi’s library was the first acquisition of the Istituto di Studii Superiori in Florence, and it became the core of the first Italian university library with an Assyriological section. 126 He was one of the founders of the Società italiana per gli studii orientali 127 in September 1871 and he also knew Hebrew and Sanskrit. 128 In a review of The old Pahlavi-Pazand Glossary edited by Hoshangji Jamaspji Asa and M. Haug, he proved his acquaintance with Iranian matters, as well. 129 The premature death of Finzi was a hard stroke to the rising Italian Assyriology. In 1876, A. de Gubernatis wrote: “Les langues touraniennes et l’assyriologie, par exemple, sont presqu’entièrement négligées chez nous.” 130 Actually, Finzi is forgotten today, and the first Italian Assyriologist is generally considered to have been Giulio Cesare (but he preferred to be called Bruto) Teloni (1857-1942). 131 In 1803, Teloni premised his book on Assyrian literature with a detailed account of the history of Assyriology, 132 probably because of its divulgatory aim 133 and because it was one of
per la letteratura e la storia della tipografia ebraica” (, with further references; the birth year is wrong). 127 Amari 1873: p. VI-VII; de Gubernatis 1876: 428. 128 Finzi R. 1983: 274. 129 Finzi 1870b. 130 De Gubernatis 1876: 14. Also Teloni 1903: p. VIII: “Gli studi assiri fino ad oggi non fecero in Italia che rare e fugaci apparizioni; questa nobilissima scienza resta da noi pressoché sconosciuta.” 131 So Castellino (1971: 38), in his essay on Assyriology in Italy, is wrong in defining Teloni the first Italian Assyriologist (‘primo assiriologo italiano’); somehow he did not cite Finzi. 132 Teloni 1903: 1-35. 133 The book appeared in the series Manuali Hoepli (from the name of the publisher, Ulrico Hoepli) which provided hundreds of handbooks devoted to the practical needs of common people, although they had a high concept of common knowledge.
13
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
the first Assyriological works in Italy. 134 He wrote that “Nel vasto regno elamitico si parlarono diversi dialetti che vengono espressi con caratteri cuneiformi, ma la loro reciproca relazione non si conosce esattamente,” and he was still in doubt about the second kind of Persepolis belonging to this Elamite group. 135 This doubt disappeared some thirty years later, since in the entry Assiriologia of the Italian encyclopaedia Treccani he assured that “oggi si preferisce chiamarlo (come dialetto dell’antico elamitico) neoelamitico.” 136 In this entry, Teloni referred to Elamite in three different ways: ‘susiano,’ 137 ‘neo-elamitico’ and ‘elamico.’ The first two referred to the Achaemenid inscriptions; the third seems to point to linear and Middle Elamite. Moreover he considered the ‘Cassitico’ as “in sostanza un dialetto elamico del N[ord].” 138 He was also in touch with Weissbach. 139 During the first years of the last century, Elam was attracting a growing interest in Europe. Various scholars were involved in Elamite studies (see for example the articles following one another on the pages of the Orientalistische Literaturzeitung) while people could see beautiful Elamite artefacts in the Louvre
exhibitions. 140 So we are not astonished by that Italian scholar who called Hüsing “dotto e geniale Elamista” 141 (i.e. skilled and ingenious Elamologist 142 )! Someone in Italy was dealing with Elam and he was not an Assyriologist but an eclectic Linguist. Alfredo Trombetti (Bologna 1866-1929), of humble birth, learned French, German, Greek, Hebrew and Latin by himself. He was fluent in these languages when he was 14 years old. 143 No surprise that, when he was an adult, he knew nearly all the languages of the world, Elamite included. In fact, in 1913 he wrote an essay (22 pages) entitled La posizione linguistica dell’Elamitico. He referred to Achaemenid Elamite as “una forma seriore del neo-elamitico” 144 and quoted texts in ‘nuovo’ and ‘medio Elamitico’ as we employ today these designations. He upheld the theory of the monogenesis of languages, and to him Elamite was the ‘connecting link’ between Nilotic (today Nilo-Saharan family, Chari-Nile sub-group 145 ) and Dravidian languages through Brahui, while being a collateral branch of Caucasian languages. 146 His main references were the German scholars, first of all Hüsing, 147 then Winkler, Weissbach and Bork. 148 He also referred to Caldwell for Dravidian
134 Preceded by Brunengo 1885, Teloni 1887, Bassi 1899. Bassi, being a scholar of Greek studies (Furlani 1929: 15), apologized to Assyriologists (Bassi 1899: p. VII). 135 Teloni 1903: 19 and 20, footnote 3. 136 Teloni 1930: 37a. 137 Teloni 1930: 36a; also Teloni 1903: 28. 138 Teloni 1930:38a, ‘3. Cassitico.’ 139 In Teloni 1903: 21, footnote 3, a letter dated 1899, August 19, is cited. 140 Benoit 1997; see especially pp. 144-145 on the 1905 exhibition with paintings and plans. See also Potts 1999: 444 for further references. 141 Trombetti 1913: 21. 142 ‘Elamologist’ after McAlpin 1981: 13. 143 Trombetti 1902: p. XXXVIII and following
pages. 144 Trombetti 1913: 3/117. 145 Cf. Trombetti 1923, §28 (see also §52) with Ruhlen 1975-76: 64-65 and Sim 1994. 146 Trombetti 1913: 18-19/132-133 and 1923, §§ 137 (cf. Trombetti 1913: 4/118), 147 and 242 (quoting Trombetti 1913: 18-19/132-133). Cf. the remark on Caucasian family in Meriggi 1966: 560. 147 See the remark on Hüsing and the German school in Meriggi 1966: 562. 148 For example, Winkler 1896 and Hüsing 1910 in Trombetti 1913: 3/117; Weissbach 1911a on p. 19/133 and Weissbach 1913 on p. 21/135, note 2; Bork on p. 18/132; Bork 1905b is cited as the first essay on linear Elamite on p. 22/136, note 3; also Oppert on p. 17/131.
14
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
and Bray for Brahui. 149 Trombetti died untimely in 1929, drowning in the Venice lagoon. Afterwards some Elamite studies were conducted in Italy by Assyriologist Giuseppe Furlani (1885-1962) whose main interest was Mesopotamian religion and mythological texts. He compiled the clear and exhaustive entry Elam in the Italian encyclopaedia Treccani and the section La religione degli Elamiti in a book on the history of religions. 150 Like Trombetti, he cited the German scholars 151 ; moreover he knew the recent essays by König and the catalogue of the famous Susa exhibition in the Louvre Museum in 1913. 152 Treading in Teloni’s wake, Furlani named Achaemenid Elamite ‘neoelamico’ 153 (in Italy, too, there was disagreement about the adjective derived from Elam 154 ) and considered Cassite as northern Elamite. 155 In 1936, he published an essay entitled Divinità gemelle nel Pantheon Elamico, which he concluded somehow triumphantly writing: “Inoltre mi pare di aver fatto vedere che siamo ancora molto ignoranti in fatto di religione sumera o elamica o accàda.” 156 Next came Piero Meriggi (1899-1982), who was a Linguist like Trombetti, and as such 157 he dealt with Elam, especially with Proto-Elamite. In 1965, he pre-
sented a collection of some scattered notes about the Elamite language to Italian scholars, 158 recalling everybody’s attention on its possible linguistic kin with Hurrian. At the end, a remark on linear Elamite peeped, preparing the way for his main work, La scrittura proto-elamica, which was devoted to the most ancient scripts of Iran. 159 Since the main interest of Meriggi was for lessunderstood languages of the ancient Near East like Lydian, Hurrian and Urartian, we owe to him the Italian tendency to associate Elamite to the Anatolian languages, in spite of Assyriology. In this ‘desertion,’ he felt comforted by the inclusion of the Elamite grammatical sketch by E. Reiner 160 in the volume Altkleinasiatische Sprachen. 161 This trend is being carried on by Mirjo Salvini, 162 a specialist in Urartian interested in linear Elamite, and to him we owe the publication in Italy of the more recent Elamite grammar, written by Margaret Kha!ikjan for the Istituto per gli Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici in Rome. Coming to the present, I would like to remember the late father Luigi Cagni, Assyriologist in Naples, whose disciple Grazia Giovinazzo studied Elamite with François Vallat in Paris. She has been holding a regular course of Elamite language at the ‘L’Orientale’ University of
149 Caldwell 1856 is cited in Trombetti 1913: 3/117 and 16/130; Bray 1908 in Trombetti 1913: 4/118 (as published in 1909) and 16/130. Obviously Trombetti could not take advantage of the third part of the latter, the useful etymological vocabulary published in 1934 (Bray 1934). 150 Furlani 1932 and Furlani 1949; the latter meaningfully not included in further editions of the book. 151 Furlani 1932: 605-606, ‘Bibl.’ Hüsing 1916 in Furlani 1936: 57. 152 Pézard & Pottier 1913 in Furlani 1932: 605-606, ‘Bibl.’ 153 Furlani 1931: 138-139. 154 See also Trombetti 1913: 21/135, note 1: “Oppure «Elamico», come si dice ora generalmente (Elamisch).” Today the adjectives ‘elamico’ and
‘elamita’ are used. 155 Furlani 1932: 603b. See also OED, ‘Kassite’: “Also Cossæan, Kasshi, Kossæan. A member of an Elamite people from the central range of the Zagros mountains, who ruled Babylon from the 18th to the 12th century B.C.; also, their language.” Cf. Potts 1999: 339-340 on the Kissians. 156 Furlani 1936: 65. 157 Meriggi 1971: 49. 158 Meriggi 1966. 159 Meriggi 1971-1974. See also Meriggi 1969a; 1969b; 1971b and 1977. 160 Reiner 1969. 161 Meriggi 1971: 56-57. See also the review of this volume in Meriggi 1971a. 162 Cited also in Meriggi 1971: 56. 15
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
Naples since 1999-2000, in which she teaches all the historical developments of Elamite. 163 In the same university, but with an Iranological emphasis, Adriano V. Rossi has been involved in Elamite studies, 164 and Giovanni D’Erme, author
in 1990 of a perhaps less-known but surely very interesting essay about the connections between Old Persian and Elamite scripts, 165 has been teaching modern Persian.
The Name Elam What is the difference between the history of studies and a footnote with a bibliographical reference? Probably it is the aim, but as a matter of fact it could be no more than a chronological gap between referring to an immediate past and reconstructing a past which is a little bit further in the same field of study. Even if you take a short essay on a lessfrequented field as Elamite studies and represent it as a point on a virtual timeline, then connect this point with other points representing, according to the chosen scale, the articles or books cited therein, then you go down to your library and fetch each of these you can, and do the same with them, you will find an uninterrupted chain going back to the half of the 19th century. Making a bibliographical note means keeping track of one’s own path, allowing others to travel more swiftly and going farther. One of the main characteristics of human beings is that we make experiences: this is true both for each individual’s personal story, and for the knowledge passing from master to disciple, from book to reader,
from generation to generation. 166 Bernard of Chartres said that we are dwarves on the shoulders of giants. 167 I prefer to say that we are dwarves perched on other dwarves’ shoulders, being piled up on top of other dwarves, and so on. And the more this building grows and becomes taller, the more, as a reversed Babel’s tower, it is sound. Moreover, as Teloni said negotiating about Jannelli, “nella storia della scienza il racconto degli errori può essere qualche volta d’ammaestramento.” 168 But time ago, a man died and since then no living man was able to read a script or to understand a language which had been the usual way of communication and of thinking for the people. The chain of knowledge had been broken. One of the differences between natural and human sciences is perhaps that the first discovers something in nature which was previously unknown to men, while the second is about what at least some of the men already knew in the past. 169 And paradoxically, while even the most innovative natural discovery relies at least on
163
subvehimur et extollimur magnitudine gigantea (Joannis Saresberiensis Metalogicus, liber III, cap. IV, 900C (Patrologia Latina 199), ). As is well known, this sentence was taken by I. Newton: “If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants” (sir Isaac Newton, letter to Robert Hooke, 1675/1676, February 5, quoted in Merton 1965: 31). 168 Teloni 1923: 231 (adapted). 169 See also Frye 1974: 57.
Among her articles, see for instance Giovinazzo 1989a, 1994a and 2000. 164 See for instance Rossi 1995, 2000, 2003a and 2003b. 165 D’Erme 1990. See also D’Erme 1983. 166 Cf. Said 2001: 200. 167 Dicebat Bernardus Carnotensis nos esse quasi nanos, gigantium humeris incidentes, ut possimus plura eis et remotiora videre, non utique proprii visus acumine, aut eminentia corporis, sed quia in altum 16
B ASELLO
means conceived by others, the rediscovery of a lost language is a somewhat zero point, even if the developments in linguistics could help deciphering, and it is not the work of a single man, but the endeavour of many people. The only faith of the decipherer, as Oppert wrote, is that what human ingenuity created, can be reconstructed. So, this is the challenge, based on the assumption that we study ourselves, or at least what we would have been, had we by chance been born some centuries ago. 170 The quest for the name of the language of the second kind was a winding path, which had been deserted for a long time, and which has finally been meeting again the main road that it had left long ago. 171 The path and the road were apart for many miles, and the landscape is now heavily changed. While the scholars toiled along the nameless path, the road was more and more unfrequented by that time. The road bears a name, and it is the road travelled by the name ‘Elam’ to come up to us. Luzzatto was treading on this road when, in 1847, he devoted an essay to Gli Elamiti; he did not connect them explicitly with the language of the second kind (it would have been a forerunning short-cut towards the path!), however he justified his attention to such a less-known people saying prophetically: E’ bene adunque, a mio giudizio, che la filologia e la storia non si lascino prendere, dirò così, alla sprovvista, ma, prevedendo quasi la scoperta archeologica, le preparino il campo e le appianino la
170 As prof. A. Panaino is used to saying to his students at the opening lesson of his courses. 171 From the point of view of the intersection (i.e. of a wrong label) with the ‘Median’ road, see Genito 1986: 65-70. Cf. also the present state of the label ‘Tocharian’ with respect to the language conventionally named after it (see Mallory 1989: 56).
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
via, cosicchè questa non distrugga già, ma sì confermi splendidamente i dati di quelle. 172
Actually, while Persians and Babylonians are mentioned also by Greek authors (revived since the 15th century AD), the name Elam is attested uninterruptedly only by the never forgotten source of the Bible. 173 Otherwise, the only trace of Elam is Elymais, mentioned by Strabo and some other ‘scrittore profano.’ 174 Moreover, like I said during the past M ELAMMU meeting, perhaps the Bible does not concern only ancient and Achaemenid Elam, if ‘Elamites’ as the name of the people from Elam as a geographical area is attested in the Acts of the Apostles (unless some Jews from Elam were in the crowd attending the apostles’ speech on the Pentecost day), more than five centuries after the fall of Elam as a political entity. 175 The Archaeology of Elam by D.T. Potts 176 is, despite its title, a deep and comprehensive historiographic work on Elam. In 450 pages covering 4500 years of history, the author shows us many Elams, from the Elammatum (or Elamtu) attested in Akkadian texts of the 3rd millennium BC to the Nestorian ecclesiastical province of Elam in the 14th century AD. Between these two ends, what was named Elam underwent continuous transformations, even if both the name Elam and a core of identity and perhaps ethnicity were maintained through the ages. 177 When Scheil spoke about Anšan as
172
Luzzatto 1847: 301. Potts 1999: 3. 174 As said in Luzzatto 1847: 303. See Gesenius 1839; Weissbach 1905; also Potts 1999, chapter 10. 175 Acts 2,9. See Basello 2002: 13-14. 176 Potts 1999. 177 Potts 1999, chapter 1, especially pp. 1-5 and 9. 173
17
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
being more specific than Elam, the perspective was mainly philological, i.e. unconcerned by the effective geographic location of Anšan. 178 F. Vallat showed how a geographic name must be seen on the background of history according to the point of view of the author who used it. 179 In fact the name ‘Elam’ was attached to different geographic areas in different periods. Moreover, the Elamite civilization was often seen and judged from a foreigner’s point of view, from ancient times onwards. The name ‘Elam’ itself is likely to have originated in Mesopotamia among Akkadians, rather than having derived
from Elamite Hallatamti. 180 In any case, the form which the Bible handed down to us and which we employ today is Semitic. But the most misplaced detour of the name ‘Elam’ is probably in the Babylonian Talmud. As on Pentecost day, Elamites appeared side by side with Medes, but this time the focus is on their languages: rabbis questioned whether the book of Esther can be read in Elamite ( ]^_` a b ^ cd ) or Median. 181 This is not likely to be our Elamite, but what if this passage had been known to Sayce and to the other scholars in 19th century?
The Place and Role of Elam in Ancient Near Eastern Studies Another characteristic of human beings is the need to schematize. Language is the first means of schematization, as language itself is a schema applied to our mind, used not only in our speeches but also in our thoughts. And languages are a very good starting point for schematizing reality. As written evidence marks the
watershed between prehistory and history, at the beginning of the 19th century a language was useful in defining the geographical and ethnic boundaries of an ancient civilization. The language of a text was that of the country where the bulk of texts in the same language were found. The catchword was one country,
178 Scheil 1909. For example, cf. Sayce 1874: 475: “Anzan was properly that part of Elam which bordered upon the Persian Gulf.” For a detailed bibliographical account on the researches about Anšan, see Prášek 1906: 189-191, footnote 1. 179 Vallat 1980 and also 1998: 302. 180 Vallat 1996; cf. Quintana 1996. See also Poebel 1932; Dandamaev 1989: 1; Vallat 1993: pp. CVI-CX; Vallat 1998: 301-302; Potts 1999: 1-4. 181 Babylonian Talmud, Megillah 18a (note also the second list with languages associated to the respective peoples, where Median is not mentioned); see also Babylonian Talmud, Shabbath 16, fol. 115a, referred to all the sacred books. “What is meant by ‘Elamite’ to the ‘Elameans’ is by no means clear to me” (Neusner 1966: 77); moreover, “about Judaism in Mesopotamia (Edessa, Nisibis), Adiabene, Armenia, Mesene, Khuzistan, Elam, Khorrasan, and other satrapies of the Western Iranian Empire in Sasanian
times where Jews lived, we know practically nothing. All we know is that there were Jews in these satrapies” (Neusner 1969: 435). “The existence of Iranian language translations of the Book of Esther in use among Jews is indicated by a question raised in the Talmud as to whether is permissible to recite the text of the Book of Esther in the following languages: Greek, Coptic, Elamite, or Median (Bavli Megilla 18a). The meaning of the last two language designations is uncertain, but they seem to refer to two varieties of Iranian. ‘Elamite’ or ‘Median’ could not have meant in the third or fourth century A.D. the ancient languages which used to carry these labels and which had long ceased to exist by this time but local varieties of the current Iranian language, presumably Persian” (Shaked 1990: 206). See also Jastrow 1903: 1070, ‘eab^cd,’ and the analysis of the relevant passages in Colorni 1983a. Giancarlo Lacerenza drew my attention to these occurrences.
18
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
one nation, one ethnic group (if not a whole race), one language. 182 Oppert wrote in 1851:
L’aire d’une langue, non plus que celle d’une race, ne se confondent nécessairement avec celle d’un pays. 185
Tout y a passé: mœurs, sciences, arts, lois, même le premier et le dernier critérium de la nationalité, la langue. La destruction de la nation entraînait la perte de l’idiome; avec celui-ci s’effaçait son représentant visible, l’écriture. 183
Also Delattre had conceded that “il n’arrive guère qu’on grand pays soit la propriété exclusive d’une race homogène.” 186 In 1890, Weissbach put forward a detailed and still today most useful synopsis about the quest for the name of the second kind. 187 Even if the only concern was the language, its title is remarkably “Das Volk der Achämenideninschriften zweiter Art.” On this matter, the last words are owed to Scheil:
The royal propaganda of the Achaemenid dynasty, putting three languages together in each inscription, started wavering this argument. So Oppert had changed his mind in 1879: A cette époque [1852], je partageais les idées alors répandues dans le monde savant et surtout parmi les représentants de la philologie comparée, à savoir: que la langue était toujours le critérium de la race, et que les nations étaient toutes, ou indo-européennes, ou sémitiques, ou touraniennes. Depuis cette époque, le progrès des études philologiques a montré la fragilité de ces théories, et je suis un des premiers qui aie soutenu, dans les discours prononcés à l’ouverture de mes cours, que la langue ne prouve que la présence d’un seul élément entrant dans la composition ethnographique d’une nation, sans préjuger pour cela la question de la race à laquelle le peuple doit appartenir. 184
Moreover, the boundaries are never sharp and clear enough, as Scheil noted:
Il serait naïf de compter, pour nous tirer d’embarras, sur des traités de grammaire ou de philologie comparée, exhumés par les fouilles, ou sur la bonne volonté d’un scribe nous avertissant que sa rédaction est ici en telle langue, là en telle autre. 188 Nous serions ravis d’accepter sans discussion ces renseignements. L’arbitraire n’aurait aucun inconvénient: l’usage antique ferait loi, lors mème que ces dénominations pussent nous paraitre inexactes, à nous qui appelons française une langue qui n’est pas du tout franque, et qui n’est pas davantage parlée par une population exclusivement franque. [...] Faute de traditions, force nous est de dénommer les langues qu’on y parlait, ou d’après des caractères intrinsèques les rattachant à des groupes connus, ou d’après la race à laquelle l’une ou l’autre est propre. 189
L’aire d’emploi de la langue anzanite ne se circonscrit pas aisément. Connussionsnous les limites politiques de l’empire élamite, notre embarras resterait grand.
Therefore the quest for the name of an ancient language ends only when the
For example, Rawlinson 1846: 32: “The character which has hitherto been denominated the Median [...] is of a very high degree of interest [...] in regard to the nation to which its language may be assignable.” Compare Rawlinson 1846: 37 (larger quotation in footnote 27) with its French translation in Delattre 1883: 8: “it would become a question of considerable embarrassment to what constituent portion of the Persian empire they might belong”; “de savoir à quelle nation de l’empire cette langue appartenait.” Finzi, Ethnologist and Assyriologist, must be seen on this background. See also Genito 1986: 70. Cf. the
ironical statement in Diakonoff 1970: 111, end of footnote 35. 183 Oppert 1851: 256. 184 Oppert 1879: 3-4. 185 Scheil 1910: 568-569. 186 Delattre 1883: 7. 187 Weisbach 1890: 11-24. 188 Cf. Kha!ikjan 1998: 3 (§2.1) about Elamite: “and, finally, Elamite, as this language and its bearers were called in Akkadian.” See Scheil 1909: 528 about the names of Sumerian and Akkadian languages. 189 Scheil 1909: 527-528.
182
19
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
conventional name is confirmed or replaced by the glottonym attested in ancient documents, possibly the name assigned by its own speakers. 190 Since in Elam different languages were spoken, 191 it was more difficult focusing on the Elamite language. Moreover, its uncertain linguistic kin delayed the acknowledgement of Elamite studies as an independent academic subject. In fact, as Oriental studies were born studying the Bible, i.e. a written text, only the deciphering of a script and the identification of the related language could originate a new academic subject. 192 In order to develop Iranian studies and especially Assyriology as distinct branches of Oriental studies, the quick identification of the languages of the first and third kinds in the Achaemenid inscriptions with those spoken by ancient Persians and Babylonians was striking. According to Teloni, in 1903 the situation of Elamite studies was still uncertain if not actually confused: il nome di mediche dato un tempo a queste iscrizioni non pare storicamente giustificabile e vien respinto dai critici odierni: i nomi poi di iscrizioni scitiche, o medo-scitiche, o elamitiche, o Amardiane (v. Strabone XI. 13, 3), che in vario modo vogliono accennare alla posizione geografica o al carattere etnico delle genti le quali parlarono il così detto medo non incontrarono neppur essi una-
190
Rossi 1984: 41-44. For the Achaemenid period, see Rossi 1981. On non-Elamite texts in Elam, see Lackenbacher 1998. 192 In this respect, archaeology was instrumental to the finding of new texts. 193 Teloni 1903: 33. 194 Meriggi 1966: 559 (adapted). 195 Gershevitch 1979 (but elaborated since 1968); see the complete list of references in Gershevitch 1994: 66, footnote 12. The ‘elamography’ represents a drastic solution to a long-known problem; see for instance the following statements: “I have sometimes thought that the relative pronoun may be foreign to the language, as in the Osmanli-Turkish; and that its 191
20
nime approvazione. Invece le iscrizioni del terzo genere di Persepoli già ai primi tempi degli studi cuneiformi si chiamarono assire, e se ne riconobbe il semitismo dal Löwenstern dall’Hincks, dal De Saulcy, dal Longpérier, ecc. 193
In the last hundred of years, this gap has not been bridged. In 1966, Meriggi spoke of Elam as “una componente della civiltà achemenide la cui voce è ancora incerta e oscura,” where Elam was considered as one ingredient in the Achaemenid civilization. 194 The obscurity of its voice, i.e. the Elamite language, led the Iranist I. Gershevitch to an extreme conclusion: Achaemenid Elamite was an artificial language used to record alloglottographically the Old Persian language. 195 From another point of view, in 1981, McAlpin wrote that “Elamite has always been the stepchild of cuneiform scholarship,” while still in 1995 Vallat remarked that “L’élamite demeure la langue la plus mal connue du Proche-Orient ancien!” 196 While even today languages play a basic role in our schematization and teaching of the past, this stepchild shows us how frail the boundaries of our academic subjects are. Ancient Elamites fought against Assyrians and rebelled against Persians, whereas Elamite studies are strictly bound to Assyriology and Iranian studies. As ancient Elam stood and represented a meeting place between Meso-
employment, together with the Anti-Scythic collocation which it necessarily produces, may be caused by the desire of producing a literal translation (in which each individual word shall correspond) of the Persian original” (Rawlinson 1846: 32-39); “I may say that I believe the language to be wholly Scythic, and that any departure from that type which we may find is due to an intercourse with nations speaking Arian tongues, or else to the probable circumstance that the inscriptions were written, not by natives, but by Persians, who, because they were Persians, wrote it with a foreign admixture” (Norris 1855: 3). 196 McAlpin 1981: 13-14; Vallat 1995.
B ASELLO
potamian lowland and Iranian highland, so Elamite studies need to grab and grasp data both from Assyriology and Iranian studies and through many fields of work. 197 As a language officially 198 attested in the Achaemenid period, Elamite attracts the interest of Iranologists. At the same time, the strong relationships between Elamites and Sumerian, Babylonian or Assyrian peoples in the preceding periods, draw the attention of Assyriologists. As an example, one could quote these words by R. Labat: Les études élamites ont toujours été plus étroitement associées que les études hittites à l’assyriologie proprement dite: l’on peut dire qu’il n’est guère un élamitologue français qui ne fût ou ne soit un authentique assyriologue. 199
On the other hand, R. Schmitt included a section on Elamite studies (although at the very end of his detailed account) in the entry about Iranian studies in German of the Encyclopædia Iranica. 200 In Gli studi sul Vicino Oriente in Italia dal 1921 al 1970, a synopsis of the history of Italian studies on Near East, the Elamite language is dealt with properly and more extensively in the Anatolian section (written by Meriggi) than in the Assyriological one. 201 In Italy, at least from a normative point of view, the wavering of Elamite as an academic subject found a more definite position on the brink of the 21st century. Today Elamite is one of the disciplines explicitly grouped under the label ‘Assyriology’:
197
What Salvini says about Hurrian (Salvini 2000: 12-13) can be applied to Elamite, too. 198 Frye 1974: 63-66. Cf. Rossi 1981: 162. 199 Labat 1973: 43. 200 Schmitt 1999: 541-542. 201 Compare Meriggi 1971: 56-58 with Castellino 1971: 40. 202 ‘Rideterminazione dei settori scientifico-
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
L-OR/03 – ASSIRIOLOGIA (EX: L15A – ASSIRIOLOGIA) Comprende lo studio epigrafico, linguistico e letterario delle testimonianze in scrittura cuneiforme relative alle antiche civiltà della Mesopotamia e dell’Iran sud-occidentale (Elam), in un arco cronologico che si estende tra la fine del IV millennio a.C. ed il I secolo d.C. 202
As A.V. Rossi (who is one of the advisors of the new classification) told me, the present choice (which may not be the final one) was made following the customary habit dating back to the beginning of Elamite studies, though forcibly neglecting the contributions of scholars of Iranian studies. Unfortunately, lacking an independent academic subject, we have little specific teaching of Elamite. As we employ a foreign designation in referring to ancient Anšan and Susiana, Elamite scholars are often Assyriologists, Iranists or Linguists in their academic background, i.e. they have approached Elam later and from an external point of view. 203 At the same time this is an enriching factor, and today, thanks to these scholars, it is much clearer what Elam was. However, the Elam revisited by modern historiography is only the last transformation in the meaning of this name. 204 As digging means unavoidably removal and mouldering, studying means reinventing and recreating the object of our study. Our Elam cannot be ancient Elam. Our Elam is a name, a mere label which we try to stick again to a thing which does not exist anymore and which we need to recon-
disciplinari (decreto ministeriale del 04/10/2000).’ 203 Cf., from an Assyriological point of view, the pressing concern regarding learning cuneiform in Oppert 1876: 147-148 and Sayce 1892: 175-176 (“Copy, copy, copy” and afterwards “translate, translate, translate!”). 204 Potts 1999: 5.
21
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
struct according to our data and our speculations. While the history of the name ‘Elam’ shows us that names are labels, the quest for a name to be assigned to Elam teaches us how important the act of giving a name to an object or a concept is, a
22
name which identifies it univocally in our or in ancient minds. I hope that by reviewing both, we can better understand what Elam represents today and what its peculiar place in modern historiography should be. I am quite confident that this stepchild can still grow.
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
R EFERENCES References are given in chronological order. An asterisk placed in front of the reference means that I could not see it; ‘E’: reference concerning Elam (till 1986, a plus sign marks references not listed in Hinz & Koch 1987, ‘Bibliographie,’ whose main concern is, however, Elamite language); ‘S’: reference containing an account of the history of studies; ‘B’: reference containing biographical data about scholars; ‘S’: reference which is interesting for the reconstruction of the history of studies. The same non-capital letters point to references by Italian scholars or about the history of studies in Italy; some references representing the first Assyriological studies in Italy are marked with an ‘a.’ DB, DNa, DPa, DPc: Achaemenid inscriptions of king Darius (D) at Bisotun (B), Naqš-e Rostam (N) and Persepolis (P). OP: Old Persian version. See Kent 1953, Schmitt 1991 and 2000. OED: Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition on CD-ROM (version 1.13), Oxford 1994. *E *E *E *E *E
ae
*E
B RUYN , Cornelis de (1711) Reizen over Moskovie door Persie en Indie, Amsterdam. C HARDIN , Jean (1711) Voyages de Monsieur le Chevalier Chardin, en Perse, en autres lieux de l’Orient, vol. 1, Amsterdam. K AEMPFER , Engelbert (1712) Amoenitates exoticarum politico-physio-medicarum fasciculi V, Lemgo. N IEBUHR , Carsten (1778) Reisebeschreibung nach Arabien und anderen umliegenden Ländern, 2, Kopenhagen. G ROTEFEND , Georg Friedrich (1805) ‘Über die Erklärung der Keilinschriften, und besonders der Inschriften von Persepolis,’ in A.H.L. H EEREN , Ideen über die Politik, den Verkehr und den Handel der vornehmsten Völker der alten Welt, I. Teil, I. Abteilung, Beilage I, Göttingen [cited in Teloni 1903: 32, footnote 1. The publishing year is 1815 in Hinz & Koch 1987: 1332. The original 1802 lecture by Grotefend is published in W. M EYER , ‘G. Fr. Grotefends erste Nachricht von seiner Entzifferung der Keilschrift,’ Nachrichten der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, 14 (1893), pp. 571-616 (cited in Lecoq 1997: 25)]. J ANNELLI , Cataldo (1830) Fundamenta hermeneutica hierographiae veterum gentium... libri tres, auctore Cataldo Jannellio regio bibliothecario, et Academico Herculanensi, Neapoli: typis regiis, 8°, pp. XLVIIII + 412. B EER , E.F.F. (1838) ‘Über die neuesten Forschungen zur Entzifferung der Keilschrift,’ Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung, 1, pp. 1-47. G ESENIUS , Guilielmus [William] (1839) ‘ eab ^ cd , ’ in idem, Thesaurus philologicus 23
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
E
*E
*E+ E
e+
*E
*E
ae+
E a E
E
ae
E
24
criticus linguae hebraeae et chaldaeae veteris testamenti, 2, pp. 1016-1017, Lipsiae. P REDARI , Francesco (1842) Origine e progresso dello studio delle lingue orientali in Italia, Milano: P. Lampato. W ESTERGAARD , Niels Ludvig (1844) ‘On the Deciphering of the second Achaemenian or Median Species of arrow-headed Writing,’ Mémoires de la Société Royale des Antiquaires du Nord (1840-1844), pp. 271-439, Kopenhagen. W ESTERGAARD , Niels Ludvig (1845) ‘Zur Entzifferung der Achämenidischen Keilschrift zweiter Gattung,’ Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 6/2, pp. 337-466, Bonn. L AYARD , A.H. (1846) ‘A Description of the Province of Khúzistán,’ Journal of the Royal Geographical Society, 16, pp. 75-79, London. R AWLINSON , Henry C. (1846) ‘The Persian Cuneiform Inscription at Behistun, decyphered and translated; with a Memoir on Persian Cuneiform Inscriptions in general, and on that of Behistun in Particular,’ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 10 (1847), pp. 1-52, London [dated 1847 also according to the preface and Delattre 1883: 8]. L UZZATTO , Filosseno (1847) ‘Saggio di critica storica. L’Asia antica occidentale e media,’ Rivista Europea. Giornale di scienze morali, lettere ed arti, pp. 300318, Milano [including a section entitled ‘Gli Elamiti.’ Cited as Luzzatti in Finzi 1872: 99-100, footnote 332]. H INCKS , Edward (1848a) ‘On the first and second kinds of Persepolis Writing,’ The Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, 21, Polite Literature, pp. 114131, Dublin. H INCKS , Edward (1848b) ‘On the three Kinds of Persepolitan Writing, and on the Babylonian Lapidary Characters,’ The Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, 21, Polite Literature, pp. 233-248, Dublin. L UZZATTO , Filosseno (1848) ‘Sulla inscrizione cuneiforme persiana di Behistun,’ Giornale dell’Istituto Lombardo, 1 nuova serie, pp. 465-487, Milano [dated “Padova, 17 marzo 1848”]. S AULCY , Félix de (1849) ‘Recherches analytiques sur les Inscriptions cunéiformes du système médique,’ Journal Asiatique, IVe série, 14, pp. 93-213, Paris. B ASEVI , Gioachino (1850) Recensione di Luzzatto 1850, Giornale dell’Istituto Lombardo, 2 nuova serie, pp. 244-249. L ÖWENSTERN , Isidore (1850a) ‘Lettre à M. de Saulcy sur la deuxième Écriture de Persépolis,’ Revue Archéologique, VIe année, seconde partie, pp. 490-496, Paris. L ÖWENSTERN , Isidore (1850b) ‘Remarques sur la deuxième Écriture cunéiforme de Persépolis,’ Revue Archéologique, VIe année, seconde partie, pp. 687-728, Paris. L UZZATTO , Philoxène [Filosseno] (1850) Études sur les inscriptions assyriennes de Persépolis, Hamadan, Van et Khorsabad, par Philoxène Luzzato, Padoue: A. Bianchi, pp. XXI + 214, franchi 5. S AULCY , Félix de (1850) ‘Recherches analytiques sur les Inscriptions cunéiformes du système médique. Deuxième Mémoire,’ Journal Asiatique, IVe série, 15, pp. 397-528, Paris.
B ASELLO
*E E
E
E
E+
E
E
E+ S
E+
*E
E
*
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
L AYARD , A.H. (1851) Inscriptions in the Cuneiform Character from Assyrian Monuments discovered by A.H. Layard, London. O PPERT , Jules (1851) ‘Etudes sur les Inscriptions des Achéménides, conçues dans l’Idiome des anciens Perses,’ Journal Asiatique, IVe série, 17, pp. 255296, 378-430 and 534-567; 18, pp. 56-83, 322-366 and 553-584. O PPERT , Jules (1852) ‘Etudes sur les Inscriptions des Achéménides, conçues dans l’Idiome des anciens Perses,’ Journal Asiatique, IVe série, 19, pp. 140213. H OLTZMANN , Adolf (1854) ‘Ueber die zweite Art der achämenidischen Keilschrift. IV.,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 8, pp. 329-345, Leipzig. H OLTZMANN , Adolf (1854a) ‘Neue Inschriften in Keilschrift der ersten und zweiten Art,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 8, pp. 539-547, Leipzig [“Heidelberg im October 1853”]. N ORRIS , Edwin (1855) ‘Memoir on the Scythic Version of the Behistun Inscription,’ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 15, pp. 1-213, London. N ORRIS , Edwin (1855a) ‘Addenda to the Paper at the Beginning of the Volume,’ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 15, pp. 431433, London. C ALDWELL , Robert (1856) A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or SouthIndian Family of Languages, 1st edition, London [1913: 3rd edition]. M OHL , Jules (1856) ‘Tableau des progrès faits dans l’étude des langues, de l’histoire et des traditions religieuses des peuples d’orient pendant les années 1855 et 1856,’ Annales de philosophie chrétienne. Recueil périodique destiné a faire connaitre tout ce que les sciences humaines renferment de preuves et de découvertes en faveur du Christianisme, IV e série, 14, pp. 356-375, Paris [including ‘Progrès dans la lecture de l’écriture cunéiforme’ in section 8]. O PPERT , Jules (1856) ‘Premiers déchiffrements de la langue cunéiforme, d’après les grammaires et les dictionnaires de la bibliothèque de Sardanapale, découverte et apportée en Europe, par A. Layard,’ Annales de philosophie chrétienne. Recueil périodique destiné a faire connaitre tout ce que les sciences humaines renferment de preuves et de découvertes en faveur du Christianisme, IV e série, 14, pp. 165-196, 245-257 and 325-355, Paris [see especially pp. 165-196; p. 240 (sic) cited in Finzi 1872: 70, footnote 245, and p. 73, footnote 257]. W ESTERGAARD , Niels Ludvig (1856) ‘Om den anden eller den sakiske Art af Akhaemenidernes Kileskrift,’ in Det kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskabs Skrifter, Femte Raekke, Historiks og philosophisk Afdeling; Andet Binds, forste Hefte, pp. 39-178, Kopenhagen. L OFTUS , William Kennett (1857) Travels and Researches in Chaldæa and Susiana; with an account of excavations at Warka, the “Erech” of Nimrod, and Shúsh, “Shushan the palace” of Esther, in 1849-52, London. O PPERT , J. (1857) ‘Die Grabinschrift Darius I. in Naksch-i-Rustam,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 11, pp. 133-137, Leipzig. R AWLINSON , G. (1858) History of Herodotus, London [assisted by H.
25
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
*E
E
*E+
E E+
ae
b
E
E+ E
E+
26
R AWLINSON and J.G. W ILKINSON . Including ‘On the religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians,’ 1, pp. 584-642, and ‘On the geography of Mesopotamia and the adjacent countries’ (3rd edition: pp. 549-605). 3rd edition cited in Delattre 1883: 1, footnote 1, and p. 22, footnote 1; 4th edition (1880) cited in Bassi 1899: p. IX]. L OFTUS , William Kennett (1859) Lithographic Facsimiles of Inscriptions in the Cuneiform Character from the Ruins of Susa, London (?) [about the publishing year, see the remark in Curtis 1993: 34; 1852 in Weisbach 1890: 4, Hinz & Koch 1987: 1334, ‘1852’]. M ORDTMANN , Andreas David (1862) ‘Erklärung der Keilinschriften zweiter Gattung,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 16, pp. 1126, Leipzig. S PIEGEL , F. (1862) Die altpersischen Keilinschriften, Leipzig [1881: 2nd edition. Cited in Oppert 1879: 11; Delattre 1883: 11 and 34, footnote 1]. F INZI , Felice (1870a) ‘Scavi di Golgos e di Soli. Lettera di F. Finzi a G. Henzen,’ Bullettino dell’instituto di corrispondenza archeologia per l’anno 1870, pp. 22-28, Roma: Salviucci. F INZI , Felice (1870b) Review of ‘An old Pahlavi-Pazand Glossary. Edited with an Alphebetical [sic] Index by Destur Hoshangji Jamaspji Asa; Revised and Enlarged with an Introductory Essay on the Pahlavi Language, by Martin Haug. Published by order of the Government of Bombay. Stuttgart 1870,’ Rivista Europea, pp. 3-6. M ORDTMANN , A.D. (1870) ‘Ueber die Keilinschriften zweiter Gattung,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 24, pp. 1-84, Leipzig. L ENORMANT , François (1871) ‘Première lettre. Sur la monarchie des mèdes, son origine et ses rois, d’après les documents assyriens’ (dedicated to M. de Saulcy), in Lettres assyriologiques sur l’histoire et les Antiquités de l’Asie antérieure, pp. 1-112, Paris [cited in Delattre 1883: 24-26, 43 and 162]. F INZI , Felice (1872) Ricerche per lo studio dell’antichità assira, Torino: Ermanno Loescher [the copy in the library of the Archiginnasio in Bologna is a gift of the author, 1872, July]. A MARI , M. (1873) ‘Proemio,’ Annuario della società italiana per gli studi orientali, 1 (1872), pp. III-VI, Firenze: Ermanno Loescher [this journal is cited in de Gubernatis 1876: 240 together with the Bollettino italiano degli studii orientali, Firenze]. L ENORMANT , François (1874a) ‘Inscriptions Susiennes,’ in Choix de textes cunéiformes inédits ou incomplétement publiés jusqu’à ce jour, Deuxième fascicule, pp. 109-141, Paris: Maisonneuve. L ENORMANT , François (1874b) La Magie chez les Chaldéens et les origines accadiennes, Paris 1874 [available in electronic format at <www.etana.org>]. S AYCE , H.A. (1874) ‘The Languages of the Cuneiform Inscriptions of Elam and Media,’ Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaelogy, 3, pp. 465-485, London. L ENORMANT , François (1875) La langue primitive de la Chaldée et les idiomes touraniens: étude de philologie et d’histoire suivie d’un glossaire accadien, Paris: Maisonneuve.
B ASELLO
s
S
E+
E+
E+
S
E+
E *E+ E+
E
*E
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
G UBERNATIS , Angelo (1876) Matériaux pour servir à l’histoire des études orientales en Italie, Paris: Ernest Leroux / Firenze: Loescher. E LLIOT , Walter (1876) ‘The Turanian Section. Address,’ in Robert K. D OUGLAS , ed., Transactions of the Second Session of the International Congress of Orientalists. Held in London in September, 1874, pp. 53-63, London. H UNFALVY , [Paul?] (1876) ‘On the Study of the Turanian Languages,’ in Robert K. D OUGLAS , ed., Transactions of the Second Session of the International Congress of Orientalists. Held in London in September, 1874, pp. 64-97, London. O PPERT , Jules (1876) ‘Rapport sur les progrès du déchiffrement des Écritures Cunéiformes,’ in Mémoires du Congrès International des Orientalistes. Compte-Rendu de la Première Session - Paris - 1873. Tomes I et II, pp. 117148, Paris. O PPERT , Jules (1876a) ‘Les inscriptions en langue susienne. Essai d’interprétation,’ in Mémoires du Congrès International des Orientalistes. Compte-Rendu de la Première Session - Paris - 1873. Tomes I et II, pp. 179216, Paris. O PPERT , Julius [Jules] (1876b) ‘On the Median dynasty; its nationality and its chronology,’ in Robert K. D OUGLAS , ed., Transactions of the Second Session of the International Congress of Orientalists. Held in London in September, 1874, pp. 35-45, London [including a brief ‘Grammar of the Median language,’ pp. 39-45, with paradigms. Being in London, Oppert spoke in English]. O PPERT , Jul. (1876c) ‘Ueber die Sprache der alten Meder,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 30, pp. 1-5, Leipzig [“Nach einem in der zweiten Sitzung der Generalversammlung der D.M.G. zu Rostock am 29. September 1875 gehaltenen Vortrage” (footnote on p. 1; see also p. VII)]. R AWLINSON , Henry (1876) ‘The Semitic Section. Address,’ in Robert K. D OUGLAS , ed., Transactions of the Second Session of the International Congress of Orientalists. Held in London in September, 1874, pp. 19-24, London. L ENORMANT , François (1877) Chaldean magic: its origin and development. Translated from the French with considerable additions by the author, and notes by the editor, London [English translation of La Magie chez les Chaldéens et les origines accadiennes, Paris 1874]. O PPERT , Jules (1879) Le peuple et la langue des Mèdes, Paris: Maisonneuve. S PIEGEL , F. (1881) Die altpersischen Keilinschriften, 2nd edition, Leipzig [1862: 1st edition]. D ARMESTETER , James (1883) Études Iraniennes, Paris [including ‘Esquisse de l’histoire de la langue persane,’ 1, pp. 3-43, and the review of Oppert 1879 (the date printed there, i.e. 1889, is clearly wrong), 2, pp. 3-15; the latter was previously published in Revue Critique (1880, 21 Juin)]. D ELATTRE , Alphonse, S.J. (1883) ‘Le peuple et l’empire des Mèdes jusqu’a la fin du règne de Cyaxare,’ Mémoires couronnés et Mémoires des Savants étrangers publiés par l’Académie des Sciences, des Lettres et des Beaux-Arts de Belgique, 45, Bruxelles [on the title-page: “Mémoire couronné par la Classe des lettres, dans sa séance du 8 mai 1882”]. H ALÉVY , Joseph (1883) Mélanges de Critique et d’Histoire relatifs aux Peuples sémitiques, Paris [Hinz & Koch 1987: 1336: “S. 7 ff., 116 ff., hält das DE
27
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
*E+
*a
E
a
*E
E
E
E
E
*E E
S
E+ E
28
ach[ämenidisch-]E[lamische] für einen susischen Dialekt”]. D ELITZSCH , F. (1884) Die Sprache der Kossäer, Leipzig. R AWLINSON , Henry Creswicke (1884) The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, 5, London [reprint 1909]. B RUNENGO , G. (1885) L’impero di Babilonia e di Ninive dalle origini fino alla conquista di Ciro descritto secondo i monumenti cuneiformi comparati colla Bibbia, Prato [cited in Bassi 1899: p. XIV]. S AYCE , A.H. (1885) ‘The Inscriptions of Mal-Amir and the Language of the second Column of the Akhæmenian Inscriptions,’ in Actes du sixième congrès international des orientalistes, tenu en 1883 à Leide, deuxième partie, section 1: Sémitique, pp. 637-756, Leiden: E.J. Brill [plus J.N. Strassmaier, S.J., Beigabe zur Abhandlung von H. Prof. Sayce, Oxford, dated 1885, May 14, pp. 754-755]. T ELONI , Bruto [pseudonym for Giulio Cesare] (1887) Crestomazia assira con paradigmi grammaticali (Pubblicazioni della Società Asiatica Italiana), Firenze: Ermanno Loescher. B ERTIN , G. (1888) Abridged Grammar of the Languages of the Cuneiform Inscriptions, London [Hinz & Koch 1987: 1336: “S. 81-94 neue kurze Grammatik des ‘Medischen’”]. S AYCE , A.-H. (1890) ‘Amardian or 'Protomedic' Tablets in the British Museum,’ Recueil de Travaux relatifs à la philologie et à l’archéologie égyptiennes et assyriennes pour servir de Bulletin à la Mission Française du Caire, 13, pp. 126-131, Paris. W EISBACH [later W EISSBACH ], Franz Heinrich (1890) Die Achämenideninschriften zweiter Art. Herausgegeben und bearbeitet von F.H. Weissbach (Assyriologische Bibliothek, 9), Leipzig [with a useful bibliography on pp. 34]. Q UENTIN , Aurèle (1891) ‘Annexe n° 2 au procès-verbal de la séance du 9 janvier 1891,’ Journal Asiatique, VIIIe série, 17, pp. 150-155, Paris [speaking about some “textes susiens” regarding king Šilhak-Inšušinak]. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1891) Anzanische Inschriften und Vorarbeiten zu ihrer Entzifferung (Abhandlungen der Königl. Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, 28, philologisch-historische Classe, 12, 2), Leipzig [manuscript submitted on 1890, November 13; printing completed on 1891, January 10]. W INCKLER , H[ugo] (1891) ‘Zu den altsusischen Inschriften,’ Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie, 6, pp. 317-326, Berlin. J ENSEN , Peter (1892) ‘Elamitische Eigennamen. Ein Beitrag zur Erklärung der elamitischen Inschriften,’ Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 6, pp. 47-70 and 209-226, Wien [obviously Hinz & Koch 1987: 1337, ‘1892,’ is wrong in reporting the title “...der elamischen Inschriften”]. S AYCE , A.H. (1892) ‘Inaugural Address,’ in Edward Delmar M ORGAN , ed., Transactions of the Ninth International Congress of Orientalists (held in London, 5th to 12th September 1892), 2, pp. 169-186. A NDREAS , Friedrich Carl (1894) ‘Amardoi,’ in Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, vol. 1/2, columns 1729-1733, Stuttgart. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1894) Neue Beiträge zur Kunde der susischen Inschriften
B ASELLO
E
*E
E
*E a E
E E E E *S E b
aS *E *E *E
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
(Abhandlungen der Königl. Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, 34, philologisch-historische Classe, 14, 7), Leipzig [manuscript submitted on 1894, May 22; printing completed on 1894, September 3]. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1895) ‘Anzanisches,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 49, pp. 692-694 [wrong “pp. 592-604” in Hinz/Koch 1987]. W INKLER , Heinrich (1896) Die Sprache der zweiten Columne der dreisprachigen Inschriften und das Altaische (Programm des städt. Johannes-Gymnasiums zu Breslau), Breslau. F OY , Willy (1898) ‘Beiträge zur Erklärung der susischen Achämenideninschriften,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 52, pp. 119-131 and 564-605. H ÜSING , G. (1898) ‘Neu-Elamisches,’ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, 1, columns 301-304. B ASSI , Domenico (1899) Mitologia babilonese-assira, Milano [reprint Cisalpino-Goliardica, Milano 1986]. F OY , Willy (1900a) ‘Die neuelamische Inschrift Art. Sus. a.’ [=Weisbach 1890: 84, ‘S,’ Artaxerxes II from Susa], Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 14, pp. 277-300, Wien. F OY , Willy (1900b) ‘Altpersisches und Neuelamisches,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 54, pp. 341-377. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1900) ‘Susische Thontäfelchen,’ Beiträge zur Assyriologie und semitischen Sprachwissenschaft, 4, pp. 168-202, Leipzig. J ENSEN , P. (1901) ‘Alt- und Neuelamitisches,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 55, pp. 223-240. S CHEIL , Vincent (1901) Textes élamites-anzanites, première série (Mémoires de la Délégation en Perse, 3), Paris. B OOTH , A. John (1902) The discovery and decipherment of the trilingual cuneiform inscriptions, London [cited in Teloni 1903: 27, footnote 1] H ÜSING , G. (1902) ‘Elamisches,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 56, pp. 790-795. T ROMBETTI , Alfredo (1902) ‘Notizie autobiografiche premesse dal Trombetti all’opera «Nessi genealogici fra le lingue del mondo antico», presentata, manoscrittta, al concorso per il premio Reale di Filologia e Linguistica del 1902,’ in Scritti in onore di Alfredo Trombetti, pp. XXXVIII-XLVIII, Milano 1938 [the birth year is 1866, not 1886 as wrongly written on p. XXXVIII]. J ASTROW , Marcus (1903) A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Bavli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, 2, New York [reprint Pardes, New York 1950]. T ELONI , Bruto [pseudonym for Giulio Cesare] (1903) Letteratura assira, Milano: Hoepli. B ORK , Ferdinand (1905a) ‘Elamisches,’ Beiträge zur Assyriologie und semitischen Sprachwissenschaft, 4, pp. 431-433. B ORK , Ferdinand (1905b) ‘Zur protoelamischen Schrift,’ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, 8, pp. 323-330. H ÜSING , G. (1905) ‘Hadamdum,’ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, 8, columns
29
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
*E E+ E E *E *E
*E
E+ E E
E *E
*E
E+ E+
e
E E *E
30
248-250. S CHEIL , Vincent (1905) ‘Miscellen V. fapirti ou atamti?,’ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, 8, columns 203-204. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1905) ‘Elymais,’ in Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, 5/2, columns 2458-2467, Stuttgart. B ORK , Ferdinand (1906) ‘Zur Erklärung der elamischen Briefe,’ Beiträge zur Assyriologie und semitischen Sprachwissenschaft, 5, pp. 401-404, Leipzig. H ÜSING , G. (1906a) ‘Semitische Lehnwörter im Elamischen,’ Beiträge zur Assyriologie und semitischen Sprachwissenschaft, 5, pp. 405-412, Leipzig. H ÜSING , G. (1906b) ‘Halpirti,’ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, 9, columns 601-604. H ÜSING , G. (1906c) ‘Zu Mal-Amir,’ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, 9, columns 605-606. P RÁŠEK , Justin V. (1906) Geschichte der Meder und Perser bis zur makedonischen Eroberung, 1, Gotha [reprint Darmstadt 1968]. W INKLER , Heinrich (1907) ‘Elamisch und Kaukasisch,’ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, 10, columns 565-573. B RAY , Denys de S. (1908) The Brahui Language. Part I, Introduction and Grammar, Calcutta [reprint New Delhi 1986]. S CHEIL , Vincent (1909) ‘La langue anzanite,’ Comptes-rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, pp. 527-635. H ÜSING , G. (1910) ‘Die elamische Sprachforschung,’ Memnon, 4, pp. 5-40. S CHEIL , V. (1910) ‘L’extension de la langue anzanite,’ Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Comptes Rendus des Séances de l’Année 1910, pp. 564-575, Paris. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1911) Die Keilinschriften der Achämeniden, Leipzig. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1911a) Die Keilinschriften am Grabe des Darius Hystaspis (Abhandlungen der Königl. Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, 29, philologisch-historische Klasse, 1), Leipzig. F RANK , Carl (1912) Zur Entzifferung der altelamischen Inschriften (Anhang zu den Abhandlungen der Königl. Preuss. Akademie der Wissenschaften vom Jahre 1912), Berlin. C ALDWELL , Robert (1913) A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or SouthIndian Family of Languages, 3rd edition, London. P ÉZARD , Maurice & Edmond P OTTIER (1913) Catalogue des Antiquités de la Susiane (mission J. de Morgan), Paris (Musées du Louvre) [reprinted with a new appendix in 1926 (Benoit 1997: 148)]. T ROMBETTI , Alfredo (1913) ‘La posizione linguistica dell’Elamitico’ (Memoria presentata il 26 febbraio 1913), in Memorie della R. Accademia delle Scienze dell’Istituto di Bologna. Classe di Scienze Morali – Sezione storico-filologica, serie I, tomo VII (1912-13), pp. 117-136, Bologna. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1913) ‘Zur Kritik der Achämenideninschriften,’ Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 67, pp. 271-341. G USTAVS , Arnold (1915) ‘Verbindungs-Linien zwischen dem Mitannischen, dem Elamischen und dem Lykischen,’ Memnon, 7, pp. 228-232. H ÜSING , Georg (1916) Die einheimischen Quellen zur Geschichte Elams. I. Teil:
B ASELLO
a s
e+
E *S a
as
aS e+ E+ e+ b *E
b B S
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
Altelamische Texte in Umschrift mit Bemerkungen, einer Einleitung und einem Anhang, Leipzig [2nd volume never published]. B OSON , Giustino (1918) Assiriologia, Milano [reprint Cisalpino-Goliardica, Milano 1979]. T ELONI , Giulio Cesare (1923) ‘Precursori italiani degli studi assiri (notizie e osservazioni),’ Bilychnis, 22 (anno XII), fasc. VIII-IX (agosto-sett. 1923, “Fascicolo d’omaggio al Congresso internazionale di storia delle religioni (Parigi: Ottobre 1923)”), pp. 218-231 [cited in Furlani 1929: 15 as ‘Bilychnis, II a ser., no. 114’ and Castellino 1971: 34, footnote 1 as ‘Bilychnis, 1923, II, pp. 218-231’]. T ROMBETTI , Alfredo (1923) Elementi di glottologia (Regia Accademia delle Scienze dell’Istituto di Bologna, Classe di Scienze Morali), Bologna [see also Vincenzo C OCCO (1938) ‘Indici dell’opera «Elementi di Glottologia», di Alfredo Trombetti,’ in Scritti in onore di Alfredo Trombetti, pp. 401-424, Milano]. B ORK , Ferdinand (1925) ‘Elam B. Sprache,’ in Max E BERT , ed., Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte, 3, pp. 70-83, Berlin. W ALLIS B UDGE , E.A. (1925) The rise and progress of Assyriology, London. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1928) La religione babilonese e assira, 1, Le divinità, Bologna: N. Zanichelli [cited in Furlani 1932a]. J ONES , Horace Leonard, ed. (1928) The geography of Strabo (The Loeb classical library), 5, London/Cambridge, Massachussets [reprinted in 1961]. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1929) La civiltà babilonese e assira, Roma: Istituto per l’Oriente [including ‘Storia dell’assiriologia’ on pp. 1-15; see pp. 14-15 about Assyriology in Italy]. T ELONI , Giulio Cesare (1930) ‘Assiriologia,’ in Enciclopedia Italiana di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti (Treccani), 5, pp. 36-38. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1931) ‘Gli dèi dei giorni e dei mesi nell’epoca neobabilonese,’ Studi e Materiali di Storia delle Religioni, 7, pp. 136-143, Bologna. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1931) ‘ !!"#$,’ in Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, 28, columns 1648-1651, Stuttgart. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1932) ‘Elam,’ in Enciclopedia Italiana di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti (Treccani), 13, pp. 603-606. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1932a) ‘Finzi, Felice,’ in Enciclopedia Italiana di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti (Treccani), 15, p. 418. P OEBEL , Arno (1932) ‘The Name of Elam in Sumerian, Akkadian and Hebrew,’ The American Journal of semitic Languages and Literatures, 48 (1931-1932), pp. 20-26. B RAY , Denys (1934) The Br h!" Language. Part II, The Br h!" Problem. Part III, Etymological Vocabulary, Delhi. C ASATI , Giovanni (1934) ‘325. Finzi Felice,’ in Dizionario degli scrittori d’Italia (dalle origini fino ai viventi), 3, pp. 61-62, Milano. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1935) ‘Oppert, Jules,’ in Enciclopedia Italiana di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti (Treccani), vol. 25, p. 414a. G UIDI , Michelangelo (1935) ‘Orientalismo’ and ‘Orientalismo. Semitistica,’ in Enciclopedia Italiana di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti (Treccani), 25, pp. 537-541.
31
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
S e
B
e+
e+
*
E b
E E
S e
E
*S
32
P AGLIARO , Antonino (1935) ‘Orientalismo. India e Iran,’ in Enciclopedia Italiana di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti (Treccani), 25, pp. 541-543. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1936) ‘Divinità gemelle nel pantheon elamico?,’ Studi e Materiali di Storia delle Religioni, 12, pp. 51-65, Bologna. B ALLINI , Ambrogio (1938) ‘Alfredo Trombetti,’ in Scritti in onore di Alfredo Trombetti, pp. XVII-XXXVII, Milano: Hoepli. W EISSBACH , F.H. (1938) ‘Delattre, Alphonse,’ in Reallexicon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie, 2, pp. 197-198, Berlin/Leipzig [defined as “Theolog und Philolog”]. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1946) ‘L’Asia Occidentale antica,’ in Nicola T URCHI , ed., Le religioni del mondo, pp. 169-199, Roma [including a section entitled ‘Gli Elamiti,’ pp. 173-175]. F URLANI , Giuseppe (1949) ‘La religione degli Elamiti,’ in Pietro T ACCHI V ENTURI , ed., Storia delle Religioni, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2, pp. 1-11, Torino [the 4th revised edition (1954) is cited in Castellino 1971: 40 and footnote 20. Not included in further editions]. A SSIRELLI , Odone (1953) La posizione linguistica del Nilotico, Faenza (pro manuscripto). K ENT , Roland G. (1953) Old Persian, Grammar Texts Lexicon, 2nd revised edition, New Haven. P APER , Herbert H. (1955) The Phonology and Morphology of Royal Achaemenid Elamite, Ann Arbor. S ABA , Umberto (1956) Ricordi - Racconti. 1910-1947, Milano [reprinted in Arrigo S TARA , ed., Umberto Saba. Tutte le prose (I Meridiani), pp. 353-511, Milano 2001]. H INZ , Walther (1962) ‘Die elamischen Inschriften des Hanne,’ A Locust’s Leg. Studies in honour of S. H. Taqizadeh, pp. 105-116, London. K ÖNIG , Friedrich Wilhelm (1965) Die elamischen Königsinschriften (Archiv für Orientforschung, 16), Graz. M ERTON , Robert K. (1965) On the Shoulders of Giants: A Shandean Postscript, New York. F RIEDRICH , Johannes (1966) Entzifferung verschollener Schriften und Sprachen, 2nd edition, Heidelberg [1954: 1st edition]. M ERIGGI , Piero (1966) ‘L’Elamico,’ in Atti dell’Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Problemi Attuali di Scienza e Cultura, Anno CCCLCIII – 1966, Quaderno 76, Atti del Convegno sul tema: La Persia e il Mondo GrecoRomano (Roma 11-14 aprile 1965), pp. 559-567, Roma. N EUSNER , Jacob (1966) A History of the Jews in Babylonia. II. The Early Sasanian Period, Leiden. % &'()*)+ , ,.-. [Igor M. D’ JAKONOV ] (1967) ‘. /0-1(,2 '34( ,’ in idem, ' 34(, %56+*62 7656%*62 0 3,, , pp. 85-112, - )1(+0 [‘Elamskij jazyk,’ in Jazyki Drevnej Perednej Azii, i.e. ‘The Elamite language,’ in The languages of the Ancient Near East, Moscow, in Russian]. J ÉQUIER , G. (1968) En Perse, 1897-1902. Journal et Lettres de Gustave Jéquier, publiés et annotés par Michel Jéquier, La Baconniére [as in Chevalier 1997: 214] / Neuchâtel [idem, p. 131].
B ASELLO
E e
e
ES
s
s
e
e e
S
e+
e
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
H ALLOCK , Richard T. (1969) Persepolis Fortification Tablets (Oriental Institute Publications, 92), Chicago. M ERIGGI , Piero (1969a) ‘Altsumerische und proto-elamische Bilderschrift,’ in Wolfgang V OIGT , ed., XVII. Deutscher Orientalistentag vom 21. bis 27. Juli 1968 in Würzburg. Vorträge (Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, Supplementa I), 1, pp. 156-163, Wiesbaden. M ERIGGI , Piero (1969b) ‘Zur Lesung und Deutung der proto-elamischen Königsinschriften,’ Bibliotheca Orientalis, 26, pp. 176-177, Leiden. N EUSNER , Jacob (1969) A History of the Jews in Babylonia. IV. The Age of Shapur II, Leiden. R EINER , Erica (1969) ‘The Elamite Language,’ in Handbuch der Orientalistik, I. Abt., 2. Band, 1. und 2. Abschnitt, Lieferung 2: Altkleinasiatische Sprachen, pp. 54-118, Leiden/Köln. D IAKONOFF [D’ JAKONOV ], Igor M. (1970) ‘The Origin of the ‘Old Persian’ Writing System and the Ancient Oriental Epigraphic and Annalistic Traditions,’ in W. B. Henning Memorial Volume, pp. 98-124, London. C ASTELLINO , G.R. (1971) ‘Gli studi di assiriologia,’ in Gli studi sul Vicino Oriente in Italia dal 1921 al 1970, 1, L’Oriente preislamico, pp. 33-48, Roma: Istituto per l’Oriente. M ERIGGI , Piero (1971) ‘Gli studi italiani nelle lingue anatoliche,’ in Gli studi sul Vicino Oriente in Italia dal 1921 al 1970, 1, L’Oriente preislamico, pp. 49-58, Roma: Istituto per l’Oriente. M ERIGGI , Piero (1971a) Review of ‘Handbuch der Orientalistik, I. Abt., 2. Band, 1. und 2. Abschnitt, Lieferung 2: Altkleinasiatische Sprachen. Leiden/Köln, E. J. Brill, 1969,’ Bibliotheca Orientalis, 28, pp. 71-74, Leiden [‘The Elamite Language’ by E. Reiner is reviewed on p. 72]. M ERIGGI , Piero (1971b) ‘Zu den neuen Inschriften in proto-elamischer Prunkschrift,’ Bibliotheca Orientalis, 28, pp. 171-173, Leiden. M ERIGGI , Piero (1971-1974) La scrittura proto-elamica. Parte I a : La scrittura e il contenuto dei testi (1971); Parte II a : Catalogo dei segni and Parte III a : Testi (1974), Roma: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. L ABAT , René (1973) ‘L’assyriologie,’ Journal Asiatique, 261, pp. 33-45, Paris. E ILERS , Wilhelm (1974) ‘Le texte cunéiforme du cylindre de Cyrus,’ in Commémoration Cyrus. Hommage universel, 2 (Acta Iranica, 2, première série), pp. 25-34, Téhéran/Liège. F RYE , Richard N. (1974) ‘Methodology in Iranian History,’ in idem, ed., Neue Methodologie in der Iranistik (Festschrift Wolfgang L ENTZ ), pp. 57-69, Wiesbaden. G NOLI , Gherardo (1974) ‘Politica religiosa e concezione della regalità sotto gli Achemenidi,’ in Gurur jamañjarik . Studi in onore di Giuseppe Tucci, 1, pp. 23-88, Napoli [see the relevant reference to Elam on p. 37. Translated in French as ‘Politique religieuse et conception de la royauté sous les Achéménides,’ in Commémoration Cyrus. Hommage universel, 2 (Acta Iranica, 2, première série), pp. 117-190, Téhéran-Liège 1974]. S TEFANINI , R. (1974) Review of ‘Piero Meriggi, La scrittura proto-elamica, Parte 1 a : la scrittura e il contenuto dei testi. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei,
33
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
e B E e+
S E
E
e
s
E
e b e
34
Roma, 1971,’ Journal of Cuneiform Studies, 26, pp. 122-129 [Stefanini is cited in Meriggi 1971: 54]. R UHLEN , Merritt (1975-76) A Guide to the Languages of the World. M ERIGGI , Piero (1977) ‘Iscrizioni proto-elamiche dell’Iran orientale,’ Kadmos, 16, pp. 1-4. D UCHESNE -G UILLEMIN , J., Pierre L ECOQ & Jean K ELLENS (1979) BioBibliographies de 134 savants (Acta Iranica, Quatrième Série, I), Leiden. G ERSHEVITCH , Ilya (1979) ‘The Alloglottography of Old Persian,’ Transactions of the Philological Society, pp. 114-190, Oxford. C ARDONA , Giorgio Raimondo (1980) ‘Etnografia della comunicazione e documenti antichi: il caso dell’antico persiano,’ Vicino Oriente, 3 (Atti del seminario di studi su bilinguismo e traduzione nell’antico oriente. Roma, 20-22 marzo 1980), pp. 277-286. M ECQUENEM , Roland de (1980) ‘Les fouilleurs de Suse,’ Iranica Antiqua, 15, pp. 1-48. V ALLAT , François (1980) Suse et l’Elam (Recherche sur les grandes civilisations, 1, Études Elamites), Paris. C ARDONA , Giorgio Raimondo (1981) Antropologia della scrittura, Torino. M C A LPIN , D.W. (1981) Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: the Evidence and its Implications (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 71, part 3), Philadelphia. R OSSI , Adriano V. (1981) ‘La varietà linguistica nell’Iran achemenide,’ Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico. Sezione Linguistica, 3, pp. 141-196, Napoli. C ARDONA , Giorgio Raimondo (1982) Nomi propri e nomi di popoli: una prospettiva etnolinguistica (Centro Internazionale di Semiotica e di Linguistica. Documenti di lavoro e pre-pubblicazioni, 119 (dicembre 1982)), Urbino. P IEMONTESE , Angelo Michele (1982) Bibliografia italiana dell’Iran (14621982), Napoli [see in particular sections IV.3 ‘Civiltà elamita’ and VII.2 ‘Elamico’]. V ALLAT , François (1982) Abstract of ‘McAlpin, D.W. Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: The Evidence and its Implications,’ Abstracta Iranica, 5, p. 47. C OLORNI , Vittore (1983a) ‘L’uso del greco nella liturgia del giudaismo ellenistico e la Novella 146 di Giustiniano,’ in idem, Judaica minora. Saggi sulla storia dell’ebraismo italiano dall’antichità all’età moderna, pp. 1-65, Milano: A. Giuffrè [previously published in Annali di storia del diritto, 8 (1964)]. C OLORNI , Vittore (1983b) ‘Genealogia della famiglia Finzi – Le prime generazioni,’ in idem, Judaica minora. Saggi sulla storia dell’ebraismo italiano dall’antichità all’età moderna, pp. 329-342, Milano: A. Giuffrè. D’E RME , Giovanni (1983) ‘Aspetti grafici e fonetici della scrittura anticopersiana,’ Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 43, pp. 429-477, Napoli. F INZI , Riccardo (1983) Correggio nella storia e nei suoi figli, Correggio: ARCA. F RYE , Richard N. (1984) The History of Ancient Iran, München. R OSSI , Adriano V. (1984) ‘Glottonimia ed etnonimia nell’Iran achemenide,’ Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico. Sezione Linguistica, 6, pp. 39-65, Napoli.
B ASELLO
S
e
S B e e e e E ES e
e
e e e e
e
e
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
S CHWAB , R. (1984) The Oriental Renaissance. Europe’s Rediscovery of India and the East 1680-1880, New York [English translation of La Renaissance orientale, Paris 1950 by G. P ATTERSON -B LACK & Victor R EINKING ; preface by E.W. S AID ]. R OSSI , Adriano V. (1985) ‘Competenza multipla nei testi arcaici: le iscrizioni di Bisotun,’ Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico. Sezione Linguistica, 7, pp. 191-210, Napoli. G ENITO , Bruno (1986) ‘The Medes. A Reassessment of the Archaeological Evidence,’ East and West, 36/1-3, pp. 11-81, Rome. B ARNETT , R.D. (1987) ‘Loftus, William Kennett,’ in Reallexicon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie, 7, pp. 102-103, Berlin/New York. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1987a) ‘na-áš dans les tablettes de Persépolis,’ Nouvelles Assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires, 1987/112, Paris. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1987b) ‘Le vin *šap dans les tablettes de Persépolis,’ Nouvelles Assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires, 1987/111, Paris. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1987c) ‘Bakabadda, un Egyptien à Persépolis,’ Nouvelles Assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires, 1987/110, Paris. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1987d) ‘L’expression appa NG(-ma) hupe(-ma) en élamite achéménide,’ Nouvelles Assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires, 1987/90, Paris. H INZ , Walther & Heidemarie K OCH (1987) Elamisches Wörterbuch, Berlin. C ALMEYER , P. (1988) ‘M8lam9r,’ in Reallexicon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie, 7, pp. 275-276, Berlin/New York. S ORRENTINO , Antonio (1988) ‘Corrispondenze lessicali nell’ipotesi di parentela elamo-dravidica,’ Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico. Sezione Linguistica, 10, pp. 239-253, Napoli. A NDRÉ , Béatrice & Mirjo S ALVINI (1989) ‘Réflexions sur Puzur-Inšušinak,’ Iranica Antiqua, 24, pp. 53-72 and plates 1-6, Leiden/Gent. D ANDAMAEV , Muhammad A. (1989) A political History of the Achaemenid Empire, translated by W.J. V OGELSANG , Leiden. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1989a) ‘L’expression ‘ha duš ha duka’ dans les textes de Persepolis,’ Akkadika, 63, pp. 12-26. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1989b) Grillot-Susini, Éléments de grammaire élamite, Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 49, pp. 315-316, Napoli. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1989c) ‘«NP hiše» dans les textes achéménides,’ Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 49, pp. 209-217, Napoli. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1989d) ‘Présence babylonienne dans les textes économiques de Persépolis,’ Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 49, pp. 201-207, Napoli. M ALLORY , J.P. (1989) In Search of the Indo-Europeans. Language, Archaeology and Myth, London. D’E RME , Giovanni (1990) ‘Elamico e antico-persiano; affinità stilistiche tra i due sistemi scrittorii,’ in Proceedings of the First European Conference of Iranian Studies, 1, pp. 69-83, Rome. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1990, unpublished) Abréviations RGTC: liste fusionnée des Inscriptions Royales élamites et des Inscriptions Achéménides (Tirage Geneva du 11/10/90, en continu international).
35
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
e
*b
S
B E ES
S e E
E
E
e e
E
36
P ANAINO , Antonio C.D. (1990) ‘Calendars, i. Pre-Islamic Calendars,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 4, pp. 658-668, London/New York. S HAKED , Shaul (1990) ‘Bible, iv. Middle Persian Translations of the Bible,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 4, pp. 206-207, London/New York. D E S ALVIA , Fulvio (1991) ‘Cataldo Jannelli e gli studi di egittologia a Napoli nella prima metà del secolo XIX,’ in Cristiana M ORIGI G OVI , Silvio C URTO & Sergio P ERNIGOTTI , eds., L’Egitto fuori dell’Egitto. Dalla riscoperta all’Egittologia, pp. 107-119, Bologna. S ANCISI -W EERDENBURG , Heleen & J.W. D RIJVERS , eds. (1991) Through Travellers’ Eyes. European Travellers on the Iranian Monuments (Achaemenid History VII), Leiden. S CHMITT , Rüdiger (1991) The Bisitun Inscriptions of Darius the Great. Old Persian Text (Corpus Iscriptionum Iranicarum, part I, vol. I, texts I), London. E MERSON , John (1992) ‘Chardin, Jean,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 5, pp. 369377, Costa Mesa, California. S TEVE , M.-J. (1992) Syllabaire Elamite. Histoire et Paleographie (Civilisations du Proche-Orient: Serie II, Philologie, 1), Neuchâtel/Paris. S TOLPER , Matthew W. (1992) ‘Cuneiform Texts from Susa,’ in Prudence O. H ARPER , Joan A RUZ & Françoise T ALLON , eds., The Royal City of Susa. Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre, pp. 253-260, New York. C URTIS , John (1993) ‘William Kennett Loftus and His Excavations at Susa,’ Iranica Antiqua, 28, pp. 1-55 [translated in French in Curtis 1997]. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1993) ‘Les šaumarraš dans les textes de Persépolis,’ Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 53, pp. 121-127, Napoli. G RILLOT -S USINI , Françoise, Clarisse H ERRENSCHMIDT & Florence M ALBRAN L ABAT (1993) ‘La version élamite de la trilingue de Behistun: une nouvelle lecture,’ Journal Asiatique, 281, pp. 19-59, Paris. V ALLAT , François (1993) Les noms géographiques des sources suso-élamites (Répertoire Géographique des Textes Cunéiformes, 11), Wiesbaden. C ATFORD , J.C. (1994) ‘Caucasian Languages,’ in R.E. A SHER & J.M.Y. S IMPSON , eds., The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2, pp. 486489, Oxford/New York/Seoul/Tokyo. G ERSHEVITCH , Ilya (1994) ‘An Old Persian Waiting for Godot,’ in P. C IPRIANO , P. D I G IOVINE & M. M ANCINI , eds., Miscellanea di studi linguistici in onore di Walter Belardi, pp. 59-82, Roma. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1994a) ‘Les documents de voyage dans les textes de Persépolis,’ Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 54, pp. 18-31, Napoli. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1994b) ‘Les voyages de Darius dans les regions orientales de l’empire,’ Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 54, pp. 32-45, Napoli. G RAGG , Gene (1994) ‘Elamite,’ in R.E. A SHER & J.M.Y. S IMPSON , eds., The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 3, p. 1104, Oxford/New York/Seoul/Tokyo. S IM , R.J. (1994) ‘Nilo-Saharan Languages,’ in R.E. A SHER & J.M.Y. S IMPSON , eds., The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 5, pp. 2804-2808, Oxford/New York/Seoul/Tokyo.
B ASELLO
S
e e
S E
E S
E S S S S ES
E
S E E
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
Z VELEBIL , K.V. (1994) ‘Dravidian Languages,’ in R.E. A SHER & J.M.Y. S IMPSON , eds., The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2, pp. 10631065, Oxford/New York/Seoul/Tokyo. D ANIELS , Peter T. (1995) ‘The Decipherment of Ancient Near Eastern Scripts,’ in Jack M. S ASSON , ed., with the collaboration of John B AINES , Gary B ECKMAN & Karen S. R UBINSON , Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, 1, pp. 81-93, New York. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (1995) ‘I ‘puhu’ nei testi di Persepoli. Nuove interpretazioni,’ Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 55, pp. 141-157, Napoli. R OSSI , Adriano V. (1995) ‘Antenati regali a Susa,’ in Un ricordo che non si spegne. Scritti di docenti e collaboratori dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli in memoria di Alessandro Bausani, pp. 379-403, Napoli. S AID , Edward W. (1995) Orientalism, 2nd edition (1st edition 1978), New York [Italian translation in Said 2001]. V ALLAT , François (1995) ‘Šutruk-Nahunte, Šutur-Nahunte et l’imbroglio néoélamite,’ Nouvelles Assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires, 1995/44, Paris. B RIANT , Pierre (1996) Histoire de l’empire perse de Cyrus à Alexandre (Achaemenid History, 10), Paris. Q UINTANA , Enrique (1996) ‘ELAM = halhatamti = high land,’ Nouvelles Assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires, 1996/50, p. 43, Paris. T ISSOT , Francine (1996) ‘Délégations Archéologiques Françaises, i. Délégation Archéologique Française en Iran,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 7, pp. 238-240, Costa Mesa. V ALLAT , François (1996) ‘ÉLAM: haltamti/Elamtu,’ Nouvelles Assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires, 1996/89, p. 79, Paris. A NDRÉ -S ALVINI , Béatrice (1997) ‘«Ici commence l’histoire de l’Elam», L’œuvre du père Jean-Vincent Scheil,’ in Chevalier 1997: 110-125. B ENOIT , Agnès (1997) ‘Les antiquités de Suse au musée du Louvre,’ in Chevalier 1997: 140-149. C HEVALIER , Nicole, ed. (1997) Une mission en Perse 1897-1912 (Les dossiers du musée du Louvre), Paris. C URTIS , John (1997) ‘Les fouilles de W.K. Loftus à Suse,’ in Chevalier 1997: 36-45 [translation of Curtis 1993 by Françoise T ALLON ]. L ECOQ , Pierre (1997) Les inscriptions de la Perse achéménide (L’aube des peuples), Paris [including chapter 1, ‘Le déchiffrement des cunéiformes,’ pp. 1930]. S TRONACH , David (1997) ‘Anshan and Parsa: Early Achaemenid History, Art and Architecture on the Iranian Plateau,’ in John C URTIS , ed., Mesopotamia and Iran in the Persian Period. Conquest and Imperialism 539-331 BC. Proceedings of a Seminar in memory of Vladimir G. Lukonin, pp. 35-53, London. G RAN -A YMERICH , Ève (1998) Naissance de l’archéologie moderne 1798-1945, Paris. K HA:IKJAN , Margaret (1998) The Elamite Language (Documenta Asiana IV), Roma. L ACKENBACHER , Sylvie (1998) ‘Elam, vii. Non-Elamite Texts in Elam,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 8, pp. 342-344, Costa Mesa.
37
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
e E E
S
S S E S e
e
B
e B s
S
38
S ALVINI , Mirjo (1998) ‘Elam, iv. Linear Elamite,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 8, pp. 330-332, London/New York. V ALLAT , François (1998) ‘Elam, i. The History of Elam,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 8, pp. 302-313, Costa Mesa. V ALLAT , François (1998a) ‘Le royaume elamite de Zamin et les «Lettres de Ninive»,’ Iranica Antiqua, 33, pp. 95-106. V OGELSANG , Willem (1998) ‘Medes, Scythians and Persians: the Rise of Darius in a North-South Perspective,’ Iranica Antiqua, 33, pp. 195-224, Leiden. A NDRÉ -S ALVINI , Béatrice (1999) ‘Les débuts de la recherche française en assyriologie. Milieu et atmosphère du déchiffrement,’ Journal Asiatique, 287/1, pp. 331-355. G IGNOUX , Philippe (1999) ‘France, xii(b). Iranian Studies in France: Pre-Islamic Period,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, vol. 10, pp. 167-173, New York. H ACHARD , Vincent & Bernard H OURCADE (1999) ‘France, xii(a). Iranian Studies in France: Overview,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 10, pp. 162-167, New York. P OTTS , Daniel T. (1999) The Archaeology of Elam. Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State, NewYork. S CHMITT , Rüdiger (1999) ‘Germany, iii. Iranian Studies in German: Pre-Islamic Period,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 10, pp. 530-543, New York. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (2000) ‘La parola kassu nei testi neo-elamiti di Susa,’ in Simonetta G RAZIANI , ed., with the collaboration of Maria Cristina C ASABURI & Giancarlo L ACERENZA , Studi sul Vicino Oriente antico dedicati alla memoria di Luigi Cagni, 1, pp. 375-382, Napoli. N ICOLAI , Roberto & Giusto T RAINA , eds. (2000) Strabone, Geografia, Caucaso, Asia Centrale e Anatolia, libri XI-XII, Milano. R OSSI , Adriano Valerio (2000) ‘L’iscrizione originaria di Bisotun: DB elam. A+L,’ in Simonetta G RAZIANI , ed., with the collaboration of Maria Cristina C ASABURI & Giancarlo L ACERENZA , Studi sul Vicino Oriente antico dedicati alla memoria di Luigi Cagni, 4, pp. 2065-2108, Napoli. S ALVINI , Mirjo (2000) ‘La civiltà dei Hurriti, popolo dell’Asia anteriore antica. Introduzione alla storia degli studi e alla documentazione testuale,’ La parola del passato, 55, fasc. I-VI (310-315 of the series), pp. 7-24, Napoli. S CHMITT , Rüdiger (2000) The Old Persian Inscriptions of Naqsh-i Rustam and Persepolis (Corpus Iscriptionum Iranicarum, part I, vol. I, texts II), London. B ORGER , Rykle (2001) ‘Norris, Edwin,’ in Reallexicon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie, 9, p. 596, Berlin/New York [defined as ‘Orientalist’]. B RIANT , Pierre (2001) ‘Gaum8ta,’ in Encyclopædia Iranica, 10, pp. 333-335. G IOVINAZZO , Grazia (2001) ‘Les Indiens à Suse,’ Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale, 60-61, pp. 59-76, Napoli. G RAN -A YMERICH , Ève (2001) ‘Oppert, Jules’ in idem, Dictionnaire biographique d’archéologie 1798-1945, pp. 499-500, Paris. I NVERNIZZI , Antonio (2001) In viaggio per l’Oriente. Le mummie, Babilonia, Persepoli, with appendixes by Enrichetta L EOSPO & Fabrizio A. P ENNAC CHIETTI , Alessandria. S AID , Edward W. (2001) Orientalismo. L’immagine europea dell’Oriente, Mi-
B ASELLO
e
S e
e
s
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
lano [Italian translation of Said 1995]. S CHAUDIG , Hanspeter (2001) Die Inschriften Nabonids von Babylon und Kyros’ des Grossen samt den in ihrem Umfeld entstandenen Tendenzschriften. Textausgabe und Grammatik, Münster. B ASELLO , Gian Pietro (2002), ‘Elam and Babylonia: the Evidence of the Calendars,’ in Antonio P ANAINO & Giovanni P ETTINATO , eds., Ideologies as Intercultural Phenomena (Melammu Symposia, 3), pp. 13-36, Milano. C HEVALIER , Nicole (2002) La recherche archéologique française au MoyenOrient 1842-1947, Paris. R OSSI , Adriano V. (2003a) ‘Echoes of religious lexicon in the Achaemenid inscriptions?,’ in Carlo G. C ERETI , Mauro M AGGI & Elio P ROVASI , eds., Religious themes and texts of pre-Islamic Iran and Central Asia (Beiträge zur Iranistik, 24), pp. 339-351, Wiesbaden. R OSSI , Adriano V. (2003b) ‘Archeologia, storia e filologia a Susa,’ in Maria Vittoria F ONTANA & Bruno G ENITO , eds., Studi in onore di Umberto Scerrato per il suo settantacinquesimo compleanno, 2, pp. 681-700, Napoli. V ITALONE , Mario (2003) ‘Il Diario di viaggio in Persia di Pietro della Valle: un confronto con le Lettere,’ in Annali di Ca’ Foscari, 42/3 (Serie orientale, 34), pp. 205-222.
39
B ASELLO
E LAM BETWEEN A SSYRIOLOGY AND I RANIAN S TUDIES
A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank: Graziano Zucchini and Stefano Buscherini for persuading me (silently and loudly respectively) not to talk about another subject; Federica Crabu for her precious editorial care; Angela Morisi (che è mia madre), Maria Simoni and prof. Mario Gandini (Biblioteca comunale Giulio Cesare Croce, san Giovanni in Persiceto, Bologna) for their bio- and bibliographical ‘excavations’; prof. Giorgio Renato Franci (University of Bologna) for his knowledge about Trombetti; prof. Riccardo Contini (‘L’Orientale’ University, Naples), prof. Felice Israel (University of Genoa) and prof. Giancarlo Lacerenza (‘L’Orientale’ University, Naples) for their critical and bibliographical suggestions; prof. Adriano Rossi (‘L’Orientale’ University, Naples) who followed the development of this research both during the spoken and the written stages. I am sincerely grateful to the kind librarians I met in Bologna (Biblioteca Discipline Geologiche e Paleontologiche; Biblioteca Universitaria, especially Miss Parrini; Biblioteca Dipartimento di Archeologia; Biblioteca dell’Archiginnasio), Florence (Biblioteca Nazionale), Naples (Biblioteca del Dipartimento di Studi Asiatici, ‘L’Orientale’ University), Turin (Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria) and Rome (Biblioteca del Dipartimento di Studi Orientali). Finally, I would like to mention here the first Assyriologist, Iranist and Elamologist I met: respectively prof. Sergio Picchioni (University of Bologna), prof. Antonio Panaino (University of Bologna, branch of Ravenna) and prof. Grazia Giovinazzo (‘L’Orientale’ University, Naples).
F IGURES 1. Robert Ker P ORTER , Stone relief of Gate R at Pasargadae with inscription CMa (1818) in the first, second and third kinds (from top to bottom) of Achaemenid languages [John C URTIS , Ancient Persia – British Museum, p. 37, London 1989]. 2. The Tomb of Daniel at Susa (Loftus 1857) [John C URTIS , ed., Mesopotamia and Iran in the Persian Period, p. 68, London 1997]. Cf. Daniel 8,2: “And I saw in a vision; and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai” [according to the King James Version]. 3. ‘Cuneiform’ motifs as heading and ornament in Mémoires du Congrès International des Orientalistes. Compte-Rendu de la Première Session - Paris - 1873. Tomes I et II, pp. 117 and 229, Paris. 4. The ‘Scythic’ inscription of Bisotun as published in Norris 1855. Note the reading A far #i on line 10 of the transliteration. 5. Title-page of Oppert 1879. 6. Title-page of Delattre 1883. 7. Jacques DE M ORGAN and Vincent S CHEIL at the Louvre Museum, 1902, February 4 [Chevalier 1997]. On the background, note the stele of victory of Naram-Sin found at Susa. 8. Filosseno L UZZATTO [courtesy of prof. Felice Israel]. 9. Felice F INZI (1847-1872) [Finzi R. 1983: 275]. 10. Alfredo T ROMBETTI (1866-1929) [Scritti in onore di Alfredo Trombetti, Milano 1938]. 11. Maps of Mesopotamia with cuneiform names [Finzi 1872]. 12. Books and articles about Elamite language per year [data from Hinz & Koch 1987 (till 1984) and Gian Pietro B ASELLO , Elamite Bibliographical Database, demo available at <www.elamit.net> (1985 onwards)]. 13. Susa, 1901, December – Ravenna, 2001, October. The discovery of the Codex Hammurapi. 40
B URKERT
W ALTER B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
Zürich
Gyges to Croesus: Historiography between Herodotus and Cuneiform
his paper is about the impact of cuneiform, or the lack of such impact, on the history of Archaic Greece. Greek history had become part of general education since the very beginnings of the European school system. Father of history was Herodotus, we learned from Cicero (leg. 1,5); so early Greek history kept to Herodotus, with a center on the Persian wars. Herodotus however begins his account with Gyges, king of Lydia, and, coincidence or not: Gyges is the first ‘Western’ personality to emerge from the Assyrian evidence, a contemporary and partner of Assurbanipal at Nineveh. Thus Gyges marks not only the beginning of Greek history in a Herodotean perspective, but also the first meeting of Greek literature with cuneiform documents. Such meetings continue through more than a century down to the catastrophe of the Lydian kingdom, when Cyrus the Persian conquered Sardis in 547 B.C. This conquest made Anatolia part of the Persian empire and a province of the Near Eastern world, including a sizeable part of the people we use to call Greeks; the Easterners had developed the custom to call them ‘Ionians,’ Iauna, Jawan in general – down to Junan in modern Turkish. This paper is about the pre-Persian period; it tries to point out how and when
T
this meeting of Eastern and Western sources become known, how it was received and reflected upon in writing the ‘History of Greece.’ The interactions between cuneiform Mesopotamia, native Anatolian kingdoms and the cities of the Eastern Greeks, and their importance for the economic and cultural history of the pre-Persian world will be in focus. Gyges looms large in Herodotus, but Herodotus is not the only source. There are traces of a rivalling account by Xanthos the Lydian, who was about a contemporary of Herodotus and, as his surname suggests, non-Greek by origin; what survives is a text of Nikolaos of Damaskos, age of Augustus. In addition there is the famous Märchen about the miraculous ring of Gyges in Plato’s Politeia. 1 The Eastern sources are mainly the so-called ‘annals’ of Assurbanipal, which survive in different recensions, as they were rewritten with the course of events; add some texts about the restoration of the temple of the Moon God at Harran and similar documents. The first and basic publication of the pertinent cuneiform tablets was by Rawlinson and Smith in 1870, followed by the History of Assurbanipal by George Smith in 1871. There were two cylinders and one tablet at that time; more evidence has come up later,
1
1956; Herter 1966.
Hdt. 1, 7-14; Plat. Resp. 359d-360b; Xanthos FGrHist 765, Nikolaos FGrHist 90 F 47. See Seel
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
41
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
such as the ‘Rassam cylinder,’ found in 1878 and published by Pinches in 1880. The discovery was recognized and brought to the knowledge of classical scholars nearly immediately: In the best known classical periodical of the time, Rheinisches Museum, there appeared the basic and brilliant article “Das Zeitalter des Gyges” by Heinrich Gelzer already in 1875. Heinrich Gelzer was able to deal with the cuneiform evidence directly; he established the chronological sequence of the sources, and he drew the consequences for the history of Lydia and Greece, with critical evaluation of the Greek evidence. In the Assyrian texts, the name of the king is written Gu-gu, his country is mat Luddu; there can be no question about the identification with Gyges, king of the Lydoi, to put it in Greek. The ‘Völkertafel’ of the Old Testament has a country ‘Lud.’ 2 In addition, Kimmerians appear as invaders of Anatolia in Assyrian documents even before the reign of Assurbanipal; these are normally written Gimiraia, which is sufficiently close to Greek Kimmerioi. 3 Gyges had troubles with them, as we know from the Greek side; he was killed by them, the Assyrian documents say. The story told from the side of Assyria is touching: “There arrived envoys from a country of which nobody had heard before, none of the kings who went before me; they said that king Gugu had been told in a dream to do obeisance to the king of Nineveh.” 4 One version, which is evidently later, tells the continuation: Gugu did not conform with the duties of this allegiance, he rather made an alliance with the rebellious king of Egypt;
hence Gugu was cursed by Assurbanipal, and deservedly killed by the Kimmerians; his successor resumed the obeisance to Nineveh. Nothing of this is to be found in Herodotus; nothing, on the other side, is mentioned at Nineveh about Gyges’ usurpation, which gave rise to the very different tales in Herodotus, Xanthos-Nikolaos, and Plato. It is still worth while to state, as against certain trends in modern Herodotean scholarship, 5 that the Eastern contemporary sources do confirm Herodotus as to the existence and importance of king Gyges of Lydia: Whatever about his miraculous ring or his affair with the wife of Kandaules, Gyges is not the product of Greek fantasy or mythology. New as against Herodotus is the alliance of Gyges with the king of Egypt, who must be Psammetichos, and the death of Gyges by the Kimmerians in battle, as well as the renewed ‘homage’ to Nineveh by the successor of Gyges. 6 According to Herodotus, this should be Ardys. As already Eduard Meyer has seen, the Eastern and the Herodotean evidence, if they do not overlap, are still fully compatible. Just because Gyges was a usurper, he was eager to seek recognition from East and from West: He sent his embassy to Nineveh, and he consulted the oracle at Delphi, leaving conspicuous amounts of gold there. We may get an idea about Apollo’s response to Gyges just from the Eastern evidence: We have messages to Esarhaddon from the inspired priestesses of Ishtar at Arbela. These usually have the dull but reassuring message: Hail to the king, do not be afraid, the God is with you. 7 Apollo’s oracle to Gyges will
2
6
3 4 5
Gen. 10,22, beside ‘Aram.’ See Ivantchik 1993. Streck 1916, 20 f.; Luckenbill 1927, §§ 909 ff. Fehling 1989; cf. Pritchett 1993.
42
His name cannot be read in the cuneiform documents; Gelzer 1875, 234 suggested Ardu]su. 7 ANET 449 f.
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
have been very much like this: The oracle gives reassurance to the king, and the king gratefully retaliates by rich donations. The warnings about the fall of Lydia within five generations, which we find in Herodotus (1,13,2), will probably come from hindsight, after the Persian conquest. Yet the great and scandalous impact of cuneiform evidence concerns chronology: Whereas the list of Lydian kings given by Herodotus would put Gyges in 716678 B.C., Assurbanipal’s reign is about 668-631. Thus the chronology of Herodotus is falsified by some decades, the date of Gyges has to be lowered by about 30 years, with consequences for the length of reigns for all the following Lydian kings as given by Herodotus. Already Heinrich Gelzer discussed the various dates given for Gyges in post-Herodotean Greek sources; he proposed to accept the date given in the chronicle of Eusebius, who evidently used non-Herodotean information: death of Gyges in 652. The dates have remained debatable: Some modern reexaminations of the cuneiform evidence would go down to 648 for Gyges’ death, others keep to 652. 8 At any rate, a basic correction of Herodotean chronology has been established which cannot be contradicted. There are consequences for the whole of early Greek history. Already Herodotus had noticed that Archilochus, the first among Greek poets to present himself in his personal individuality, mentions “Gyges, rich in gold” (Fr. 19 West) and hence should have been his contemporary. The solar eclipse also mentioned by Archilochus (Fr. 122 West) has to be arranged with the Gyges date; one usually accepts 648 B.C.
Heinrich Gelzer’s article drew due attention at his time. Still if Erwin Rohde, in a very learned article in Rheinisches Museum 1878, refers to “the results of assyriology,” 9 while discussing Gelzer’s reconstructions of Eusebius, we see how this field of scholarship is perceived as a foreign continent: ‘die Assyriologie’ in general brings ‘results,’ without detailed documentation or dialogue. Precise information and discussion keeps to the familiar Greek world, from Herodotus to Eusebius. In the following generation it was Eduard Meyer most of all to take full account of all the new materials – still without Hittite. Eduard Meyer needs no praise. He made the first and last great synthesis of Geschichte des Altertums. He knows the Greek sources as well as the cuneiform ones; he discusses the different cuneiform versions. 10 Gyges appears in vol. II (1893) which became vol. III in the new edition. What is surprising: Gyges comes up three times, in the history of Assyria and the Kimmerians, which includes Gyges’ embassy to Assurbanipal; in what Meyer calls ‘Griechisches Mittelalter,’ describing Greek ‘colonization’ thwarted by the Kimmerians; and in a special chapter on Ionia which finally comes to praise the Greek genius. 11 Thus even Eduard Meyer does not succeed in presenting one ‘history of antiquity’ from Mesopotamia to the Aegean; Oriental and Greek persist as different compartments. No decisive new evidence has appeared after Gelzer and Meyer. Additional texts brought some refinements. The main Assyrian text was accessible in transcript and German translation since
8
10
9
11
See Ivantchik 1993. Rohde 1878, 196,1: “den Ergebnissen der Assyriologie.”
Meyer 1936, 84,2; 86. Meyer 1936, 84,2; 86; 131-134; 425-427; 566573. 43
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
1890, 12 and the whole material was collected, republished, and translated by Maximilian Streck in his Assurbanipal (1916). But I have not found any historian writing on Greece to quote the one or the other publication. The new edition of Eduard Meyer’s work by Hans Erich Stier at least refers to the most accessible English edition of the Assurbanipal texts, George Luckenbill’s Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia (1927). Only selections of Assurbanipal’s texts are included in ANET 13 ; the passages about Gyges are missing. In German historiography on Greece after Gelzer and Meyer, Assyria is getting out of focus again. Of course Gelzer and Meyer were not forgotten, but Nineveh remains beyond the horizon. The extensive Griechische Geschichte of Georg Busolt (I 2 1893) has no room at all for non-Greeks. The more original and very critical history of Greece by Julius Beloch (I 2 1912) mentions the “inscriptions of Assurbanipal” for Gyges and his embassy, with explicit reference to Eduard Meyer 14 – no use of Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek. Here and elsewhere, cuneiform literature appears in the category of “inscriptions” 15 which is absolutely misleading for classicists 16 : They know Inscriptiones Graecae and Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum as totally separated from literature such as Herodotus or Livy; cuneiform tablets however are not ‘inscriptions’ in such a sense, but the form of literacy proper. The Greek History of Helmut Berve (1931), has an impressive chapter on Ionians, their
achievements and their weaknesses; the Lydian kingdom of Gyges comes as an intruder. Gyges, we learn, was fighting the Kimmerians “in an alliance with the Assyrians” – this is correct, but skips the details which had been in Gelzer and Meyer. 17 The Griechische Geschichte by Helmut Bengtson finally, in the Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, 18 has no mention at all of the Assyrians. Bengtson still has the merit to call attention to what he thought the first mention of ‘Greeks’ in cuneiform, the vicissitudes of Iamani of Ashdod at the time of Sargon – though it has been argued in the meantime that Iamani could be an epichoric name which has nothing at all to do with ‘Greeks,’ and an earlier text about ‘Ionians’ plundering in Syria has been published in the meantime. 19 It pays to have a look at the relevant articles in Pauly-Wissowa’s RE: There are impeccable articles by competent Near Eastern experts, esp. Franz Heinrich Weissbach on Kyros and Kroisos as well as on Sargon, Sardanapal and Nabonid. 20 But the articles on Gyges and on Kimmerier done by Karl Lehmann-Haupt are problematic. 21 Karl Lehmann-Haupt no doubt was a specialist as to the cuneiform evidence, and he was well at home with the Greek sources too. But he had more ideas than method, let alone didactic ability. His articles, jumping between details of Urartu, Assur and Eusebius, with polemics to various sides, remain baffling. Instead of gaining the confidence of classicists for the new evidence, he rather gave permanence to the impres-
12
Assarhaddons, Graz, 1956. 17 Berve 1951, 142. 18 Bengtson 1950, 67. 19 ANET 286; see Elayi-Cavigneaux 1979; Braun 1982, 15. 20 See bibliography. 21 Lehmann-Haupt 1912; 1921.
Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek II (Berlin, 1890), 173-177. 13 ANET 294-296. 14 Beloch 1912, 343 f. 15 See also Stein 1901, 188; 190. 16 Even if it occurs in original publications such as Rawlinson - Smith 1870; R. Borger, Die Inschriften 44
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
sion of a foreign continent, unsufficiently explored, to be left to certain specialists but far from archaic or classical Greece. More modern scholarship is rich and dispersed. The chronology of the Lydians has been restudied in a much-quoted article by Kaletsch in 1958. The very learned article of Hans Herter on Lydia is attentive to the Anatolian background – Hittites had made their entrance into classics; but Assyrians are not mentioned. Non-classicists reexamined “Gyges and Ashurbanipal” 22 ; a careful account of the Kimmerian material is due to the Russian Askold Ivantchik. 23 A broad synthesis of ancient history is presented by Cambridge Ancient History; the new edition has a very good article by T. F. R. G Braun on “The Greeks in the Near East” (1982) and by Machteld Mellink on the Lydian kingdom (1991). It is still characteristic that the two sections appear in two different volumes, even if Mellink does stress the impact of Greek style and art on Lydia. It still remains practically impossible to make one history. To get beyond Gyges: The next problematic meeting of Herodotus and Near Eastern evidence is the Eastern king ‘Labynetos’ in Herodotus. Labynetos appears in two unrelated situations, and it has usually been concluded that these must be two different personalities: One Labynetos of Babylon, together with Syennesis king of Cilicia, was mediating the conflict of Medes and Lydians at the time of the famous solar eclipse in which Thales is involved24 ; this is usually fixed to 585 B.C. But Labynetos son of Labynetos also appears as the last king of Babylon,
conquered by Cyrus; he is called tyrannos. 25 Since oriental history has been recovered, we know that in 585 king of Babylon was Nabu-kudurri-uzur, or ‘Nebukadnezar’ of Protestant Bibles, whereas the last king of Babylon was Nabuna’id (556-539), usually called Nabonid today in accordance with the Berossos tradition. 26 !"#$$%&'( is sufficiently close to Labynetos, but comparatively far from Nabu-kuduri-uzur the king of 585, and there are more errors, since the father of Nabonid king of Babylon was Nabûbalassu-iqbi and not another Labynetos, as Herodotus would have it. We see: Confusion has infected the tradition presented by Herodotus. It is tradition nevertheless, modified tradition, but not sheer invention. The events lay 100 years back when Herodotus tried to organize his ‘History.’ Later Greek texts had some additional information, directly from oriental sources, Ktesias first, then Berossos; this material went into the late chronicles, Abydenos, Eusebius. The Hebrew Bible was drawing on a different line of tradition; Qumram has a totally different edifying story on Nabonid recognizing Jahweh, 27 whereas the book of Daniel outdoes Herodotus through total confusion about Babylonian, Median, and Persian kings. As to Labynetos in Herodotus, it seems as if two transmogrifications have taken place: three Nabu-names have been confused, Nabu-kuduri-uzur ‘Nabu guards the son,’ alias Nebukadnezar, Nabu-balassuiqbi ‘Nabu has pronounced his life,’ father of Nabonid, and Nabu-na’id himself, ‘Nabu is exalted;’ in addition there is the
22
IIIC p.408 = Euseb. PE 9,41,4. Xen. Kyrup. 5,4,5; 7,5,30 has no name for the last Babylonian king. ‘Belsazar’ in Daniel 5 is fantasy. See Dandamyev 1998. 27 Meyer 1962; F. García Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated (Leiden, 1994), 289.
Cogan-Tadmor 1977. Ivantchik 1993; Gyges-texts: 256-270. 24 Hdt. 1,74. On the date cf. Plin. n.h. 2,53. 25 Hdt. 1,77; 1,188. 26 !"#$$%&'( Berossos FGrHist IIIC p.394 = Ios. c. Ap. 1,152; !"'$$)&'*'( in Abydenos, FGrHist 23
45
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
change of the initial consonant, Nabuna’id to Labunetos. Weidner in his REarticle on Labynetos asserts that this is a ‘graphic variant,’ for which ‘many parallels’ are to be found; he presents none. 28 Nikosia / +,-.'/0! the modern capital of Cyprus would be a very distant parallel. For the Greek philologist the suspicion remains that misreading within Greek writing has occurred: ! and "! are very similar just in Greek letters. This would mean that certain written sources are to be assumed in the chain of information down to Herodotus – an intriguing possibility – still lacking confirmation. The third meeting point of oriental and Greek sources is the end of king Croesus of Lydia in 547. Let us just recall that the most direct testimony to king Croesus is his name on some marble columns from the great Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, evidently sponsored by that monarch. 29 The legendary fame of Croesus rested on his gold at Delphi, squandered by the Phocians in the sacred war 355 B.C. The detailed and impressive tales about Croesus in Herodotus are matched by just one cuneiform tablet, the so-called ‘Nabonidus chronicle’; this tablet is damaged in the decisive line. The tablet became known in 1880, edited by Pinches, it was included in Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek in 1890. 30 A supplement of the decisive passage to bring in Sardes and Lydia was already proposed in 1881; the most promising integration came from LehmannHaupt in 1898, 31 confirmed by Pinches on the original tablet. In this form the text appeared in Sidney Smith’s Edition of 1924, and this went to ANET 305 f. It was contradicted by Santo Mazzarino 32
with the arguments that the geographical indication does not fit, and that we know from Herodotus and Bacchylides that Croesus survived. The new edition by A. K. Grayson (1975), with reexamination of the tablet, remains non-committal: the reading lu-u-du for the country concerned is ‘not impossible,’ but it is not there. Was there more to be seen when Pinches examined the tablet? We have, as Cargill wrote two years after Grayson, “consensus based on crumbling feet of clay.” New was the insight that the tablet really is from the time of Darius, i.e. a nearly contemporary account. Glassner, in 1993, comes back to lu 2 -u 2 -di, “land Lydia.” This text, produced by the priests of Belu-Marduk in Babylon, is mainly interested in the defective rituals Nabonid performed or failed to perform at Babylon, and the piety of Cyrus who restored the Babylonian rituals. In such a context the text mentions, first, the overthrowing of ‘Istumegu’ king of ‘Anshan’ by Cyrus – this must be Astyages king of Media of the Herodotus tradition, overthrown by Cyrus –, and then a campaign of Cyrus to some land beyond the Tigris, with the conquest of a city and the end of a king. In simple translation, the sentence goes: “he killed its king, he took his possessions, his own garrisons he put up.” If this regards Lydia and Sardis, this is in blatant conflict with the Herodotean version. Herodotus has the touching incident of Croesus surviving the pyre on which Cyrus was about to burn him; Croesus, stepping down from the pyre, became the wise and estimated advisor of Cyrus in various situations afterwards.
28
31
Weidner 1924, 311 f. SIG I3 6. 30 Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek III 2 (Berlin, 1890), 128-137. 29
46
Arch. Anzeiger 1898, 122 cf. Lehmann-Haupt 1921, 415. 32 Mazzarino 1947, 156 n. 459.
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
And behold, cuneiform has proved incapable to withstand Herodotus. LehmannHaupt himself, the originator of the decisive reading which makes the passage refer to Lydia, came to the rescue of Herodotus 33 : the verb idûk (written GAZ) in the sentence quoted should not mean ‘he killed,’ but something like ‘he defeated.’ No doubt ‘to kill’ is the central meaning of this word, but ‘to smite,’ ‘to conquer’ is possible. 34 Hence Grayson translates, even without question mark: “He defeated,” whereas Glassner has “Il mit a mort son roi” (203), again without question mark. Lehmann-Haupt had even proposed that the next sentence, “Afterwards his garrison and the king remained in the midst of...,” should not refer to King Cyrus but to Croesus remaining at Sardes, and thus definitely confirm Herodotus; this is nonsense: Even Herodotus does not say that Croesus remained at Sardes, where of course a Persian satrapes took up residence, and Croesus, had he ever survived a ‘defeat,’ would no longer have been a ‘king’ for Babylonian writers. But Lehmann-Haupt succeeded to soothe classical scholars, happy with Herodotus. An article of 1985 35 has pointed out that in fact the Greek pre-Herodotean evidence indicates the death of Croesus at the conquest of Sardis: A redfigure vase painting of about 490 B.C. which shows KROESOS on the pyre, and the poem of Bacchylides of 468. If Bacchylides has Croesus transported by Apollo from the pyre to the land of the Hyperboreans, this leaves him as dead as any martyr at the place of his execution, even if he should be transferred to
heaven by angels. There is no need to depart from the simple translation of the Akkadian text. The lesson to be learned is rather a critical position as against Herodotus’ alluring tales – he is ‘fourth grade as against the facts,’ as he presents a rationalization of Bacchylides’ poetic imagination. Yet Herodotus is to survive. Even Weissbach, when writing on Croesus and Cyrus in the Realencyclopädie, felt ravished by the story of Cyrus and Croesus 36 : “Man denkt unwillkürlich an Napoleon III. und Wilhelm I. bei Sedan,” the vanquished emperor and the victorious king, performing the impeccable etiquette of monarchs above the slaughter of war in 1870. Who would like such a story to be annihilated by cuneiform GAZ? Coming back from stories to history, some remarks about the historical importance of the Gyges embassy and the Lydian kingdom in general: The earlier Greek connection with the East had mainly been by the sea route, via Lycia, Cyprus, and Syria, with Crete, Rhodes, and Euboea as the active centers of commerce and interactions. Writing spread to Greece by this route in the eighth century, Al Mina, Chalkis, and Ischia being decisive steps. 37 It must have been on this line too that the name Iawones-Jawan-Iauna established itself with the Easterners, which from the Eastern side is first attested in Syria about 734. 38 There are two glimpses at that situation, one from West, one from East: The poet of the Odyssey has Poseidon returning from the Eastern Aethiopians and beholding the raft of Odysseus, as he comes from the far West, from the “Mountains
33
37
Lehmann-Haupt 1929. W. von Soden, Akkadisches Handwörterbuch (Wiesbaden, 1965) 152: “töten; schlagen.” 35 Burkert 1985a. 36 Weissbach 1931, 462. 34
Burkert 1992; probably Cyprus is to be added, even if so far there is no evidence of Greek writing from Cyprus. See Woodard 1997. Writing came to Lydia from Ionian Greeks. 38 Burkert 1992; 1998; cf. n. 19. 47
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
of the Solymoi,” that is from Lycia at the Southern coast of Anatolia 39 : This is where the far East, Aethiopia, and the far West, from Kalypso to Phaeacia, will meet. From the other side, Assurbanipal’s record of Gyges’ embassy has the strange indication that these people came “from the other side of the sea,” sha nibirti tamti 40 ; Heinrich Gelzer found this “schwer zu erklären,” because a look at the map shows there is no sea to pass between Mesopotamia and Sardis. But there were no maps at the time. It must have been the presupposition of the Assyrians at Nineveh that ‘Western countries’ meant Cyprus and beyond, so that even the Aegean coast was “beyond the sea.” The Anatolian continent had not been permeable before Gyges’ embassy. Thus the real benefit that came to the Greeks from Gyges was not his gold at Delphi, but rather the new connection of Ionia, in the wake of Lydia, with the Near East. Lydia became a central connecting link between Assyria and Greece. Lydia had been a country “which nobody had known before” at Nineveh; but from that embassy onwards regular interrelations were developing. A new route had been opened, the land route from Aegean Anatolia to Mesopotamia, later known as ‘the king's road.’ This road must have had its beginnings with the Phrygians before Gyges, because, as described by Herodotus, it takes the striking detour via Gordion. 41 But it was Gyges who, after the collapse of the Phrygian kingdom through the attack of the Cimmerians, established the definite link from the Aegean to the Eastern route. Since then, this road definitely extended as far as Sardes and was open to the Ionian
Greeks, from Smyrna to Miletus. The rise of Ionia has often been commented upon. It now appears that Ionia takes its real start only in the 7th century, that is, in the ‘Age of Gyges.’ The colonial activities in the Black Sea, too, only begin in the seventh century, in contrast to the Chalkidian and Corinthian colonisation in the West which belongs to the eighth century. In other words: The flourishing of Ionia is later than the advent of Gyges, it is to be seen in connection with the new route opened up at that time. Ionia was thriving through symbiosis with Lydia. Four details of cultural transfer to Greece from the East via Lydia should be considered in this context: First, the Great Goddess KubabaKybebe. The name of Kubaba is attested at Karkemish. Kubaba is related to, but linguistically different from the Phrygian name of the Mother Goddess, Matar kubileya. For the image of the goddess, an Anatolian road can be traced from Cilicia to Phrygia. But Lydia has the name of the goddess in the form derived from Karkemish, kuvav. She is Kybebe in Ionia with Hipponax (Fr. 127 West), possibly already with Semonides of Amorgos (Fr. 36 West). Greeks later have both forms of the name, preferably Kybele, but Kybebe too. 42 Secondly, more practical and more ubiquitous, a new form of luxury behaviour that spread from Assyria via Lydia to Ionia and to the Greeks in general: The use of klinai, of couches for ‘lying’ at the symposium. The key piece of evidence is a relief from Nineveh, termed ‘Assurbanipal’s garden party’; it became a type of iconography directly copied by the Greeks. 43
39
43
40 41 42
48
Od. 5,283. Gelzer 1875, 231,4; Streck 1916, 20 f. See Burkert 1998. The evidence is collected in Burkert 1985b, 177 f.
London, Brit. Museum; Strommenger 1962, fig. 241; cf. Dentzer 1982; Matthäus 1993, 177-179. The pattern is copied in the well-known vase of Andokides, Munich, LIMC IV s.v. Herakles Nr. 1487.
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
Thirdly, more of a problem, the yearly magistrates. We are so used to lists of archons and consuls as the backbone of bureaucracy and chronology in ancient history that we may forget that this is a very special institution – it is not found in the Middle ages – and that in the East it appears first and only in Assyria, since 911 B.C. The Assyrian term is limu. 44 In the system of Eusebius ephors start with 754/3 B.C., Athenian archons with 683/2. 45 It seems that the Assyrian parallel has never been discussed in the context of Greek history. Had the Greek institution to do with the introduction of writing, the development of economy, or some progress in politics? Is there anything to connect it with Lydia, or rather with Phoenicians and Carthaginians? 46 At any rate, independent development seems quite unlikely, and the priority of Assyria is indisputable. Fourth, the word tyrannos which somehow goes together with Gyges. A Hellenistic scholar-poet in fact says Gyges was the first to be called tyrannos. 47 In Greek literature, the word appears with Archilochus in connection with Gyges. 48 The word has been suspected to be of Asian derivation. Thus the Assyrian term turtanu will come to one’s mind 49 :
turtanu is a title of the highest official after the Assyrian king, it is used also for the kings of Urartu, Elam and Egypt, it would equally fit the king of Lydia. Linguists will still forbid us to delete one consonant to get from turtanu to turannu. The question remains open. The reign of Lydia was not oppressive. The first big marble temple of Greece, that of Artemis at Ephesus, was built by king Croesus. The impressive rock façades of the Phrygian Mother Goddess too belong not to the time of Midas, but to the later period of Lydian dominance. It has been usual to comment on Lydians as foreign conquerors subduing free Ionian cities; it seems more to the point to see the symbiosis of Ionians and Lydians that evolved in the generation following Gyges ‘rich in gold,’ in spite of ongoing diversity and quarrelling. No native Lydian literature, 50 and very few inscriptions survive. The big tumulus not far from Sardis, at Bin Tepe, was thought to be the tomb of Gyges; tunnels dug in this mound by George Hanfmann in the Sixties brought to light graffiti which Hanfmann read as Gugu; but no burial chamber was discovered, and the archaeological date seems not to fit. 51 Gyges still keeps his secret.
44
47
45
48
See Ungnad 1938. Cf. Samuel 1972, 195-245; archons are used for chronology in Hdt.8,51,1, archons and ephors in Thuk.2,2,1. 46 Carthage had eponymous officials at least in Hellenistic times, see Ehrenberg “Suffeten” RE IV A (1931) 645 f.
Euphorion 1,23456,-7&8$494Clem. Str. 1,117,9. Fr. 19 West cf. Fr. 23. Hippias (Diels - Kranz 86 B 9) stated that the word become known “at the time of Archilochus.” See Jeffery 1976, 46; 211. 49 See Akkadisches Handwörterbuch 1322. 50 See also Burkert 1995. 51 See Ratte 1994; Arch. Rep. 1998/9, 145. 49
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
B IBLIOGRAPHY ANET = J.B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts relating to the Old Testament (Princeton, 1969 3 ). J. Beloch, Griechische Geschichte I (Berlin, 1893); I 2 (Strassburg, 1912). H. Berve, Griechische Geschichte (Freiburg, 1931); I 2 (Freiburg,1951). T. F. R. G Braun, “The Greeks in the Near East,” in: The Cambridge Ancient History III 3 2 (Cambridge, 1982), 1-31. W. Burkert, “Das Ende des Kroisos. Vorstufen einer Herodoteischen Geschichtserzählung,” in: Catalepton, Festschrift B. Wyss (Basel, 1985), 4-15 (= Burkert 1985a). W. Burkert, Greek Religion Archaic and Classical (Oxford, 1985) (= Burkert 1985b). W. Burkert, The Orientalizing Revolution. Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age (Cambridge, Mass., 1992). W. Burkert, “Lydia between East and West or How to Date the Trojan War: A Study in Herodotus,” in: J.B. Carter, S.P. Morris, eds., The Ages of Homer. A tribute to Emily Townsend Vermeule (Austin, 1995), 139-148 = Kleine Schriften I (Göttingen, 2001), 218-232. W. Burkert, “La via fenicia e la via anatolica: Ideologie e scoperte fra Oriente e Occidente,” in: Convegno per Santo Mazzarino (Roma, 1998), 55-73 = Kleine Schriften II (Göttingen, 2003), 252-266. G. Busolt, Griechische Geschichte bis zur Schlacht bei Chaeroneia I 2 (Gotha, 1893). J. Cargill, “The Nabonidus Chronicle and the Fall of Lydia. Consensus with Feet of Clay,” American Journal of Ancient History 2 (1977), 97-116. M. Cogan, H. Tadmor, “Gyges and Ashurbanipal. A study of Literary Transmission,” Orientalia 46 (1977), 29-54. M. A. Dandamayev, “Nabonid,” RlAss IX (1998), 6-12. J. M. Dentzer, Le motif du banquet couché dans le Proche Orient et le Monde Grec du VII e au IV e siècle (Paris, 1982). J. Elayi, A. Cavigneaux, “Sargon II et les Ioniens,” Oriens Antiquus 18 (1979), 59-75. D. Fehling, Herodotus and his Sources (Leeds, 1989). H. Gelzer, “Das Zeitalter des Gyges,” RhMus 30 (1875), 230-268. J. J. Glassner, Chroniques Mésopotamiennes (Paris, 1993). A. K. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles (Locust Valley, 1975). H. Herter, “Lydische Adelskämpfe,” in: O. Wenig., ed., Wege zur Buchwissenschaft (Bonn, 1966), 31-60 = Kleine Schriften (München, 1975), 536-563. A. Ivantchik, Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient (Freiburg, 1993). 50
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
F. Jacoby, “The Date of Archilochus,” CQ 35 (1941), 97-109 = Kleine Philologische Schriften I (Berlin, 1961), 349-367. L. H. Jeffery, Archaic Greece. The City States c. 770-500 B.C. (London, 1976). H. Kaletsch, “Zur lydischen Chronologie,” Historia 7 (1958), 1-41. R. Kratz, “From Nabonidus to Cyrus,” in: Melammu Symposia III (Milano, 2002), 143156. C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, “Gyges,” RE VII (1912), 1956-1966. C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, “Kimmerier,” RE XI (1921), 397-434. C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, “Der Sturz des Kroisos und das historische Element in Xenophons Kyropädie,” Wiener Studien 47 (1929) 123-127. G. Luckenbill, Ancient records of Assyria and Babylonia (Chicago, 1927). H. Matthäus, “Zur Rezeption orientalischer Kunst-, Kultur- und Lebensformen in Griechenland,” in K. Raaflaub, ed., Anfänge politischen Denkens in der Antike (München, 1993), 165-186. S. Mazzarino, Fra oriente e occidente (Firenze, 1947; repr. 1989). M. Mellink, “The Native Kingdoms of Anatolia: The Lydian Kingdom,” in: The Cambridge Ancient History III 2 2 (Cambridge, 1991), 643-655. E. Meyer, “Das Gebet des Nabonid,” Sitzungsber. Leipzig, phil.-hist.Klasse 107,3 (1962). E. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums II (Stuttgart, 1893); III 2 ed. H.E. Stier (Stuttgart, 1936). Th. G. Pinches, Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia V (London, 1880). W. K. Pritchett, The Liar School of Herodotus (Amsterdam, 1993). C. Ratte, “Not the Tomb of Gyges,” JHS 114 (1994), 157-161. G. Rawlinson, G. Smith, The cuneiform inscriptions of Western Asia III, (London, 1870). RlAss = Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie (Berlin, 1932 ff.). E. Rohde, “:;<'$,4in den Biographica des Suidas,” RhMus 33 (1878), 161-220 = Kleine Schriften I (Tübingen, 1901) 114-179. R. Rollinger, “The ancient Greeks and the impact of the Ancient Near East: Textual evidence and historical perspective (ca. 750-650 BC),” in: Melammu Symposia II (2001), 233-264. O. Seel, “Lydiaka,” Wiener Studien 69 (1956), 212-236. SIG = W. Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum 3 (Leipzig, 1915-1924). G. Smith, History of Assurbanipal (London, 1871). S. Smith, Babylonian Historical Texts Relating to the Capture and Downfall of Babylon (London, 1924). H. Stein, Herodotos erklärt I 6 (Berlin, 1901). H. Strasburger, “Herodots Zeitrechnung,” Historia 5 (1956), 129-161, revised in: W. Marg, ed., Herodot. Wege der Forschung 26 (Darmstadt, 1962, 1982 3) , 677-725.
51
B URKERT
H ISTORIOGRAPHY BETWEEN H ERODOTUS AND C UNEIFORM
M. Streck, Assurbanipal und die letzten assyrischen Könige bis zum Untergange Niniveh’s (Leipzig, 1916). E. Strommenger, Fünf Jahrtausende Mesopotamien (München, 1962). C. Talamo, La Lidia arcaica (Bologna, 1979). A. Ungnad, “Eponymen,” RlAss II (1938) 412-457. E. F. Weidner, “Labynetos,” RE XII (1924) 311 f. F. H. Weissbach, “Sardanapal,” RE I A (1920), 2436-2475. F. H. Weissbach, “Sargon,” RE I A (1920), 2498-2514. F. H. Weissbach, “Kyros,” RE Suppl. IV (1924),1128-1166. F. H. Weissbach, “Kroisos,” RE Suppl. V (1931), 455-472. F. H. Weissbach, “Nabonadios,” RE XVI (1935), 1438-1489. S. West, “‘Croesus’ Second Reprieve and Other Tales of the Persian Court,” CQ 53 (2003), 416-437. R. D. Woodard, Greek Writing from Knossos to Homer (Oxford, 1997).
52
C ARILE
A NTONIO C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
Ravenna
Political Thought in Byzantium as Seen by 20th Century Historians
T
he 73 pages of bibliography 1 about political thought in Byzantium – most probably just a fragment of what historians have written in the last century – show sufficiently well the importance which this field of research represents in our culture. As a theocratical autocracy, the Byzantine empire provided european culture with a complete model of absolute power, that is the political form against which western european culture reacted from XVIII century up to our days, not without some nostalgies and some exotical whims, suggested by the gorgeous court ritual which surrounded the earthly life of the man appointed by God to the salvation of the world, the !"#$!%$&' theosteptos crowned by God, not a god himself but a saint emperor who, with the words of VI century deacon Agapetus – who Sevchenko, Cavarra and Riedinger 2 have proposed to our reflection in the last thirty years – “in the reality of his body is like every man but as for the dignity he is a similitude of God above all” (chap. 21 of his booklet
Expositio capitum pareneticorum). The “imitation of God,” according to the text of the Saint Sophia deacon about 527 (chap. 1), from XV century on will be evocated in the Ottoman title of the sultan “shade of god on the earth” in the retorical and ideological continuity of divine majesty which for the first time in the Roman world was adopted by stoicism and quoted by Seneca in his de clementia. 3 Transmitted by Hellenistic culture to late Roman world, in the theories of Gregory of Naziance and of Basil of Cesarea, quoted word by word by Agapetus, this theory projected the imperial dignity into a sacral sphere of action of divinity in the created world: “as the eye is a part of the human body, so the emperor is harmonically an integral part of the world, given by god in order to work with him in the realisation of the good” (chap. 46). The world of Byzantium is in our culture characterized by two features, which for Stein, Barker and Zakythenos 4 are survival of Roman political tradition and of Hellenistic civilisation during a millen-
1
London 1971. H. KÖPSTEIN, Das 7. Jahrhundert (565-711) im Prozess der Herausbildung des Feudalismus in Byzanz, in Studien zum 7. Jahrhundert in Byzanz. Probleme der Herausbildung des Feudalismus, Hrsg. von H. KÖPSTEIN und Fr. WINKELMANN, Berlin 1976, pp. 289-301, cfr. p. 29. J. FERLUGA, Bisanzio. Società e stato, Firenze 1974, pp. 90-92. P. LEMERLE, La notion de décadence à propos de l’empire byzantin, in Classicisme et déclin culturel dans l’Islam, Paris 1957, pp. 268-277; G. WEISS, Antike und Byzanz. Die Kontinuität der Gesellschaftstruktur, in “Historische Zeitschrift,” 224 (1977), pp.
A. CARILE, Bibliografia sulla ideologia imperiale romea, Bologna, under print. Here enclosed I show just a selection of major items on political ideology in Byzantium: see Appendix. 2 See the items quoted in the Appendix. 3 See the items of Antonella Borgo and of A. Carile n. 20. 4 D. ZAKYTHENOS, Processus de Féodalisation, in “L’Hellénisme Contemporain,” Athènes 1948, pp. 116, reprinted in ID., Byzance: Etat-Société-Economie, London 1973, XIII. H. AHRWEILER, Etudes sur les structures administratives et sociales à Byzance, A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
53
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
nium in the eastern half of the Roman empire and moreover retrogression and contraction in secular and religious fields, each field following its own rhythm. In the secular field the retrogression was from the pax romana into a BalkanAegean national Greek unity reduced at last into Constantinopolis as the city state on the sea, in the hopes of Nikiphoros Gregoràs (XIV century). In the religious field the supra-national outlook of Catholic church made way to a series of religious conflicts which marked the triumph of a State religion that Toumanoff (1983) 5 views as the return to the more ancient psychology of the city cult, which Spengler (1918) 6 considered dead in the third century as a feature of an ending culture; according to Toumanoff and to Ahrweiler too, the chosen people of Byzantium shared the widespread firm belief that a particular community is in some way a manifestation of the divine, that is a theophany. According to this picture, continuity and retrogression, the historians have focused their attention to the emperor cult as if it was the allinclusive world-view, the total ideology of the Byzantine empire, more or less unaware of the changes of mentality produced by the evolution of the eastern Roman society in the different phases of its existence. In this view most important
is the concept of the centre, that is the imperial city Constantinople New Rome as the centre of the world, or of the theophanic segment of space in which the king appears or better “rises,” in the solar metaphor pointed out by Kantorowicz. 7 Byzantine man’s consciousness of self is bound with the consciousness of belonging to a group, which alone is sacred and wholesome, so that according to Kazhdan 8 the Byzantine man suffers by the anguish of loneliness in front of the absolute power of the king. The rebuilding of Rome in Constantinople New Rome – though Dölger thinks that the double name is not an official one and enters in use some years after the foundation 9 – is the recapturing of the freshness of creation, according to Paul Alexander, 10 through a ritual repetition of cosmogony in any creative act which introduces into the theophanic microcosm of the community, the holy city progressively concentrated through the temples and relics of saints into the imperial city of Constantinople (Kaplan). 11 Eusebius called the empire the messianic kingdom of Israel so that the empire had to last till the end of time. The pseudo-Methodius in the VII century announced the end of the world as coincident with the abdication of the last Roman emperor in favour of God.
520-560; D. VERA, La società del Basso Impero, Roma-Bari 1983; V. VAVRINEK, The Eastern Roman Empire or Early Byzantium? A Society in Transition, in From Late Antiquity to Early Byzantium, Praha 1985, pp. 9-20; G.L. KURBATOV, On the Problem of Transition from Antiquity to Feudalism in Byzantium, in “Byzantiakà,” 9 (1989), pp. 151-177. 5 C. TOUMANOFF, Moscow the Third Rome, in “Catholic Historical Review,” 40 (1954)/55), pp. 411-447. ID., The Social Myth, Rome 1983. 6 O. SPENGLER, Il tramonto dell’Occidente, Lineamenti di una morfologia della Storia mondiale, Nuova edizione italiana a cura di R. CALABRESE CONTE, M. COTTONE, F. JESI, trad. it. di J. EVOLA, Milano 1981, pp. 277-290. 7 Oriens Augusti – Lever du roi, in “Dumbarton
Oaks Papers,” 17 (1963), pp. 117-177. 8 On the social fear of Kazhdan cfr. A. KAZHDAN, G. CONSTABLE, People and Power in Byzantium. An Introduction to Modern Byzantine Studies, Washington 1982. 9 Fr. D ÖLGER, Rom in der Gedankenwelt der Byzantiner, in ID., Byzanz und die Europäische Staatenwelt. Ausgewählte Vorträge und Aufsätze, Ettal 1953, pp. 82-83. 10 P. J. ALEXANDER, The Strength of Empire and Capital as seen through Byzantine Eyes, in “Speculum,” 37 (1962), pp. 339-357. 11 See his essay published in Les saints et leur sanctuaire à Byzance. Textes, Images et Monuments, Publié par C. JOLIVET-LEVY, M. KAPLAN, J.P. SODINI, Paris 1993.
54
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
The taxis, society and its order, are symbolised as analogues to the cosmos and its order, of which god and the king are the warrants so that the microcosm of political world is conceived as an image of heaven, at the sacred centre of the universe, while the surrounding outside is barbarism and wickedness. 12 The imperial city is an omphalos, that is a link between the microcosm and the cosmos. And the king is the concentrate of communal theophany with the monopol of the divine origin, as the embodiment of the theophanic microcosm, which puts him in a special relation to God, becoming the link between earth and heaven. The custom of dating with regnal years is the expression of the new era which brings about a new springtime, as Pertusi pointed out in the acclamations of Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos (X century). 13 The king, as the true representative of the divine, enjoys the wisdom, symbolised by the church of Hagia Sophia and by the throne of Solomon, which connected the world order of the empire to the cosmic order, as beeing both created together with all things by the Wisdom of God; Hagia Sophia was not far from the omphalos of the city the true connecting point between heaven and earth. The empire was the kingdom of heaven brought to earth through the renewal of Constantine, so that it was the orthodox empire, in a supernatural polity, a corpus politicum
mysticum, as Otto Treitinger 14 named it, in a Christian reshaping of an ancient Pagan belief. The empire was a sign of victory of God over sin and unbelief that marks the Outside 15 : hence the difficulty to represent the disasters that befell the empire, from Manzikert to the Turkish conquest of Constantinople. According to Corippus in the VI century the empire belonged to God, whilst in the VII century George of Pisidia styled God as commander in chief of the Byzantine army having the emperor as the second commander. In VI and VII centuries texts like in George of Pisidia God, Christ and the Virgin are represented fighting for the empire. Dölger in its familia Regis 16 outlined the theory of the emperor as secular head of the Christian rulers in a kind of commonwealth, where the emperor was the father and the other rulers were his sons or younger brothers. The emperor was in time the providential man by a special designation by God (Jenkins) in “an autocracy tempered by the legal right of revolution,” which is the mirage that the historians of the last century inherited from Mommsen, who first one joked about “the legal right of revolution.” 17 They named revolution every expression of disagreement, and they have believed that the Byzantine political theory was to be completely absorbed into the imperial cult: but what have we to say about the theory of the VI
12
Torino 2002, pp. 37, 29, 66. 16 Fr. DÖLGER, Die „Familie der Könige“ im Mittelalter. “Hist. Jahrb.” 60 (1940) (Festgabe für R. v. Heckel), pp. 397-420 (reprinted in: Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt, pp. 34-69). ID., Die mittelalterliche „Familie der Fürsten und Völker“ und der Bulgarenherrscher (= Srèdnovekovnoto „semejestvo na vladetelite i narodit“ i Bulgarikijat vladetel. “Spisanie na Bulg. Akad. Na Naukite i Izkustava” 66/4 [1943], pp. 181-222) (abridged version of the German edition in: Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt. Darmstadt 1964, pp. 159-182). 17 See Appendix.
See A. CARILE nn. 7, 19, 28-31. Insegne del potere sovrano e delegato a Bisanzio e nei paesi di influenza bizantina, in Simboli e simbologia nell’Alto Medioevo, 3-9 aprile 1975, XXIII Settimana di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, II, Spoleto 1976, pp. 481-568. 14 O. TREITINGER, Die oströmische Kaiser- und Reichsidee nach ihrer Gestaltung im höfischen Zeremoniell, Jena 1938 (reprinted Darmstadt 1969). 15 About the ethic signification of inside and outside in order to exercise the just violence cf. J. ASSMANN, Potere e salvezza. Teologia politica nell’antico Egitto, in Israele e in Europa, It. tr. by U. GANDINI, 13
55
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
century dialogue, attributed by Pertusi to the patrice Peter and consider anonimous by the editor Mazzucchi 18 ? The author fixed at 57 years of age the time of reign of an emperor who had to be choosen out of a dozen names proposed by the senate: the God’s choice was to be made through drawing. The power of the emperor had to be shared with twelve major senators choosen for the government of the respublica. The fact is that in all the Byzantine history there is, in parallel with the imperial cult, an aristocratic line of control of the imperial power, usually shared with the highest members of the hierarchy: the task of the research is to outline this aspect of the Byzantine government, after the catalogue of the so called rebellions made under the label Pouvoir et contestation à Byzance. 19 An important source of disagreement are the lives of the saints with the topos of the fear phobos made to the emperor in order to reduce the imperial arbitrary acts against aristocrats as well as the acts of repentance by the emperor. We meet in the Byzantine historians a line of Kaiserkritik, which Tinnefeld has reduced to a
retorical repertory of common places, which means the effective limitation of this absolute power and the aspiration to a legalised share in the government by some class of citizens: a picture of the inside life of the empire very far from the praises of the imperial laudes and the official consent of the court ritual. The praises and acclamations directed to the emperor were no flattery but a sign of legitimacy. In space the emperor was a cosmocrat, that is a single emperor on earth corresponding to one God in heaven. With the words of Jenkins “Heaven is a single kingdom, ruled by a single, eternal and imprescriptible monarchy. It was God’s will and decree that the whole mundane sphere should be governed in exactly the same way…: that is, in unity, by one single monarch, who was the roman emperor of the day.” The imperial iconography of the emperor inside the shield, the clypeus, expressed the assertion of the solar cosmocracy of the emperor. Corippus expressed lively in the VI century the cosmological aspects of kingship:
Adsistit in clypeo princeps fortissimus illo Solis habens specimen; lux alta fulsit ab urbe. Mirata est pariter geminos consurgere soles Una favens eademque dies. 20
The imperial court is the heaven and foreign ambassadors, on being received in audience, credunt aliud romana palatia caelum. 21 The emperor came to be thought of as an image of Christ, in the sense of an image of God, so that in twelfth century
for the archbishop of Ochrida Theophylact god and the emperor exercised a symbasileia, so that the emperor is the god of the world. Toumanoff is of a different opinion from Dölger and from Jenkins: the latter ones thought that the Roman cult survived in Byzantine time
18 A. PERTUSI, I principi fondamentali della concezione del potere a Bisanzio. Per un commento al dialogo „Sulla scienza politica” attribuito a Pietro Patrizio (secolo VI), “Bullet. Istit. Stor. Ital. per il Medioevo e Arch. Muratoriano” 80 (1968), pp. 1-23. Menae patricii cum Thoma referendario De scientia politica dialogus, ed. C.M. MAZZUCCHI, Milano
1982, pp. 136, reprinted Milano 2002. 19 J.C. CHEYNET, Pouvoir et contestations à Byzance (963-1210), Byzantina Sorbonensia 9, Paris 1990, pp. 213-237. 20 COR, In laudem Iustini augusti minoris, II, 148-151. 21 COR, In laudem Iustini augusti minoris, III, 244.
56
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
whilst the first one thinked that the terms of divinity attributed to the emperor in court ceremonial were just empty formulas of courtesy. Sacred Palace and Hippodrome were the chief sanctuaries of the imperial cult and the influence of the imperial pomp on the church ceremonies and on the vestements of the Byzantine bishops is a matter of fact. The veiled hands were reserved into the church to the blessed sacrament and into the court to the emperor. The basileus’ functioning as an individual human being is identified with the functioning of the cosmos and basileus’ victory, that is force, fertility and good luck, guarantee men and land. If the king fails, he has lost his imperial saintliness, connected to the elevation to the throne, a fact strictly connected with the strifes against the ecclesiastical dogmes, as for the monophysite emperors or the iconoclastic ones, whom the Orthodox Church still includes into the catalogue of the church persecutors: Constant I and Constance II (337-361); Constantine IV and Constant II (642-668); Leo III, Constantine V, Leo V (813-820), Michael II (820-829), Theophile (829-842). The imperial specula catalogue the virtues which show the imperial saintliness or its contrary the “tyranny” (chap. 65). If the emperor bears “the crown of piety” (chap. 15), “the crown of self-restraint… if he wears the purple of justice…” (chap. 18), the emperor is “the image of piety, made by God” (chap. 5) and he becomes an instrument of saintliness “… a clean mirror…” which “shines of the divine rays” (chap. 9), a recipient of divine saintliness, who must imitate God “through deeds” (chap. 45), into the limit of
mercy, philanthropy, and charity: “in this he can imitate God at his best, thinking that nothig is more precious than mercy” (chap. 37), “a robe which does not become old is the mantle of charity, incorruptible robe is the love for the poors” (chap. 60). The imperial ceremonies and iconography underline that the imperial saintliness and the Christ’s divinity are connected together. Christ is represented with the purple like the king of kings, the saintliness of the Theotokos is represented through the image of an empress on the throne with purple and crown. The excellence symbol of the imperial garments symbolises in general the saintliness of the saints, like Saint Agnes with crown and loros in the roman mosaic of 625-638. 22 The saintliness gives to the emperor the iconological signs of giantism and the x v ar nah/aureola. The christomimesis is always present in the court ceremonial: Leo III, proclaimed emperor on 18 april 716, waited 25 mars 717 for the crowning (the day in which the archangel Gabriel announced to the Theotokos the conception of the Christ) and in 718 he fixed the baptism of the future Constantine V on 25 december, naissance of Christ, king of kings. The mummies of the emperors, clad in purple, are associated to the relics of the Twelve Apostles in the imperial mausoleum, which Mahomet II the Conqueror, when conquered in 1453 Constantinople New Rome, transformed into Fatih Camii and his own mausoleum (turbe). Toynbee (1973) 23 preferred to analyse the palace as a centre of power whilst Runciman pointed out to the constitutional aspects of the imperial power, and
22
23
E. KITZINGER, L’arte bizantina. Correnti stilistiche nell’arte mediterranea dal III al VII secolo, (1977), Ed. it. a cura di P. CESARETTI, Presentazione di M. ANDALORO, Milano 1989, n. 187.
A.J. TOYNBEE, Constantino Porfirogenito e il suo mondo, It. tr. by M. STEFANONI, Firenze 1987, pp. 214-219, 547-554, 592 ss.
57
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
insists on the fact that the the emperor’s autocracy was limited: he recognised his obligation to respect the fundamental laws of the Roman people and in some way there lingered the idea that sovereignity was people’s. Justinian in the Lex de imperio states that the people had only delegated their power to the emperor. In 811 the dying emperor Stauracius, amidst the quarrels of his wife and his sister for
the succession, threatened to give the empire back to the demes, which probably means the growing importance of the merchant class and of the working classes in the resistance against the Arabs. 24 The same phaenomenon happened in XI century during the reign of Constantine IX Monomachos, who opened the senate to representative of the merchant class.
24 J. IRMSCHER, Rivoluzione dall’alto a Bisanzio?, in “Bizantinistica. Rivista di Studi Bizantini e Slavi,” s.
II, 2 (2000), pp. 337-344.
A PPENDIX : S HORT B IBLIOGRAPHY OF B YZANTINE P OLITICAL I DEOLOGY
BZ RE PG PL TM ZRVI
ABBREVIATIONS “Byzantinische Zeitschrift” Real-Encyklopädie d. klass. Altertumswissenschaft v. Pauly-Wissowa Migne, Patrologia Graeca Migne, Patrologia Latina Travaux et Memoires “Zbornik Radova Vizantoloskog Instituta”
SOURCES IMPERIAL ACCLAMATIONS (from Constantine Porphyrogennetos) P. M AAS , Metrische Akklamationen der Byzantiner, BZ, 21 (1912), pp. 28-51. AGAPETUS DEACON (VI Century) Critical Edition – but deprived of the indirect tradition that was exposed by R. F ROHNE , Agapetus Diaconus. Untersuchungen zu den Quellen und zur Wirkungsgeschichte des ersten byzantinischen Fürstenspiegel, Tübingen 1985 – Agapetos Diakonos, Der Fürstenspiegel für Kaiser Iustinianos, Erstmal kritish herausgegeben von R. R IEDINGER , Athenai 1995. Italian translation with indirect tradition: B. C AVARRA , Ideologia politica e cultura in Romània fra IV e VI secolo, Bologna 1990; see too the translation of S. R OCCA , Un
58
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
trattatista di età giustinianea: Agapeto Diacono, in “Civiltà Classica e Cristiana,” 10,2 (1989), pp. 303-328. German translation in W. B LUM , Byzantinische Fürstenspiegel, Stuttgart 1981, pp. 59-80. See King Louis XIII’s translation: Les precepts d’Agapetus a Justinien, sur une version latine, par le roi Louis XIII, en sis leçons ordinaires, Paris 1612, in- 8°. See PG 86, (Migne reprinted the Galland’s news), cc. 1155- 1160 with a list of editions and translations of Agapetus till the XVII century. ALEXIUS MACREMBOLITES (XIV Century) S.I. K OUROUSES , Hai antipeseis perì ton eschaton tou kosmou, in “Epeteris Etaireias Byzantinon Spoudon,” 37 (1969-1970), pp. 223-240. I. S EVCHENKO , Alexios Makrembolites and his Dialogue between the Rich and the Poor, in ZRVI 6 (1960), 187-228, critical edition and English translation. E.V. M ALTESE , Una fonte bizantina per la storia dei rapporti tra Costantinopoli e Genova alla metà del XIV secolo: il Logos historikòs di Alessio Makrembolite, in “Atti e Memorie della Società Savonese di Storia Patria,” 14 (1908), pp. 55-72. ANONIMUS (VI Century) identified in the past with Peter Patritius Menae patricii cum Thoma referendario De scientia politica dialogus, ed. C.M. M AZZUCCHI , Milano 1982, pp. 136, reprinted Milano 2002. ARISTEA (II Century b. C. but of traditional use in the Byzantine high culture) R. T RAMONTANO , La lettera di Aristea a Filocrate, Introduzione, testo, versione e commento; prefazione di A. V ACCARI , Napoli 1931. ATHANASIUS PATRIARCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE (1289-1293, 1303-1310) A.M. M AFFRY T ALBOT , The Correspondance of Athanasius I, Patriarch of Constantinople, Washington 1975, CFHB, VII, ep. 3. COUNCILS ACTS J.D. M ANSI , Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio. Ed. novissima Flor. Et Ven. 1759. Pseudo CODINUS curopalates (about 1347-1360) Codini Curopalatae de officialis palatii Constantinopolitani et de officiis magnae ecclesiae liber ex recog. I. B EKKERI (Corpus Scriptorum Hist. Byz.). Bonn 1839. But see the last critical edition in V ERPEAUX , J., Pseudo- Kodinos, Traité des offices, Paris 1966, 420 pp. FLAVIUS CRESCONIUS CORIPPUS (VI Century) Flavii Cresconii Corippi Africani Grammatici in laudem Justini Augusti minoris libri IV, rec. M. Petschenig, Berlin 1886, 153-217. We dispose now of two critical editions of Corippus: Flavius Cresconius Corippus, In laudem Iustini Augusti minoris libri IV, 59
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
Edited with Translation and Commentary by Av. C AMERON , Bristol 1976, and Corippe (Flavius Cresconius Corippus), Eloge de l’empereur Justin II, Texte établi et traduit par S. A NTES , Paris 1981. CONSTANTINE VII PORPHYROGENNETOS (905-959) Constantini Porphyrogeniti imperatoris de cerimoniis aulae byzantinae libri duo Graece et Latine e rec. J.J. R EISKII (Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae) Bonn 1829/30. Constantin VII Porphyrogénète, Le livre des cérémonies. Tome I. Livre 1. Chapitres 1-46 (37). Texte établi et traduit par A. V OGT . – Commentarie (Livre 1. Chapitre 1-46 (37) par A. V OGT . (Collection byzantine publiée sous le patronage de l’Association G. Budé) Paris 1935. M ORAVCSIK , Gy. – R.J.H. J ENKINS (edd.): Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De administrando imperio. (I.) Greek text edited by Gy. M ORAVCSIK , English translation by R.J.H. J ENKINS (Magyar-Görög Tanulmànyok 29). Budapest 1949, 347 pp., 1 Pl. (New, revised edition [Corpus Font. Hist. Byz. 1 = Dumb. Oaks Texts 1]. Washington 1967, IX pp., 1 Pl., 341 pp., 1 Pl.). vol. II: Commentary, by F. D VORNIK , R.J.H. J ENKINS , B. L EWIS , Gy. M ORAVCSIK , D. O BOLENSKY , S. R UNCIMAN , ed. by R.J.H. J ENKINS . London 1962. X, 221 pp. – cfr. BZ 46 (1953) 119-123; 55 (1962) 302-309; 63 (1970) 73-75. Italian translation of some passages: Costantino Porfirogenito Ibn Rosteh Liutprando da Cremona, Il libro delle cerimonie, a cura di M. P ANASCIA , Palermo 1993. ECLOGA (726 or 741) Ecloga. Das Gesetzbuch Leon III. und Konstantinos’ V., Herausgegeben von L. B URGMANN , Frankfurt am Main 1983, Forschungen zur Byzantinischen Rechtsgeschichte, Herausgegeben von D. SIMON, Bd. 10. EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA (260-339 A.C.) E US . de laudibus Constantini, ed. I.A. H EIKEL , Eusebius Werke, I, Leipzig 1902. E US . Triacontaetericon, 10 (H EIKEL , 223) PG XX, c. 1373. Euchologion sive Rituale Graecorum, ed. J. G OAR , Paris 1647. ed. Js. H ABERT , Paris 1676. PHILOTHEUS basilikos protospatharios ke atriklinis later eparchos Kletorologion of Philotheos (text of 1 September 899): J.B. B URY , The Imperial Administrative System in the Ninth Century. With a revised Text of the Kletorologion of Philotheos (The British Academy, Supplemental Papers I), London 1911, and new critical edition in N. O IKONOMIDES , Les listes de préséance byzantines des IXe et Xe siècles, Paris 1972.
60
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
EMPEROR JULIAN (361-363) Jul. Misopogon, ed. Bidez; see the fine translation of A. R OSTAGNI , back to the year 1920, reprinted in: Giuliano Imperatore, Misopogone o il nemico della barba, testo greco e traduzione italiana, Genova 1980, and in Giuliano l’apostata, La restaurazione del paganesimo. Scritti politici e filosofici dell’ultimo grande imperatore pagano, Milano 1988, pp. 237-292. GREGORY OF NAZIANZOS (second half of the IV Century) Greg. Naz. or. XIV, perì philoptochìas, in PG 35 BOOK OF THE EPARCH Legislation about the Constantinople’s Guilds emanated under the eparch of the imperial city Philotheus, see above. J. K ODER , Das Eparchenbuch Leons des Weisen, Wien 1991. LIUTPRAND bishop Cremona (920-972, bishop from 961) Die Werke Liudprands von Cremona. 3. Aufl. hrgb. Von J. B ECKER . Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum in usum Scholarum ex Monumentis Germaniae Historicis separatim editi. Hannover Leipzig 1915. K. V . D . O STEN -S ACKEN , Aus Liudprands Werken (Die Geschichtsschreiber der deutschen Vorzeit, 29), Leipzig 1913. Liudprandi opera, in Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum in usum Scholarum, III ed., Herausgegeben von J. B ECKER , Hannover und Leipzig 1915, Legatio, LIIII, pp. 204205; Liudprand of Cremona, Relatio de legatione constantinopolitana, Edited and Translated with Introduction and Commentary by B. S COTT , London 1993. Liudprandi Cremonensis Opera omnia, cura et studio P. C HIESA , Turnholti 1998, CCh 156. Italian translations: Liutprando di Cremona, Italia e Bisanzio alle soglie dell’anno Mille, a cura di M. O LDONI e P. A RIATTA , Novara 1987, pp. 244-245. Short Bibliography in J.N. S UTHERLAND , The Mission to Constantinople in 968 and Liudprand of Cremona, in “Traditio,” 31 (1975), pp. 55-81. J. K ODER Th. W EBER , Liutprand von Cremona in Konstantinopel, Wien 1980, pp. 17-18. A. C ARILE , Roma e Romania dagli Isaurici ai Comneni, in XXXIV Settimana del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, Bisanzio e l’Italia nell’alto Medioevo, Spoleto 1988, pp. 531-582: pp. 548-551. H. H OFMANN , Profil der lateinischen Historiographie im 10. Jahrhundert, in XXXVII Settimana del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, Il secolo di ferro: mito e realtà del secolo X, Spoleto 1991, pp. 837-907. J. K ODER , Stereòtypa sti vyzantinì istorìa. O Liutpràndos Kremònis os “istoriogràphos” ke os antikìmeno tis istoriographìas, in To pechnìdi me tin Istorìa, Ideologikà sterepòtypa ke ypokimenismòs stin istoriographìa, epimèlia Ph. M ALINGUDIS , Thessaloniki 1994, pp. 29-53 more developed version in J. K ODER , Subektivität und Fälschung in der byzantinischen Geschichte Liutprand von Cremona als “Historiograph” und als Objekt der Historiographie, in “Byzantiakà,” 15 (1995), pp. 109-132.
61
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
NOVELS OF MACEDONIC DINASTY (X Century) N. S VORONOS , Les Novelles des empereurs macédoniens concernents la terre et les stratiotes, Introduction Edition Commentaires, Ed. posthume et index établis par P. G OUNARIDES , Athènes 1994; Italian translation in A. C ARILE , Materiali di storia bizantina, Bologna 1994, pp. 138 ss. (the translations were founded on the edition in use before the Svoronos’ edition but the text and the dates have been confirmed by the new edition). PAUL OF MONEMVASIA (X Century) J. W ORTLEY , Les récits édifiants de Paul éveque de Monemvasie et d’autres auteurs, Paris 1987. BYZANTINE SATIRES AGAINTS THE ARISTOCRATS (XIV Century) G. W AGNER , Carmina Graeca medii aevi, Lipsiae 1874 M.C. B ARTUSIS , The Fruit Book, in “Modern Greek Studies Yearbook,” 4 (1988), pp. 2O5-212; H.G. B ECK , Geschichte der byzantinischen Volksliteratur, München 1971, pp. 177 ff. Ho poulologos, ed. I. T SABARI , Athens 1987; S. K RAWCZYNSKI , Ho poulologos, Berlin 1960. V. T SIOUNI , Paidiòphrastos diégesis ton zoon ton tetrapodon, München 1972, Miscellanea Byzantina Monacensia, Hrsggb. von H.G. B ECK ; H. H UNGER , Byzantinisches Geisteswelt, Baden Baden 1958, p. 287. The date comes from vv. 12-14: September of the XV Indition year 6873 = 1364. For the influence of the XIV century satires on Russian graphics and the movements of contestation against the tsars in XIX-XX Century see: M. ANIKST - E. CERNEVIC con la coll. di N. BABURINA, Grafica russa 18801917, Firenze 1990, cf. pp. 15-37 Viktor Vaznecov, S. Jaguzinski, I. Nevinskij, B. Zvorykin, Aleksandr Benua, Ivan Ropet, A. Burnovo, E. Firsov, A. Paramonov, Ivan Bilibin and in general the movement of Miriskasniki. It is not perhaps necessary to remind that the symbolic image “sunset of Byzantium,” comes from Sumrak Vizantije (1989) of Ivan Djuri , translated in Italian too with the title Il crepuscolo di Bisanzio 1392-1448, Roma 1995. Symeon Thessalonicensis, Opera, PG 155. THEOPHYILACTOS OF OCHRID (XI Century) German translation in W. B LUM , Byzantinische Fürstenspiegel, Stuttgart 1981, pp. 81-98. THOMAS magistros (XIV Century) Thomae Magistri perì politias, cc. 6-11 in PG 145, cc. 505-516; Letter of Thomas Magistros to the great logothetes Metochites in PG 145, c. 409. Toma Magistro, La regalità, Testo critico introduzione e indici a cura di P. V OLPE C ACCIATORE , Napoli 1997 with a summary at the pp. 87-94. German translation in W. B LUM , Byzantinische Fürstenspiegel, Stuttgart 1981, pp. 99-145.
62
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
B IBLIOGRAPHY G.D. A ALDER , ()*)+, -*./0)+, in: Politeia und Res Publica. Dem Andenken Rudolf Starks gewidmet, hrsg. von P. Steinmetz. Wiesbaden 1969, 315-329. N. A DONTZ , Notes sur le Livre des cérémonies. “Byzantion” 14 (1939) 387-406. H. A HRWEILER , Un discours inédit de Constantin VII Porphyrogénète. TM 2 (1967) 393-404. — , L’idéologie politique de l’empire byzantin, Paris 1975. K. A LAND , Die religiöse Haltung Kaiser Konstantins, in: Studia Patristica 1 (Texte u. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte d. altchristl. Lit. 63). Berlin 1957, 549-600. — , Kaiser und Kirche von Konstantin bis Byzanz, in: Aus der byzantinistischen Arbeit der DDR, Bd. I, hrsg. Von J. Irmscher (Berl. Byz. Arb. 5). Berlin 1957, 188212. P.J. A LEXANDER , The donation of Constantine at Byzantium and Its Earliest Use Against the Western Empire. ZRVI 8/1 (1963) (Mélanges G. Ostrogorsky I) 11-26. — , The Strength of Empire and Capital as seen through Byzantine Eyes. “Speculum” 37 (1962) 339-357. A. A LFÖLDI , Insignien und Tracht der römischen Kaiser, “Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Istituts, Röm. Abtlg.” 50 (1935) 3-158 (reprint: Die monarchische Repräsentation im römischen Kaiserreich 119-276). — , The Conversion of Constantine and Pagan Rome. Transl. by H. Mattingly. Oxford 1948. VI pp., 140 pp. Maria A LFÖLDI , Die constantinische Goldprägung. Untersuchungen zu ihrer Bedeutung für Kaiserpolitik und Hofkunst (Rm.- Germ. Zentral Museum zu Mainz). Mainz 1963. XI, 236 pp., 41 Pl. — , Signum Deae. Ein kaiserzeitlicher Vorgänger des Reichsapfels. “Jahrb. Numism. und Geldgesch.” 11 (1961) 19-32. H.S. A LIVISATOS , Caesaropapismus in den Byzantinischen kirchlichen Gesetzen und den Canones, in: Akten XI. Intern. Byz-Kongr. 1958. München 1960, 15-20. M.V. A NASTOS , Church and State during the First Iconoclastic Controversy, 726–787. “Rivista di Studi Storico-Religiosi” 1 (1957) (Ricerche di Storia Religiosa. Studi in onore di G. La Piana) 279-280. — , Justinian’s Despotic Control over the Church as Illustrated by his Edicts of the Theopaschite Formula and his Letter to Pope John II in 533. ZRVI 8/2 (1964) (Mélanges G. Ostrogorsky II) 1-11. — , The Ancient Greek Sources of Byzantine Absolutism, in: Harry Austryn Wolfson Jubilee Volume. Jerusalem 1965, 89-109. M. A NGOLD , Archons and Dynasts: local Aristocracies and the Cities of the later byzantine Empire, in The byzantine Aristocracy IX to XIII Centuries, ed. by M. Angold, Oxford 1984, 241-243. G. A NTONAZZI , Lorenzo Valla e la polemica sulla donazione di Costantino. Con testi inediti dei secoli XV-XVII, Roma 1985. 320 pp. 63
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
J. A SSMANN , Potere e salvezza. Teologia politica nell’antico Egitto, in Israele e in Europa, tr. it. di U. Gandini, Torino 2002. W.T. A VERY , The Adoratio Purpurae and the Importance of the Imperial Purple in the Fourth Century of the Christian Era. “Memoirs Amer. Acad. Rome” 17 (1940) 6680. M. A ZKOULL , Sacerdotium et Imperium: The Constantinian Renovatio according to the Greek Fathers. “Theological Studies” 32 (1971) 431-464. C. A ZZARA , L’ideologia del potere regio nel papato altomedievale (secoli VI-VIII), Spoleto 1997. 341 pp. E. B ARKER (ed.), Social and Political Thought in Byzantium from Justinian I to the Last Palaeologus: Passages From Byzantine Writers and Documents, Transl. with Introduction and Notes. Oxford 1957. 256 pp. P. B ATTIFOL , Les survivances du culte impérial romain. Paris 1920. N.H. B AYNES , Constantine the Great and the Christian Church. Second edition with a preface by H. Chadwick. London 1972. VIII, 108 pp. — , Eusebius and the Christian Empire. “Annuaire Inst. Phil. Hist. Orient. et Slaves” 2 (1934) (Mélanges Bidez) 13-18. — , Greek Religion and the Saviour King. “History” N.S. 4 (1919) 61-71. H.-G. B ECK , Byzantinische Gefolgschaftswesen, in: Sitzungsber. Bayer. Akad. Wiss., phil.-ist. Kl., Jg. 1965, H. 5. München. 32 pp. — , Der Byzantinische „Ministerpräsident“. BZ 48 (1955) 309-338. — , Reichsidee und nationale Politik im spätbyzantinischen Staat. BZ 53 (1960) 8694. — , Res publica Romana. Vom Staatsdenken der Byzantiner, in: Sitzungsber. Bayer, Akad. Wiss., Phil.-hist. Kl., Jg. 1970, H. 2. München 1970. 41 pp. (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, pp. 379-414). — , Senat und Volk von Konstantinopel. H. 6. München 1966, 75 pp. (partially reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, pp. 353-378). Y.-M. B ERCE , Il re nascosto. Miti politici popolari nell’Europa moderna, tr. it. di A. Comba, Torino 1996. H. B ERKHOF , Kirche und Kaiser. Eine Untersuchung der byzantinischen und der theokratischen Staatsauffassung im vierten Jahrhundert. Aus dem Holländischen übersetzt von G.W. Locher. Zollikon-Zürich 1947. 223 pp. — , 123,45$6',4%7#5&%&'. “Nederl. Archief v. Kerkgesch.” 34 (1943) 24-28. E. B EURLIER . Le culte imperial, son histoire et son organisation depuis Auguste jusq’à Justinien. Paris 1891. 3 Pl., 357 pp. — , Les vestiges du culte impérial à Byzance et la querelle des iconoclastes (Compte rendu du Congrés scientifique international des catholiques tenu à Paris du 1 er au 6 avril 1981), Paris 1891, Deuxìeme Sect., Sciences religieuses, 167-180. L. B IEHL , Das liturgische Gebet für Kaiser und Reich. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Verhältnisses von Kirche und Staat (Görresgesellschft, Veröff. Sektion Rechts- u. Staatswiss. 75). Paderborn 1937. 173 pp.
64
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
A.E.R. B OAK , Imperial Coronation Ceremonies of the Fifth and Sixth Centuries. “Harvard Studies in Class. Philology” 30 (1919) 37-47. S. L E B OHEC , L’idéologie officielle du roi de Macédoine à l’époque hellénistique, in L’idéologie du pouvoir monarchique dans l’antiquité, Paris 1991. J. B OMPAIRE , La ville de Constantinople vue à travers le Livre des Cérémonies, in Jerusalem, Rome, Constantinople. L’image et le mythe de la ville, Textes réunis par D. Poirion, Cultures et Civilisations Médiévales, V, Paris 1986. B ORGO , Clemenza dote divina. Persistenza e trasformazione di un tema da Cicerone a Seneca, in “Bollettino di Studi Latini,” 20 (1990) 360-364. — , Il potere e la sua degenerazione nel lessico politico di Seneca, in “Vichiana. Rassegna di studi filologici e storici,” 17 (1988) 120-150. — , Clementia: studio di un campo semantico, in: “Vichiana. Rassegna di Studi filologici e storici,” 14 (1985) 25-73. G.I. B RATIANU , Empire et „démocratie” à Byzance. BZ 37 (1937) 86-111. L. B REHIER , 8!9!:', 5;<, =;#>?!@', in: Mémorial L. Petit (Archives Or. Chrét. 1). Bukarest 1948, 41-45 (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, pp. 86-93). — , Les empereurs byzantins dans leur vie privée. “Rev. Hist.” 168/169 (1940) 193212. — , L’investiture des patriarches de Constantinople au moyen âge, in: Miscellanea G. Mercati III (Studi e Testi 123). Città del Vaticano 1946, 368-372. — , L’origine des titres impériaux à Byzance. BZ 156 (1906) 161-178. — , Les institutions de l’empire byzantin, Paris 1970. L. B REHIER et P. B ATTIFOL , Les survivances du culte impérial romain, Paris 1920. G. B RETT , The Automata in the «Byzantine Throne of Salomon». “Speculum” 29 (1954) 477-487. F.E. B RIGHTMAN , Byzantine Imperial Coronations. “Journ. Theol. Studies” 2 (1901) 359-391. G. B UEHL , Constantinopolis und Roma. Stadtpersonifikationen der Spätantike, Zürich 1995. J.B. B URY , The Ceremonial Book of Costantine Porphyrogennetos. “The English Historical Review” 22 (1907) 209-227, 417-439. A. C AMERON , The construction of Court Ritual: the Byzantine Book of Ceremonies, in: Rituals of Royalty. Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies, ed. by D. Cannadine and S. Price, Cambridge et alias, 1987. M. C ANARD , Le ceremonial fatimite et le ceremonial byzantin. Essai de comparaison. “Byzantion” 22 (1951) 355-420. Rituals of Royalty. Power and ceremonial in Traditional Societies, edited by D. Cannadine and S. Price, Cambridge et alias 1987.
65
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
A. C ARILE : — 1, Consenso e dissenso fra propaganda e fronda nelle fonti narrative dell’età giustinianea, in L’imperatore Giustiniano. Storia e mito, a cura di G.G. Archi, Milano 1978, 37-93. — 2, Impero romano e Romania, in Atti del II Seminario Internazionale di Studi Storici “Da Roma alla Terza Roma,” La nozione di “romano” tra cittadinanza e universalità, Napoli 1984, 247-261, updated in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 3, La crudele tirannide: archetipi politici e religiosi dell’immaginario turchesco da Bisanzio a Venezia, in AA.VV., Venezia e i Turchi, Milano 1985, 70-85. — 4, La Romania fra territorialità e ideologia, in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 5, Assimilazione o annientamento. Il problema dei rapporti fra aristocrazie alla conquista ottomana di Bisanzio, in: Studi albanologici, balcanici, bizantini e orientali in onore di Giuseppe Valentini S.J., Firenze 1986, 247-259 (reprinted in: “Byzantinische Forschungen” 11,1 (1987) 271-284. — 6, Roma e Romania dagli Isaurici ai Comneni, in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 7, I nomadi nelle fonti bizantine, in XXXV Settimana del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, Popoli delle steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari, Spoleto 1988, 55-87. — 8, A. P ERTUSI , Il pensiero politico bizantino, a cura di A. Carile, Bologna 1990. — 9, Political Ideology of the Byzantine Empire in the Eleventh-Twelfth Centuries and Rus’, in Proceedings of the International Congress Commemorating the Millennium of Christianity in Rus’-Ukraine, “Harvard Ukrainian Studies,” 12-13 (19881989) pp. 400-413; translated in Italian in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 10, Ideologia politica e bestiario immaginario, in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 11, L’Europa dall’Atlantico agli Urali, in Materiali di storia bizantina, Bologna 1994. — 12, Fonti vicino-orientali dell’immaginario imperiale costantinopolitano in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 13, Le cerimonie musicali alla corte bizantina, in Da Bisanzio a San Marco. Musica e liturgia, a cura di G. Cattin, Quaderni di “Musica e Storia,” 2, Bologna 1997, pp. 43-60. — 14, Gerarchie e caste, in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 15, Produzione e usi della porpora nell’impero bizantino, in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 16, Santi aristocratici e santi imperatori, in Oriente cristiano e santità, Figure e storie di santi tra Bisanzio e Occidente, in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 17, Ricchezza e gerarchia nel XIV e XV secolo, in Simposio Internazionale Ricchi e poveri nella società dell’oriente grecolatino, a cura di Ch. Maltezou, Venezia 66
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
1998, 37-51; summarized with the following item in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 18, Ricchezza e povertà negli “specula principum” bizantini dal VI al X secolo, in Specula principum, a cura di A. De Benedictis, Frankfurt am Main 1999, pp. 1-20 summarized with precedent item in Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 19, Eutaxia: l’ordine divino nel cosmo e nell’impero, in Da Roma alla Terza Roma, Documenti e Studi, a cura di P. Catalano e P. Siniscalco, Studi IV (1984) Spazio e centralizzazione del potere, Roma 1998, pp. 131-136. — 20, Seneca e la regalità ellenistica, in AA.VV., Seneca nella coscienza dell’Europa, a cura di I. Dionigi, Milano 1999, 58-80. — 21, Le insegne del potere a Bisanzio, in AA.VV., La corona e i simboli del potere, Rimini 2000, 65-124, larger version of 23. — 22, Immagine e realtà nel mondo bizantino, Bologna 2000. — 23, La sacralità rituale dei basileis bizantini, in Adveniat Regnum. La regalità sacra dell’Europa cristiana, a cura di F. Cardini e M. Saltarelli, Genova 2000, Fondazione Cardinale Giacomo Lercaro, Veritatis Splendor, Istituto per la ricerca e la formazione culturale cattolica, pp. 65-117, published in a larger version in 21. — 24, Le cerimonie musicali alla corte di Bisanzio, in Il piacere del testo. Saggi e studi per Albano Biondi, a cura di A. Prosperi, I-II, Roma 2001, 779-811. — 25, Roma vista da Costantinopoli, in CISAM, XLIX Settimana di Studio, “Roma fra Oriente e Occidente,” 19-24 aprile 2001, Spoleto 2002, 49-99. — 26, Regalità sacra ed iniziazione nel mondo bizantino, in Sulla soglia del sacro: esoterismo ed iniziazione nelle grandi religioni e nella tradizione massonica, Atti del Convegno di Studi del Grande Oriente d’Italia, Firenze 1-3 marzo 2002, a cura di A. Panaino, Milano 2002, 75-96. — 27, La sacralità rituale dei basileis bizantini, in Per me reges regnant. La regalità sacra nell’Europa medievale, a cura di F. C ARDINI e M. S ALTARELLI , Rimini-Siena 2002, 53-96, reprint of 23. — 28, La prossemica del potere: spazi e distanze nei cerimoniali di corte, in Settimane del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, L, Uomo e spazio nell’Alto Medioevo, II, Spoleto 2003, 589-656, Pl. I-IX. — 29, Il palazzo imperiale come luogo della epifania del potere trascendente dell’imperatore, in Istituzione Biblioteca Classense Associazione Palatina Istanbul – Yildiz Teknik Universitesi, Palatia. Palazzi imperiali tra Ravenna e Bisanzio, a cura di A. Augenti, Ferrara 2003, 6-15. — 30, Credunt aliud romana palatia caelum. Die Ideologie des Palatium in Konstantinopel dem Neuen Rom, in Palatia. Kaiserpaläste in Konstantinopel, Ravenna und Trier, Herausgegebn von M. Koenig, in Zusammenarbeit mit E. Bolognesi Recchi Franceschini und E. Riemer, Trier 2003, 27-32. — 31, Il sacro palazzo di Costantinopoli Nuova Roma, in “Quaderni di Scienza della Conservazione,” 2003, 15-35.
67
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
M.A. C ASETTI , Giustiniano e la legislazione in materia ecclesiastica (Pontif. Inst. Utriusque Iuris, Theses ad lauream, fasc. 123). Rom 1958. XV, 73 pp. S. C ASSEL , Der goldene Thron Salomo’s = Wissenschaftliche Berichte. Unter Mitwirkung von Mitgliedern der Erfurter Akademie gemeinnütziger Wissenschaften Herausgegeben von S. Cassel, Enfurt 1853, 35-133. F. C AVALLERA , La doctrine sur le prince chrétien dans les lettres pontificales du V me siècle. “Bull. Litt. Ecclés.” 38 (1937) 67-78. 119-135. 167-179. L. C ERFAUX J. T ONDRIAU , Un concurrent du christianisme: Le culte des souverains dans la civilisation gréco-romaine (Bibliotéque de Thèologie III 5). Tournai 1957. 535 pp. P. C HARANIS , Church and State in the Later Roman Empire. The Religious Policy of Anastasius the First, 491–518. Madison 1939. 4 Pl., 192 pp. — , Coronation and its Constitutional Significance in the Later Roman Empire. “Byzantion” 15 (1940/41) 49-66. M.P. C HARLESWORTH , Some Observation on Ruler-Cult, especially in Rome, “The Harvard Theological Review” 28 (1935) 5-44. — , Imperial Deportement. Two Texts and Some Questions. Journ. Rom. Stud. 37 (1947) 34-38. P. C HRESTOU , A,=;#>?!:',5;<,B,C!9!:',!D',$6,EFGH3$>&3I,“J?K9&3&L7;”,3(1971) 1-25. — , The Missionary Task of the Byzantine Emperor. “EFG;3$>3H” 3 (1971) 279-286. A. C HRISTENSEN , L’Iran sous les Sassanides (Annales du Musée Guimet. Bibliothèque d’Etudes 48), Copenhague 1936. Aikaterine C HRISTOPHILOPOULOU , M5?&NOP, Q3;N"9!F#>', 5;<, #$RS>', $&T, =FG;3$>3&T ;U$&59H$&9&'I, “V9;NL;$!7;>, W5;XKL7;', W K323” 22, 2. Athen 1956. !, 238 pp., 1 Pl. cfr. BZ 50 (1957) 467-474 (J. Karayannopulos). — , YC, =H#!>', $&T, =FG;3$>3&T, %&?>$!@L;$&', “M%>#$KLI, M%I, Z>?&#&[I, +\&?]' V;3!%>#$>L7&F,W K323P”,%!9I,=P,22 (1971/72) 201-223. — , ^,Q3$>=;#>?!7;,!D',$6,EFGH3$>&3I,“+@LL!>5$;” 2 (1970) 1-144. — , V!9<, $6, %9"=?KL;, $]', Q3;X!7_!`', $&T, =FG;3$>3&T, ;U$&59H$&9&'I, “M%>#$KLI M%!$K9<',Z>?&#&[I,+\&?]',V;3!%>#$I,W K323P”,%!9I,=, 12 (1961/1962) 458-497; 13 (1962/63) 375-399 (V9&# O5;>,5;<,X>&9 a#!>'). — , +bcde1bfe. BZ 44 (1951) 79-85. — , 1g, !D', $&:', 3;&:', J`3#$;3$>3&F%"?!`', ;U$&59;$&9>5g, #$RLL;$;P, “d??K3>5H” 15 (1957) 279-285. E.K. C HRYSOS , ^,455?K#>;#$>5h,%&?>$>5h,$&T,i&F#$>3>;3&T,5;$g,$h3,j9>3,%!9<,$g,$97; 5![H?;>;, 5;<, $h3, R, &D5&FL!3>563, #@3&X&3, kW3;?R5$;, E?;$HX`3l. Thessalonike 1969, 225 pp. P. C LASSEN , Karl der Gro e, das Papsttum und Byzanz. Die Begründung des karolingischen Kaisertums, in: Karl der Gro e. Lebenswerk und Nachleben, hrsg. Von W. Braunfels. I: Persönlichkeit und Geschichte, hrsg. Von H. Beumann. Düsseldorf 1965 (reprinted and enlarged: Düsseldorf 1968). 80 pp., 537-608.
68
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , Romanum gubernans imperium. Zur Vorgeschichte der Kaisertitulatur Karls des Gro en. “Deutsch. Arch.” 9 (1951) 103-121. D.J. C ONSTANTELOS , Byzantine Philanthropy and Social Welfare (Rutgers Byz. Series 1). New Brunswick 1968. XXVII, 356 pp. — , Philanthropia as an Imperial Virtue in the Byzantine Empire of the Tenth Century, “Anglic. Theol. Review” 44 (1962) 351-365. G. D AGRON , Empereur et pretre. Etude sur le “césaropapisme” byzantin, Paris 1996. J. D EER , Byzanz und die Herrschaftszeichen des Abendlandes, BZ 50 (1957) 405-436 (notes to Schramm, Herrschaftszeichen und Staatssymbolik). — , Das Kaiserbild im Kreuz. “Schweizer Beiträge z. Allg. Gasch.” 13 (1955) 48110. — , Der Globus des spätrömischen und des Byzantinischen Kaisers. Symbol Oder Insigne? BZ 54 (1961) 53-85. 291-318 (notes to Schramm, Sphaera – Globus – Reichsapfel). — , Der Kaiserornat Friedrichs II. (Dissertationes Bernenses II 2). Bern 1952. 88 S., 38 Taf. — , Der Ursprung der Kaiserkrone. “Schweizer Beiträge z. Allg. Geschichte” 8 (1950) 51-87. — , Die Entstehung des ungarischen Königtums (Ostmitteleuropäische Bibliothek 38). Budapest 1942. 2 all., 97 pp., 2 Pl. — , Die heilige Krone Ungarns. Denkschriften Osterr. Akad. Wiss., phil. Hist. Kl. 91. Wien 1966. 303 S., 397 Abb. Auf 139 Taf. — , Die Vorrechte des Kaisers in Rom (772–800). “Schweizer Beiträge z. Allg. Geschichte” 15 (1957) 5-63. — , Zum Patricius- Romanorum-Titel Karl des Gro en. “Arch. Hist. Pont.” 3(1965) 31-86. — , Zur Praxis der Verleihung des auswärtigen Patriziats durch den Byzantinischen Kaiser. “Arch. Hist. Pont.” 8 (1970) 7-25. C H . D IEHL , Sur la date de quelques passages du livre des Cérémonies, “Revue des Études Grecques” 16 (1903) 28-41. F. D OELGER , (Art.) Brüderlichkeit der Fürsten, in: Reallex. f. Ant. u. Christent. 2 (1954 [1953]) 641-646. — , Bulgarisches Cartum und byzantinisches Kaisertum, in: Actes IVe Congr. Intern. Èt. Byzantines Sofia I (Izvestija Bülg. Archeol. Institut 9). Sofia 1935, 57-68 (reprinted: Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt 140-158). — , Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt. Ausgewählte Vorträge und Aufsätze. Ettal 1953 (Darmstadt 1964). 382 pp. (with some enrichments: pp. 383-387 in the second edition). — , Das byzantinische Mitkaisertum in den Urkunden, in: Byzantinische Diplomatik 102-129 (= recension of E. Stein, Post-Consulat et ;U$&59;$&97;. “Annuaire Inst. Phil. Hist. Orient. et Slaves” 2 [1934] [Mélanges Bidez] 869-912, in: BZ 36 [1936] 123-145) (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, 13-48).
69
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , Der Bulgarenherrscher als geistlicher Sohn des byzantinischen Kaisers. “Izvestija na Bülgarskogo Istoricesko Druzestvo” 16-18 (1940) (Sbornik v pamet’ na... P. Nikov) 219-232 (reprinted in: Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt 192196). — , Der Kaiser- und Reichsgedanke Konstantins des Gro en in der Geschichte (Schriftenreihe des Internationalen Konstantinordens 1). Männerdorf-Zürich 1959. 16 pp. — , Die „Familie der Könige“ im Mittelalter. “Hist. Jahrb.” 60 (1940) (Festgabe für R. v. Heckel) 397-420 (reprinted in: Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt, 34-69). — , Die mittelalterliche „Familie der Fürsten und Völker“ und der Bulgarenherrscher (= Srèdnovekovnoto „semejestvo na vladetelite i narodit“ i Bulgarikijat vladetel. “Spisanie na Bulg. Akad. Na Naukite i Izkustava” 66/4 [1943] 181-222) (abridged edition of the German version in: Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt. Darmstadt 1964, 159-182). — , Kaiser und Mönch auf dem Athos, in: Le Millenaire du Mont Athos 963–1963. Ètudes et Mélanges, I. Chevetogne 1963, 145-148. — , VYmY+VfmY. 30 Aufsätze zur Geschichte, byzantinischen Reiches. Ettal 1961. XX, 447 pp., 5 Pl.
Kultur
und
Sprache
des
— , Rom in der Gedanken welt der Byzantiner. Ztschr. F. Kirchengeschichte 56 (1937) 1-42 (reprinted: Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt 70-115). — , Zur Ausführung weltlicher Musik am byzantinischen Kaiserhof, in: VYmY+VfmY 306-318 (= review of J. Handschin, Das Zeremonienwerk Kaiser Konstantins und die sangbar Dichtung. Basel 1942, in: BZ 42 [1943] 218-227. — , Das Sonnengleichnis in einer Predigt des Bischofs Zeno von Verona. Christus als wahre und ewige Sonne. “Antike u. Christent.” 6 (1940) 1-56. — , Zur antiken und frühchristlichen Auffassung der Herrschergewalt von Gottes Gnaden. “Antike u. Christent.” 3 (1932) 117-127. G. D OWNEY , Justinian and the Imperial Office (Lectures in memory of Lousie Taft Semple 2). Cincinnati 1968. 31 pp. — , The Tombs of the Byzantine Emperors at the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople. “Journ. Hell. Stud.” 79 (1959) 27-51. Fr. D VORNIK , Early Christian and Byzantine Political Philosophy, Origins and Background, I, The Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies, II, Washington 1966, 2 voll. Washington 1966. XVI, 1 Pl., pp. 1-452; X, 1 Pl., pp. 453-975. — , Emperors, Popes and Councils. “Dumb. Oaks Papers” 6 (1951) 3-23. — , The Emperor Julian’s “Reactionary” Idea on Kingship, in: Late Classical and Medieval Studies in Honour of A. M. Friend, Jr. Princeton 1955, 71-81. J. E BERSOLT , Mélanges d’histoire et d’archéologie Byzantines. I: Etudes sur la vie publique et privée de la cour byzantine. “Rev. Histoire des Religions” 76 (1917) 3105. — , Le grand palais de Constantinople et le livre des cérémonies, Paris 1920. — , Sainte-Sophie de Constantinople, Étude de topographie d’après les cérémonies, Paris 1910. 70
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , Les arts somptuaires de Byzance, Paris 1923. H. E GER , Kaiser und Kirche in der Geschichtstheologie Eusebs von Caesarea. “Ztschr. Neutest. Wiss.” 38 (1939) 97-115. G. E GERR , Römischer Kaiserkult und konstantinischer Kirchenbau. “Jahreshefte des Osterreichischen archäologischen Institutes in Wien” 43 (Hauptblatt) (1958) 120132. — , Das Labarum, die Kaiserstandarte der Spätantike, in: Sitzungsber. Osterr. Akad. Wiss., phil.-hist. Kl. 234, Nr. 1. Wien 1960. 26 pp., 4 Pl. R. E LZE , Die Herrscherlaudes im Mittelalter. “Ztschr. Savigny-Stiftung f. Rchtsgesch.,” Kann. Abtlg. 40 (1954) 201-223. W. E NSSLIN , Auctoritas und Potestas. Zur Zweigewaltenlehre des Papstes Gelasius I. “Hist. Jahrb.” 74 (1955) 661-668. — , Das Gottesgnadentum des autokratischen Kaisertum der frühbyzantinischen Zeit. “Studi Biz. e Neoell.” 5 (Atti V Congr. Internaz. Studi Biz. Roma) (1939) 154-166. — , Der Kaiser in der Spätantike. “Hist. Ztschr.” 177 (1954) 449-468. — , Die Religionspolitik des Kaisers Theodosius d. Gr., in: Sitzungsber. Bayer. Akad. Wiss., phil.-hist. Kl., Jg. 1943, H. 6. München 1943. 143 S. (partially reprinted in: Die Religionspolitik..., 54-85). — , Gottkaiser und Kaiser von Gottes Gnaden, pp. 13-48. — , Justinian I. und die Patriarchate von Rom und Konstantinopel. “Symbolae Osloenses” 35 (1959) 123-127. — , Nochmals zu der Ehrung Chlodowechs durch Kaiser Anastasius. “Hist. Jhrb.” 56 (1936) 499-507. — , Staat und Kirche von Konstantin d. Gr. bis Theodosius d. Gr. Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem „Cäsaropapismus“, in: V!%9;NLR3;, no, =FG;3$>3&T, #F3!X97&F n!##;?&375K', kd??K3>5;, %;9I 9). Athen 1956, 404-415 (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, 193-205). — , The Government and Administration of the Byzantine Empire. II: Government, Church and Civilisation, ed. By J.M. Hussey – D.M. Nicol – G. Cowan. Cambridge 1967, 1-54. — , Zur Frage nach der ersten Kaiserkrönung durch den Patriarchen und zur Bedeutung dieses Aktes im Wahlzeremoniell. BZ 42 (1943) 101-115. 369-372 (reprinted Würzburg 1947). — , Zur Torqueskrönung und Schilderhebung bei der Kaiserwahl. “Klio” 35 (1942) 268-298. E. E WIG , Das Bild Constantins des Gro en in den ersten Jahrhunderten des abendländischen Mittelalters. “Hist. Jahrb.” 75 (1956) 1-46 (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, 133-192). — , Zum christlichen Königsgedanken im Frühmittelalter, in: Das Königtum. Seine geistigen und Rechtlichen Grundlagen. Mainauvorträge 1954 (Vorträge und Forschungen 3). Darmstadt (reprint) 1965, 7-73. R. F ARINA , M%7#5&%&', $23, 45$6' (Eusebio, De Vita Const. IV 24). “Salesianum” 29 (1967) 409-413. 71
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , L’impero e l’imperatore cristiano in Eusebio di Cesarea. La prima teologia politica del cristianesimo (Bibl. Theol. Salesiana, ser. I [Fontes], 2). Zürich 1966. 381 pp. E. F ENSTER , Laudes Constantinopolitanae (Misc. Byz. Monac. 9) München 1968. 379 pp. J. F ERLUGA , La ligesse dans l’empire byzantin. ZRVI 7 (1961) 97-123. — , Lista adresa za strane vladare iz knjige o cerimonijama (L’elenco dei regnanti stranieri nel Libro delle cerimonie) (with an Italian summary). ZRVI 12 (1970) 157178. A. F OURLAS , Der Ring in der Antike und im Christentum. Der Ring als Herrschaftssymbol und Würdezeichen (Forschungen zur Volkskunde 45). Münster 1971. 148 pp., 38 Pl. J. G AGE ’, De Rome à Byzance. Le cérémonial monarchique, les insignes et le costume des empereurs romains. “Byzantion” 11 (1936) 325-340 (review of Alföldi, Monarchisches Zeremoniell und Insignien und Tracht). G.P. G ALAVARIS , The Symbolism of the Imperial Costume as Displayed on Byzantine Coins. “Americ. Numism. Soc. Museum Notes” 8 (1958) 99-117. A. G ASQUET , De l’autorité impériale en materie religeuse à Byzance, Paris 1879. — , L’empire byzantin et la monarchie franque, Paris 1888. — , L’empire d’orient et l’empire d’occident. De l’emploi du mot dans les actes de la cancellerie byzantine, “Revue historique” 26 (1884) 281-302. J. G AUDEMET , Le régime impérial. “Studia Doc. Hist. Iuris” 26 (1960) 282-322. — , Société religieuse et monde laïc au Bas Empire. “Iura” 10 (1959) 86-102. D.J. G EANAKOPLOS , Church and State in the Byzantine Empire: A Reconsideration of the Problem of Caesaropapism. “Church History” 24 (1965) 381-403. — , Church Building and Caesaropapism. “Greek, Roman and Byz. Studies” 7 (1966) 167-186. R.E. G IESEY , Le roi ne meurt jamais. Les obsèques royales dans la France de la Renaissance, Préface de F. Furet, Paris 1987. M. G IGANTE , Sulla concezione bizantina dell’imperatore nel VII secolo, in: Synteleia Vincenzo Arangio-Ruiz, II. Napoli 1964, 546-551. — , e"L&',=;#>?!@', Napoli 1956, rist. 1979, pp. 311. V. G LOETZNER , Das Moskauer Cartum und die byzantinische Kaiseridee. “Saeculum” 21 (1970) 393-418. I. G OSEV , Zur Frage der Krönungzeremonien und der zeremoniellen Gewandung der byzantinischen und der bulgarischen Herrscher im Mittelalter. “ByzantinoBulgarica” 2 (1965) 145-168. A. G RABAR , God and the “Family of Princes” Presided over by the Byzantine Emperor. “Harvard Slavic Studies” 2 (1954) (Essays … dedicated to F. Dvornik) 117-123.
72
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , L’archéologie des insignes médiévaux du pouvoir. “Journal des Savants” (1956) 5-19, 77-92 ; 1957, 25-31 (review of Schramm, Herrschaftszeichen und Staatssymbolik). — , L’empereur dans l’art byzantin. Recherches sur l’art officiel de l’empire d’Orient (Publ. Fac. Lettre univ. Strasbourg 75). Paris 1936 (Nachdruck London 1971). VII, 296 pp., 40 tavv. – Cf. “Gnomon” 14 (1938) 202-210 (F. Dölger). — , Pseudo-Codinos et les cérémonies de la cour byzantine au XIVe siècle, in: Art et société à Byzance sous les Paléologues. Actes du colloque… à Venise en septembre 1968 (Bibl. Inst. Hell. d’Ètudes Byz. et Post-Byz. de Venise 4). Venise 1971, 193221. — , Un médaillon en or provenant de Mersine en Cilicie. “Dumb. Oaks Papers” 6 (1951) 27-49. — , Zur Geschichte von Sphaira, Globus und Reichsapfel. “Hist. Ztschr.” 191 (1960) 336-348 (notes to Schramm, Sphaera – Globus – Reichsapfel). I. G RADEL , Emperor Worship and Roman Religion, Oxford 2002. N. G RASS , Königskirche und Staatssymbolik. Begegnungen zwischen griechischem Osten und lateinischem Westen im Bereich von Staatsrepräsentation und Sakralkultur, in: Gedächtnisschrift Hans Peters. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1967, 66-96. H. G REGOIRE , *pN;', =;#>?!q', in: Michel III et Basile le Macédonien dans les inscriptions d’Ancyre. “Byzantion” 5 (1929/30) 344-346. Ph. G RIERSON , Tombs and Obits of the Byzantine Emperors (337–1042). With an additional note by C. Mango and I. Sevcenko. “Dumb. Oaks Papers” 16 (1962) 1-63. N. G RIMAL , Les termes de la propagande royale égyptienne. De la XIXe dynastie à la conquete d’Alexandre, Paris 1986. R. G UILLAND , Autour du Livre des Cérémonies de Constantin VII Porphyrogénète. “Rev. Èt. Gr.” 59/60 (1946/47) 251-259 (reprinted under the title: La cérémonie de la %9@3K#>', in: Recherches sur les institutions Byzantines I 144-150). — , fC,=FG;3$>3&<,;U$&59H$&9!',5;<,$6, R?NK$9&3,$&T,L&3;#$K97&F. 21 (1951) 215234 (reprinted in French with the title Les empereurs de Byzance et l’attrait du monastère, in: Ètudes Byzantines. Paris 1959, 33-51). — , La destinée des empereurs de Byzance. “r%!$K9<', r$;>9!7;', EFG;3$>323 +%&FX23” 24 (1954) 37-66 (reprinted in: Ètudes Byzantines. Paris 1959, 1-32). — , La noblesse de race à Byzance. “Byzantinoslavica” 9 (1947/48) 307-314 (reprinted in: Recherches sur les institutions byzantines I 15-22). — , Le droit divin à Byzance. “Eos” 42 (1947) 142-168. — , Recherches sur les institutions byzantines. Avec trois index par Manfred Nauenburg. 2 voll. (Berl. Byz. Arb. 35). Berlin-Amsterdam 1967. XVI. 607 pp. 2 vol. 397 pp. Rh. H AACKE , Rom und die Cäsaren. Geschichte des Cäsaropapismus. Düsseldorf 1947. 124 pp. G.H. H ALSBERGHE , The Cult of Sol Invictus (Ét. prelim. Religions orient. Dans l’Empire rom. 23). Leiden 1972. XI, 175 pp., 1 Pl.
73
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
J. H ANDSCHIN , Das Zeremonienwerk Kaiser Konstantins und die sangbare Dichtung (Rektoratsprogramm Univ. Basel 1940 u. 1941). Basel 1942. 112 pp. – cfr. BZ 42. (1943) 218-227. F. H EIM , Virtus. Idéologie politique et croyances religieuses au IVe siècle, Berne et alias 1991. A. H EISENBERG , Staat und Gesellschaft des byzantinischen Reiches, in: Staat und Gesellschaft der Griechen und Römer bis zum Ausgang des Mittelalters (hrsg. von U.v. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, J. Kromayer und A. Heisenberg) = Die Kultur der Gegenwart II,IV, 1. Leipzig-Berlin 1923, 364-364. T. H ENTSCH , L’Orient imaginaire. La vision politique occidentale de l’Est méditerranéen, Paris 1988. I. H ERKLOTZ , Gli eredi di Costantino. Il papato, il Laterano e la propaganda visiva nel XII secolo, trad. it. di N. Giovè Marchioli, Roma 2000. A. H ERRMANN , (Art.) Edelsteine, in: Reallex. f. Ant. u. Christent. 4 (1959 [1958]) 505552. O. H ILTBRUNNER , Die Heiligkeit des Kaisers (Zur Geschichte des Begriffes Sacer). “Frühmittelaltrl. Studien” 2 (1986) 1-30. H. H UNGER , Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, Herausgegeben von H.H., Darmstadt 1975. — , Die Schönheitskonkurrenz in „Belthandros und Chrysantza“ und die Brautschau am Byzantinischen Kaiserhof. “Byzantion” 35 (1965) 150-158. — , Kaiser Justinian I. (527-565). “Anz. Österr. Akad. Wiss., Phil.-hist. Kl.” 102 (1965) 339-356 (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, 333-352). — , Prooimion. Elemente der byzantinischen Kaiseridee in den Arengen der Urkunden (Wiener Byz. Studien 1). Wien 1964. 260 pp., 1 Pl. — , Reich der Neuen Mitte. Der christliche Geist der byzantinischen Kultur. GrazWien-Köln 1965. 472 pp., 29 Pl. — , Zur Humanität Kaiser Andronikos’ II. ZRVI 8/1 (1963) (Mélanges G. Ostrogorsky I) 149-152. H.U. I NSTINSKY , Bischofsstuhl und Kaiserthron. München 1955. 124 pp. — , Offene Fragen zum Bischofsstuhl und Kaiserthron. “Röm. Quartalschrift” 66 (1971) 79-87. N. I ORGA , Rélations entre l’Orient et l’Occident, in Id., Ètudes Byzantines, I, Bucarest 1939, pp. 165-298. R. J ANIN , L’empereur dans l’église byzantine. “Nouv. Rev. Théol.” 77 (1955) 49-60. — , Les processions religieuses à Byzance. “Rev. Ét. Byz.” 24 (1966) 69-88. — , Rôle des commissaries impériaux byzantins dans les conciles. “Rev. Ét. Byz.” 18 (1960) 97-108. E. J ERG , Die “sustentatio” in der römischen Liturgie vor dem Hintergrund des Kaiserlichen Hofzeremoniells. “Ztschr. Kath. Theol.” 80 (1958) 316-324. E. J UNGER C. S CHMITT , Il nodo di Gordio. Dialogo su Oriente e Occidente nella storia del mondo, con introduzione di C. Galli, Bologna 1987. 74
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
J. K ABIERSCH , Untersuchungen zum Begriff der Philanthropia bei dem Kaiser Julian (Klassisch-philolog. Studien 21). Wiesbaden 1960. X, 96 pp. E.H. K ANTOROWICZ , Constantinus Strator. Marginalien zum Constitutum Constantini, in: Mullus. Festschrift Th. Klauser (Jahrb. Ant. u. Christent., Erg.-Bd. 1). Münster 1964, 181-189. — , Kaiser Friedrich II. und das Königsbild des Hellenismus, in: Varia Variorum. Festgabe f. K. Reinhardt. Münster-Köln 1952, 169-193. — , Laudes Regiae. A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Medieval Ruler Worship. With a Study of the Music of the Laudes and Musical Trancsriptions by M.F. Bukofzer. Berkeley-Los Angeles 1958. XXI, 292 pp., 15 Pl. — , Oriens Augusti – Lever du roi. “Dumb. Oaks Paper” 17 (1963), pp. 117-177 (partially reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, pp. 258-280). — , The King’s two Bodies. A Study in Medieval Political Theology, Princeton 1957, reprinted 1981. J. K ARAYANNOPOULOS , Der frühbyzantinische Kaiser. BZ 49 (1956) 369-284 (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, 235-258). — , Konstantin der Gro e und der Kaiserkult. “Historia” 5 (1956) 341-357 (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, 109-132). F. K ERN , Der Rex et Sacerdos in bildlicher Darstellung, in: Forschungen und Versuche zur Geschichte des Mittelalters und der Neuzeit. Festschrift, D. Schäfer zum 70. Geburtstag dargebracht. Jena 1915, 1-5. — , Gottesgnadentum und Widerstandsrecht im früheren Mittelalter (Mittelalterliche Studien I/2). Leipzig 1914. XXXII, 444 pp. Th. K LAUSER , (Art.) Akklamation, in: Reallex. f. Ant. u. Christen. 1 (1950 [1942]) 216232. — , Aurum coronarium. “Mittlg. Deutsch. Archäol. Inst., Röm. Abtlg.” 59 (1944/48) 129-153. L. K NABEN , Die gelasianische Zweigewaltentheorie bis zum Ende des Investiturstreits (Historische Studien 292). Berlin 1936, 174 pp. L. K OCH , Christusbild – Kaiserbild. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Lösung der Frage nach dem Anteil der byzantinischen Kaiser an griechischen Bilderstreit. “Bened. Monatsschr.” 21 (1939) 85-105. B. K OETTING , (Art.) Euergetes, in: Reallex f. Ant. u. Christent. 6 (1966 [1965]) 848860. E. K ORNEMANN , Die römische Kaiserzeit (= J. Vogt u. E. Kornemann, Röm. Geschichte, Einleitung in die Altertumswissenschaft hrgb. v. A. Gercke u. E. Norden, 3, Aufl., Bd. III. H.2), Leipzig und Berlin 1933. I. K OTSONES , ^, R#>',$&T,;U$&59H$&9&',$&T,EFG;3$7&F,43,$s, !7t,?;$9!7tI,“M%>#$KLI +\&?]', e&LI, 5;<, fD5&3&LI, M%>#$OL`3, V;3!%>#$I, n!##;?&375K'” 8 (1960/63) (u3KL"#F3&3,VI,E>G&F57X&F) 109-120. R. K RAUTHEIMER , Tre capitali cristiane. Topografia e politica, Torino 1987 (ed. or. 1983).
75
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
O. K RESTEN , Zur sogenannten Pertinenzzeile der byzantinischen Kaiserurkunde. “EFG;3$>3H” 3 (1971) 55-68. Ph. K OUKOULES , EFG;3$>323, =7&', 5;<, %&?>$>#L"'. I. Athen 1984. 231 pp., 4 Pl. + 290 pp., 2 Pl.; II. Athen 1984. 283 pp., 237 pp., 5 Pl.; III. Athen 1949. 403 pp., 8 Pl.; IV. Athen 1951. 499 pp., 19 Pl.; V. Athen 1952. 467 pp., 12 Pl.; V, V;9H9$KL;. Athen 1952. 118 pp.; VI. Athen 1955. 575 pp., 2 Pl. (Collection de l’Institut Franç. 10.11.12.13.43.73.76.90). — , 1g,5;$g,$h3,$;[h3,$23,=FG;3$>323,=;#>?R`3. 15 (1983) 52-78. St. K YRIAKIDES , 8#$&9>5g, #KL!>aL;$;I, YP, J`3#$;3$73&', B, uRN;', 5;<, v, ;U$&w 59;$&9>5h,?;$9!7;I,“r??K3>5H” 17 (1960) 219-249. D. L ASSANDRO , Sacratissimus Imperator. L’immagine del princeps nell’oratoria tardoantica, Bari 2000. V. L AURENT , Les droits de l’empereur en matière ecclésiastique. L’accord de 13801382. “Rev. Ét. Byz.” 13 (1955) 5-20. — , Le serment de l’empereur Andronic II Paléologue au patriarche Athanase I, lors de sa seconde accession au thrône œcuménique (sept. 1303). “Rev. Ét. Byz.” 23 (1965) 124-139. — , L’ unité du monde vue de Byzance et son expression dans les concilies genéraux des neuf premiers siècles. “Divinitas” 2 (1961) 252-269. — , Notes de titulature byzantine. “Échos d’Or.” 38 (1939) 355-370. — , Une lettre dogmatique de l’empereur Isaac l’Ange au primat de Hongrie. “Échos d’Or.” 39 (1940) 59-77. H. L ECLERCQ , Constantin Porphyrogénète et le livre des cérémonies de la cour de Byzance = F. Cabriol et H. Leclercq, Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de la liturgie, III, 2 col. 2695-2713. E. L EPORE , Il princeps ciceroniano e gli ideali politici della tarda Repubblica, Bologna 1999. A. L IPINSKY , L’evoluzione del diadema imperiale da Augusto a Maurizio Tiberio, in: Atti Congr. Intern. di Num., II. Roma 1965, 457-463. E. L OHMEYER , Christuskult und Kaiserkult (Sammlungen gemeinverständl. Vorträge u. Schriften aus d. Gebiete d. Theologie und Religionswiss.). Tübingen 1919. 58 pp. H.P. L’O RANGE , Expressions of Cosmic Kingship in the Ancient World, in: Studies in the History of Religions. The Sacral Kingship (Suppl. to Numen, 4). Leiden 1958, 481-492. — , Sol invictus inperator. “Symbolae Osloenses” 14 (1935) 86-114. — , Studies on the Iconography of Cosmic King in the Ancient World (Instit. Sammenlignende Kulturforskning, Ser. A: Forelesninger 23). Oslo 1953. 205 S., 140 Abb. P. M AAS , Metrische Akklamationen der Byzantiner. BZ 21 (1912) 28-51. Sabine M ACCORMACK , Change and Continuity in Late Antiquity. The Ceremony of Adventus. “Historia” 21 (1972) 721-752.
76
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
S.G. M AC C ORMACK , Art and Ceremony in late Antiquity, Berkeley-Los AngelesLondon, 1981, H.J. M AGOULIAS , Byzantine Christianity: Emperor, Church and the West. New York 1970. 196 pp. J. de M ALAFOSSE , La monocratie byzantine, in: La monocratie, II. (Recueils de la Société Jean Bodin 21). Brüssel 1969, 31-55. G.A. M ANSUELLI , I mosaici di Giustiniano e Teodora e il problema della rappresentazione iconografica ufficiale, in: Corsi di Cultura sull’Arte Ravennate e Bizantina, Ravenna, 8-21 marzo 1970. Ravenna 1970. 277-284. St. M ASLEV , Die staatsrechtliche Stellung der Byzantinischen Kaiserinnen. “Byzantinoslavica” 27 (1966) 308-343. J. M AURICE , Les pharaons romains. “Byzantion” 12 (1937) 71-103. M. M C C ORMICK , Eternal Victory. Triumphal Rulership in late Antiquity, Byzantium and the early Medieval West, Cambridge Paris, 1986 (repr. 1990); Italian translation by G. Iamartino, Vittoria eterna. Sovranità trionfale nella tarda Antichità a Bisanzio e nell’Occidente Altomedievale, Milano 1993 (from the English edition of 1986). McCormick does not make any use of the Italian bibliography, which he does not quote at all. H. M ELAERTS , Le culte du souverain dans l’Egypte ptolemaique au III e siècle avant notre ére, in: Actes du Colloque international, Bruxelles 1995, Bruxelles 1996. J. M EYENDORFF , Justinian, the Empire and the Church. “Dumb. Oaks Papers” 22 (1968) 43-60. G. M ICHAELIDES -N OUAROS , Les idées philosophiques de Léon le Sage sur les limites du pouvoir législatif et son attitude envers les coutumes. “M%>#$KLI, M%!$I, +\&?]' (&LI,5;<,)D5&3&LI,M%>#$OL`3,V;3!%>#$I,n!##;?&375K'” 8 (1960/63) (*3KL"#F3&3 VI,x>G&F\7X&F) 27-54. H. M ICHAELIS , Der Thronbaldachin (Zum Verständnis eines Herrscher-symbols), in: Aus der byzantinistischen Arbeit der DDR, vol.. II, hrsg. Von J. Irmscher (Berl. Byz. Arb. 6). Berlin 1957, 110-119. A. M ICHEL , Die Kaisermacht in der Ostkirche (843–1204). “Ostkirchl. Studien” 2 (1953) 1-35. 89-109; 3 (1954) 1-28. 133-163; 4 (1955) 1-42. 221-260; 5 (1956) 1-32 (gathered in: Darmstadt 1959, 6 Pl., 227 pp.) (partially reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, 206-234). — , Papstwahl und Krönungsrecht oder das Papstwahlkonkordat von 1059. München 1936. XVI, 228 pp. D.A. M ILLER , Royauté et ambiguité sexuelle. Symbolique de la monarchie à Byzance. “Annales” 26 (1971) 639-652. — , The Emperor and the Ritual: Magic and Harmony, in “Byzantine Studies/Ètudes Byzantines,” 6, 1-2(1979). T.S. M ILLER , The Birth of the Hospital in the Byzantine Empire, Baltimore and London 1985. M. M ITARD , Le pouvoir impérial au temps de Léon le Sage, in: Mélanges Ch. Diehl I. Paris 1930, 217-223. 77
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
Anna M ORISI , Ricerche sull’ideologia imperiale a Bisanzio. “Acme” 16 (1963) 119-181. S. M UELLER -C HRISTENSEN , Das Günthertuch im Bamberger Domschatz, Bamberg 1984. D. N ASTASE , L’aigle bicéphale dissimulée dans les armoiries des pays roumains. Vers une crypto-héraldique, in: Da Roma alla Terza Roma, Documenti e Studi, collana diretta da P. Catalano e P. Siniscalco. I, Roma Costantinopoli Mosca, Napoli 1983 pp. 357 ss. H. N EUBAUER , Car und Selbstherrscher. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Autokratie in Ru land (Veröffentl. Osteuropa-Inst. München 22). Wiesbaden 1964. 236 pp. D.M. N ICOL , Byzantine Political Thought, in The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought c. 350 – c. 1450, Edited by J.H. Burns, Cambridge et alias, 1988, 5182. D. O BOLENSKY , Il Commonwealth bizantino. L’Europa orientale dal 500 al 1453, tr. it. Bari 1974. W. O HNSORGE , W.: Abendland und Byzanz. Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Geschichte der byzantinisch-abendländischen Beziehungen und des Kaisertums. Weimar 1958 (reprinted Homburg vor der Höhe [= Darmstadt] 1963). VIII, 573 pp., 4 Pl. – Cf. BZ 52 (1959) 387-391 (H.-G. Beck). — , (Art.) Abendland und Byzanz. I. Das abendländische Kaisertum, in: Reallex. d. Byzantinistik, Reihe A, 1 (Heft 3) (1969) 126-169. — , Byzanz und das Abendland im 9. und 10. Jahrhundert. Zur Entwicklung des Kaiserbegriffes und der Staatsideologie. “Saeculum” 5 (1954) 194-220 (reprinted in: Abendland und Byzanz, 1-49). — , Das Kaisertum der Eirene und die Kaiserkrönung Karls des Gro en. “Saeculum” 14 (1963) 221-247 (reprinted in: Konstantinopel und der Okzident, 49-92) (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, 281-332). — , Das Mitkaisertum in der abendländischen Geschichte des früheren Mittelalters. “Ztschr. Savigny-Stiftung f. Rechtsgesch., Germ. Abtlg.” 67 (1950) 309-335 (reprinted: Abendland und Byzanz 261-287). — , Das Zweikaiserproblem im früheren Mittelalter. Die Bedeutung des byzantinischen Reiches für die Entwicklung der Staatsidee in Europa. Hildesheim 1947. 143 pp. — , Der Patricius-Titel Karls des Gro en. BZ 53 (1960) 300-321 (reprinted: Konstantinopel und der Okzident 1-28). — , Die Anerkennung des Kaisertums Ottos I. durch Byzanz. BZ 54 (1961) 28-52 (reprinted: Konstantinopel und der Okzident, 176-207). — , Die Entwicklung der Kaiseridee im 9. Jahrhundert und Süditalien, in: W. Ohnsorge, Abendland und Byzanz 184-226 (reprinted in Italian with the title L’idea d’impero nel secolo nono e l’Italia meridionale, in: Atti III Congr. Internaz. di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo. Spoleto 1959, 255-272). — , Die Idee der Mitregentschaft bei den Sachsenherrschern. “Mittlg. Osterr. Staatsarchiv” 25 (1972) 539-548.
78
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , Konstantinopel im politischen Denken der Ottonenzeit, in: Polychronion, Festschrift Franz Dölger zum 75. Gebrtstag, hrsg. Von P. Wirth. Heidelberg 1966. VIII, 309 pp., 5 Pl. — , Orthodoxus Imperator. Vom religiösen Motiv für das Kaisertum Karls des Gro en. “Jahrb. Gesellsch. Niedersächs. Kirchengesch.” 48 (1950) 17-28 (reprinted in: Abendland und Byzanz, 64-78). — , Ottos III. Legation an Basileios II. vom Jahre 998. Ein Beitrag zur Frage des byzantinischen Einflusses auf die Metallsiegelpraxis des Westens, in: W. Ohnsorge, Abendland und Byzanz, 288-299. — , Renovatio regni Francorum, in: Festschrift z. 200-Jahrfeier d. Haus-, Hof- u. Staatsarchivs Wien, Bd. II. Wien 1952, 303-313 (reprinted in: Abendland und Byzanz, 111-130). B. O PFERMANN , Die liturgischen Herrscherakklamationen im Sacrum Imperium des Mittelalters. Weimar 1953. 226 pp. with 2 Pl. A.M. O RSELLI , La donna e il sole in Ap xii,1 tra esegesi e iconologia, Bologna 1992, Letture CISEC, I, 1992, n. 3. — , Santità militare e culto dei santi militari nell’impero dei romani (secoli VI-X), Bologna 1993. — , Santi e città. Santi e demoni urbani fra tardo-antico e alto medioevo, in XXXVI Settimana di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, Santi e demoni nell’alto Medioevo Occidentale (secoli V-XI), Spoleto 1989, 794-795, 822-823. G. O STROGORSKY , Autokrator Johannes II. und Basileus Alexios. “Annales Inst. Kondakov” 10 (1938) 179-183. — , Avtokrator i samdrzac. “Glas Srpske Kral. Akademija” 164 (1935) 95-187. – Cf. BZ 35 (1935) 406-409 (B. Granic) and “Byzantion” 10 (1935) 763-775 (H. Grégoire). — , Bemerkungen zum byzantinischen Staatsrecht der Komnenenzeit. “SüdostForschungen” 8 (1943) 261-270. — , Das Mitkaisertum im mittelalterlichen Byzanz, in: E. Kornemann, Doppelprinzipat und Reichsteilung im Imperium Romanum. Leipzig-Berlin 1930, 166-178. — , Die byzantinische Staatenhierarchie. “Seminarium Kondakovianum” 8 (1936) 41-61. — , Die Krönung Symeons von Bulgarien durch den Patriarchen Nikolaos Mystikos, in: Actes du IV Congrès International des Ètudes Byzantines, Sofia 1934. “Bulletin de l’Institut Archéologique Bulgare” 9 (1935) 275-286. — , Observations on the Aristocracy in Byzantium. “Dumb. Oaks Papers” 25 (1971) 1-32. — , Otnosenie cerkvi I gosudarstva v Vizantii (The rapports between Church and State in Byzantium, with German summary). “Seminarium Kondakovianum” 4 (1931) 121-134. — , recension of O. Treitiger, Die oströmische Kaiser- und Reichsidee. BZ 41 (1941) 211-223.
79
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , The Byzantine Emperor and the Hierarchical World Order. “Slav. and East Eur. Review” 35 (1956) 1-14. — , Urum – Despotes. Die Anfänge der Despoteswürde in Byzanz. BZ 44 (1951)448460. — , Zum Stratordienst in der byzantinisch-slawischen Welt. “Seminarium Kondakovianum” 7 (1935) 187-204. — , Zur Kaisersalbung und Schilderhebung im spätbyzantinischen Krönungszeremoniell. “Historia” 4 (1955) (Festschrift W. Ensslin) 246-256 (reprinted in: Hunger, Das byzantinische Herrscherbild, pp. 94-108). G. O STROGORSKY – E. S TEIN , Die Krönungsurkunden des Zeremonienbuches. Chronologische und verfassungsgeschichtlische Bemerkungen. “Byzantion” 7 (1932) 185-233. – Cf. BZ 36 (1936) 145-157 (F. Dölger). J.-B. P APAPDOPOULOS , Le mitatorion des églises byzantines, in: Mémorial L. Petit (Archivies Or. Chrét. 1) Bukarest 1948, 366-372. D.E.J. P ERL , Symbol, Sacrament and Hierarchy in Saint Dionysios the Areopagite, in “The Greek Orthodox Theological Review,” 39 (1994) 348-349. A. P ERTUSI , Il pensiero politico bizantino, a cura di A. Carile, Bologna 1990 (the book is dated 1968-1978). — , Bisanzio e le insegne regali dei Dogi di Venezia. “Riv. Stud. Biz. e Neoell.” N. S. 2-3 (1965/66) 277-284. — , I principi fondamentali della concezione del potere a Bisanzio. Per un commento al dialogo „Sulla scienza politica“ attribuito a Pietro Patrizio (secolo VI). “Bullet. Istit. Stor. Ital. per il Medioevo e Arch. Muratoriano” 80 (1968) 1-23. — , Quaedam regalia insignia. Ricerche sulle insegne del potere ducale a Venezia durante il Medioevo. “Studi Veneziani” 7 (1965) 3-123. — , Insegne del potere sovrano e delegato a Bisanzio e nei paesi di influenza bizantina, in Simboli e simbologia nell’Alto Medioevo, 3-9 aprile 1975, XXIII Settimana di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, II, Spoleto 1976, pp. 481568. E. P ETERSON , Christus als imperator. “Cattolica. Vierteljahrsschr. F. Kontroverstheol.” 5 (1936) 64-72. — , Der Monotheismus als politisches Problem. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der politischen Theologie im Imperium Romanum. Lepizig 1935. 158 pp. — , Die Einholung des Kyrios. “Ztschr. f. system. Theol.” 7 (1929) 682-702. — , db+, ndf+. Epigraphische, Formgeschichtliche und religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten u. Neuen Testaments, N. F. 24). Göttingen 1926. VIII, 346 pp., Pl. — , Das Buch von den Engeln, Stellung und Bedeutung der heiligen Engel im Kultus, Leipzig 1935. P. P ICCININI , Costantino toi theoi philos. La lettura eusebiana della monarchia divina, Bologna 1989. — , Costantino servo di Dio, in “Rivista di Studi Bizantini e Slavi,” 6 (1989), pp. 1 ss. 80
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , La regalità sacra da Bisanzio all’Occidente ostrogoto, Bologna 1991. G. P ODSKALSKY , Byzantinische Reichseschatologie. Die Periodisierung der Weltgeschichte in der vier Großreichen (Daniel 2 und 7) und dem tausendjährigen Friendensreiche (Apok. 20) (München Universitätsschriften, Reihe Phil. Fak. 9). München 1972. X pp., 1 Pl., 114 pp. Colloque du Départment d’Etudes Médiévales de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne (Paris IV), Jerusalem, Rome, Constantinople, L’image et le mythe de la ville au Moyen Age, Textes réunis par D. Poirion, Paris 1986. G. R AVEGNANI , La corte di Bisanzio, Ravenna 1984, pp. 74. J.J. R EISKE , (ed), Costantini Porphyrogeniti imperatoris De cerimoniis aulae byzantinae libri duo. Bd. I. Bonn 1829. LXII, 807 S. Bd. II: Commentarii. Boon 1830. [IV] 940 pp. G. R OSCH , y3&L;, =;#>?!7;'. Studien zum offiziellen Gebrauch der Kaisertitel in Spätantiker und Frühbyzantinischer Zeit, Wien 1978. K. R OSEN , Il pensiero politico dell’antichità, trad. it. di F. Ferraresi, Bologna 1999, ed. or. 1986, 1997. St. R UNCIMAN , La teocrazia bizantina, tr. it., introduzione di V. Peri, Firenze 1988, first ed. 1977, pp. 142. J.-M. S ANSTERRE , Eusébe de Cèsarée et la naissance de la théorie «césaro-papiste». “Byzantion” 42 (1972) 131-195, 532-594. J. S CHARF , Der Kaiser in Proskynese. Bemerkungen zur Deutung des Kaisermosaiks im Narthex der Hagia Sophia von Konstantinopel, in: Festschrift P.E. Schramm zu seinem siebzigsten Geburtstag, Bd. I. Wiesbaden 1964, 27-35. — , Jus divinum. Aspekte und Perspektiven einer byzantinischen Zwei-gewaltentheorie, in: Polychronion, Festschrift Franz Dölger zum 75. Geburtstag, hrsg. Von P. Wirth. Heidelberg 1966, 462-479. — , Photios und die Epanagoge. BZ 49 (1956) 385-400. A. S CHMEMANN , Byzantine Theocracy and the Orthodox Church. “St. Vald. Sem. Quart.” 1 (1953) 5-22. A.M. S CHNEIDER , Das byzantinische Zeremoniell und der Alte Orient. “Jahrb. f. Kleinasiant. Forschung” 2 (1952) 154-163. P.E. S CHRAMM , Das Herrscherbild in der Kunst des früher Mittelalters, in: Vorträge der Bibliothek Warburg, hrsg. Von F. Saxl. II: Vorträge 1922-1923; 1. Teil. LeipzigBerlin 1924, 145-224. — , Die Anerkennungn Karls des Großen als Kaiser. Ein Kapitel aus der Geschichte der mittelalterlichen „Staatssymbolik“. “Hist. Ztschr.” 172/73 (1951) 449-515. — , (and others): Herrschaftszeichen und Staatssymbolik. Beiträge zu ihrer Geschichte von dritten bis zum sechzehnten Jahrhundert. I. Stuttgard 1954. XXIV, 376 pp., 5 pictures, 40 maps. II. Stuttgart 1955. XVI pp., pp. 377-688, 15 pictures, 40 maps III. Stuttgart 1956. XXIV pp., pp. 689-1165, 8 pictures i, 48 maps (Schriften der Monumenta Germanie Historica 13/I-III). – cfr. BZ 50 (1957) 405-436 (J. Déer). — , Kaiser, Rom und Renovatio. Studien und Texte zur Geschichte des römischen Erneuerungsgedankens von Ende des karolingischen Reiches bis zum Investiturstreit 81
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
(Studien Bibl. Warburg 17). 2 voll. Leipzig-Belin 1929. I: Studien. XIV, 305 pp. II: Exkurse und Texte. VI. 185 pp. (2. ed. with the two parts united: Darmstadt 1957). — , „Mitherrschaft im Himmel“: Ein Topos des Herrscherkults in christlicher Einkleidung, in: Polychronion, Festschrift Franz Dölger zum 75. Geburtstag, hrsg. Von P. Wirth. Heidelberg 1966, 480-485. — , Sphaera – Globus – Reichsapfel. Wanderung und Wandlung eines Herrschaftszeichens von Caesar bis Elisabeth II. Ein Beitrag zum „Nachleben“ der Antike. Stuttgart 1958. XI, 219 pp., 6 Pl., 160 Pl. in 84 pp. – cfr. BZ 54 (1961) 53-85, 291318 (J. Déer). P. S CHREINER , Zur Bezeichnung „Megas“ und „Megas Basileus“ in der byzantinischen Kaisertitulatur. “EFG;3$>3H” 3 (1971) 175-192. D. S CHUBERTH , Kaiserliche Liturgie. Die Einbeziehung von Musikinstrumenten, insbesondere der Orgel, in der frühmittelalterlichen Gottesdienst (Veröff Evang. Gesellschaft f. Liturgieforschung 17). Göttingen 1968. 155 pp., 4 Pl. K. Fürst von S CHWARZENBERG , Adler und Drach. Der Weltherrschaftsgedanke. WienMünchen 1958. 392 pp., 49 pictures. I. S EVCHENKO , A neglected Byzantine Source of Muscovite Political Ideology. “Harvard Slavic Studies” 2 (1954) (Essays ... dedicated to F. Dvornik) 141-179. W. S ICKEL , Das byzantinische Krönungsrecht bis zum 10. Jahrhundert. BZ 7 (1898) 511-557. B. S INOGOWITZ Die Begriffe Reich, Macht und Herrschaft im byzantinischen Kulturbereich. “Saeculum” 4 (1898) 450-455. A.V. S OLOVIEV , „Reges“ et „Regnum Russiae“ au moyen âge. “Byzantion” 36 (1966) 144-173. B. S PICQ , La philanthropie hellénistique, vertu divine et royale. “Studia Teologica” 12 (1958) 169-191. E. S TEIN , Post-consulat et ;U$&59;$&97;. “Annuaire Inst. Phil. Hist. Orient. et Slaves” 2 (1934) (Mélanges Bidez) 869-912. – Cf. BZ 36 (1936) 123-145. — , Zum mitteralterlischen Titel „Kaiser der Rhomäer“. “Forschungen und Fortschritte” 6 (1930) 182-183. — , Geschichte des spätrömischen Reiches, 1., Vom römischen zum byzantinischen Staat, Wien 1928. — , Untersuchungen zur spätbyzantinischen Verfassungs und Wirtschaftsgeschichte = “Mitteilungen zur osmanischen Geschichte” II (1923-1925), Hannover 1925, 1-62. A. S TEINWENTER , efuf+, du.z{f+. Zur Geschichte einer politischen Theorie. “Anzeiger Akad. Wiss. Wein, phil.-hist. Kl.” 83 (1946) 250-268. B.K. S TEPHANIDES , A, Q59;7&', #$; L6', $]', 4_!?7_!`', $23, #\R#!`3, 455?K#7;', 5;< %&?>$!7;', $&T, =FG;3$>3&T, 5;<, $g, |L!#;, Q%&$!?R#L;$;, ;U$&T (1416-1439). “r%!$K9<', r$;>9!7;', EFG;3$>323, +%&FX23” 23 (1953) (J;37#5>&3, ZI, J&F5&F?R) 27-40. — , A, uRN;', J`3#$;3$73&', 5;<, v, ?;$9!7;, $23, ;U$&59;$"9`3I, “r%!$K9<' r$;>9!7;',EFG;3$>323,+%&FX23” 8 (1931) 214-226.
82
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
— , 1g, }9>;, $]', 455?K#>;#$>5]', 3&L& !#7;', $23, =FG;$3>323, ;U$&59;$"9`3I “r%!$K9<',r$;>9!7;',EFG;3$>323,+%&FX23” 25 (1955) 12-27. P. S TOCKMEIER , Konstantinische Wende und kirchengeschichtliche Kontinuität. “Hist. Jahrb.” 82 (1963) 1-21. — , Leo I. des Großen Beurteilung der kaiserlichen Religionspolitik (Münchener Theol. Studien, I. Abtlg., Bd. 14). München 1959. XIX, 226 pp., 1 Pl. — , Zum Problem des sogenannten „konstantinischen Zeitalters“. “Trier. Theol. Ztschr.” 76 (1967) 197-216. N. S VORONOS , Le serment de fidélité à l’empereur byzantin et sa signification constitutionnelle, in: Actes VI Congr. Intern. Et. Byz., I. Paris 1950, 191-197. F. T AEGER , Charisma. Studien zur Geschichte des antiken Herrscherkultes, I. Stuttgart 1957. 460 pp. vol. II. Stuttgart 1960. X, 718 pp. Vasilika T APKOVA -Z AIMOVA , L’idee imperiale à Byzance et la tradition étatique bulgare. “EFG;3$>3H” 3 (1971) 289-295. F. T INNEFELD , Kategorien der Kaiserkritik in der byzantinischen Historiographie von Prokop bis Niketas Choniates. München 1971. 205 pp. C. T OUMANOFF , Caesaropapism in Byzantium and Russia. “Theol. Studies” 7 (1946) 213-243. — , Christian Caucasia Between Byzantium and Iran: New Light from Old Sources. “Traditio” 10 (1954) 109-189. O. T REITINGER , Die oströmische Kaiser und Reichsidee nach ihrer Gestaltung im höfischen Zeremoniell vom Ostroemischen Staats und Reichsgedanken, II ed., Darmstdt 1956. — , (Art.) Baldachin, in: Reallex. f. Ant. u. Christent. 1 (1950) 1150-1153. — , Die oströmische Kaiser- und Reichsidee nach ihrer Gestaltung im höfischen Zeremoniell. Jena 1938 (reprinted Darmstadt 1969). XIV, 246 S. – Reviews: “r%!$K9<', r$;>9!7;', EFG;3$>323, +%&FX23” 14 (1938) 523-528 (D. Xanalatos); “Hist. Jahrb.” 59 (1939) 498-502 (A. Michel); “Deutsche Litztg.” 62 (1941) 170-177 (W. Enßlin); “Jahrb. Gesch. Osteur.” 5 (1940) 468-470 (B. Rubin); BZ 41 (1941) 211-223 (G. Ostrogorsky). — , Review of J.A. S TRAUB , Vom Herrscherideal in der Spätantike. BZ 41 (1941) 197-210. — , Vom oströmischen Staats- und Reichsgedanken. “Leipziger Vierteljahrsschr. f. Südosteur.” 4 (1940) 1-26 (reprinted: Die oströmische Kaiser- und Reichsidee, 247274). K. T REU , Byzantinische Kaiser in der Schreibernotizen griechischer Handschriften. BZ 65 (1972) 9-34. S. T ROIANOS , Die Sonderstellung des Kaisers im früh- und mittelbyzantinischen kirchlichen Prozeß. “EFG;3$>3H” 3 (1971) 71-80. — , +FL=&?h, !D', $h3, ~9!F3;3, $23, %6, $23, =FG;3$>323, ;U$&59;$"9`3, %;9!\&LR3`3 43"95`3, 4NNFO#!`3I, “M%!$I, JR3$9&F, M9!F3]', i#$I, r??I, >5;7&F” 12 (1965) 130168.
83
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
C. T SIRPANLIS , Byzantine Parliaments and Representative Assemblies from 1081 to 1351. “J?K9&3&L7;” 5 (1973) 28-72. — , The Imperial Coronation and Theory in “De cerimoniis aulae byzantinae” of Constantine VII Porphyrogennitus. J?K9&3&L7; 4 (1972) 63-91. P. V ACZY , Culte imperial et adoration chrétienne des images. “Studi Biz. e Neoell.” 7 (Atti VIII Congr. Internaz. Studi Biz. Palermo) (1953). A. V ASILIEV , Harun-ibn-Yahya and his description of Constantinople, “Seminarium Kondakovianum” 5 (1932) 149-163. J. V ERPEAUX , Contribution a l’etude de l’administration byzantine:, L!#HG`3. “Byzantinoslavica” 16 (1955) 270-296. — , (ed): Pseudo-Kodinos, Traité des offices. Paris 1966. 420 pp. G. V ESPIGNANI , Simbolismo magia e sacralità dello spazio circo, Bologna 1994. — , Il circo e le fazioni del circo nella storiografia bizantinistica recente, in “Rivista di Studi Bizantini e Slavi,” 5 (1985), pp. 61-103. — , Il circo di Costantinopoli Nuova Roma, Spoleto 2001, pp. 230. A. V OGT (ed.), Constantin VII Porphyrogenete, Le livre des cérémonies. I: Livre I, chapitres 1-46 (37). Texte. Paris 1935. XI, 183. Commentaire. Paris 1935. XXXIII, 194 pp., 2 Pl. II: Livre I, chapitres 47 (38)-92(83). Texte. Paris 1939. XI, dopple pages 193. Commentaire. Paris 1940. XVI, 205 pp., 1 Pl. – Cfr. BZ 37 (1937) 126130 and 41 (1941) 453-455. J. V OGT , Bemerkungen zum Gang der Constantinforschung, in: Mullus. Festschrift Th. Klauser (Jahrb. Ant. u. Christent., Erg.-Bd. 1). Münster 1964, 374-379. — , Constantin der Große und sein Jahrhundert. München 1949 (1960). 303 pp., 16 Pl. — , (Art.) Constantinus der Große, in: Reallex. f. Ant. u. Christent. 3 (1957 [1956]) 306-379. — , Konstantin der Große und das Christentum. Ergebnisse und Aufgaben der Forschung (Schriftenreihe des Internationalen Konstantinordens 2). MännedorfZürich 1960. 9 pp. K. V OIGT , Staat und Kirche von Kostantin dem Großen bis zum Ende der Karolingerzeit, Stuttgart 1936; reprinted Aalen 1965, X, 460 pp. – Cf. “Gnomon” 14 (1938) 211-217 (W. Enßlin). D.P. W ALKER , Spiritual and demonic Magic from Ficino to Campanella, London 1958, 1969 2a ed. C. W ALTER , The Coronation of a Co-Emperor in Skylitzes Matritensis, in: ResumesCommunications XIV Congr. Intern. Et. Byz. Bucarest. Bukarest 1971, 120-121. T. W ASILEWSKI , La place de l’état russe converti dans l’Europe chrétienne, in Il battesimo delle terre russe. Bilancio di un millennio, a cura di S. Graciotti, Firenze 1991, 56-58. P.R.C. W EAVER , Familia Caesaris. A Social Study of the Emperor’s Freedmen and Slaves. Cambridge 1972. XII, 330 pp.
84
C ARILE
P OLITICAL T HOUGHT IN B YZANTIUM AS S EEN BY 20 TH C ENTU RY H ISTORIANS
A. W IFSTRAND , Autokrator, Kaisar, Basileus, in: mYuY, Martino P. Nilsson ... dedicatum. Lund 1939, 529-539. R.M. W OOLLEY , Coronation Rites (The Cambridge Handbooks of Liturgical Study). Cambridge 1915. XVI, 207 pp. F.A. Y ATES , Astrea. L’idea di impero nel Cinquecento, tr. it. di E. Busaglia, Torino 1978. G. Z ECCHINI , Il pensiero politico romano. Dall’età arcaica alla tarda antichità, Roma 1997, pp. 181. A.W. Z IEGLER , Die byzantinische Religionspolitik und der sog. Caesaropapismus, in: Münchener Beiträge zur Slavenkunde. Festgabe für P. Diels (Veröff. Osteuropa-Inst. München 4). München 1953, 81-97.
85
C AVALLINI
E LEONORA C AVALLINI
F ROM M AZZARINO UNTIL T ODAY
Ravenna
From Mazzarino until Today: Italian Studies between East and West
he first edition of Santo Mazzarino’s Fra Oriente e Occidente (published in 1947) contains the last echoes of the contest provoked by the so-called “neo-humanists,” and particularly by the “third humanism,” which had contamined classicism with racism, and substantially denied any influence of the Oriental cultures upon ancient Greece: on the contrary, the neo-humanism (particularly represented, from this point of view, by Helmut Berve’s Griechische Geschichte, 1934) had claimed the originality and purity of the Greek people, as Indo-European and predestined to lay the foundations of modern German culture. This idea is strongly affirmed by Berve, who, in countering Victor Ehrenberg’s objection that the unity of ancient history had to be seeked in the tension between East and West, said that in such a way one would lose the sense of the ‘nordic’ function of Greek history and of its importance in mondial history (“Philologische Wochenschrift” 1937, p. 650). In Berve’s reconstruction, the search of the peculiar values of the Greek people threatened to become a sort of determinism, which assigned fixed and unchanging roles to each people, depending upon their respective, predetermined ‘missions.’ 1 When Mazzarino’s book appeared, the neo-humanists had almost completely lost their battle. The evidence of a clear
T
turnabout is given, for example, by Robert Cohen’s handbook (published 1934). In his Introduction to the Histoire grecque (written with Gustav Glotz and Pierre Roussel), Cohen described the Greek as “a small people… that had come out late of the Balcanic woods” and “settled at the crossing of the roads bound to Europe and Asia, in the very heart of the most ancient cultures in the world. Soon this people – he continues – drew the best from all those cultures.” Cohen’s approach to the study of Greek history is, on the one hand, the aknowledgement of the peculiar Greek talent, but on the other hand it assumes that the Greek culture should be viewed as a ‘melting pot’ of various influences. Nevertheless, another important work of that period (that is to say Victor Ehrenberg’s Ost und West, Prag 1934) still shows the influence of the neohumanist positions, even if it offers a very well-balanced and measured interpretation of the neo-humanist thought. Ehrenberg insists on the differences and the contrasts between Eastern and Western cultures; besides, he does not point out enough the so-called “dark centuries” and the archaic period, but lays stress especially to the Persian Wars, to Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age. In 1947, Mazzarino’s book faced quite
1
Jahrhunderts (1930), one of the corner-stones of the Nazi propaganda.
From this point of view, Berve’s vision appears to be influenced by A. Rosenberg’s Der Mythus des 20
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
87
C AVALLINI
F ROM M AZZARINO UNTIL T ODAY
a lot of questions that Ehrenberg’s work had not answered. In particular, Mazzarino identified the two ways of communication and interaction between East and West, that is to say “the Microasiatic way” (Anatolia, Lydia, Lycia, Troas) and the “insular way” (or “the way of the alphabet,” which was introduced into Greece by the Phoenicians during their trades with the islands of the Mediterranean sea). The innovative challenge of the book consisted in analyzing, in a critical and impartial way, a very complicated and disperded documentation, and in elaborating, on the basis of such data, a general definition of the problem and of the ways of discussing it. However – because of the intrinsecal scarceness of the documentary background – interpretative mediation, keen intuition and personal capacity to organize and synthesize the matter played a key role in the various stages of the research. The peculiarity of Mazzarino’s work consisted in going deeply into the analysis of some detailed exegetical questions and then in gathering and connecting the single arguments in a comprehensive overall vision. The author himself was conscious of the methodological problems and difficulties which his work involved. In the Introduction (p. 3), Mazzarino wrote: “These researchs… are not independent from one another, but mean to face the problem of the relations between Orient and Greece on the whole.” Even in the most specialized and erudite treatment of the single subjects, the author never loses touch with his fundamental purpose, but pursues it with constant attention: and his purpose, as said, is to point out the central role of the cultural link between East and West in the development of Greek history. Just by recognizing the connexion and the tension between the
88
two worlds, Mazzarino identified a substantial unity not only in the Greek history, but in the Ancient history as a whole, this unity consisting in an uninterrupted sequence of exchanges and interactions, beginning from the ‘gift’ of the alphabet, introduced by the Phoenicians, to finish with the ‘gift’ of Christianity during the Roman Era. In particular, as regards the period which coincides with the ‘archaic’ Greek history, and which represents the predominant subject-matter of the research, the author identified in the Microasiatic Area the principal scenery of the birth and of the development of the dialogue between East and West: a point of contact and cohabitation, of stimulating encounters, but also of opposition and elaboration of different cultural and political patterns. Here, in the perspective of an ancient, Microasiatic “koiné,” Mazzarino tried to get beyond the old historiographical contrasts between those who asserted the absolute peculiarity of the Greek culture as compared with the Oriental world, and those who, on the other hand, preferred to qualify the Greek experience as a particular moment of a global and unitary historical process. As we have seen, Fra Oriente e Occidente ascribed a particular importance to Minor Asia: but above all to Ionia, which is the mirror and the ensign-bearer of the Anatolic Greek people. Here, in a favourable climate of cultural exchanges, the Microasiatic Greek not only acquired from the Oriental world a lot of important “emprunts”; they realized their most peculiar and exclusive creation, a political pattern which finds no match in the other ancient cultures: that is to say, the polis as independent constitutional entity. Ionia was not a politically weak area, as some neo-humanists claimed; on the contrary, it was the place of birth of the
C AVALLINI
most original political discovery of the Greek people. The research about the “via di terra,” i.e. the Microasiatic way, has a leading role in Mazzarino’s book. However, although in minor terms, the author also refers to the other way, “la via del mare” or of the alphabet, by means of which the Phoenicians could act as mediators between East and West and convey some important artifacts and cultural items from the far and inner East to the Greek islands and to the continental Greece itself. In the following years, Ehrenberg’s position generally found more favour than Mazzarino’s one, especially in some countries, such as Italy, where the ideal of the ‘classicism’ persisted for a long time also after the 2nd World War Era. Nevertheless, in 1951 the University of Pisa published the first issue of the periodical “Studi Classici e Orientali,” with contributions of the Greek historian Giovanni Pugliese Carratelli and other scholars (especially archaeologists), who showed a deep interest in the Aegean archaic cultures and in the links between the Eastern civilizations and the socalled ‘Classical antiquity.’ In the tenth issue (1961), an article by the archaeologist Silvio Ferri, entitled Tracce di una koinè greco-anatolica nel secondo millennio a.C., substantially corroborated Mazzarino’s arguments about the existence of a cultural koiné in the Anatolic region, where the Ahhijawa, i.e. the Homeric Achaeans, could have cohabited with the Hittites about the half of the second Millenium B.C. Starting from the archaeological evidence, Ferri argued that the hypothesis of a historicalethnographic koiné in the Bronze Age could be supported by linguistic elements, in particular by the presence of peculiar Greek (and Italic) toponymes in
F ROM M AZZARINO UNTIL T ODAY
the Caucasic region and on the coasts of the Black Sea. In the Seventies, Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli and the other authors of Storia e civiltà dei Greci declared their intent of abandoning the traditional (that is to say, the so-called ‘neo-humanist’) interpretation of classical antiquity. In his Presentation of this important work, which aimed at offering a wide and comprehensive view of Greek culture (including social and political history, figurative art, literature and philosophy), Bandinelli wrote: “The Storia e civiltà dei Greci intends to offer, by means of a systematic exposition of the culture and of the social and economic history, the essential information for the acquisition of an updated knowledge of those themes which still contribute to make ancient Greece a fundamental element of our modern civilization. Although we confirm this acknowledgement, in this work we will not follow the traditional interpretation of the classical antiquity: that is to say, the so-called ‘humanist’ interpretation” (p. VII). Bandinelli also remarked that such an interpretation, generally supported by a thorough knowledge of the philological technique, had been used (sometimes in a very explicit way) to sustain conceptions deriving from the conservative viewpoint that had prevailed in the 19th century. In the Introduction to the first part of the first volume, dedicated to the socalled “Greek Middle-Age,” Giovanni Pugliese Carratelli insisted on the preeminent role of Anatolia in the birth and development of the archaic Greek culture. Pugliese Carratelli reaffirmed the importance of that “melting pot of peoples and civilizations that was Minor Asia in the second Millennium before Christ,” and particularly on the close link between the complex and composite
89
C AVALLINI
F ROM M AZZARINO UNTIL T ODAY
Anatolic civilization, dominated by the Hittites, and the Minoic one, which in its turn was destined to influence the Greek insular and peninsular populations around the half of the second Millennium. The fourth chapter of the first volume is entitled L’età orientalizzante, with particular reference to the archaeological and artistic point of view. This section also contains Lorenzo Braccesi’s documented discussion of that political phaenomenon called ‘tyranny,’ which he views as quite different from the Oriental concept of autocratic power, even though the Greek tradition associates the Hellenic tyranny with the Lydian king Gyges. As for Greek Literature, an important contribution is Bruno Gentili’s thorough and original study of some ‘orientalizing’ poets such as Alcman, Sappho and Anacreon. Just few years before (1975), Arnaldo Momigliano had written in English, and published in Cambridge, his book Alien Wisdom, dedicated to Persian culture and religion as seen and interpretated by the Greeks. But just in the same year, in Italy, the “Fondazione Lorenzo Valla” had issued Filippo Cassola’s important edition of the Inni Omerici, where the author illustrated the Oriental origin of most Greek deities. In treating this subject, Cassola often referred to the latest archaeological discoveries and to some specific studies of the Fifties and Sixties, such as the Proceedings of the Colloque de Strasbourg (1958) about Éléments orientaux dans la religion grecque ancienne (published in Paris 1960). An exemplarly case is represented by the goddess Aphrodite, who is denominated Ourania or “celestial” in many places (see Pindar fr. 122,4s., Herodotus I 105, 2-3, Pausanias 1,14,7), “armed” in Corinth, Sparta and Cythera (Pausanias 2,5,1;
90
3,15,10; 3,23,1) but also in Cyprus (Hesychius s.v. !"#$%&), and is surrounded by hierodoulai or sacred prostitutes at least in Cyprus (see Pseudo-Apollodorus III 182, with reference to the myth of Kinyras’ daughters) and in Corinth (see Pind. fr. 122, Athenaeus 573c-574c, SEG XI 145). From these characters, Aphrodite clearly emerges as the Greek interpretation of the Phoenician Astarte: as a matter of fact, Astarte is the “queen of heaven” (see Jeremiah 7,18; 44,17,25), but also a “warrior” and advisor to the king in the administration of the political power. Moreover, the cult of Astarte includes the characteristic custom of the sacred prostitution. But Astarte is the Phoenician counterpart of the Sumeric Inanna and of the Assyrian Ishtar or Mylitta, whose cult was introduced into Greece by the Phoenicians as they crossed the ‘maritime way’ (Cyprus, Cythera), but probably was also conveyed through the ‘Microasiatic way’ and particularly through the Troas, as we can infer from the myth of Aphrodite and Anchyses. As Cassola pointed out, the Anatolic and the Chypriot cult of Aphrodite were independent from one another: in fact, the Greek of Cypros identified their goddess with the Astarte of Ascalon and Byblos, whereas the Ionians identified her with the Mesopotamic, Hittite and Phrygian Kybebe (see Hipponax fr. 125 Degani, where Kybebe is called – with a peculiar syncretistic operation – '$(&) *%+,-, i.e. “daughter of Zeus”; moreover, see Charon of Lampsachus 262 F 5 J.). In this case, and in many other cases, Cassola confirms Mazzarino’s basic idea of a double communication way between East and West. Finally, Mazzarino’s book returned to the limelight: the second edition appeared in 1989, with a strong and provoking introduction by Cassola himself,
C AVALLINI
who shows how Fra Oriente e Occidente continues to be an important, intense, stimulating book. Fra Oriente e Occidente still offers quite a lot of subjects for a discussion; but above all, the book’s general statement of the problems is still valid, also on the basis of the latest archaeological data.
F ROM M AZZARINO UNTIL T ODAY
The reprinting of Fra Oriente e Occidente was an important turning point, which could open new horizons to the Italian studies on antiquity, in spite of some rigorously ‘classicistic’ positions which still appear to have quite a lot followers in our country.
91
C HIODI
S ILVIA M ARIA C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Roma
Eracle tra Oriente e Occidente
L
a doppia natura di Eracle, eroe e dio, ha da sempre appassionato gli studiosi del mondo antico e molto è stato scritto sulle sue origini orientali, ravvisate in Mesopotamia, 1 Fenicia ed Egitto… La spinta iniziale di queste analisi fu data dagli stessi antichi, da Erodoto che, nelle sue Storie, non lo considerò un
eroe e un dio greco, ma uno straniero. 2 Nella ricerca della patria natia di Eracle, gli studiosi contemporanei hanno posto l’attenzione su numerosi aspetti: da quelli propriamente iconografici a quelli, invece, che toccavano la sua natura, la sua ambivalente condizione di dio e di eroe, le sue fatiche, la sua vittoria sulla
1
dimostrerebbero due monete di questo periodo trovate a Tarso in cui è incisa la legenda «Nrgl Trz» «Nergal di Tarso». In ambedue il dio è raffigurato con arco, lancia o scettro ed in una è rappresentato ritto su un leone. Questa iconografia richiama quella contemporanea di Eracle incisa su due monete di Cipro (Lapéthos). Secondo Lipinski, questo parallelismo iconografico e temporale escluderebbe l’ipotesi nel processo sincretistico di una mediazione del dio fenicio Melqart. W. Burkert, Mito e rituale in Grecia, 132, a sua volta ricorda che la morte di Eracle sul rogo del monte Oeta ha il suo corrispettivo a Tarso nell’incendio del dio Santas/Sandas/Sandes, alias Eracle e, aggiungiamo noi, dato che anche di Melqart le fonti ci informano del suo «passare per il fuoco», gli studiosi discutono, anche in questo caso, se sia possibile stabilire una connessione tra Eracle-Melqart-Nergal. Discussa è anche l’ipotesi di un’identificazione di Nergal con Melqart (la versione della Lista di E. F. Weidner in Altababylonische Götterlisten, in Archiv für Keilschriftforschungen 2 (1924-25), 1-18 e 71-82 identifica dma-lik a dU.GUR) in diversi siti fenici: ricordo tra gli altri, oltre Tarso, Palmira e Hatra di cui abbiamo già detto, anche Ibiza, Akko, Cartagine; Tharros, Thasos. Che, in terra Fenicia si praticasse il culto di Nergal non deve certo stupire, in quanto, come testimonia la Bibbia, in II Re 17, 24.30 (ricordato da H. Donner - W. Röllig, Kanaanäische und Aramäische Inschriften, II (Wiesbaden 1968), 72-73), i cittadini di Khuta furono mandati dagli assiri a Samaria e lì hanno praticato il culto di Nergal, e come si legge in un’iscrizione su sigillo del II millennio, trovato a Tell Ta‘annek, un certo Atna -ili si definisce «servitore di Nergal» (E. Sellin, Tell Ta‘annek 1 (1904) Abb. 22). 2 Le possibili patrie di Eracle sono, secondo Erodoto, Le Storie, II, 43-44, l’Egitto, Tiro e Taso.
Sono state notate, a tal proposito, delle somiglianze, purtroppo mute, in quanto iconografiche, tra le imprese di Eracle e quelle di divinità della terra tra i due fiumi, identificate dagli studiosi come Ninurta o Ningirsu. Sono stati evidenziati, inoltre, dei paralleli tra le fatiche di Ercole con le vicende accorse al re di Uruk, Gilgameš, e che sono narrate nell’Epopea di Gilgameš. Molte di queste attestazione sono riportate da W. Burkert in Structure and History in Greek Mythology and Ritual (Berkeley 1979), trad. it. di F. Nuzzaco, Mito e rituale in Grecia. Struttura e storia (Milano 1992), 128 sgg. Nel chiedersi se Eracle possa essere considerato un’importazione dell’Oriente del VII secolo lo studioso sottolinea, tra le altre cose, che «… la prima e rozza immagine di una lotta col leone, su un piedistallo di tripode del tardo periodo geometrico proveniente da Atene, che è quasi contemporaneo al primo documento di scrittura greca, è di derivazione orientale, sebbene si possa a buon diritto pensare che rappresenti Eracle» (p. 132). Egli ricorda, inoltre, che nel 1939 Frankfort ipotizzò tale migrazione nel III millennio mentre nel 1958 Brudege avanzò l’ipotesi che essa si diffuse, da Tiro alla Lidia, nella prima metà del bronzo (p. 133, n. 28). La menzione di Tiro apre il problema relativo alla possibile mediazione fenicia. Il culto di Nergal in terra greca è, con certezza, attestato nel III secolo a.C. in una iscrizione bilingue, greca-fenicia, trovata nel Pireo, CIS I, 119 = KAI 59, e su cui ci soffermeremo nel prosieguo del lavoro. Tra le tante ipotesi, includenti od escludenti tale mediazione, si ricorda quella avanzata da Lipinski in Dieux et Déesses de l’univers phénicien et punique (Leuven 1995), 242-243. Lo studioso belga, nel soffermarsi sull’assimilazione in epoca greco-romana di Nergal con Eracle – attestata a Palmira, Hatra e a Tarso –, afferma che probabilmente l’identificazione fra i due dèi risale almeno al V secolo a.C., come
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
93
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
morte, il suo nome 3 ... In questo lavoro ci si soffermerà su quest’ultimo aspetto e sui rapporti di Eracle con il mesopotamico Nergal, ambedue, seppur in maniera diversa, vincitori del funesto destino di morte.
Come è noto, la divinità di Eracle è affermata per la prima volta nell’Odissea, più precisamente nel Libro XI, dove con queste parole Omero fa narrare ad Ulisse il suo incontro con il mitico personaggio:
E poi conobbi la grande forza di Eracle, ma la parvenza sola: lui tra i numi immortali gode il banchetto, possiede Ebe caviglia bella, figlia del gran Zeus e di Era sandali d’oro. 4
Il passo è stato ritenuto da alcuni studiosi interpolato. Rohde, ad esempio, sottolineò che «chi scrisse questo trattava la teologia a modo suo: né Omero né i Greci posteriori conoscono affatto questa opposizione tra un «se stesso», che vive pienamente ed è quindi costituito dall’unione di anima e corpo, ed un vuoto «simulacro» che non può essere l’anima, confinato nell’Ade», 5 anche se, nota ancora, la «… distinzione tra un eíd lon dall’autos, pienamente vivente, è molto simile ciò che Stesicoro e già Esiodo (v. Paraphras. Antiq. Lycophr., 822, p. 71 Scheer; cf. Bergk, P. Lyr. 4 , III, p. 215) hanno raccontato di Elena e del suo eíd lon. Forse questa favola ha dato la spinta all’introduzione dei versi 602 sgg 6 ». Secondo lo studioso inglese G.S. Kirk quanto si afferma nell’Odissea in merito alla parvenza, all’eíd lon di Eracle ha come scopo quello di «conciliare la versione secondo la quale Eracle era morto e disceso nell’Ade come tutti con l’idea contraddittoria, che non compare altrove
nell’Iliade e nell’Odissea, che era asceso all’Olimpo, aveva sposato Ebe e sarebbe vissuto in eterno. C’è una situazione esattamente simile in una poema frammentario di Esiodo, le Ehoiai o Catalogo delle donne». 7 Di conseguenza «L’idea di trasformare Eracle in un dio non sembra molto antica, non anteriore al VII secolo a.C. … perché i poemi omerici asseriscono due volte specificamente che egli era mortale …». 8 Inoltre «L’Odissea venne composta nella sua monumentale forma primaria intorno al 700 a.C., ma sembra che poco dopo venissero fatte delle aggiunte ai libri XI e XXIV… Ecco perché il VII secolo appare il periodo più probabile per l’emergere di Eracle come dio. Questa idea è universalmente attestata nell’arte e nella letteratura a partire dal VI secolo». 9 Sia che si voglia considerare o meno il passo un’interpolazione – questione questa che tocca il problema relativo a quando Eracle fu considerato dio10 e se divenne tale dopo la sua morte, come attesta poco
3 Secondo l’interpretazione greca Eracle significherebbe «gloria di Era», mentre, per quella orientale, deriverebbe dal nome di un dio mesopotamico: Nergal o Erra. Si veda, a tal proposito, W. Burkert, Mito e rituale in Grecia, 133 e n. 27. 4 Odissea, libro XI, rr. 601-604, trad. it. di R. Calzecchi Onesti (Milano 1976), 199. 5 E. Rohde, Psyche. Seelncult und Unsterblichkeitsglaube der Griechen (Freiburg im Breisgau 19801984), trad. it. di E. Codignola e A. Oberdorfer, Psyche. Culto delle anime presso i Greci, I (Bari 1982), 63. 6 E. Rohde, Psyche, 63 n. 2.
7
94
G.S. Kirk, The Nature of Greek Myths (Harmondsworth 1974), trad. it. di M. Carpitella, La natura dei miti greci (Bari 1984), 185. 8 G.S. Kirk, La natura dei miti greci, 184. 9 G.S. Kirk, La natura dei miti greci, 186. 10 Secondo E. Rohde, Psyche, 187: «Fra gli dèi venne innalzato dalla fede Ercole, che Omero non conosceva ancora come «eroe», nel senso moderno, e che in parecchi luoghi si continuò anche di poi a venerare sotto forma di «eroe». Esculapio veniva considerato ora eroe, ora dio, ciò che era stato fin da principio (nella nota 3 scrive: «Anche Achille è venerato p. es.
C HIODI
dopo Esiodo nell’Ehoiai, mentre su questo punto vi è il silenzio più assoluto in Omero, il quale si limita a registrare la presenza della parvenza di Eracle nell’Ade 11 – rimane aperto il problema, sottolineato da Rohde di questa estranea opposizione, nel mondo greco, tra «un se stesso» e il simulacro, 12 per cui non è fuor di luogo domandarci se questa sia ravvisabile nella teologia mesopotamica. Come si cercherà di dimostrare, tale dicotomia è rintracciabile nella figura di Nergal, anche se vi sono delle differenze sostanziali ravvisabili, soprattutto, in quella che potremmo chiamare «storia» di Eracle. Ovvero, se Eracle fu, come ipotizza Kirk, nell’ipotetica originaria cultura greca considerato un eroe che dopo la morte, per veleno o sul rogo, divenne dio, si deve, allora, subito ricorda-
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
re che differentemente da lui Nergal nasce e rimane dio. Le fonti mesopotamiche, che permettono di avanzare tale ipotesi, sono diverse; tra queste, tre sono di primaria rilevanza. La prima si trova in un passo tratto dal poemetto sumerico Gilgameš, Enkidu e gli Inferi, la seconda è la sua traduzione accadica, contenuta nella Tavola XI dell’Epopea classica di Gilgameš, la terza è la versione di Sultantepe e di Uruk di Nergal ed Ereškigal. Esse attestano, a tal proposito e come vedremo, due differente ideologie. Gilgameš, si racconta alle rr. 225-229 del poemetto sumerico, così si rivolse al capo del pantheon, Enlil, quando il suo servo Enkidu venne trattenuto negli Inferi perché non aveva seguito i consigli del re di Uruk:
«[Padr]e Enlil, [mi è scivolato] il pukku negli Inferi, il mekku mi è scivolato negli Inferi! Enkidu, che era andato (per prendermeli), l’hanno trattenuto agli Inferi! Non lo trattiene Namtar, non lo trattiene Asakku, lo trattengono gli Inferi! Non lo trattiene il divino spirito (dgidim) di Nergal, che non risparmia, lo trattengono gli Inferi! Non cadde in battaglia, lo trattengono gli Inferi.
Nell’invocazione ripetuta con identiche parole anche davanti al dio Enki, il dio della saggezza, si afferma, alla r. 228, che nell’aldilà non risiede Nergal in persona, ma «il divino spirito di Nergal», « d g i d i m - d n è - e r i 11 - g á l ». Da ciò si
possono trarre due ipotesi: a) Nergal, come tutti coloro che hanno varcato la soglia degli Inferi, siano essi uomini o divinità, è diventato uno spirito, un fantasma. Egli vive nell’aldilà in una condizione simile a quella di un
ora come dio, ora come eroe»). Ed a qualche altro eroicizzato si cominciò a sacrificare “come ad un dio,” non senza influenza probabilmente dell’oracolo delfico, che almeno per Licurgo pare abbia iniziato il passaggio dalla venerazione eroica alla divinità. I limiti fra eroe e dio cominciarono a confondersi, e non raramente un eroe di autorità locale limitatissima vien designato come “dio,” senza che si debba pensare per ciò ad una vera e propria elevazione al rango divino e alla mutuazione quindi del rito sacrificale, che ne sarebbe dovuta seguire. La dignità eroica pareva manifestamente già un po’ scemata, se pure non era giunto ancora il tempo in cui denominare un morto “eroe” non significava quasi più distinguerlo dagli altri morti». 11 A tal proposito E. Rohde, Psyche, 63 sottolinea «Ulisse getta uno sguardo nell’interno del regno dei morti, cosa propriamente impossibile poiché egli se
ne stava all’ingresso e vi scorge figure d’eroi che continuano l’occupazione cui si erano dedicati una volta in vita, come veri “simulacri” (eíd la) dei viventi: Minosse che giudica le anime, Orione che caccia, Ercole con l’arco sempre teso in mano e la freccia incoccata “simile ad uno che continuamente saetti.” Non è questi Ercole, l’“eroe-dio” dei tempi posteriori: il poeta non sa ancora che il figlio di Giove fu innalzato sulla comune sorte de’ mortali, come il primo poeta del viaggio all’Ade non sa ancora nulla del rapimento di Achille dall’Ade. Il che naturalmente doveva sembrare alla maggior parte dei lettori un’omissione. Ed essi hanno così inserito sfacciatamente tre versi». 12 Per quanto concerne le critiche rivolte all’interpretazione, avanzata da Rhode, della psyche omerica e dell’eíd lon si veda G. Reale, Corpo, anima e salute (Milano 1999), 81 sg. ed, in questo contributo, la n. 17. 95
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
morto comune, anche se il suo spirito è divinizzato come ci fa comprendere la presenza del d i n g i r davanti al termine g i d i m . Eppure, sappiamo che Nergal era anche considerato un importante dio del cielo e che si muoveva liberamente tra questi due reami. Non ci rimane, allora, che la seconda possibilità. b) In cielo si trovava il dio in persona, mentre negli Inferi vi era solo il suo divino g i d i m. Questa seconda ipotesi, non solo si inserirebbe nella concezione relativa all’aldilà, come luogo di residenza degli spiriti, ma, in un certo qual modo precede, nonostante alcune e per certi versi sostanziali differenze teologiche, quello che la redazione più recente del mito di Nergal ed Ereškigal espone, e di cui parleremo in seguito, e di quanto si evince da un testo, tradotto alcuni anni fa da W.G. Lambert 13 e recentemente ritradotto da G. Pettinato, 14 relativo alla prigionia di Ningizzida nell’aldilà e alla sua liberazione per mezzo di una statua. 15 La dicotomia, purtroppo solo accennata nel testo sumerico, del dio Nergal richiama quella tratteggiata nell’Odissea di Eracle anche se vi è un’importante differenza. Mentre, infatti, nel passo greco prima citato si afferma che negli inferi vi è l’eíd lon, non la psyche di Eracle, in quello sumerico si legge che lì si trova il divino g i d i m, ovvero il divino spirito – che corrisponde per certi aspetti alla psyche omerica –, di Nergal. Questo dato ci conduce a porci le seguenti domande: qual è, in Omero, il rapporto tra l’eíd lon e la
psyche? Vi è, in sumerico, un lemma corrispondente all’eíd lon greco? Secondo Vernant «In Omero esistono... tre modi di apparizione soprannaturale, designati con la stessa parola eíd lon. In primo luogo lo spettro, phasma, creato da un dio a somiglianza di una persona in carne ed ossa, come quello che Apollo fabbrica «uguale allo stesso Enea e identico nelle armi». Il vero Enea si trova al sicuro a Pergamo… In secondo luogo il sogno, l’immagine onirica, oneiros, concepito come l’apparizione durante il sonno di un doppio spettrale inviato dagli dèi a immagine di un essere reale… Infine e soprattutto le psychai dei morti, chiamate eíd la kamónt n, ombre dei defunti. Ci si rivolge alla psyche come ci si rivolgerebbe alla persona in carne ed ossa; la psyche ne ha l’esatta apparenza, pur essendo priva di esistenza reale, il che la rende, nella sua somiglianza con l’essere di cui ha assunto l’aspetto, paragonabile ad un ombra o a un sogno, a un soffio di fumo». 16 La psyche, in quanto eíd lon, si caratterizza, dunque, come il fantasma del defunto, il suo doppio che, «nel momento in cui si mostra presente, rivela anche la sua appartenenza a un inaccessibile altrove, il suo non essere di questo mondo» 17 così, ad esempio, essa viene delineata in un famosissimo passo dell’Iliade (libro XXIII, 72) dove viene magistralmente descritta l’apparizione di Patroclo morto al dormiente Achille:
13
27-28, ed anche, «Mi scusi: qual è la via per l’aldilà», in G. Pettinato (a cura), I miti degli Inferi AssiroBabilonesi (Brescia 2003), 44-45. 16 J.P. Vernant, Entre mythe et politique, 1996, trad. it. di A. Ghilardotti, Tra mito e politica (Milano 1998), 275-76. 17 J.P. Vernant, Tra mito e politica, 277. G. Reale, Corpo, anima e salute, 82, scrive a tal proposito: «La psyche, in verità, non rappresenta affatto un «altro io», come pensava Rohde, bensì … il «non essere più
W.G. Lambert, «A new Babylonian Descent to the Netherworld», in Abusch, T. - Steinkeller, P. (eds.), Lingering over Words. Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of W.L. Moran (Atlanta 1990), 289-300. 14 G. Pettinato, I miti degli Inferi Assiro-Babilonesi (Brescia 2003), 126-28. 15 Si veda a questo proposito della scrivente, «Introduzione», in G. Pettinato, Nergal ed Ereškigal. Il poema assiro-babilonese degli Inferi (Roma 2000), 96
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Ed ecco a lui venne l’anima (psyche) del misero Patroclo, gli somigliava in tutto, grandezza, occhi belli, voci, e vesti uguali vestiva sul corpo; gli stette sopra la testa e gli parlò parola: «Tu dormi, Achille, e ti scordi di me: mai, vivo, mi trascuravi, ma mi trascuri da morto. Seppelliscimi in fretta, e passerò le porte dell’Ade. Lontano mi tengono le anime, fantasmi (eíd la) di morti, non vogliono che tra loro mi mescoli di là dal fiume, ma erro così, per la casa larghe porte dell’Ade». 18 (…) «Perché, testa cara, sei venuto fin qui e mi comandi queste cose a una a una? Sì, certo compirò tutto quanto, obbedirò come chiedi: ma vieni vicino e almeno un istante, abbracciàti, godiamoci il pianto amaro a vicenda!» Tese le braccia, parlando così, ma non l’afferrò: l’anima come fumo sotto la terra sparì stridendo; saltò su Achille, stupito, batté le mani insieme e disse mesta parola: «Ah! C’è dunque, anche nella dimora dell’Ade, un’ombra, un fantasma (eíd lon), ma dentro non c’è più la mente. Tutta la notte l’ombra del misero Patroclo m’è stata intorno, gemendo e piangendo: molte cose ordinava. Gli somigliava prodigiosamente». 19
Non è fuor luogo ricordare che l’espressione usata dall’aedo greco per delineare come l’anima di Patroclo comunicò ad Achille sia analoga a quelle che si trova
nei documenti sumerici, come ad esempio nel Cilindro A di Gudea, governatore di Lagaš attorno al 2200 a.C., dove alle righe 5-6 della Colonna IX si legge:
Per la seconda volta a colui che dormiva, a colui che dormiva, egli (il dio Ningirsu) stette sopra la testa e comunicò con lui. 20
dell’io», la sua negazione: un suo permanere emblematico appunto nella dimensione del «non più», del «non più vivo». Walter Otto indica giustamente nella psyche omerica una rappresentazione dell’«essere dell’essere stato». A ragione scrive: «I morti sono sì soltanto ombre, ma non per questo non sono. Essi hanno un loro proprio modo d’essere e possono perfino … destarsi per qualche attimo, riprendendo coscienza e parola, non però possibilità d’azione. Non si tratta di una prosecuzione della vita, perché, quello proprio dei morti, è l’essere dell’essere stato. I Greci hanno capito che l’essere stato è esso stesso essere nel senso vero e proprio della parola». I Sumeri prima e gli Accadi poi, diversamente dai Greci, non solo concepirono ciò che resta dell’essere umano cosciente, ma anche in grado di agire. 18 Iliade, Libro XXIII, rr. 65-74, trad. it. di R. Calzecchi Onesti (Milano 1977), 421-422. 19 Iliade, Libro XXIII, rr. 94-107, trad. it. di R. Calzecchi Onesti, 422-423.
20 Trad. it. di G. Pettinato, in S.M. Chiodi - G. Pettinato, «Sogni rituali nella Lagaš presargonica» in P. Negri Scafa - P. Gentili (a cura), Donum Natalicium. Studi in onore di C. Saporetti in occasione del suo 60° compleanno (Roma 2000), 201-212. Una simile e più antica espressione si ritrova nella Stele degli Avvoltoi di Eannatum, VI 18 sgg.: A lui che giace, a lui che giace, egli si appressò alla testa; a lui che giace, a Eannatum, il [suo ama]to signore [Ningirsu], si appressò alla testa. (Trad. di G. Pettinato, I Re di Sumer (Brescia 2003), 149-150). Per quanto concerne l’interscambio culturale tra il mondo vicino orientale e quello greco è interessante sottolineare che Omero per descrivere l’aspetto, la figura dell’essere umano utilizza il lemma démas, da lui usato solo all’accusativo di relazione (si veda a tal proposito B. Snell, La cultura greca e le origini del pensiero europeo, 24, J.P. Vernant, «Corps obscur, corps éclant», in L’individu, la mort, l’amour (Paris
97
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Diversamente dal passo greco è un dio, non un fantasma, colui che comunica con il governatore, ma interessante rimane il dato che per esprimere il gesto del dio che trasmette il messaggio oracolare venga usata, come in Omero, l’espressione «stare sopra la testa». Il fatto di utilizzare gli stessi stereotipi letterari porta a pensare che l’interscambio tra mondo orientale e mondo greco non si sia fermato alla sola trasmissione del pensiero, ma va ben oltre, per cui non è inverosimile cercare un punto di contatto ideologico tra il concetto di psyche omerica e quella sumerica di g i d i m . La psyche, secondo Omero, dunque, assomiglia prodigiosamente al defunto, ma essa è solo un ombra, un fantasma
privo di mente ed in quanto tale è priva di corpo. Quando, infatti, Achille tese le braccia, essa «come fumo sotto la terra sparì stridendo». Anche il g i d i m , per i Sumeri, è la copia perfetta del defunto, diversamente, però, dalla psyche omerica in esso vi è ancora la mente ed, inoltre, viene delineato, stando almeno ad un passo che sarà fra poco citato, come dotato di un corpo, seppur diverso da quello terreno. 21 Secondo il poema Gilgameš, Enkidu e gli Inferi, rr. 242-254, il dio della saggezza Enki, dopo aver accolto le suppliche del re di Uruk relative ad Enkidu preso prigioniero dagli Inferi, chiese al dio Sole di aprire una finestra degli Inferi:
Ed appena questi ebbe aperto una finestra negli Inferi, il suo servo (Enkidu), come una folata di vento, venne fuori dagli Inferi.
1989), trad. it. di A. Ghilardotti, L’individuo, la morte, l’amore (Milano 2000), 5; demas dal verbo demo “significa innalzare una costruzione a ordini sovrapposti, come si fa per un muro di mattoni.” Per quanto concerne le etimologie «ad assonanze» comuni fra queste due culture si veda Burkert, Da Omero ai magi (Venezia 1999), 14 sgg.). Ora, nelle lingua accadica, per designare «la forma, la sembianza» dell’essere umano viene utilizzato il termine damtu (CAD, D, p. 74, sub voce damtu B), in ebraico damah (si veda G. Pettinato, Il rituale per la successione al trono (Roma 1992), 201 § 21 con i relativi rimandi bibliografici). L’accostamento dei lemmi: démas-damtu-damah viene spontanea. Se si dimostrasse veritiera o almeno plausibile la derivazione di tale termine greco dal semitico, per di più in un ambito così importante in quanto relativo alla persona umana, allora l’influenza vicino orientale sulla cultura greca è più profonda di quanto sospettato fino ad ora. Inoltre, G. Reale, Corpo, anima e salute, 98, sottolinea che «il termine omerico per persona è ‘testa’» ora anche in sumerico e in accadico viene usato lo stesso termine. In questo caso non si può però parlare di derivazione linguistica. Venendo alla suddivisione dei poteri tra Zeus, Poseidone e Ade, delineata nel Libro XV, alle rr. 187-193 dell’Iliade, e messa in parallelo da W. Burkert, in Da Omero ai magi, 21-22 con alcuni passi del poema babilonese Atramkhasis, si veda, della scrivente: «Rapporto cielo, terra, Inferi nel mondo mesopotamico», in S. Graziani (a cura), Studi sul Vicino Oriente antico dedicati alla memoria di Luigi Cagni, (Istituto 98
Universitario di Napoli - Dipartimento di Studi Asiatici, Series Minor LXI) vol. I (Napoli 2000), 107-124. Nello stesso contributo sono ravvisati altri paralleli con le opere omeriche. F. Graf, Griechische Mythologie (München-Zürich 1985), trad. it. di C. Romani, Il mito in Grecia (Bari 19882), 6-7, ha posto, inoltre, in parallelo due frammenti, di altrettante opere, uno di Ibico e l’altro di Sofocle, in cui viene menzionata la perdita della pianta della giovinezza – che un asino, incaricato da Zeus, doveva portare agli uomini – a causa di un serpente, con quanto si narra nella XI Tav., r. 259 sgg., dell’Epopea di Gilgameš. Si veda a tal proposito della scrivente: «Immortalità e giovinezza», in Volume in onore di G. Pettinato, in stampa. Vorrei, infine, ricordare che la terminologia usata da Platone, nel Timeo 41c, per designare ciò che il demiurgo fornisce per la formazione dell’essere umano, ovvero “il seme e il pricipio,” si ritrova, pur con le debite differenze, nel prologo sumerico dell’Inno alla zappa; a tal proposito si veda della scrivente: Le concezioni dell’oltretomba presso i Sumeri (Roma 1994), 339 n. 3. 21 Sia la psyche omerica che il g i d i m sumerico, inoltre, vengono generalmente menzionati e descritti solo quando abbandonano il cadavere. Diverso è il caso dell’e#emmu; si veda a tal proposito della scrivente, Le concezioni dell’oltretomba presso i Sumeri, 359371, e della stessa «Il prigioniero e il morto. Epopea di Gilgameš. Tav. X, r. 318-320», in OA, Miscellanea II (1995), 159-171. Sulla psyche omerica si veda, tra gli altri, G. Reale, Corpo, anima e salute, 35 e 75 sgg.
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Allora essi si abbracciarono e baciarono l’un l’altro, essi conversarono sospirando: “Hai visto gli ordinamenti degli Inferi?” “Io non te li dirò, amico mio, non te li dirò! Se io infatti, ti dicessi gli ordinamenti degli Inferi, allora tu ti sederesti e piangeresti.” “Io voglio sedermi e piangere.” “Il mio corpo, al cui contatto il tuo cuore gioiva, [ ] ...”: disse: “(il mio corpo) è mangiato dai vermi, come [un vecchio vestito]. [il mio corpo] è come una crepa della terra, pieno di polvere.” “Ahimè!”: il signore gridò, e si buttò nella polvere.
Come si evince dalle rr. 250-253, colui che appare «come una folata di vento» viene indicato come il servo, non come il fantasma, e viene considerato come dotato di un corpo, seppur diverso da quello terreno. Lo scriba accadico, nel tradurre ed in
un certo qual modo reinterpretando il passo, inglobato nella XII tavola dell’Epopea di Gilgameš, afferma che, per esaudire, parzialmente, il desiderio di Gilgameš, il dio della saggezza non si rivolse al dio del sole, ma a Nergal ed appena questi:
(…) ebbe aperto una fessura negli Inferi, lo spirito di Enkidu, come una folata di vento, uscì fuori dagli Inferi. Allora essi fecero per abbracciarsi, me non vi riuscirono; essi conversarono sospirando: “dimmi amico mio, dimmi amico mio, dimmi gli ordinamenti degli Inferi che tu hai visto” “Io non te li posso dire, amico mio, non te li posso dire! Se io infatti, ti dicessi gli ordinamenti degli Inferi che ho visto, allora [tu] ti butteresti giù e piangeresti.” “[Io] mi voglio buttare giù e piangere.” “Il mio [corp]o, che tu potevi toccare e del quale il tuo cuore gioiva, [il mio corp]o è mangiato dai vermi, come un vecchio vestito. [Il mio corpo che tu potevi to]ccare e del quale il tuo cuore gioiva, è come una crepa [del terreno,] piena di polvere.” [“Ahimè”], egli gridò e si buttò nella po]lvere. [“Ahimè”], egli gridò [e si buttò nella polvere].
La descrizione del commovente e fallimentare abbraccio richiama il passo omerico. Non è, poi, forse un caso che
qui lo scriba accadico, diversamente da quello sumerico, sottolinei che colui che appare al re di Uruk è il fantasma di 99
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Enkidu. Il termine da lui utilizzato, contrariamente a quanto ci si sarebbe aspettato, non è e#emmu, il corrispettivo del gidim sumerico e della psyche greca, ma utukku. Generalmente utilizzato per designare lo spirito, buono o cattivo, di divinità e di uomini, utukku corrisponde al sumerico udug, un segno, quest’ultimo, molto simile a quello di gidim – per cui i due segni sono stati spesso confusi nelle traA C+E F
scrizioni degli studiosi contemporanei. Gli scribi li hanno talvolta usati come sinonimi, come si evince, ad esempio, da un passo sumerico tratto dall’Incantesimo al dio sole Utu. Alla r. 120, relativa alla sezione riguardante gli spettri che, per vari motivi, rendono, a dir poco, difficoltosa la vita dei viventi, lo scriba della fonte A ha utilizzato il lemma «u d u g », mentre quelli della fonte C e E «g i d i m »:
lú-ti-la udug ug 5 -ga-šè b[a-a]n-gi-a lú al-t[i + l]a gidim ú-ga-šè ba-gi 4 (?) x x lul-la-ta […]
l’uomo vivo si è trasformato in un u d u g / g i d i m dei morti
Purtroppo, proprio per la difficoltà di lettura dei due segni, che ha portato alla loro confusione nella trascrizione delle tavolette, è impossibile comprendere se e quali differenze intercorrevano tra i due lemmi. La descrizione che le fonti sumeriche forniscono del gidim non ci permettono, allo stato attuale degli studi, di rintracciare un termine parallelo a quello di eíd lon, anche se, da quanto è possibile comprendere, questi veniva considerato una perfetta replica del defunto, un suo duplicato dotato di un corpo non «terreno». Proprio questo dato porta a considerare il passo in cui si menziona la presenza del divino gidim di Nergal negli Inferi non lontano da quello omerico incentrato sulla presenza dell’eíd lon di Eracle nell’Ade, anche se questi deve essere inteso come un impalpabile fanta-
sma. Idea, quest’ultima rintracciabile, come si è visto, nella tradizione assirobabilonese, che ci fornisce, inoltre, diversi termini relativi alla rappresentazione dello spettro, ovvero dell’e#emmu. Tre sono, a tal proposito, i più importanti e si tratta di: ardan!n m"ti; zaq"qu/ziq"qu; šaru. 22 Il primo può essere considerato un corrispettivo dell’eíd lon omerico. Secondo The Assyrian Dictionary (d’ora in poi CAD), ardan!nu/din!nu 23 ha due possibili valori: 1) sostituto 2) spettro. Il primo lo si trova utilizzato nelle lettere (dove il termine deve essere inteso come il rappresentante, il commissario – spesso del re), e nei rituali magici di sostituzione di una persona (spesso attraverso l’utilizzo di una piccola statua). Il secondo, ovvero quello di spettro, si caratterizza come il «doppio», lo spettro della persona morta come in questo passo:
ár-da-na-an m"ti i$bassu imât Egli è stato afferrato dal «doppio» della persona morta e morità. 24
22 Per gli altri termini si veda J. Bottéro, «La mitologia della morte», in P. Xella (a cura), La mitologia della morte (Verona 1987), 57 sg. 23 Il corrispettivo sumerico di ard!nanu/din!nu è s a g , che significa anche, testa e forma dell’essere
100
umano. Tale termine si trova anche nei testi di creazione dell’essere umano. 24 Labat, TDP 108 IV 20, cfr. TDP 88 r. 6, citato dal CAD, D, sub voce din!nu, 2, p. 150.
C HIODI
Altrove viene specificato che il «doppio» altro non è che il gidim o il cattivo
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
e#emmu, come ad esempio:
GIDIM ár-da-na-an m"ti [i$bassu] il GIDIM, il doppio della persona morta, lo ha afferrato. 25 ša … ár-da-na-nu mi-tù e#emmu lemnu $abtuš se … il doppio della persona morta, il cattivo e!emmu, lo ha afferrato. 26
Il g i d i m /e#emmu si caratterizza, dunque, come il «doppio» della persona morta e l’espressione «GIDIM ár-da-na-an» come quella «ár-da-na-an e#emmu» ricordano quella omerica di eíd la kamónt n, ovvero di «fantasmi, ombre, repliche dei defunti» che ricorre in Odissea, XI, 476; XXIV, 14 e in Iliade XXIII, 72. Il termine ard!nanu/din!nu, inoltre, viene applicato sia ai vivi che ai morti. Nei rituali magici esso viene associato anche alla piccola statua che ha il compito di sostituire in «toto» la persona che «rappresenta»; in questo caso il lemma copre un arco semantico vicino a quello di eíd lon associato alle immagini artificiali fabbricate dall’uomo, ovvero al kolossós di cui parlano Erodoto e Pausania. 27 Venendo a zaq"qu/ziq"qu, 28 si osserva che tale termine ricopre almeno tre campi
semantici: 1) fantasma, spettro, ma anche nullità, inesistenza e idiozia; 2) posto infestato di spettri; 3) il/un dio del sogno. Tale lemma ricorre nel passo, sia sumerico che accadico, relativo al momentaneo ritorno di Enkidu sulla terra, contenuto, ricordiamo, in Gilgameš, Enkidu e gli Inferi e nella XII Tav. dell’Epopea di Gilgameš. Nella traduzione proposta da G. Pettinato si legge che Enkidu giunse al cospetto di Gilgameš «come una folata di vento», diversamente, secondo il CAD, egli si «materializzò» come un «fantasma», avvicinando, in tal modo il lemma ziq"qu a šaru nel suo quarto significato. 29 Ambedue le rese sono possibili, si deve però sottolineare che, in alcuni casi, tale termine ha valore, appunto, di vento. Venendo alla terza parola accadica, presa qui in considerazione, ovvero, šaru questa ha cinque significati, ovvero quello
25
existence, littéralement: «sont réduits à [n’être plus qu’]un souffle». Le passage est intéressant parce qu’il met l’accent sur le lien que l’on établissait entre le temple et le ou les dieu(x) qui l’habite(nt), comme si la ruine de son siège privait du même coup la divinité concerneé de son existence. Les soldats profanent les bosquets sacrés «où nul étranger n’avait jamais pénétré, ni foulé l’orée» et y mettent le feu». Nella nota 43 a p. 370 scrive: «les dieux et le déesses du pays d’Elam amnâ ana zaq"qi, littéralement: “je comptai comme un souffle.” La traduction que donnent ce passage CAD (1961), Z, p. 59a, et (1977), N1, p. 226b: “I counted [turned] their gods and goddesses as [into] powerless ghosts,” ne me semble pas rendre exactement la signification du passage, qui met plutôt l’accent sur le rôle tout à fait inexistant auquel sont réduits ces dieux chassés de leurs demeures par l’envahisseur, et qui, de ce fait, ont perdu leur efficacité et leurs pouvoir…. La traduction de zaq"qu par «souffle», à laquelle je me tiens, est la plus littérale et exprime bien l’état d’errance propre à ces dieux qui ne peuvent plus se fixer nulle part».
Ibid. 124: 26, citato dal CAD, D, sub voce din!nu, 2, p. 150. 26 ZA 45 206 IV 6 (Bogh. inc.) citato dal CAD, D, sub voce din!nu, 2, p. 150. 27 Erodoto, Le storie VI, 58 e I, 51, Pausania IV, 38. Per quanto concerne il rapporto tra eíd lon e kolossós in Erodoto ed in Pausania si veda J. P. Vernant, Figures, idoles, masques (Paris 1990), trad. it. di A. Zangara, Figure, idoli e maschere (Milano 2001), 35 sgg., dello stesso si veda anche, Mythe et pensée chez les Grecs. Etudes de psychologie historique (Paris 1971), trad. it. di M. Romano e B. Bravo, Mito e pensiero presso i Greci. Studi di psicologia storica (Torino 1978), 343 sgg. 28 zaq"qu/ziq"qu traduce il sumerico l i - i l ; l í l ; s ì g sìg; si-si-ig. 29 Elena Cassin, «Le mort: valeur er représentation en Mésopotamie ancienne», in G. Gnoli - J.P. Vernant (a cura), La mort, les morts dans les sociétés anciennes (Cambridge 1982), 363, afferma che Assurbanipal «... se vante d’avoir anéanti les sanctuaires élamites, de sorte que les dieux e les déesses du pays n’ont plus
101
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
di: 1) vento; 2) punto cardinale, direzione; 3) aria, afflato; 4) alito, emanazione; 5) vuotezza, nullità, vanità, bugia, etc. Di
questi il valore che qui interessa è il quarto. In KAR 21, alla r. 11 relativa al defunto, si legge:
lu e#emmu ša ina $#ri nadûma IM-šú la edpu šumšu la zukru “Se è lo spirito (di qualcuno) che fu buttato fuori nella steppa, il cui “alito” non ha lasciato il corpo, il cui nome non è stato menzionato (nelle offerte funebri).”
Tre tipi di fantasmi che disturbano i viventi sono qui elencati: lo spirito di una persona non seppellita, quello che non ha lasciato il corpo e, infine, lo spettro a cui nessuno fa offerte. La seconda accezione è la più interessante in quanto si accenna ad un “alito” – IM-šu – che non ha abbandonato il corpo del defunto. Secondo il CAD “alito” deve essere qui tradotto con “spirito” in quanto in alcuni contesti il termine sembra riferirsi ad esseri demoniaci – chiamati “vento,” “vento del deserto,” “cattivo vento” – considerati spiriti di persone decedute private, per i più diversi motivi, delle necessarie cure che permettono al loro spirito di abbandonare il corpo. 30 L’e#emmu, dunque, abbandona, con il sopraggiungere della morte, il corpo del defunto (in altri testi sembra fuoriuscire dalla bocca 31 ), è immaginato come la perfetta replica del vivente ed appare o è
simile ad un vento. In quanto tale non è dotato di un corpo e sembra, sulla base dei significati correlati, relegato al mondo del non essere, questo, chiaramente, rispetto a quello in cui vivono e agiscono gli esseri umani. Tale descrizione lo avvicina alla psyche omerica come alla sua definizione di eíd la kamónt n, anche se i campi semantici ricoperti dai tre termini prima analizzati, sono, senz’ombra di dubbio, più ampi e variegati di quelli omerici. Tornando, dopo questa lunga digressione, al tema che qui ci interessa, ovvero a quello relativo alla presenza di Nergal negli Inferi, osserviamo che il passo sumerico – citato all’inizio di questo lavoro ed in cui si accennava alla presenza, nel regno di Ereškigal del divino gidim del dio – è stato tradotto, ma anche reinterpretato dallo scriba accadico. Inglobato nella XII Tav. dell’Epopea di Gilgameš in cui si narra del viaggio di
30
da-ku5-ru-ne Se sono invece gli spiriti di famiglia che girovagano, fa sì che miele e burro siano recisi, 125 fa sì che il corpo della persona, il figlio del suo dio [non sia avvicina]to, lo spirito vitale del corpo pesante che esce dalla bocca [è uscito?] … che possono recidere. In questa ultima composizione ciò che dovrebbe lasciare il cadavere, non la bocca, è designato con «z i », ovvero lo spirito vitale infuso negli uomini. Tutto da studiare è il rapporto tra «z i », ovvero spirito vitale e «I M », vento, così come il loro rapporto con il lemma g i d i m /e#emmu. Si tratta, però, di uno studio che esula dal presente lavoro. Per una prima analisi del problema rimandiamo della scrivente a: «Il prigioniero e il morto. Epopea di Gilgameš, Tav. X, rr. 318320», in OA Miscellanea II (1995), 159-171. 31 Si veda nota precedente.
E’ interessante, a tal proposito notare che il sumerico [ b ] a - b a r - r a m u - u n - n à è equivalente a e-depu šá GIDIM. KAR 21 richiama un incantesimo (RA 17, 176 i 9') riguardante probabilmente lo spirito di Ardat-Lili in cui si afferma: ša e-#é-em-ma-ša [i]na pî la kuteššû Il cui e#emmu non è stato espluso dalla bocca. Mentre alla r. 11 di KAR 21 si parla di un “alito,” ovvero di uno spirito che non ha lasciato il corpo, qui viene menzionato l’e#emmu che, però, in questo caso, fuoriesce dalla bocca. KAR 21 sembra, avere, inoltre, un corrispettivo sumerico. Si tratta di un difficile brano tratto dall’Incantesimo ad Utu, rr. 124-126, in cui si legge: gidim im-ri-a-ni a-ba-su8-ge-eš "làl#(?) ì-nun a-ba-da-ku5-dè 125 su lú-ulù dumu dingir-ra-"na# [x x] x-e-dè zi su dugud-da ka-ta- "i#(?) x x x [x x] é102
C HIODI
Enkidu verso gli Inferi per cercare di recuperare il pukku e il mekku, lì caduti, del suo imprigionamento – in quanto egli non segue i consigli del re di Uruk su come ci si debba comportare per passare
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
lì inosservato –, lo scriba con queste parole presenta la supplica di Gilgameš al dio Enlil affinché faccia tornare l’amico sulla terra:
56 «Padre Enlil, oggi, mi è caduto il pukku negli Inferi, il mekku mi è caduto negli Inferi! Enkidu, che era andato per riportarmeli su, lo trattengono gli Inferi. Non lo trattiene Namtar, non lo trattiene Asakku, lo trattengono gli Inferi colà! 60 Non lo trattiene il rappresentante (r!bi$u) di Nergal, lo trattengono gli Inferi. Non cadde in battaglia, lo trattengono gli Inferi.
Come si può leggere, alla r. 60, lo scriba non ha scritto: «Non lo trattiene il divino gidim di Nergal…», ma «Non lo trattiene il r!bi$u di Nergal…», ovvero il rappresentante, l’ambasciatore, l’alter ego del dio. Vi sono a questo punto due possibilità: o affermiano che gli Accadi hanno considerato l’e#emmu – la resa accadica del gidim sumerico – un r!bi$u, ovvero un «rappresentante» della persona deceduta, oppure r!bi$u può, in certi casi, avere un significato simile a quello di ardan!nu precedentemente affrontato. Per quanto concerne la prima ipotesi si deve, innanzitutto, sottolineare che r!bi$u oltre a indicare un rappresentante ufficiale dell’alta autorità, designava anche un demone o un genio protettore, e – dal periodo di Ur III – un giudice. 32 L’e#emmu non ha questi valori, a meno che non si voglia considerare un aspetto: il suo potere benefico e malefico nei confronti degli esseri viventi. In tal caso, però, il suo campo d’azione sembra limitato al mondo umano, differentemente dai demoni, dai geni protettori divini e,
in taluni casi, dai divini gidim che agiscono in tutto il cosmo Lo scriba accadico ha tradotto con r!bi$u proprio il «dingir gidim», ovvero «il divino spirito», non un semplice spirito umano e, nella stessa Tavola XII dell’Epopea di Gilgameš, ha definito Enkidu, tornato momentaneamente sulla terra, un utukku, non un e#emmu; e, come si è già detto, con utukku venivano indicati sia gli spiriti benefici che malefici. A questo punto non ci si può non chiedere quale differenza intercorrava tra utukku e r!bi$u, visto che ambeude indicano, in taluni casi, gli spiriti buoni e cattivi. 33 R!bi$u, differentemente da utukku, ha bisogno, davanti al segno, del determinativo divino, in mancanza di questo generalmente il suo significato cambia. Di conseguenza sembra che con questo termine si volesse indicare un demone o un genio protettivo divino mentre, con utukku oltre a questi anche gli spiriti dei defunti. Non è forse un caso che Enkidu fu definito utukku, egli, infatti, non apparteneva al mondo divino. Nell’Epopea di Gilgameš lo scriba,
32
giuri Udug-hul-a-meš dove compare spesso al posto del demone Asag, Maškim), la qual cosa dimostrerebbe quanto sia sottile la differenza fra r!bi$u e utukku.
Si veda CAD, R, sub voce r!bi$u, p. 20-23. E’ interessante notare che il corrispettivo sumerico di utukku è udug. Ora, gli scribi accadici traducevano r!bi$u non solo il sumerico maškim, ma anche udug (per quanto concerne maškim si veda la serie di scon33
103
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
però, non ha apposto davanti a r!bi$u il determinativo divino, e veniamo così alla seconda ipotesi. Proprio per tale motivo deduciamo che, in questo caso, non lo si considerava un demone o un genio protettore, ma un rappresentante ufficiale. In quanto tale, la sua funzione non è molta diversa da quella svolta da un sostituto, come si evince dal primo significato del termine ardan!nu/dananu. E’, però, vero che, in questo lavoro, è stato preso in considerazione il secondo valore di tale lemma, ovvero quello di doppio, di sostituto del defunto ed in questo caso non si tratta di un qualcuno che fa le veci di un altro, ma, del fantasma del morto. Come vedremo, nel caso specifico di Nergal colui lo che rappresenta è, e non è, un’altra divinità in quanto ha un diversa persona, ma ha la stessa natura di colui che rappresenta. Proprio per questo motivo, possiamo affermare che, nel racconto che analizzeremo, r!bi$u copre un arco semantico vicino a quello di ardan!nu che, come si è detto, può essere
considerato il corrispettivo dell’eíd lon greco. Proprio questi dati, insieme alla descrizione del fallimentare abbraccio fra Gilgameš ed Enkidu – contenuto nella medesima Tavola – porta a considerare il passo simile a quello omerico relativo alla presenza dell’eíd lon di Eracle nell’Ade. Ma chi era il r!bi$u di Nergal negli Inferi e di cui accenna la Tavola XII dell’Epopea di Gilgameš? Il passo prima citato tace su questo punto ci viene, però, incontro un altro poemetto babilonese, Nergal ed Ereškigal. Si tratta di un testo dagli interessanti risvolti teologici e che conobbe un gran successo nel mondo antico; basti pensare che noi oggi abbiamo a disposizione tre copie di questo racconto provenienti rispettivamente dalla Mesopotamia, dall’Egitto e dalla Turchia e che abbracciano un periodo di tempo che va da circa il 1400 al 500/400 a.C. Come si cercherà di dimostrare, probabilmente dietro al termine r!bi$u si nasconde, in questo caso, il dio Erra.
Versioni di Sultantepe e di Uruk Le versioni che vengono qui prese in visione sono quelle provenienti da Uruk e da Sultantepe. La prima è molto frammentaria, ma è in più punti parallela con quella di Sultantepe, la più lunga e la più completa. Non sarà analizzata, invece, quella proveniente da Tell el-Amarna in quanto incompleta, non tutto il testo è, infatti, riportato come ammette lo stesso scriba alla fine della sua copiatura; ma soprattutto perché non è illuminante sui punti di cui ci stiamo qui occupando. Il racconto, come è noto, narra della I
104
30
discesa agli Inferi del dio Nergal a seguito di un comportamento irriguardoso nei confronti di Namtar, il messaggero di Ereškigal. La narrazione, dopo una lacuna di circa 15 righe di cui 10 sono state integrate dagli studiosi sulla base del racconto di Tell el-Amarna, si apre con la descrizione del viaggio del messaggero celeste Kakka verso la cittadella infera, incaricato dal dio del cielo Anu di comunicare il seguente messaggio alla regina Ereškigal:
«Anu [tuo] padre mi ha mandato [a te] (con il messaggio): “Poiché tu non puoi salire sopra, nel tuo anno non puoi salire al nostro cospetto,
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
e noi non possiamo scendere giù, nel nostro mese non possiamo scendere al tuo cospetto, 35
possa un tuo messaggero venire (qui) e ripulire il desco ricevendo la tua spettanza; tutto ciò che io gli darò, egli deve consegnarlo integralmente a te”». 34
Seguono fra Kakka ed Ereškigal dei convenevoli ed infine la regina delle tenebre decide di mandare come suo rappresentante al banchetto celeste: Namtar. Che cosa successe nella corte celeste quando questo dio dell’aldilà si presentò r. II
0' …1'
non è subito detto in quanto la narrazione si interrompe; quando riprende troviamo il dio della saggezza Ea intento a biasimare Nergal per il suo comportamento irrispettoso:
[Ea aprì la sua bocca e disse, a Nergal rivolse la parola:] [ ]…[ ] «[Quando il messaggero di Ereškigal] giunse ne[lla corte di Anu] dal suo viaggio [dal Paese da cui non si ritorna]
5
[gli dèi davanti] a lui si inchinarono tutti, [gli dèi grandi], i signori dei destini, poiché da lui emanava l’aura, l’aura (del potere) [degli Inferi], [degli dèi] che abitano nell’Ir[kalla]. E tu perché non ti sei inchinato al suo cospetto? [ ] Con i miei occhi ti guardavo di traverso,
10
ma tu facevi finta di non capire, … I tuoi occhi erano rivolti al suolo».
Quasi nulla, purtroppo, è conservato della risposta di Nergal: S II
12-17 20'
34
(Rotto:) [Nergal aprì la sua bocca e disse, ad Ea rivolse la parola:] [ ] voglio alzarmi [ ] hai detto …il corpo per quanto la mia divinità è… farò in due (raddoppierò) 35
Trad. it. di G. Pettinato, Nergal ed Ereškigal, 77. D’ora in poi sarà citata questa traduzione. 35 S II 17' (Rotto:) 18' [ l u]-ut-bi x 19' [ ] x taq-bi 20' [ ] x ma-la d ingir x ana 2-šú e$-$ep-šú. Diversamente G. Pettinato, Nergal ed Ereškigal, 81, non integra il “corpo,” ma si veda commento ad II 20, p. 112; C. Saporetti, Appunti sul poemetto “Nergal ed Ereškigal,” OA Miscellanea I (1994), 26, così traduce le righe in questione «[…Nergal gli rispose: “… Volevo al]zarmi … tu hai detto … sarà raddoppiato quanto (hanno offerto?) gli dèi(?)”», C. Saporetti, Nergal ed Ereškigal (Pisa 1995), 47: «“[… che io ] mi alzi, [Farò ciò che] tu hai detto, […] quanto … per due lo raddoppierà”»; O.R. Gurney, The Myth of
Nergal and Ereškigal, AnSt 10 (1960), 113: «Nergal opened his mouth to speak and said to Ea:] [“…] I will arise […] you said […] … he/I will twine it double”»; G.G.W. Müller, in K. Hecker et al. (eds.), Weisheitstexte, Mythen und Epen, TUAT III, Mythen und Epen II (Gütersloh 1994) p. 762: «[Nergal tat seinen Mund auf zu sprechen und sagte zu Ea]: [“… ich will mich] aufmachen, […] sagtest du, […] … werde ich verdoppeln”»; M. Hutter, Altorientalische Vorstellungen von der Unterwelt. Literar- und religionsgeschichtliche Überlegungen zu “Nergal und Ereškigal,” Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 63 (FreiburgGöttingen 1985), 22 «[Nergal öffnete seinen Mund, er sagte zu Ea und sprach]: [“… ich will mich] aufmachen, [ich will beherzigen, was] du sagtest. … ich will es verdoppeln”». 105
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Ci chiediamo se l’ultima frase, purtroppo mutila, sulla base di quello che noi sappiamo del racconto e di altri elementi che verranno in seguito elencati, non possa essere interpretata in questa direzione: il testo sta qui accennando a quello che accadrà nel prosieguo della narrazione. In altri termini, sembra che qui Nergal si proponga di sdoppiare se stesso, di creare un «doppio» di sé, per avere la meglio sulle ferree leggi degli Inferi. 36 Prima di soffermarci su questo aspetto è utile continuare il racconto che via via chiarirà quello che stiamo cercando di dimostrare. Ea, ascoltato il proposito di Nergal,
dopo aver pensato tra sé, dà alcuni consigli al dio per poter portare a buon termine la sua «missione». Innanzittutto, dopo avergli ricordato che la sua sola spada poco può fare nell’aldilà, gli ordina di costruire un seggio per Anu e Ningizzida (nella versione di Sultantepe), o per Ea Ninšiku (in quella di Uruk). Compiuta la prima opera egli gli impartisce alcune raccomandazioni che, quando si troverà nel regno delle tenebre, dovrà eseguire alla lettera per non essere qui definitivamente trattenuto, preso prigioniero. Solo se egli si atterrà scrupolosamente ad esse potrà tornare sano e salvo in cielo:
«Non appena tu arriverai e ti si offrirà un trono 40 non correre a sederti su di esso; quando il cuoco ti porterà del pane, non correre a mangiarlo; quando il macellaio ti offrirà la carne, non correre a mangiarla; quando il birraio ti offrirà la birra, non correre a berla; quando ti si porterà acqua per pulire i piedi non correre a pulirti i piedi; 50 quando essa (= Ereškigal) entrerà nel bagno e avrà indosso come abito solo il suo corpo e ti mostrerà così le sue grazie, tu, non alzare gli occhi su di lei alla maniera di un uomo e di una donna.
Accettare qualsiasi offerta, dividere cibo o bevande con le divinità di questo reame significa creare un vincolo inscindibile con l’oltretomba, per questo Nergal deve fare attenzione. Questo concetto non è esclusivo dei Mesopotamici, lo ritroviamo espresso in altre culture, come ad esempio in Grecia nell’Inno omerico a Demetra, in cui viene narrato il ratto di Persefone da parte di Ade, il dolore della madre e il loro temporaneo ritrovarsi. Proprio quando madre e figlia felice-
mente si rincontrano, Demetra «presa da cupo terrore e interrompendo gli abbracci» 37 domanda con ansia alla figlia se essa ha mangiato qualcosa negli Inferi. Se così fosse stato ella, allora, sarebbe stata destinata a vivere con il re dell’oltretomba per un terzo dell’anno e solo il resto del tempo in cielo con gli immortali. Ma torniamo al mito mesopotamico, dove – dopo una rottura di alcune righe in parte integrate dagli studiosi – ritroviamo Nergal intento a recarsi nell’oltre-
36
toto prigioniero della Terra del non ritorno. 37 Inno a Demetra, r. 391-392, trad. it. di F. Càssola, in Inni omerici (Milano 1997), 69.
Oppure se colui che parla non è Nergal, ma Ea, il dio della saggezza sembra proporre, per salvare Nergal, lo sdoppiamento del dio della guerra, cosicché diventi impossibile renderlo definitivamente e in 106
C HIODI
tomba. Giunto alla porta degli Inferi, il portinaio, da quello che si comprende vista la frammentarietà del testo, gli chiede di attendere, in quanto deve riferire sul viaggiatore. Quando la narrazione riprende troviamo Namtar intento a scrutare il nuovo arrivato; e a questo punto S III
20'
della narrazione lo scriba inserisce un dato: colui che Namtar scorge non viene, come ci si aspetterebbe, chiamato Nergal, ma Erra. Come vedremo, questo elemento sarà molto importante per il problema che stiamo qui analizzando:
Namtar andò e da dietro la porta scrutò Erra. 38
Namtar, impallidì come un tamarisco tagliato, le sue labbra divennero lucide come il bordo di una cannuccia vedendo Erra, il dio che lo aveva offeso e che non si era inchinato al suo cospetto quando
egli era salito in cielo per ordine della regina delle tenebre. Egli, allora, corse verso Ereškigal e le rivelò con queste parole l’identità del nuovo venuto:
S III S III
24' 25'
“Mia Signora, quando tu mi mandasti [da Anu], tuo padre, entrando nel cortile [di Anu]
U III U III S III U III
1' 1'-2' 28-31 3'
si inchinarono davanti a me gli dèi tutti, [ ] si inchinarono tutti gli dèi al mio cospetto [ ] ora sono scesi al Paese del non ritorno.” 39
Il plurale usato dallo scriba di Uruk è problematico. Un gruppo di divinità è sceso negli Inferi – e a questo punto non ci si può non chiedere chi siano e perché colà si siano recati –, o, invece, non si deve forse leggere questa riga alla luce di quanto ha scritto precedentemente il compilatore della tavoletta di Sultantepe alla col. II r. 20' di cui abbiamo parlato prima? Anche qui purtroppo si tratta di
un passo molto mutilo per cui, prima di avanzare una qualsiasi ipotesi, è meglio continuare la narrazione che, come vedremo, chiarirà l’uso apparentemente improprio del plurale. Ereškigal, ascoltate da Namtar le novità, pronuncia inizialmente alcune frasi dal significato incomprensibile e in seguito gli impartisce il seguente ordine:
S III U III
40' 11'
«Va, Namta[r ]». «Va, Namtar e fai entrare al mio cospetto quel dèi».
U III
12'
Namtar andò e fece entrare gli dèi Erra. 40
Nella versione di Uruk, come si può vedere, lo scriba non ha scritto alla r. 11', come ci si sarebbe aspettati, d i n g i r S III 20 dnam-tar il-lik-m[a ina $]i-li giš.ig ippa-la-šú dèr-ra. 39 S III 24 be-el-ti ul-"tú# [ana da-nim a]d-ki tašpu-ri-ni-ma S III 25 ana ki-sal-li [da-nim ina] e-re-bi-ja S III 26 kan-su áš-r[u dingir.meš ina p!ni-ya] U III 1' kan-su áš-r[u dingir.meš ina p!ni-ya] S III 27 kan-su [ ] U III 1'/2' [kan-su] // dingir.meš ina igi-ja "it#38
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
šá-a-šú, «quel dio», e alla r. 12' d i n g i r e r - r a «il dio Erra», ma d i n g i r m e š šá-a-šú, «quel dèi» spiegato nella
d
[bu-ú] S III 28-31 [ ] ] S III 32 "e#-[nin-na U III 3' e-ni-na it-tar-du ana kur.nu.g[i4.a ]. 40 S III 40 a-"lik#-ma dnam-ta[r ] U III 11' a-lik-ma dnam-tar-ri dingir.meš šá-ašú šu-ri-bi ana mah-ri-ja U III 12' dnam-tar-ri il-lik-ma ú-še-rib dingir.meš dèr-ra. 107
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
riga seguente con d i n g i r . m e š d e r r a , «gli dèi Erra». Non si tratta di un errore scribale, ma probabilmente di un artificio per far capire all’ascoltatore che un dio, che in realtà è doppio, sta varU III
3'
ora sono scesi al Paese del non ritorno.
e probabilmente anche con quanto riportava «lo scriba di Sultantepe» quando faS II
20'
108
48' 3/
ceva dire a Nergal (o a Ea) il suo intento con queste parole:
[… il corpo per] quanto la mia divinità è … farò in due (raddoppierò).
In altri termini, Nergal per cercare di eludere le leggi dell’aldilà si è sdoppiato, è diventato «gli Erra» anche se apparentemente è sempre uno. Interessante, inoltre, è la scelta che lo scriba fa del nome del dio. Egli poteva benissimo dire che gli «dèi Nergal» varcano la soglia degli Inferi, invece preferisce, proprio in questo momento della narrazione, cambiare nome, come se volesse marcare ulteriormente il cambiamento di status del dio. Inoltre, se Erra fosse semplicemente un altro nome di Nergal non si capirebbe perché il compilatore del mito scambi i due nomi solo in momenti precisi e problematici della narrazione. Ma, ancora una volta, per capire meglio questo gioco delle alternanze è importante continuare l’esposizione del mito. Arrivato al cospetto di Ereškigal, il dio del cielo comunica alla regina delle tenebre che è giunto colà per odine di Anu. Per tutta risposta Ereškigal gli offre di sedersi su un trono, così potrà esercitare la giustizia dei grandi dèi. Il dio non vi si avvicinò. Gli portarono allora il pane, poi la carne, poi la birra, ma egli rifiutò tutti i doni. Ereškigal, allora, entrò in bagno e si denudò, ma egli rimase impassibile. A questo punto il testo diventa frammentario. Da quanto si può capire, Ereškigal, vista fallire la sua tattica, si S IV UV
cando la soglia degli Inferi. Questo è in perfetta concordanza con quanto affermava precedentemente alla r. 3 della col. III la stessa versione di Uruk:
consulta con i grandi dèi dell’aldilà. Sembra che Nergal – nominato al singolare – ascolti le loro discussioni e a causa di ciò cambi repentinamente parere in merito al suo comportamento. Quando il mito riprende la narrazione troviamo ancora una volta Ereškigal intenta a spogliarsi, a questo punto il dio del cielo – non nominato dallo scriba – cede alle seduzioni della regina degli Inferi. Il testo si interrompe nuovamente e quando riprende troviamo il dio che chiede implorante ad Ereškigal di tornare nuovamente, seppur momentaneamente, in cielo. Non conosciamo la risposta della regina, sappiamo però che egli va senza indugi verso la porta degli Inferi ed ordina al portinaio di lasciarlo andare, di liberarlo per ordine di Ereškigal. A questo punto Nergal, nominato al singolare, sale le lunghe scale che portano in cielo e qui suo padre Ea, lo asperge con acqua di fonte per renderlo calvo, strabico e deforme cosicché non lo riconosca il messaggero di Ereškigal che sicuramente verrà a cercarlo. Ereškigal, intanto, ignara di quello che è successo, chiama Namtar e lo incarica di purificare la casa, di portare un seggio e del cibo per il messaggero di Anu colà giunto. Namtar, però, le comunica che cosa nel frattempo era successo:
[il messaggero di Anu], nostro padre, che è venuto a noi [il messaggero] di Anu, nostro padre, che è venuto a noi
C HIODI
S IV UV
49' /3
prima che il sole spuntasse, è salito al suo monte. prima che il sole spuntasse, sono saliti al suo monte. 41
Anche questa volta il compilatore di Uruk usa il plurale, in perfetto accordo con quanto affermava precendentemente U III
3'
50
quando descriveva “il dèi” che si era presentato agli Inferi:
ora sono scesi al Paese del non ritorno.”
Ricalcando qui ancora una volta la pluralità del dio quando si presenta ed entra nella Terra del non ritorno. S IV
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Ereškigal ascoltata la notizia, si abbandona a scene di disperazione:
[Ere]škigal inspirò ed emise un forte grido, dal trono si buttò giù, per terra, dai suoi occhi cominciarono a scendere lacrime: sulle sue guance scorrevano le sue lacrime: «Erra, mio amante, mio piacere, non mi ero ancora saziata del suo piacere che già mi ha abbandonato; Erra mio amante, mio piacere, non mi ero ancora saziata del suo piacere che già mi ha abbandonato».
Come si può notare, Ereškigal rivendica come suo amante Erra, non Nergal e anche questo è in armonia con quanto precedentemente aveva affermato lo scriba di Sultantepe relativamente al dio che era entrato negli Inferi – Namtar scorge
alla soglia Erra e non Nergal – come se si volesse sottolineare che colui che agisce negli Inferi non sia Nergal, ma il suo doppio, il suo alter ego, Erra. Ma continuiamo la narrazione e vediamo qual è la reazione di Namtar:
S IV UV
58' 10
Namtar aprì la sua bocca e disse, ad Ereškigal rivolse la parola: Namtar aprì la sua bocca e disse, ad Ereškigal rivolse la parola:
S IV UV
59' 11
[«Da Anu, tuo padre,] mandami: voglio prendere prigioniero quel dio [«Da Anu, tuo padre,] mandami: voglio prendere prigioniero quel dèi
S IV UV
60' 11
e portartelo.” 42
Come si può notare lo scriba di Uruk fa dire a Namtar che egli vuol prendere prigioniero non “il dio” che ha offeso la
regina, ma “il dèi,” come se egli fosse sempre stato conscio del gioco che Nergal aveva attuato.
41 S IV 48 [dumu šip-ri šá da-nim a]d-ni šá il-li-kana-ši U V 3/ [dumu šip-ri] šá d60 ad-ka šá il-lik-anna-a-šú S IV 49 [la-am ur-ra i-nam-mi-ru šá-d]a-šú e"tu#-li U V /3 la-am ur-ra i-nam-mi-ru šá-da-šú i-te-lu. 42 S IV 58 "dnam#-tar pa-a-šú du11-ma du11.ga ana d ereš-ki-gal a-mat muár
U V 10 [dnam-tar pa-a-šú] dù-ma du11.ga ana ereš-ki-gal a-mat muár S IV 59 [ana da-nim ad-k]a šu-p[u]-"ur!#-[in-nim]a dingir šá-a-šú lu $ab-tak-ma U V 11/ [ana d60 a]d-ka šu-pur-in-ni-ma dingir.meš šá-a-šú lu-u$-bat-tak-ma S IV 60 [ lu]l!-qa-ak-ki ka-a-ši U V /1 lul-qa-ka ka-a-šú. d
109
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Ereškigal, continua il racconto, dopo essersi abbandonata a scene di disperaV
zione, incarica Namtar di salire in cielo e di ripetere le seguenti parole ai grandi dèi:
3
«Da quando ero fanciulla ed adolescente
5
non ho avuto modo di conoscere i giochi delle vergini, non ho conosciuto nessun gioco dei bambini. [Quel dio che] avete inviato a me si è unito a me, possa (ora) egli giacere con me. Mandate qui quel dio perché possa essere il mio amante, perché possa giacere con me. Io sono diventata impura, non sono più vergine, non posso quindi emettere sentenze sui grandi dèi, sui grandi dèi che abitano l’Irkalla!
10
Se voi non manderete qui quel dio secondo [le leggi dell’Irkal]la e del Grande Paese, allora io farò salire i morti, perché possano mangiare i vivi, farò diventare i morti più numerosi dei vivi».
Ereškigal non menziona il nome del dio che l’ha sedotta e il testo di Sultantepe usa sempre il singolare. 43 La minaccia di Ereškigal, se attuata porterebbe ad un totale sovvertimento dell’ordine cosmico, cosa questa da evitare assolutamente. Ecco, allora, che cosa escogita ancora una volta il dio della saggezza Ea. Egli invita Namtar ad entrare nel vasto cortile del cielo – dove tutti gli dèi sono riuniti – per cercare, sempre che lo trovi, il fuggiasco. Inutile dire che Namtar non riconosce “il dèi” nella divinità strabica e deforme, per cui se ne torna a mani vuote negli Inferi. Ereškigal, però, non si fa ingannare dall’astuto Ea e ordina a Namtar di prendere prigioniero proprio quello strano dio che sicuramente altro non è che colui che l’ha
abbandonata. Il testo a questo punto diventa lacunoso; da quello che si comprende, Namtar trovato colui che cercava e che alla r. 2 e 5 della col. VI chiama Erra, sembra esprimere il desiderio di ucciderlo; in seguito gli spiega tutte le regole della terra tenebrosa. Innanzittutto egli deve portarsi un trono 44 più altri sei oggetti di cui nulla sappiamo in quanto il testo ha molte lacune. Da quanto si evince da quel che rimane del racconto di Sultantepe, il dio celeste – il nome purtroppo non è conservato – pone qualcosa nel suo cuore, ed unge il suo tendine e tende l’arco, ma mentre accede agli Inferi attraverso le sette porte viene piano piano spogliato da tutto ciò che egli aveva portato con sé 45 :
43 Si potrebbe ipotizzare che ella non conoscesse il nome di colui che aveva giaciuto con lei; in realtà, alla col. IV di S. r. 54, 56, la regina degli Inferi lo ha chiamato Erra. Per una diversa interpretazione si veda M. Hutter, Altorientalische Vorstellungen von der Unterwelt, p. 71. 44 Il seggio, probabilmente, era funzionale alla sua nuova vita negli Inferi. Sposando Ereškigal egli diventa il re di questa terra tenebrosa e, come tale,
quando sarà seduto sul suo trono, emetterà sui nuovi arrivati le sentenze degli Inferi. 45 La svestizione della divinità celeste mentre oltrepassa le soglie degli Inferi è un classico nella letteratura mesopotamica. Anche la dea dell’amore, Ištar, fu spogliata di tutto ciò che indossava quando varcò le sette porte, per cui giunse davanti a sua sorella Ereškigal nuda e quindi impotente.
110
C HIODI
S. VI
28
(Egli) entrò quindi nella vasta corte,
30
le andò incontro e sorrise; la prese per i capelli;
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
dal [trono?] … [ ] la prese [per la chio]ma tanto era l’amore nel suo amore;
35
si abbracciarono allora fratello e sorella e nella camera da letto essi voluttuosamente entrarono. Un giorno, due giorni fecero l’amore la regina E[reškigal ed E]rra; tre giorni, [quattro giorni], DITTO cinque giorni [ sei giorni [
40
[ [
] DITTO ] DITTO; ] quando ] giunse.
Il finale del racconto è dapprima lacunoso e poi rotto, per cui non si possono trarre altri dati oltre a quelli che ci offre quest’ultimo passo. Innanzittutto, da quanto si evince, secondo lo scriba di Sultantepe, il dio che fa l’amore con la regina degli Inferi è Erra, anche se poco prima chiamò Nergal il dio che scese negli Inferi. 46 Sembra quasi, che sia l’autore della tavoletta di Sultentatepe sia quello di Uruk, volutamente nominino sempre il dio che agisce negli Inferi con il nome di Erra, mentre invece quando l’azione si svolge in cielo oppure quando nell’aldilà si deve prendere una decisione, con quello di Nergal; inoltre il redattore di Uruk usa il singolare-plurale quando si riferisce a colui/coloro che agisce/ono negli Inferi. Che cosa significa tutto questo scambio di nomi? Che cosa vuol dirci lo scriba con questo artificio? Si potrebbe ipotizzare, come si è già
detto, che in realtà nulla si celi dietro questo mito perché Erra altro non è che un altro nome di Nergal, ma se così fosse non si capirebbe l’alternanza dei nomi solo in precisi e importanti momenti della narrazione mitica e non in qualsiasi momento della vicenda. Ricordo, infatti, che chi offende in cielo l’araldo della regina degli Inferi è Nergal. Ne dovrebbe conseguire che colui che scende agli Inferi debba sempre essere Nergal, eppure, lo scriba di Uruk nomina il dio celeste, usando un singolare-plurale, che attende di poter varcare le soglie degli Inferi con un altro nome: Erra. Ed è sempre Erra, anzi gli Erra, colui/coloro che Namtar fa entrare dietro ordine di Ereškigal. Ambedue le versioni, poi, affermano che il dio che Ereškigal reclama come amante è Erra, così come colui che fa l’amore con lei è chiamato con tale nome. Diversamente, il dio fuggito dal regno delle tenebre e colui che qui ritorna è nominato Nergal.
46
ferma su tale aspetto. Dato questo ripreso da G. Selz, UGASL (Philadelphia 1995), 299 n. 46, ambedue non giungono, però, alle conclusioni da me tratte.
Di questo scambio di nomi si era già accorta V. Afanasieva, «Vom Gleichgewicht der Toten und der Lebenden», ZA 70 (1981), 167, anche se non si sof-
111
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Probabilmente quello che il mito vuol dirci è che il dio che si unì con la regina degli Inferi, cioè Erra, è e non è Nergal, per cui queste due divinità sono e non sono la stessa divinità. Sembra, in altri termini, che qui ci troviamo di fronte ad una speculazione sulla natura e sulla persona del dio, che si può così riassumere: Nergal è due, ma nel contempo è uno; la natura è una, ma le persone sono due: Nergal ed Erra. La loro identica natura spiega anche la loro interscambiabilità e quindi la difficoltà di riconoscerli. Proprio questo aspetto permetterà a Nergal, diventato due, di sfuggire alla dura legge dell’aldilà. Una parte di sé, la sua copia, può benissimo qui essere trattenuta, ma
non in toto il dio in persona; il discorso vale anche rovesciato. Solo così divengono chiari gli strani plurali-singolari usati dallo scriba di Uruk, i quali a loro volta sembrano chiarire la frase mutila della versione di Sultantepe: «[il corpo per] quanto la mia divinità è … raddoppierò». In altri termini, Nergal attraverso tale astuzia è riuscito ad aggirare, rispettandola, una ferrea legge degli Inferi di cui siamo edotti, ad esempio, dalla composizione sumerica: La discesa di Inanna agli Inferi. Quando la dea, si legge nel testo, si accinse a lasciare il tenebroso regno dei morti, gli Annunna, i grandi dèi, la fermarono e le dissero:
«Chi mai salito al Kur, ne è disceso libero? Se ora Inanna vuol scendere dal Kur, una testa per la sua testa dia!». 47
Per quanto concerne Nergal il suo sostituto, almeno da come si evince dal mito, altro non è che la sua replica, il suo perfetto gemello. Attraverso questo stratagemma il dio non solo riesce ad avere la meglio sugli Inferi, ma riesce a diventare un dio più potente in quanto allarga la sua sfera di influenza. Egli, infatti, oltre ad essere, in terra, il dio della guerra diviene, in quanto sposo di Ereškigal, il sovrano degli Inferi. Chiaramente questo status si attua solo nella condizione di gemello. Se cerchiamo altre fonti che possano confermare quanto detto fino ad ora queste si possono ritrovare tra le speculazio-
ni astrologiche. Si deve innazittutto sottolineare che Nergal, forse non a caso, oltre ad essere associato al pianeta Marte, fu identificato con un emblematico segno zodiacale: i gemelli. Questi, poi, nell’Astrolabio B, 48 dove vengono forniti i nomi dei Grandi (MAŠ.TAB.BA.GAL. GAL) e dei Piccoli Gemelli (MAŠ.TAB. BA.TUR.TUR), sono rispettivamente chiamati Nergal e Erra (mentre i piccoli Lugalgirra e Meslamtaea 49 ). Questo testo astrologico, inoltre, fornisce un illuminante passo il cui contenuto ben si inserisce con quanto sottilmente afferma questo mito. Alla col. III r. 1-10 della sezione A (KAV 218) si legge 50 :
III 1 i t i - g a [ n é-gál é - n u n t u 10 ] 2 MUL [… ur-sag kala-ga d ir-ra-gal] u r urugal-la-[ta ba-ra]-è 3 4 ur4-ur4 [dingir-maš]-tab-ba
47
Discesa di Inanna agli Inferi, rr. 286-289, trad. it. di G. Pettinato, Mitologia sumerica (Torino 2001), 275. 48 Astrolabio B, III 33 sgg. 112
6 ITI.GAN hé-gal-lu u nu-uh-šu 7 uk-ta-ma-ru UR.SAG dan-nu 8 d U+GUR iš-tu er-$e-ti i-la-a 9 ka-šu-uš [DINGIR].MEŠ ki-lal-la-an
49
Diversamente in M u l. a p i n vengono invertiti. Compilato nel periodo neo-assiro però le prime copie sono del periodo medio-assiro (1400-1300). 50
C HIODI
5 iti ur-sag GÌR.BÍL AŠ.DU
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
10 ITI UR.SAG [gít-m]a-li d U+GUR
«Nel mese Gan (IX 51 ) abbondanza e prosperità/ vengono accumulate, l’eroe forte,/ Nergal (in sum. Erra) è salito dagli Inferi/ unendo (sum. raccogliendo) i due dèi gemelli,/ è il mese del giovane eroe Nergal».
Il verbo sumerico ur 4 -ur 4 , raccogliere, significa tornare insieme, diventare uno e il testo accadico chiarifica che cosa si vuol dire: «rendere uno i due gemelli», i quali hanno ragione di esistere solo in quanto sono separati, mentre, quando uno sale, essi scompaiono perché esiste in S II
20'
[… il corpo per] quanto la mia divinità è … farò in due (raddoppierò).
Questi passi confermano la nostra interpretazione del mito di Nergal ed Ereškigal, ma essi non sono gli unici. Un amuleto neo-assiro discusso da 1
5
questa nuova condizione solo una divinità. I gemelli, in altri termini, risultano come due emanazioni della stessa divinità, e tale dato non può non richiamare quanto si afferma, anche se in modo lacunoso nella versione di Sultantepe del mito di Nergal ed Ereškigal:
d
MAŠ. d MAŠ MAŠ.TAB.BA SAG.GÁ DU.DU GABA $UL.GÁL NU.UN.GI.GI ZI d ASAL.LÚ.$I LUGAL AN.KI.A $É.PÀD DINGIR $UL NAM.BA. TE.GE 26 . DA ÉN
Wiggermann 52 mostra nel verso due figure identiche con mazza e doppia ascia, mentre nel recto viene riportato il seguente testo: maš-maš, coppia, andate davanti, il petto del cattivo fate vacillare. Per la vita di Asalluhi re del cielo e della terra sii scongiurato; il dio cattivo non si avvicini. Scongiuro.
Il testo, indirizzato al dio maš-maš, i gemelli, un nome di Nergal, ma anche, ricorda Wiggermann, di Meslamtaea e di Lugalgirra, mostra, secondo lo studioso che «… the incantation concerns the reduplicated god on the other side» egli inoltre osserva che «The amulet and the text imply that one god, Meslantaea, is imagined as having two identical bodies», anche se, a proposito di Meslantaea, osserva che la scelta dell’identificazione del dio o degli dèi non è facile, e si basa solo sulla presenza della mazza e della
doppia ascia, ma osserva poco dopo: «in the new b"t m#seri manuscript SpTU 3 69:2 it is Lugalgirra who is armed with mace and axe (also Nergal and a figure whose name is broken), which stresses the identity of two gods, and the futility of choosing». Comunque stiano qui le cose, a noi interessava portare un’ulteriore attestazione relativa ad un dio «replicato», in quanto ciò mostra la diffusione di questa ideologia. Altri due testi sono a questo proposito
51
cate, e 68 in cui si afferma: «Our suspicion that the mace is the sign of office of the divine deputy (u d u g /r!bi$u), and that the divine deputy appears as the “god with the mace” on OB (and later peripheral) seals, must be substantiated elsewhere».
IX mese = novembre-dicembre. Si veda E. Reiner, En$ma, Anu, Enlil, Tablets 50-51, in Babylonian Planetary Omens 2 (Malibu 1981), 82. 52 F.A.M. Wiggermann, Mesopotamian Protective Spirits. The ritual texts (Groningen 1992), 38, si veda anche 18sgg., relative a quattro statue divine redupli-
113
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
illuminanti. Si tratta di un passo riportato da Tallqvist, 53 3 R 66, IV 17 in cui Nergal è chiamato: il!ni ša m!t Namar «gli dèi (al plurale) del paese di Namar», ed un altro, riportato da E. von Weiher, 54
15
.................... U 4 .2.KAM šá arah du’$zi ina mu-ši i-šá-a-ta ina b"t d nèrgal ta-an-da-qu-ut lú za-zak-ku u md nabû-n!$ir a-na muh-hi it-tal-ku-nu ina giš $illi šá il!ni meš šu-lum a-na mim-ma ma-la ina lìb-bi il!ni meš a-na b"t d lugal-marad-da nu-ul-le ! -ti-iq
in cui si afferma che a causa di un incendio nella cappella di Nergal «i due Nergal» furono trasportati dall’Eanna di Uruk nel tempio del dio Lugalmarad:
.............. il secondo giorno del mese di Tammuz, di notte un fuoco scoppiò nel tempio di Nergal T. il funzionario Zazakku e Nabû-n %ir sono subito accorsi. Grazie alla protezione degli dèi tutto ciò che vi era là dentro si è potuto salvare. Gli dèi, al tempio di Lugalmarad, abbiamo portato.
Gli dèi, il!ni meš , della r. 15 sono, secondo E. von Weiher, 55 i «due Nergal», in quanto alla r. 23 dello stesso testo si legge: «a-na d nèrgal (IGI.DU) meš ki-lálle-e» che lo studioso identifica con Lugalgirra e Meslantaea. Come si può comprendere da questi ultimi passi, soprattutto quelli riportati da Wiggermann e da E. von Weiher l’idea di una divinità raddoppiata non è certo estranea al mondo mesopotamico, e il significato di questa dualità ci viene fornito dal mito di Nergal ed Ereškigal da una parte e dall’Astrolabio B dall’altra. Giunti a questo punto credo risulti chiaro che probabilmente il r!bi$u di cui si parla nella XII Tavola dell’Epopea di Gilgameš ninivita possa essere inteso come Erra, il suo identico gemello. Si è aperto questo lavoro affermando
che la dicotomia di Eracle, accennata nel libro undicesimo dell’Odissea, è rintracciabile nella figura di Nergal così come è stata delineata nel poemetto sumerico Gilgameš, Enkidu e gli Inferi, nella XII Tavola dell’Epopea di Gilgameš ninivita e nella versione di Uruk Sultantepe di Nergal ed Ereškigal, ora, le analogie fra queste due figure furono percepite dagli stessi antichi come dimostrerebbe, tra l’altro, l’associazione di Eracle al segno zodiacale dei Gemelli che per gli AssiriBabilonesi, come si è visto, era proprio di Nergal o forse sarebbe meglio dire degli dèi Nergal. Eracle, in compagnia di Apollo o di Teseo, 56 non è l’unica divinità o eroe greco ad essere associato ai Gemelli; Bouché-Leclercq ricorda, ad esempio, i Dioscuri Castore e Polluce, Apollo e
53
l’intento di rapire Persefone. Giunti colà, furono accolti da Ade che li invitò ad un banchetto. Appena, però, essi si sedettero sui seggi – che procuravano l’oblio – non poterono più alzarsi. Eracle, con il permesso di Persefone, potè liberare il solo Teseo. Piritoo, a causa della sua audacia fu punito a restare negli Inferi. «Dei sedili del sovrano dell’oltretomba, scrive C. Saporetti, Nergal ed Ereškigal, 1, sembra, per certi versi, antesignano un altro seggio, anche se fatto di legno: quello su cui Ereškigal ha tentato di far sedere Nergal, con cui era adirata».
K. Tallqvist, Akkadische Götterepitheta, StOr VII (1938), 392. 54 E. von Weiher, Der Babylonische Gott Nergal, AOAT 11 (Neukirchen-Vluyn 1971), 62, n. 1. 55 E. von Weiher, Der Babylonische Gott Nergal, 62, n. 1. 56 Di Teseo, in compagnia di Piritoo, si racconta – si veda per le fonti R. Graves, Greek Myths, trad. it. di E. Morpurgo, I miti Greci (Milano 1987), 333 nota 4 – la sua catabasi e liberazione per mezzo dell’intervento di Eracle. I due erano scesi agli Inferi con 114
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
Bacco; Zetho e Anfione; Trittolemo e Giasone, i Cabiri di Samotracia. 57 Eracle, però, è l’unico fra questi – a quanto mi consta – ad essere associato al pianeta Marte; connessione che, secondo Achille Stazio ed Aristotele, sarebbe stata avanzata degli Egiziani, mentre per Macrobio dai Caldei: «Chaldaei stellam Herculis vocant quam reliqui omnes Martis appellant». 58 Il problema che rimane aperto, ma che esula dal presente lavoro, è la comprensione delle vie e dei tempi di diffusione, dato questo importante non solo per i periodi antichi, ma anche per quelli più recenti per cercare di comprendere se anche la teologia babilonese su Nergal, non solo quella sumerica, è documentata nel mondo greco. A tal proposito, anche se si tratta di una attestazione riguardante una straniera, vorrei ricordare una iscrizione bilingue del III secolo a.C. rinvenuta nel Pireo, dunque in terra greca, in cui una sidoniana afferma che il monumento funebre fu fatto costruire da Yaton-Bêl, figlio di Ešmun-Sillè , capo dei sacerdoti del dèi Nergal 59 : dove Nergal è al singolare, mentre l’apposizione dèi è al plurale: ’lm nrgl. Pur essendo noto che nelle iscrizioni fenicie si trova talvolta il plurale ’lm per indicare una singola divinità, ritengo però che questa caratteristica riferita a Nergal possa avere una motivazione teologica che affonda le sue radici nel mondo mesopotamico, la patria di origine del culto di questo dio. Questa iscrizione dimostrerebbe che la sidoniana praticava un culto di Nergal più vicino a quello teologicamente delineato nella versione di Sultantepe-Uruk che a quello sumerico dimostrando che l’impatto della cultura
mesopotamica con i paesi vicini e, in questo caso, indirettamente con la Grecia, sono stati continui e fecondi. Riportando, dopo questa lunga digressione, la nostra attenzione alla traduzione-interpretazione data dallo scriba babilonese al passo sumerico prima citato, si può, sulla base di quanto è stato fino ad ora detto, ipotizzare che egli rese il sumerico «il divino spirito ( d g i d i m ) di Nergal» con «il rappresentante di Nergal» in quanto sostituì l’idea di una scissione del dio con quella di un suo reduplicamento, per cui il r!bi$u, o il rappresentante di Nergal di cui si parla nella XII Tav. dell’Epopea di Gilgameš ninivita potrebbe essere inteso come Erra, il suo identico gemello. Una speculazione che, per certi versi e con le debite differenze, si pone a metà strada tra quella avanzata dai Sumeri e quella degli Accadi si può rintracciare nella teologia egiziana, dove troviamo, innanzittutto, l’idea di scissione del dio, come nel mondo sumerico, e quella di riunione di ciò che precedentemente era scisso, come attesta il passo tratto dall’Astrolabio B più su citato. In un Inno ad Ammone (IV 16 sgg.) di epoca post-amarniana, redatto dunque non molto tempo dopo la copiatura a Tell elAmarna del mito di Nergal ed Ereškigal, viene delineata la presenza del dio in tutto il cosmo secondo questo schema: il ba del dio creatore, ovvero la sua energia, la sua forza vitale, la sua apparizione, si trova in cielo mentre il suo corpo negli Inferi, e la sua immagine sulla terra. In questo modo, sottolinea Hornung, 60 «la divinità è pensata come presente nell’intero mondo ordinato della creazione
57
’šmn$lh rb khnm’lm nrgl». 60 E. Hornung, Der Eine und die Vielen. Ägyptische Gottesvorstellungen (Darmstadt 19904), trad. it. di D. Scaiola, Gli dèi dell’antico Egitto (Roma 1992), 204.
A. Bouché-Leclercq, L’astrologie grecque (Paris 1899), 135-136. 58 Per le altre attestazioni si veda A. BouchéLeclercq, L’astrologie grecque, 98-99 n. 4 59 KAI 59: «’nk ’spt bt ’šmnšlm $dnt ’š y#n’ ly ytnbl bn
115
C HIODI
E RACLE TRA O RIENTE E O CCIDENTE
… La residenza preferita è sempre il cielo… Gli Inferi costituiscono un luogo di soggiorno secondario e temporaneo, in cui il Ba e il corpo si uniscono ogni notte. Sulla terra gli dèi vivono solo nelle immagini, nel re in quanto immagine del dio, nelle immagini cultuali dei templi, in animali, piante e oggetti sacri». Diversamente dal Nergal accadico, Ammone non si è sdoppiato, duplicato, ma, si è semplicemente scisso in due parti: da un lato il Ba, dall’altro il corpo, e questo richiama in un certo qual modo il passo sumerico – dunque non accadico – relativo a Nergal, in cui si afferma che negli Inferi non risiede il dio in persona, ma il suo divino spirito, lasciando in un certo qual modo intendere che il dio in persona, il suo sé, si trovava in cielo come ben chiarisce, anche se avanza una formulazione teologica diversa, la traduzione del passo in lingua accadica. Inoltre, mentre la riunione del dio Ammone avviene negli Inferi ogni notte, i due gemelli – ovvero Erra e Nergal – secondo il testo astrologico scritto in lingua accadica prima riportato, si riuniscono sulla terra una volta all’anno. I testi accadici ci fornisco, infine, un altro testo relativo questa volta al dio Ningizzida di cui si narra la sua singolare liberazione dagli Inferi attraverso uno stratagemma. A causa del cattivo stato di conserva-
61
zione della tavoletta su cui fu inciso il racconto, non conosciamo perché egli fu preso prigioniero dalla terra tenebrosa, né la motivazione del suo viaggio. Da quello che si comprende, Ningizzida, dopo essere stato fatto prigioniero, subisce il giudizio degli Anunna infernali per venir poi condotto alla presenza di Ereškigal. A questo punto del racconto interviene Ningiridu/Ninsiskurra, la madre del dio, che intercede per la sua liberazione. Il riscatto sarà attuato per mezzo di un prezioso simulacro del dio defunto, alla r. 15 del v., mi-li-it la-ni-šu ovvero “statua del suo corpo.” La traduzione a questo proposito è però incerta, in quanto, come afferma W.G. Lambert: «As for mi-li-it, the only other occurrences seem to be in ARM 13 19, where there is mention of the militu of a snake … From the contexts the word seems to refer to a model or replica of something, but its etymology is not clear». 61 Se la traduzione qui offerta è esatta, la statua si presenterebbe come un sostituto del dio, essa, infatti, non rappresenta, ma è Ningizzida, è il dio, è colui che essa “raffigura.” In tal modo egli è sempre presente, per mezzo della sua statua, nel regno di Ereškigal, mentre il dio liberato si trova sulla terra ed in cielo. Si avrebbe probabilente, inoltre, un altro corrispettivo del termine greco eíd lon, in questo caso, però, associato al kolossós.
W.G. Lambert, «A new Babylonian Descent to the Netherworld», p. 294 ad Rev. 14.
116
D E M EIS
S ALVO D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
Milano
A Modern Approach to Assyrian-Babylonian Astronomy
ssyrian-Babylonian Astronomy is on a great way to show most of its important features, after a little more than a century from the beginning of its true discovery and study. I shall not repeat, although due, the celebration of the efforts of the Fathers Founders of Assyriology: Epping, Strassmaier, Kugler, Schaumberger, neither of the researches which followed, especially those of P. Victor and Otto Neugebauer, Karl Schoch, Abe Sachs, until Simo Parpola, Hermann Hunger, Peter Huber, Giovanni Pettinato. This immense enterprise is well known to scholars for the results obtained in such a short time, and its works stand in front of us as a monument aere perennius. It is however interesting to go somehow into details to show the difficulties of these researchers, in order to consider the great advantages that we have at present, to repeat their studies and, whenever the case, try to improve or update them, or to apply the methods to other civilizations. To do this, a full humbleness is due, also because now we can take advantage of the results achieved, and because we have more powerful tools at our disposal: texts, transliterations, translations, photos, dictionaries, computers. While our Fathers, to call them shortly so, had just pen, paper and brain, we
A
have a safety layer from which to start: their works. Just to have an idea of them, look at the figure 1: it is the conclusive table in Epping’s “Astronomisches aus Babylon,” 1 the result of years of deciphering, calculating, trying and trying again solutions to the questions put forward by the clay tablets. First of all we must admire the systematic and useful layout, something we would often like to have handy: the names of the months, the words for time divisions, the names of planets, zodiacal signs, orientation, and finally of stars, all with the cuneiform ideogram, transliteration, translation. Remarkably the stars mentioned are just six; only about 1907 Schiaparelli was able to identify 118 stars. 2 This is perhaps the most striking aspect: all the names are derived from comparisons of many texts, from the calculation of astronomical positions to check any proposed identification, from the painful interpretation of the cuneiform signs in many and many tablets. Epping, modestly, states that it was easy to understand numbers and some words, but this is not a simple task, because only who commands astronomy, especially positional astronomy, can direct the research in such a way to understand that a tablet has data on lunations,
1
2
Epping 1889.
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
De Meis 1999, 63-80. 117
D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
planetary motions, stars, when nothing is known of its contents, and the figures have to speak by themselves. Strassmaier and Epping were in continuous exchange of data, translations, improvement of results, and we find here another advantage which we have at present: Epping was at Quito, Strassmaier some thousand kilometers away, and mail was not so fast as it is today, they had no fax or e-mail and all had to be hand-written, mailed, sent back and forth. So, although obvious, we are in a privileged condition which we often forget. The other aspect is that the command of astronomy meant calculating by hand thousands of positions to be sure of the correspondence of the text to the calculations. Of course this is true for all scientists; I am always amazed at the enormous quantity of hand calculations, generally without errors, when I see the manuscripts of Galileo, Gauss, Schiaparelli, Neugebauer, just to mention a few names. But a main consideration is in order. The first calculation of Epping was that of New Moon, first the interpretation of the texts, the enlightening discovery that they referred to Moon phases, then the calculations. Well, by hand this is lengthy, painful, subject to errors; anyone who has tried this kind of exercise can appreciate the efforts and time needed. Now, with the touch of a few computer keys we obtain exact results in fractions of a second. The ephemeris table for the Moon in SE 189 (–122/–121), SE 188 (–123/ –122), SE 201 (–110/–109) must have required hours, if not days, of calculations (again, a few seconds of computer time), besides the comparisons of Babylonian and his calculations, which oc-
cupy many pages of that precious book, small in size, great in knowledge (Fig. 2). Without insisting too much, I shall only mention the computing of the Chaldean ephemerides as he called them, and of their errors [p. 68–80], the calculations of solar and lunar eclipses [pp. 103–108], the conjunctions of the Moon with stars, the planetary conjunctions with stars [pp. 114–134], the oppositions and stations of planets, their heliacal rising and setting [pp. 140–148], and last but not least, the drawings of the kudurrus with astronomical meanings, also important at present (Fig. 3), all this at a time when even the astronomical terms had to be deciphered. I have recalculated these events and found Epping’s values correct. All this was masterly continued by F.X. Kugler, O. Neugebauer, A. Sachs and other scholars. And to conclude on this aspect, I must say that the same great knowledge and experience has to be credited to Simo Parpola, who some three decades ago calculated by hand the astronomical phenomena mentioned in his highly acclaimed “Letters from Assyrian Scholars to Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal,” 3 a huge enterprise to give scholars an enormous quantity of documents, parallel to the work of A. Sachs for Babylonian Diaries, continued by H. Hunger. 4 Let us now have a brief look at the advantages offered by modern techniques, and some suggestions to use them in the study of the astronomical part of cuneiform texts. Amongst the main purposes is the dating of a text. As it is well known, even if a date was written in a tablet, often it is broken or otherwise illegible. If we are lucky enough to find a relatively
3
4
Parpola 1970. Also mentioned as LAS.
118
Sachs-Hunger 1988, 1989, 1996.
D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
clear date, this might refer to a regnal or accession year of a king, to a year of the Seleucid Era, and in this case we have tools such as Parker-Dubberstein 1956, 5 with extensions by Parpola (LAS, Appendix J) or Peter Huber 6 (“Astronomical Dating of Babylon I and Ur III”). If we want a closer accuracy, then we can update some of the data with new findings, and write a computer program to calculate Babylonian dates from Julian ones and viceversa. This will allow us a faster search, and avoid jumping from a publication to another. In fact, when dating a tablet, it is necessary to perform several calculations of the same type, and an enormous saving of time is achieved by the computer because it is fast, and, if well programmed, is less subject to errors than a human, and can incorporate several documents to be consulted at once. An immediate check for example is that of dates which fall on intercalary months or on a definite month; moreover the inverse calculation is also fast, an advantage if we are trying different dates. This first step of the humanist has to be followed by the astronomical computing of the events supposedly occurred in the period supposedly covered, to take care of scribal errors, wrong data and similar occurrences; and also this requires repetitive calculations better made by the computer. But what should we compute first? Of course, the events which are rare, such as Solar and Lunar eclipses, Lunar occultations (“the star xx entered the Moon” is the usual quotation), Lunar conjunctions of stars or planets, Lunar phases, heliacal phenomena (the so-called Greek-Letter Phenomena).
Again, though not so easy, these phenomena can be calculated by proper computer programs, and here is a first advice and caveat. It is much commendable that an Assyriologist takes the trouble of computing astronomical events, but there are several objections to this. Generally the Assyriologist is mainly a philologist, historian, humanist and the command of astronomy is not his main “cultural luggage.” Epping and Strassmaier cooperated, each one for his own specialisation; so, there is nothing bad if after the first trials, the Assyriologist asks an astronomer to perform the calculations. What is important is that from the contents of the tablet he has a good idea of the text, the time range of historical events (if mentioned or guessed), the names and the astronomical events quoted, if this is possible. The reason is that independent calculations should always be performed to arrive at common results: only the convergence of philological, historical and astronomical data gives a high probability of a certain dating. The disadvantage is that modern astronomers are much more expert in big bang theories or other astrophysical questions, than in calculating heliacal phenomena or lunar occultations. Hence it is necessary to find one who is conversant with the calculations of the ancient astronomical phenomenology. And, incidentally, this raises the question of how and when our Universities will start interdisciplinary courses to this purpose. Another consideration refers to the use of commercial computer programs, however advertised. No program can properly calculate all the phenomena described in Babylonian astronomy, as several programs are needed and linked, and com-
5
6
Parker-Dubberstein 1956.
Huber 1982, 1999-2000. 119
D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
mercial programs are far to meet the requirements of Assyriologists. A word of warning includes even very recent ones. Ideally, one should write his own programs as Jean Meeus 7 often says, especially to know the limitations of the programs, the proper use of certain details and parameters, the necessity of including special data or conditions, in other words to know what to expect, not to have a blind trust on the program results, which may be wrong instead. Just an example. Eclipses, solar ones especially, are most useful to date a historical document. In the near past, to avoid cumbersome and difficult calculations, one used to consult eclipse tables or “Canons.” Tables gave rise to equivocal results: for example one would find a day in which an eclipse occurred, but that eclipse actually was visible elsewhere, and the table was silent on this. Oppolzer’s “Canon der Finsternisse” 8 has been very useful, but normally one would not perform those lengthy calculations (with logarithms), which give good results, but would simply jump to the diagrams showing the eclipse path. As Oppolzer himself wrote, these lines were drawn connecting three points by circular arcs, that is eclipse beginning, maximum and end. This often leads to errors, because the real lines are not circle arcs, and because that eclipse might have been observed within its northern or southern limits, not necessarily within the totality path, but the limits are not shown in the maps of many Canons, except those of Meeus-Mucke. 9 Anyway, the question of total eclipses is limited for Babylon: as a matter of facts from –750 to the year zero there were only four eclipses visible from there
as such, on –435 May 31, –401 January 18, –135 April 15 and –9 June 19, the other ones were annular (2 only) or partial. Knowing this, one can look at Oppolzer maps and exclude totality even if the curve passes close to Babylon, but still there are cases where an eclipse which is represented far from that place was rather significant, although partial, and one could think that it was not visible instead. As an example, Fig. 4 shows a part of the Oppolzer map: the track of total eclipse of –302 April 2 passes almost exactly through Babylon, that of the annular one of –306 June 14 is quite far from the town. Accurate calculations shown in figs. 5 and 6, give that at Babylon the eclipse of –306 was only of magnitude 0.687, while that of – 302 was 0.880, contrary to what one would expect. Incidentally, to my knowledge, we have not yet records of these eclipses. This shows the importance of accurate calculations by which the other maps have been calculated, with the centrality lines and the isomagnitudes. It is important to stress that by the computer it is possible to obtain accurate maps where precise positions are computed point by point, instead of hand drawings: another advantage in our studies. Another example is the dating of occultations, either lunar or planetary. Generally one computes close conjunctions of the celestial bodies, what – if small in angle – may lead to the discovery of an occultation fitting our text. However, further calculations are needed, such as the local visibility of the event, the phase of the occulting body (Moon or planet), the altitude of the body above the horizon to check if the event, al-
7
9
8
Meeus 1991. Oppolzer 1887.
120
Meeus-Mucke 1983, Mucke-Meeus 1983.
D E M EIS
though occurred, was in fact well visible from a given site, all in order that the results coincide with the text. A simple reference is the lunar occultation of Mars quoted in Aristoteles, De Coelo, 12, 2, for which many dates have been proposed. However even if these occultations occurred at Athens, the conditions described in the text must be fulfilled, such as the Moon about half illuminated, Mars ingress from the dark side of the Moon and egress from the bright one, besides a suitable altitude on the horizon. These conditions eliminate all proposals, except the date of –356 May 4, also taking into consideration that some event occurred when the great philosopher was too young to observe and note the occultation. In fact he really observed the event, and did not report others, his words are: !"#$%$& '()*+,-!$ ./0123-3$&-4$&35 ,$. Hence we can conclude how misleading could be the simple browsing into eclipse catalogs or Canons, or to perform calculations without the necessary accuracy and care. Another cause of errors is to omit in the calculations the value of Delta T ( T). This quantity is the difference between Dynamical and Universal Time, that is between a constantly running time and the actual perturbed time (due to the variations in the rotation of the Earth). It amounts to about six hours in –700, and this means that the actual visibility of a phenomenon occurs at a longitude about 90 degrees east of the point calculated in Dynamical Time. Fig. 7 shows how the track would be for the eclipse of –306 June 14 if T were evaluated as zero, that is supposing the Earth to revolve uniformly and without rotational perturbations. Exact values of T are subject to
10
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
various considerations, however good mean values can be computed; to ignore T is clearly a source of errors. Again, old catalogs and Canons either ignored T, or gave wrong values, as the measurement and extrapolation of this variable is quite recent, especially by Meeus and Huber. 10 Another warning concerns the difficult motion of the Moon (Newton said it caused his head to ache, which is something for such a genius!), which is quite fast, so its calculation needs thousands of correcting parameters, and they might not be known exactly or not all incorporated in a commercial program, so that the Moon results somewhere else when the Sun or other bodies are supposed to be eclipsed or, worse, occulted. Also the positions of stars, if calculated without precession and proper motion, may give surprises, and lunar conjunctions – or, worse, occultations – fail the result, and we are tempted to exercise the usual attack to careless scribes, who really deserve no such insult. The M ELAMMU Project has several very positive aspects, and one is the creation of an astronomical database, which will free scholars from the errors and pains of many computations. This database will prove useful in the study of Babylonian civilization, besides of pure astronomical records. Its structure for astronomy should be flexible, in order to accommodate for improved parameters or significant new ones and hence be always up-to-date. It could be extended to list of kings, dated tablets, correlated terms in Assyrian, Akkadian and modern languages, metrological data, a sort of generalized “Planetarium Babylonicum” for the several facets of Assyrian and Babylonian
Meeus 1991, Huber 1999. 121
D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
culture, including its historiography. A further advantage is in the calculations of events for which no definite dating is immediately possible, and in this case one will be able to put forward several proposals which can be confirmed by further studies. Also in this case computer applications prove very useful, saving large quantities of time and avoiding those inescapable errors of the hand calculations, but proposing to the humanist several possibilities from which he will choose according to his specific knowledge of text, philology, history. Needless to say, recording in a proper magnetic support (CD, DVD, diskettes, tapes etc.) the texts, figures, words, will allow fast comparisons, listing, availability of all this material. Just think of having quickly available transliterated or transcribed texts, drawings and photos of archaeological interest. One could easily classify them, consult and compare them rapidly for new studies, for example to find the age of a kudurru or the kings named in texts. A recent example is the study by Basello for Elamite calendars. 11 And indeed the memory of recent available hard disks is such that it allows enormous quantities of data to be stored. Besides the M ELAMMU Project, I take this opportunity to mention with gratitude the great impulse given by Is.I.A.O., especially Gherardo Gnoli, with the Project for the History of Science in Ancient and Oriental World, directed by Antonio Panaino, active also in several specialized fields of Oriental Studies, which is giving fruits of important value, with creative intelligence, effort and great reliability of results. Coming back to the topic of my talk, I shall quote two examples of interesting
11
Basello 1999.
122
novelties, which I found for Babylonian eclipses, and which were possible because of the speed of calculation allowed by the computer. Eclipse records often mention the presence of winds blowing in certain directions. I know 12 such cases of solar eclipses and 45 of lunar ones, either from the LBAT or the Diaries. First, I noticed that in the not observed eclipses, those mentioned as “nu pap,” there is no mention of wind. This has something to do with predictions; as we shall see Babylonians could predict eclipses – contrary to former statements – but not to the extent of their complete appearance evolution as seen from a given site. Second, the winds are actually blowing during solar eclipses, due to the fast temperature drop in the event, but this is not the case for lunar eclipses. Then the possibility was that the winds could refer to the movement of the Moon with respect to the Sun in solar eclipses, or to that of the Earth shadow during lunar eclipses, as if the winds could cause the displacement of the shadow or of the Moon during eclipses. So the computer helped, because the long calculations of many eclipses were reduced to reasonable times, including the entrance and exit angles for the main phases. Programs were written by Jean Meeus, whom I thank once again for his friendly cooperation, and by me. The result is shown in fig. 8 for some solar eclipses. Here the wind direction mentioned results the incoming one, that is the Sun is fixed and the Moon moves; “gusty” wind refers to the changing directions of the darkened lunula, in the case of total eclipses. The figure represents three phases: first, maximum and
D E M EIS
last, and it is immediate to see that the scribes noted the movements of the Moon during the eclipse, when mentioning winds. In a similar way one can investigate lunar eclipses and arrive to a conclusion hidden until now; in this case the wind refers to the motion of the Earth shadow with respect to the Moon considered fixed. Fig. 9 represents the partial lunar eclipse of –685 April 22, for which the text [LBAT 1417] says that the “West wind blew” and by looking at it one can see that the direction of the calculated shadow and that of the wind mentioned in the tablet are in agreement. This occurs for more than 45 texts, and should not be a simple coincidence. Figure 10 shows some lunar eclipses, from –662 to –647, mentioned in LAS, which I have redrawn by computer, with less pain than Simo had to experience for a similar figure. In the tablets studied here, which are not astrological, there is no mention of the directions of the shadow towards Elam, Amurru and the other lands, but the wind directions are stated as such. Concerning the prediction of eclipses by Babylonians, for brevity I shall only show some diagrams, again using data from LBAT, the Diaries or the Reports to the Kings. First of all often it is mentioned that an eclipse was expected but not seen or that “it was late,” which requires a previous computation for such a statement. Second, we find that such eclipses rated “nu pap,” that is eclipses known to occur, but not seen, were visible elsewhere than Babylon, but the times of the event are correct. In fact the details of the calculations are too many to be exposed here, and it is more convenient to give the results. If one calculates the difference between the time T1, first contact, in the tablet and
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
the corresponding computed New or Full Moon, the difference is very small, and can be called the “error.” Thus we may suspect that the conjunction time was calculated, what Babylonians could do with no large difficulty. One has for example from tablet ACT 122, column F, the Moon’s speed calculated by System B. Fig. 11 shows the comparison of data from ACT 122 and calculations made according to the ELP 2000 theory of Chapront. As it can be seen, the differences are quite small. Fig. 12 represents the error Babylonian–computed for the initial time T1 in solar eclipses. For 24 cases the mean error is 0.99 hours with a standard deviation of 4.17 hours, but, excluding errors larger than 3.5 hours, as shown in the figure the mean error drops to –0.41 hours with a standard deviation of 1.53 hours! This is a surprisingly small difference, which even nowadays an astronomer would not be able to calculate by additions and multiplications only. It is also interesting that the computing technique improved with respect to time, as the line of tendency gets closer to zero with increasing time. Also the next figure shows the error distribution, which is close to a normal one. In a similar way the errors for lunar eclipses have been calculated for 53 eclipses and the mean value is 0.17 hours with a standard deviation of 0.6 hours. Due to lack of geographical knowledge and relative sizes of Sun and Moon, and in the absence of physical theories, the prediction of visibility from a given place was not possible, still what is important is to document that predictions were made with a remarkable accuracy, obtained by other astronomers much later. Still, we do not know exactly how these calculations were made, although
123
D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
lists of eclipses by the Saros cycles are known, the so-called Saros canon, their accuracy is not the same of the predictions studied, and the tablets are there to put us questions after millennia. As a further example of cooperation between humanists and astronomers, I would like to quote a recent example. Tommaso Gnoli has made a deep study, C. Furius Sabinus Aquila Timesitheus, concerning episodes in Historia Augusta. A solar eclipse is mentioned there in relation to Gordianus acclaimed as the only emperor. We made a search of eclipses visible at Athens, as clearly detailed in Gnoli’s paper, finding that the best candidate for the eclipse mentioned was the total one of 240 August 5, which was large at Athens and total at Sunion, what might have given resonance to the event, as occurred in such a sacred place. Gnoli had therefore an astronomical confirmation of his historical research. Further application of modern tools may be found in the software for images, or for language analysis, data analysis, graphic representations. For example one could efficiently use image software to reproduce cuneiform texts and put easily interlinear transliteration or translation, indicate on images particular remarks or signs, which once had to be made manually (a byproduct is that printing-proof correction becomes very limited, as it is now for camera-ready texts); preparation of indexes, glossaries, list of frequencies of words or names, and similar applications. From a computing point of view, data analysis software results particularly important when series of observations are to be studied, and their relationships determined. A recent study by Peter Huber on Delta T has lead to conclusive results
on the basis of statistical analysis, and in the present study I have used his formula, with programs by Jean Meeus for the theories ELP-2000 by Chapront (Moon) and VSOP 87 by Bretagnon (Sun and Planets). Graphic representations are widely increasing their useful role in scientific texts, showing the evolution of particular phenomena either of physical or of general nature, and they are quite easily made now. Another recently introduced software is dedicated to the analysis of sentences, Akkadian in particular, so that so called “tokens” are grouped in order to obtain something like automatic translation (from the transliterations), and, more efficiently, to discover special interpretations which will help not only beginners but experienced Assyriologists as well, in the search for significant connections. A recent work by G. Graßhoff 12 is a good example of this technique, applied to Normal Stars and Lunar Six observations, with results which are either new or confirm those already known. Also, the fundamental study by John Britton 13 “Lunar Anomaly in Babylonian Astronomy” is a splendid example of the use of computer and brain, with the help of mathematical and graphic analysis and the impressive amount of calculations, as it is the paper by Beaulieu and Britton “Rituals for an eclipse possibility in the 8 the year of Cyrus,” where lunar phenomena were calculated to fit an interesting text. Many other applications of the computer to Assyrian-Babylonian astronomy could be investigated, but I believe that everyone will add those specifically apt to her or his own studies. To finish this talk, I would like to
12
13
Graßhoff 1999.
124
Britton 1999.
D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
mention two cases. The first is the enormous work made by Neugebauer and van Hoesen for their “Greek Horoscopes,” 14 if we only think that to calculate Jupiter–Saturn conjunction from –60 to +600 they had to use long graphs on tracing paper, which were slided in order to find the periods (every 60 years) and then perform hand calculations by tables: it takes a few minutes (5) to calculate all of them by computer, so one can imagine what amount of time could be saved. The second is to revive an interesting paper by Otto Neugebauer, in which he studied the influence of Babylonian as-
tronomy to Renaissance art. 15 Indeed an analysis of the famous tables of the Trés riches heures du Duc du Berry (fig. 13) is an example of the limitation of computer applications: no computer will have the talent and the imagination of the Limbourg Brothers to draw those unequalled miniatures, although with a computer one could quickly calculate the litterae dominicales (fig. 14), and no computer would have the command of astronomy and culture which lead Neugebauer to find Babylonian influences in such an art masterpiece.
14
15
Neugebauer-van Hoesen 1959.
Neugebauer 1974 (Astr. & Hist. 507).
B IBLIOGRAPHY Basello G. P., Problemi calendariali nelle fonti elamiche di età achemenide, Thesis, Bologna 1999. Beaulieu P.-A. and Britton J.P, ‘Rituals for an Eclipse Possibility in the 8 th Year of Cyrus,’ JCS 46, 1994, 73-86. Bretagnon P., ‘Théorie du mouvement de l’ensemble des planètes. Solution VSOP82,’ Astronomy and Astrophysics 114, 1982, 278-288. Britton J. P., ‘Lunar Anomaly in Babylonian Astronomy’ in Ancient Astronomy and Celestial Divination, ed. by N. Swerdlow, Cambridge 1999. Chapront-Touzé M. et Chapront J., ‘The lunar ephemeris ELP 2000,’ Astronomy and Astrophysics, 124, 1983, 50-62. De Meis S., ‘Il “Planetarium Babylonicum” di G.V. Schiaparelli. Problematiche astronomiche,’ in Giovanni Schiaparelli: storico della Astronomia e uomo di cultura, ed. by A. Panaino and G. Pellegrini, Milano 1999, 63-80. Epping J., ‘Astronomisches aus Babylon,’ Ergänzungshefte zu den “Stimmen aus Maria-Laach” 44, 1889, Freiburg im Breisgau. Gnoli T., ‘C. Furius Sabinus Aquila Timesitheus,’ Mediterraneo Antico, III, I, 2000, 261-308.
125
D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
Graßhoff G., ‘Normal Stars Observations in Late Babylonian Astronomical Diaries,’ in Ancient Astronomy and Celestial Divination, ed. by N. Swerdlow, Cambridge 1999, 97-147. Huber P.J. et al., Astronomical Dating of Babylon I and Ur III (Occasional Papers 1/4 of the Monographic Journals of the Near East), Malibu 1982. Huber P.J., ‘Astronomical Dating of Ur III and Akkad,’ AfO, Bd. XLVI und XLVII, Horn 1999/2000, 50-79. Huber P.J., ‘Modeling the Length of Day and Extrapolating the Rotation of the Earth,’ in Astronomical Amusements. Papers in Honor of Jean Meeus, ed. by F. Bonoli, S. De Meis, A. Panaino, Milan 2000, 91-104. Hunger H., ‘Schiaparelli’s Notebook of Babylonian Star Names,’ in Giovanni Schiaparelli: storico della Astronomia e uomo di cultura, Milano 1999, 81-90. Meeus J., Astronomical Algorithms, Richmond 1991. Meeus J.-Mucke H., Canon of Lunar Eclipses -2002 to +2526, Wien 1983. Mucke H.-Meeus J., Canon of Solar Eclipses -2003 to +2256, Wien 1983. Neugebauer O., van Hoesen H. B., Greek Horoscopes (Am. Philosoph. Soc.), Philadelphia 1959. Neugebauer O., ‘Astronomical and Calendrical Data in the Très Riches Heurs,’ in The Limbourgs and Their Contemporaries, Meiss, Pierpont Morgan Library 1974, 421481. Oppolzer Th., Canon der Finsternisse (Math.-Naturwiss. Classe, Denkschriften Band LII), Wien 1887. Panaino A., ‘Giovanni V. Schiaparelli e la storia dei più antichi calendari iranici, con tre inediti di G.V. Schiaparelli ed una Nota di S. De Meis,’ in Giovanni Schiaparelli: storico della Astronomia e uomo di cultura, ed. by A. Panaino and G. Pellegrini, Milano 1999, 99-148. Parker R. A. and Dubberstein W. H., Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.-A.D. 75, Providence 1956. Parpola S., Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal (LAS), Neukircher-Vluyn 1983. Parpola S., Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars (LABS), Helsinki 1993. Sachs A., Hunger H., Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, Wien 1988, 1989, 1996. Schiaparelli G.V., Nomi di stelle e di costellazioni e di pianeti presso i Babilonesi, unpublished manuscript (see De Meis 1999, above).
126
D E M EIS
A M ODERN A PPROACH TO A SSYRIAN -B ABYLONIAN A STRONOMY
F IGURES 1. Epping 1889, Astronomische Ausdrücke. 2. Epping 1889, Babylonische Mond-Ephemeride des Jahres 189 S.A. 3. Epping 1889, Kudurrus with constellation names. 4. Oppolzer 1887, Map of solar eclipses, from Blatt N° 44. 5. Map of the path of the Annular solar eclipse of –306 June 14. 6. Map of the path of the Annular solar eclipse of –302 April 2. 7. Map of the path of the Annular solar eclipse of –306 June 14 computed without and with T (3.96 h ). 8. Movement of the Moon in some solar eclipses, considered “winds” in Babylonian texts. 9. Movement of the Earth’s umbra with respect to the Moon, considered “wind” in Babylonian texts. 10. Lunar eclipses visible at Babylon from –662 to –647. The arrow indicates the movement relative to the Earth’s umbra; quadrants are indicated, used for predictions. 11. Difference of Moon’s speed as in ACT 122, col. F, and Chapront theory. 12. Difference Babylonian prediction–modern for T1 in solar eclipses. 13. Les trés riches heures du Duc du Berry, January. The miniature has no litterae dominicales nor astronomical data. 14. Les trés riches heures du Duc du Berry, June. The miniature is complete with the astronomical data.
127
F RYE
R ICHARD N. F RYE
T RUTH AND L IES IN A NCIENT I RANIAN H ISTORY
Harvard
Truth and Lies in Ancient Iranian History
S
ome archaeologists claim that the word impressionistic is a synonym for superficial, since they deal with the hard facts of material culture, while historians are shallow because they study causes and effects which frequently are intangible. In the ancient Near East and Central Asia, however, to try to understand the past the paucity of all sources forces one to resort to analogies, comparisons and logic, or just simple common sense. Unfortunately sometimes the last is forgotten in trying to explain enigmas. For example, it is well known, but at times overlooked, that both writing and oral memories were limited to a few people. One might say that until the spread of Arabic in the Middle Ages, in the Near East writing was restricted to priests (or other religious figures) and professional scribes. The former were interested in preserving religious texts, while the latter primarily in keeping accounts. Oral history was preserved by professional story tellers, called g s!n in Parthian times, while common folk frequently mis-remembered or forgot past events. Those with prodigious memories were respected and honoured as folk ‘historians,’ but additions and losses were the normal practices of those reporting past events. All of the above does not take into account deliberate falsification of information for political or other reasons. Consequently one must be sceptical of much information from the ancient world and consider motives and reasons for the A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
records which are preserved. One should always ask why a priest or scribe recorded a text, or why a ruler ordered a text to be written. Even more questions need to be applied to information handed down orally and then recorded in writing. Finally the historian of the ancient Near East must be on guard not to import contemporary views or biases into an interpretation of the past. All very simple and understood but sometimes neglected. What follows is speculative and impressionistic, but it concerns an important historical question: how can we assess and believe records from the past? Anyone who tries to recover memories from his own past, or remembers the Japanese film Rashomon, will sympathize with any attempt to set up guidelines, trying to establish what Leopold von Ranke said about history – to report was eigentlich geschehen ist. As a general rule one should ask, does the information support or promote a position or point of view, or is it neutral in not contributing to any argument which is advanced by the text or inscription? In a somewhat simple or crude example, in Suetonius’ Life of Caesar (22), when he has the consul say that the Amazons had controlled a large part of Asia, this remark really has to do with a contemporary joke, and cannot be deemed true or historical. The Classical writers are full of ‘historical information’ which is meant to edify or teach their readers some lesson, and consequently must be regarded with caution. On the other hand, if a remark is simply recorded as an interesting
129
F RYE
T RUTH AND L IES IN A NCIENT I RANIAN H ISTORY
piece of information, without any didactic or glorification purpose, then the chances of being true are enhanced. In other words, the purpose of a statement should be determined before moving to the next step, which is a comparison of similar statements or situations, to determine the reasonableness or logic of the information. It is this second step which is tricky but frequently necessary for the ancient world, where sources are few, or mere copies of one original source. In this vein let us turn to ancient Iran and examine the long standing argument about Darius and his Behistun inscription. Previously I had upheld the veracity of Darius’ remarks, considering the fact that witnesses undoubtedly existed who would know about the events he describes. Yet there was one instance where he might have escaped detection, and that was the murder of the person he claimed was the usurper Gaum ta rather than Bardiya, brother of Cambyses. The Gaum ta episode has been discussed ad nauseam, and here I wish to concentrate only on the question of legitimacy. If we cosider who was legitimate or not in previous history, the case of the neo-Assyrian king Sargon (722-705 B.C.), who was a usurper, might come to mind. He had asserted legitimacy by claiming descent from ancient kings of Babylonia, and had great success in not only maintaining power, but also expanding the Assyrian realm. Could the story of Darius be a parallel to that of Sargon, or even better to more ancient rulers who exhibited similar claims? In a recent trip to Pasargadae I again examined the inscriptions with the name Cyrus there. All
were similar and simple, saying “I am Cyrus the Achaemenid.” This seemed strange, since it is now generally accepted that Darius introduced the Old Persian cuneiform script, and most probably it was he who ordered these inscriptions to be engraved on the buildings in the city of Cyrus. Why would Darius order such a simple text engraved there? Obviously he wanted everyone to know that Cyrus was an Achaemenid like himself, and therefore Darius had legitimacy to rule. However, what does Cyrus say in his Babylonian inscriptions? Cyrus never mentions Achaemenes as his ancestor in proclaiming his genealogy in cuneiform texts. 1 The common name which attaches the descent of Darius to that of Cyrus is Teispis (OP !išpiš), but is it the same person? It would be easy to assert that it was one and the same ancestor, but just as the matter of Sargon, the intention was to prove legitimacy, which was very important in the ancient world. If we may question Sargon’s ancestors, why not also those of Darius? Why did Darius insist that both he and Cyrus were descended from Achaemenes, and not be content with Teispis as their common ancestor, since after the latter the two branches of the family diverged? We may consider several reasons for Darius’ insistence on exalting Achaemenes, which in every inscription of all the successors of Darius is emphasized. All proclaim that they are Achaemenids. The Greeks accepted the Persian version of the descent of their rulers, and the name Achaemenid came down in history everywhere except in Iran. The usual explanation for this phenomenon is the loss of memory after Alexander, but why was
1 Cf. Weidener, E.F., “Die älteste Nachricht über das persische Konigshaus,” Archiv für Orientforschung, 7 (1930), pp. 1-7. The Old Persian inscriptions may be
found in Kent, R., Old Persian Grammar, Text, Lexicon, (AOS, New Haven, Conn., 1953).
130
F RYE
T RUTH AND L IES IN A NCIENT I RANIAN H ISTORY
the Assyrian Empire and its kings remembered even in Islamic times in Iran and not the Achaemenids? The great savant al-B"r#n" knew about the kings of Assyria but not the Achaemenids under that name. It is fascinating that even though he did not know the name ‘Achaemenid’ he did have the correct sequence of their rulers (Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius, etc.), but they are listed under the sobriquet of the kings of the Chaldaeans. 2 Later, when he gives a list of the Persian kings, according to Classical authors, in a curious fashion he repeats the Chaldaean list, with the additions of Tiglath Pileser, Salmanassar and a form of Esarhadon. 3 I am at a loss to know where al-B"r#n" found these lists, but with his wide use of different sources, one would expect the name Achaemenid to appear somewhere in some form, even with the mixture of lists. One would have expected the Assyrians to have been forgotten after the fall of Nineveh in 612 B.C., while the inscriptions of Darius and his successors attest to their desire to preserve memory of the Achaemenids. This requires an explanation. It seems there are two possible answers to the loss of memory of the name Achaemenids in Iran. The generally accepted explanation is that the Seleucid, and especially the Parthians, were the primary agents of forgetfulness. The latter, who came from Central Asia, it is asserted, substituted their mythic and epic version of the ancient history of Iran for the true history of the Achaemenids. It is surprising, however, that in western Iran, home of the Medes and Persians, memory of the Achaemenids was completely lost. Forms of the names of the Achaemenid
kings (Darius, Artaxerxes) do appear on coins of the Frataraka rulers of Persis or F rs, homeland of the Achaemenids, but again no trace of the name Achaemenid. Is it possible that the people in western Iran did not want, or care, to remember a dynasty which was not beloved, or may even have been considered illegitimate, in the eyes of many? This may seem farfetched, but the disappearance of the Achaemenids in the one land where they should have been remembered is puzzling. Another, and I suggest more plausible, explanation of the loss of memory of the name Achaemenid is that it was not forgotten, but a substitution was made which was codified in Sasanian times. What do I mean? The ‘Parthian’ epic account of the past was based in part on names and events in the Avesta, which may give us a clue, if we remember what was stated above that primarily it was the priests of the Zoroastrian religion who wrote down what little has been preserved. I propose that the priests, together with popular story tellers, constructed an account of Iran’s past parallel to the history which we know today. But why would the Sasanians accept this account as their ‘official’ version of the past in place of the ‘real’ history? I suggest that the Classical account was first considered propaganda of their Roman/ Byzantine enemies. Second, and more important, the priests became greatly concerned about the spread of Christianity, the religion of the enemies of the Sasanians, especially in the fifth century and later when Christianity was the official religion of their enemies. I have proposed that it was this fear of the progress of Christianity in Iran which caused the
2
p. 89, trans. p. 111. 3 Ibid., text p. 101, trans. p. 115.
al-B"r#n", Ath!r al b!qiya (The Chronology of Ancient Nations), trans. E. Sachau (London, 1879), text
131
F RYE
T RUTH AND L IES IN A NCIENT I RANIAN H ISTORY
Zoroastrian priests to persuade the Sasanian kings to accept and proclaim the popular and religious account of the past of Iran instead of the pernicious ‘Western’ history. 4 Later Islamic authors were confused about this manipulation of the past by Iranians, and the above explanation should be considered when studying Islamic versions of the past. The third century is a turning point in world history when universal, intolerant and competing religions replaced former allegiances. No longer was it a privilege to become a Roman citizen, rather one identified himself as a Christian, Jew, Zoroastrian, Manichaean or other. Christians did not tolerate pagans and Zoroastrians also adopted the intolerant attitude of their enemies. Religion became the prime player in everyone’s life and this is reflected in the history of the Near East as well as the West. The above suggests that we must be very cautious in accepting accounts of the past, without careful questioning of the motives of the recorder of those events. The repetition of patterns or motifs in the past, such as the tale of ‘baby Moses in the bulrushes,’ found also in ancient Mesopotamia, and elsewhere with variations, points to an unconscious, or even possibly intended, desire to conform to well-known and popularly accepted paradigms of behaviour. Another recurring pattern in the history of Iran is that of the founder of a new dynasty, who is connected by blood
with the previous dynasty, but for some reason has to flee from court and hide among the common folk, who raise him until the time of his revolt and success arrives. This is the account of the childhood of Cyrus, repeated for Ardaš"r, founder of the Sasanian dynasty, and with similar events even in Islamic times, witness the rise of Ismail, founder of the Safavid dynasty. Are we dealing with mythic or epic elements of history; how much can one believe? To take another general but seemingly comparable instance, how is one to understand the recurring pattern of revolutions, with a violent uprising and struggle, followed by a regime of terror and then foreign invasion? The French, Russian and Iranian revolutions are almost eerily similar, as though participants in each follow a law of revolutions, again either unconsciously or by design, having determined the paths all revolutions must follow. Sheep or shrewd readers of history? Many are the puzzles of the past. Truth and falsehood are indeed difficult to distinguish in history, but we should not go to one extreme, which has history a ‘pack of lies agreed upon.’ Rather one should examine the past with objectivity, logic, and with all the resources available, to reconstruct what really happened in the past. Then perhaps we can approach the dictum of Ranke rather than an account of what should have happened.
4
by A.S. Shahbazi, “Early Sasanians’ Claim to Achaemenid Heritage,” in the first issue of the same journal (2001), pp. 61-73.
Cf. Frye, R.N., “Founder Myths in Iranian History,” N!me-ye Ir!n-e B!st!n, vol. 2, no. 1 (Tehran, 2003), pp. 19-21, where reference is to an important article 132
G ARIBOLDI
A NDREA G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
Ravenna
Monete dell’Iran preislamico dal Medagliere del Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna: catalogo e considerazioni in margine* Introduzione
I
l Medagliere del Museo Civico di Bologna possiede un gruppetto di monete dell’Iran preislamico che, ad eccezione di tre darici in oro, 1 sono sinora inedite. Sebbene l’importanza delle monete per la storia e per l’arte dell’Iran antico sia fuori di dubbio e riconosciuta dagli studi moderni, 2 anche considerando la scarsità di fonti primarie che sovente affligge lo studio dell’età che va dagli Achemenidi, ai Parti, e poi ai Sasanidi, tuttavia, specie in Italia, l’interesse per questo tipo di
materiale è stato sempre assai scarso. Infatti, a partire dal Settecento, quando iniziarono a formarsi le grandi collezioni private, tutta l’attenzione venne naturalmente rivolta alla monetazione romana, greca, ed alla medaglistica rinascimentale, con la conseguenza che anche in Medaglieri importanti, come quello di Bologna o di Milano, 3 confluissero nel tempo solo pochissime monete iraniche. 4 È lecito dire che, ancora oggi, gli studi numismatici risentono di questa impostazione “classicista” degli studi.
*
niennes 13), ed. P. Briant - C. Herrenschmidt, Paris 1989; per l’età partica, Das Partherreich und seine Zeugnisse – The Arsacid Empire: Sources and Documentation, ed. J. Wiesehöfer, Stuttgart 1998; per l’età sasanide e kushano-sasanide, Coins, Art and Chronology, Essays on the pre-Islamic History of the Indo-Iranian Bordenlands, ed. M. Alram - D.E. Klimburg Salter, Wien 1999; Matériaux pour l’histoire économique du monde iranien, ed. R. Gyselen - M. Szuppe, Paris 1999. Per tutta la monetazione iranica è invece fondamentale ALRAM 1986, che descrive con cura le monete recanti nomi propri di persona. 3 Il Medagliere milanese, che raccoglie circa 300.000 monete, custodisce solo 69 monete sasanidi. Si veda GARIBOLDI 2003. Attualmente è in preparazione da parte di una équipe di studiosi una Sylloge commentata delle monete sasanidi dei medaglieri di Vienna, Berlino e Parigi: si veda ALRAM - GYSELEN 2003. 4 Ovviamente lo scarso interesse per le monete “persiane” era dovuto anche alla loro non reperibilità sul suolo italiano, circostanza che, peraltro, non ha mai frenato, ad esempio, la passione per l’egittologia.
Ringrazio la Dott.ssa Cristiana Morigi Govi e la Dott.ssa Daniela Picchi per avermi consentito la visione del materiale conservato presso il Medagliere, ed i Proff. Carlo Cereti e Antonio Panaino per il loro prezioso consiglio. Questo studio è frutto di una ricerca svolta nell’ambito del Programma di Ricerca Scientifica di interesse nazionale (ex 40%) dal titolo: “Interculturalità e interazione culturale, storico politica e religiosa tra Oriente e Occidente dall’Antichità all’Alto Medioevo.” 1 I tre darici furono pubblicati da PANVINI ROSATI 1963 in occasione di una mostra sulla civiltà greca. 2 Contributi numismatici sono ormai spesso presenti in importanti volumi di studi dedicati ai vari periodi della civiltà iranica preislamica. Cito, ad esempio, per l’età achemenide, Coinage and Administration in the Athenian and Persian Empires, ed. I. Carradice, Oxford 1987; L’or perse et l’histoire grecque (Revue des Études Anciennes 91, 1/2), ed. R. Descat, Bordeaux 1989; in particolare per il problema dei tributi e delle tasse nell’impero achemenide, Le tribut dans l’empire perse (Travaux de l’Institut d’études iraA. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
133
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
La storia del Medagliere di Bologna conferma questo quadro. 5 Infatti esso nacque nel 1878 dalla fusione della collezione Universitaria (sorta nel 1714, nello stesso anno in cui fu fondato l’Istituto delle Scienze con sede a Palazzo Poggi) con la raccolta Comunale. I due nuclei, con aggiunte successive, raggiunsero la consistente cifra di quasi 90.000 monete. Significativa fu, ad esempio, l’acquisizione nella raccolta Comunale presso l’Archiginnasio, assieme ai punzoni della zecca
di Bologna, chiusa nel 1861, della collezione di Pelagio Palagi, che tuttavia privilegiava sempre i settori classici. Nonostante ciò, tra i numeri di inventario delle monete del nostro catalogo comparirà più volte il suo nome, segno del grande eclettismo di questo studioso-collezionista. In totale, oggi si annoverano, per il settore qui preso in esame, solo 3 monete degli Achemenidi, 29 monete partiche, 1 del regno di Caracene e 5 monete sasanidi.
Monete Achemenidi (cat. nn. 1-3) I 3 darici, che appartenevano già alla collezione Palagi, in quanto d’oro, costituiscono, in sé e per sé, una rarità. Col termine darico si intende la moneta aurea degli Achemenidi, anche se la sua esatta cronologia costituisce ancora un problema. La prima attestazione letteraria del termine greco !"#$%&' è in Erodoto VII, 28, 2, dove si racconta che un Lidio di nome Pythios, interrogato da Serse (486-465 a.C.), nel 480, sull’ammontare delle sue ricchezze, avrebbe risposto che egli disponeva di 4.000.000 di stateri darici meno 7.000 (3.993.000 di ()!)*"+,- !"#$%.,). Questo Pythios, forse parente di Creso, era allora l’uomo più ricco di tutto il mondo greco, secondo solo allo stesso re dei Persiani, e già aveva fatto dono al padre di Serse, Dario, di un platano e di una vite d’oro, opere illustri realizzate da Teodoro di Samo (Hdt. VII, 27, 2). Pythios, esponente della più alta borghesia Lidia filo-persiana, intendeva finanziare la spedizione di Serse contro Atene, ma il re, con un gesto munifico, non accettò il suo danaro, ma
anzi gli diede i 7.000 darici mancanti per raggiungere la cifra tonda (Hdt. VII, 29, 2). L’enorme ricchezza di Pythios si spiega col fatto, omesso da Erodoto, ma riferitoci da Plutarco (Moralia 262, D-F, 263) e da Polieno (VIII, 42), che egli era un grande possidente terriero che, oltre ai proventi dell’agricoltura, poteva contare anche su alcune miniere d’oro ubicate sulle sue terre. Vista la rarità dei darici, ci si potrebbe chiedere se la cifra fornitaci da Erodoto non sia, in realtà, da intendere come un’unità di peso dell’oro in lingotti o in pepite, e non come oro monetato, 6 ma l’argento di Pythios è espresso in talenti (2.000) e l’oro in darici, mentre sarebbe stato certamente più agevole esprimere anche l’oro in talenti (infatti 3.993.000 darici pesano a 8,4 gr. l’uno, circa 33.600 kg., e cioè 1.000 talenti persiani). Dunque perché Erodoto avrebbe dovuto fornire una cifra così complessa, se non per indicare che si trattava effettivamente di darici e non di un quantitativo d’oro grezzo?
5 Per una storia dettagliata del Medagliere di Bologna si veda MORIGI GOVI 1986.
6 La questione è stata sollevata da LE RIDER 2001, pp. 155 e 189-190.
134
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
Ancora Erodoto (IV, 166) narra che Ariande, governatore dell’Egitto, volendo rendersi pari a Dario, che aveva fatto coniare moneta con oro purissimo 7 (/"0(12, %!3!"4)!)2,), fece battere monete in argento purissimo (Erodoto ricorda queste monete col nome di ariandici), tanto da suscitare il risentimento di Dario che, col pretesto che egli si era ribellato, lo fece uccidere. Il re, evidentemente, considerava un delitto di lesa maestà ed una diminuzione della sua gloria l’emissione di moneta non preventivamente autorizzata, e tanto peggio se in competizione o emulazione con la propria. Dal testo si evince anche che il re desiderava mantenere una stretta politica di controllo sul circolante dell’impero, come si addice ad uno Stato complesso e burocraticamente sviluppato. Altre importanti attestazioni del termine darico si trovano in vari conti finanziari ateniesi, dei quali il più antico risale al 429/428 a.C. (si menzionano 105 stateri di oro darico). 8
I Greci non sembrano nutrire molti dubbi sul fatto che fu Dario I (522-486 a.C.) ad introdurre per primo una moneta d’oro con l’immagine del re, naturalmente idealizzato nell’espressione del potere sovrano e senza alcuna connotazione fisionomica. La moneta achemenide, pertanto, esprime l’impronta, il segno distintivo regale, come scrive Diodoro Siculo (XVI, 66, 2), quando racconta che Alessandro Magno nel 331 trovò nel tesoro reale di Susa più di 40.000 talenti d’oro e d’argento non monetato, e 9.000 talenti di pezzi d’oro con l’emblema di Dario (/!"!%)*"!- 5!"#$%&,), cioè 2.700.000 darici. 9 Polluce (Onom. III, 87) e i lessicografi 10 ripetono poi chiaramente che il termine darico viene da Dario, perché egli lo inventò per primo. Aggiungiamo poi che forse, alle orecchie dei Greci, come ebbe già a rimarcare E. Herzfeld, 11 il nome persiano di Dario, D rayavauš, poteva evocare per assonanza il termine antico-persiano indicante l’oro, daraniya-,
7
Probabilmente a Sardi la mina persiana era equiparata a 100 sicli (100 x 60 = 6.000 = 1 talento). Il sistema ponderale adottato a Sardi dai Persiani ebbe grande fortuna perché risultava facilmente interscambiabile con il sistema ponderale attico, che prevedeva la divisione del talento in 6.000 dracme, portando ad una graduale assimilazione fra il siclo e la dracma. Tuttavia, il talento ateniese pesava circa 26 kg ed era frazionato in 6.000 dracme dal peso teorico di 4,3 gr. Nonostante le differenze di peso teorico date al talento, i Persiani manifestarono grande acume nel proporre al mercato greco un talento al pari frazionabile in 6.000 unità (sulla questione, si veda da ultimo, LE RIDER 2001, pp. 157-160; ALBUM - BATES - FLOOR 1993, p. 15). Gli Achemenidi mantennero per tutta la durata del loro impero un rapporto costante tra oro e argento calcolabile in 1: 13,3 (solo con Dario I si ebbe 1: 13), e questa stabilità della loro moneta fu senz’altro uno dei fattori che ne determinò il successo; si veda LE RIDER 2001, pp. 200-205. Ricapitolando, in età achemenide i rapporti di cambio in Asia Minore erano i seguenti: 1 Talento = 60 Mine = 6.000 sicli. 1 Darico = 20 Sicli. 300 Darici = 1 Talento. 10 MELVILLE JONES 1993, p. 464. 11 HERZFELD 1938, p. 416.
Analisi chimiche compiute su darici conservati al British Museum hanno rivelato che essi contengono circa il 99% di oro e solo l’1% d’argento (si veda TUPLIN 1989, p. 72). Questo elevatissimo valore di purezza dell’oro è indice, oltre che di una precisa volontà politica di rendere la moneta achemenide assolutamente competitiva sul mercato estero, come ci risulta anche dai ripostigli, anche del raggiungimento di un elevato livello tecnico nella raffinazione dei metalli nobili, che, come noto, in natura ben difficilmente raggiungono simili valori: vedi ZOURNATZI 2000, pp. 256-265. 8 IG I3 383, l. 17-18.Vedi LE RIDER 2001, p. 145; CARRADICE 1987, p. 75, nota 13. 9 Sarà utile ricordare che a Sardi 1 talento persiano equivaleva a 300 darici o a 6.000 sicli d’argento, ed 1 darico (8,4 gr.) valeva 20 sicli d’argento di 5,35 gr. (siclo leggero) o di 5,6 gr. (siclo pesante). Mentre a Babilonia il talento comprendeva 3.600 sicli di 8,4 gr. e pesava pertanto 30,240 kg, contro il talento usato in Asia Minore pesante 33,600 kg. (5,6 gr. x 6.000). La divisione intermedia del talento era la mina, un’unità di peso di origine babilonese (man!) del valore di un sessantesimo di talento (504 gr. circa). La mina babilonese valeva 60 sicli d’argento, mentre nel sistema attico la mina (di 436 gr.) valeva 100 dracme.
135
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
così come il nome del re Creso (6"27(2'), in greco, non poteva che richiamare la parola /"0(&', oro. In Erodoto è indubbio che entrambi i personaggi siano associati a grandi quantitativi d’oro (ad esempio, per Creso, I, 50-54, per Dario, III, 94; IV, 166). Ma, se le fonti letterarie ed epigrafiche attestano con certezza l’esistenza del darico solo dalla seconda metà del V secolo a.C. (l’epoca in cui scrisse Erodoto), è difficile stabilire quando esattamente Dario compì la sua riforma monetale, e le cronologie relative o assolute dei diversi tipi di darici o di sicli. Dobbiamo al Robinson (1958) una prima sistemazione cronologica, poi affinata da Carradice (1987), della successione dei diversi tipi monetali in cui, comunque, al dritto compare sempre il re barbuto, con una corona merlata e vestito con il kandys, una tunica regale e, al rovescio, sono presenti delle punzonature rettangolari. Sono individuabili, principalmente, quattro tipi monetali: Tipo I: Il re è rappresentato a mezzo busto verso destra, tiene un arco nella mano sinistra e due frecce nella destra. Di questo tipo non si conoscono attualmente esemplari in oro, ma solo sicli del peso di 5,4 gr. circa. Dall’esame dei ripostigli, 12 risulta essere alquanto raro ed il più antico (500-480 a.C.). Tipo II: Il re, a figura intera, avanza verso destra, tiene una faretra sulla schiena ed è nell’atto di scoccare una freccia. Si conoscono darici (8,35gr.) e sicli (5,4gr.) e frazioni in oro e argento. 13 Sulla base dei ripostigli risulta aver circolato qualche decennio in più rispetto al tipo precedente (500-450 a.C.).
12 Per i ripostigli monetali di monete achemenidi rimando a CARRADICE 1987 e LE RIDER 2001, in particolare pp. 180-185.
136
Tipo IIIa-b: Il re, a figura intera, avanza verso destra, tiene una lancia nella destra ed un arco nella sinistra, la faretra sulla schiena. Alcuni esemplari presentano due globuli lungo la barba del re (Tipo IIIa di Carradice), altri, in maggior quantità, sono senza globuli ed hanno un aumento nel peso del siclo (5,6 gr.) (Tipo IIIb di Carradice. Cfr. nn.1-3 del catalogo). Dall’esame dei ripostigli il Tipo IIIb sembra essere stato coniato per molto tempo in più, sino al 370/360 a.C., rispetto al Tipo IIIa, la cui la produzione termina intorno al 450. Tipo IV: Simile al tipo precedente, ma il re impugna un lungo pugnale nella mano destra al posto della lancia. Lo studio dei ripostigli consente di affermare che questo tipo iniziò ad essere coniato dal 450/425 circa fino alla caduta dell’impero achemenide, ed è comune nei rinvenimenti della prima metà del IV secolo a.C.
Questa classificazione tipologica può, naturalmente, essere ancora perfezionata mediante l’inserimento di alcune subtipologie, come ha mostrato M. Alram, 14 ma, nella sostanza, resta valida e molto pratica. A riprova dell’esattezza dell’analisi delle cronologie relative che si evincono dai ripostigli, è stata fortunatamente rinvenuta nelle fortificazioni di Persepolis, e pubblicata dal Root, 15 una tavoletta amministrativa riguardante una distribuzione di farina per uno spostamento, che ci fornisce un utile terminus ante quem per la produzione del Tipo II (re che tira con l’arco). La tavoletta, infatti, reca al verso, a guisa di sigillo del beneficiario, l’impronta ripetuta per due volte di una moneta del Tipo II, ed è datata al venti-
13 14 15
LE RIDER 2001, pp. 143-144. ALRAM 1993, pp. 23-53. ROOT 1988, pp. 1-12.
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
duesimo anno e al dodicesimo mese di un regno, che il Root ha dimostrato essere quello di Dario I, per cui la tavoletta è ascrivibile al 500 a.C. Se il Tipo II era già in circolazione nel 500 a.C., anche se non possiamo sapere da quanto, il Tipo I deve essere comunque precedente, e, secondo Le Rider e Carradice, 16 non di molti anni, dato che è stata rilevata la presenza di pochissimi punzoni, e quindi si presume che l’emissione sia stata scarsa e di breve durata. Un ultimo importante dato che occorre tenere in considerazione è che nella sala del trono e delle udienze del palazzo reale di Persepolis, l’apad na, sono state rinvenute due scatole in pietra, poste una all’angolo nord-est, l’altra all’angolo sud-est, contenenti tavolette in oro e in argento iscritte in antico-persiano, elamico e babilonese, dove Dario invoca la protezione per sé e la sua casa da parte di Ahuramazd , dal quale ha ricevuto il
regno. Sotto ciascuna scatola erano state interrate sei monete: quattro creseidi 17 d’oro “leggero,” e due monete d’argento di Cipro da una parte, e dall’altra un pezzo in argento di Abdera ed uno di Egina. 18 Trattandosi di un deposito di fondazione del palazzo di Persepolis, voluto da Dario intorno al 519/518, e terminato verso il 513/512, sembrerebbe che a quell’epoca Dario non avesse ancora riformato la monetazione e che, pertanto, l’inizio della coniazione dei darici e dei sicli con l’immagine (/!"!%)*") del re (Tipo I e II) sarebbe da collocare fra il 510 ed il 500 a.C. Questo ragionamento, tuttavia, è valido solo se si crede, come alcuni studiosi, 19 che, se fossero esistite all’epoca del termine dei lavori del palazzo, le nuove monete sarebbero state deposte assieme alle tavolette, certamente per esaltare ulteriormente la grandezza di Dario. Personalmente sono
16
co inspiegabile nell’uso della moneta (dal 547 al 510). Inoltre le fonti parlano della retribuzione di soldati e mercenari in moneta coniata già al tempo di Ciro il Giovane (Xenoph. Anab. I, 3, 21). La grande quantità di conî e di punzoni differenti, nei quali si nota anche una evoluzione artistica da uno stile naturalistico ad uno più crudo e lineare, poco si addice al regno del solo Creso. A ciò si aggiunga che nei ripostigli monetali i creseidi leggeri non sono mai associati a quelli pesanti, segno che non solo si tratta di due emissioni distinte, ma anche separate cronologicamente. Solo i mezzi stateri del secondo gruppo di creseidi, infatti, sono stati rinvenuti assieme ai sicli persiani (CARRADICE 1987, pp. 74-75). Sulla complessa questione dell’attribuzione dei creseidi rimando ancora una volta al saggio di LE RIDER 2001, in particolare le pp. 101-121 e passim. 18 ROOT 1988; LE RIDER 2001, pp. 129-130. 19 ROBINSON 1958 e CARRADICE 1987, ritengono corretta la datazione 510/500, altri, tra cui spiccano ROOT 1988 e VARGYAS 2000, pp. 40-41, stimano che proprio l’assenza dei darici sia da interpretare come un segno positivo della loro esistenza, poiché il deposito è altamente simbolico e le monete nascoste alluderebbero al passato. Altri studiosi ancora, come LE RIDER 2001, si limitano prudentemente a tenere per certo il 500 come terminus ante quem delle emissioni regali.
LE RIDER 2001, pp. 130-131; CARRADICE 1987, p. 83. Si ritiene che i “creseidi” siano le prime monete in oro emesse nel mondo greco, verso la metà del VI sec. a.C., dal re di Lidia Creso (560-547 a.C.), dopo le prime emissioni in elettro (lega di oro e argento). Si è soliti citare, a questo proposito, il noto passo di Erodoto, I, 94, 1, in cui si dice che i Lidi furono i primi a coniare monete d’oro e d’argento. I Greci conoscevano bene questo tipo di monete, e, nei rendiconti ateniesi, le differenziavano con cura rispetto alle altre monete d’oro in circolazione (si veda, ad esempio, IG3 458, 29, iscrizione del 439/438, concernente l’acquisizione di oro per la statua dell’Atena Parthenos di Fidia). I creseidi “pesanti” sono costituiti da stateri, sia in oro che argento, del peso di 10,7 gr., con frazioni, quelli detti “leggeri,” presentano uno statere d’oro di 8,1 gr. ed un pezzo d’argento pesante circa la metà dell’antico statere, pari a circa 5,4 gr. La moderna ricerca numismatica (the orthodox view, come scrive CARRADICE 1987, p. 74) è incline a ritenere che i Persiani, dopo la conquista della Lidia da parte di Ciro, nel 547/546, abbiano continuato a coniare a Sardi i creseidi “leggeri,” mantenendo inalterata la tipologia delle protomi del leone e del toro affrontati, sino alla riforma monetale di Dario I del 510/500. Se così non fosse, se cioè tutti i creseidi fossero da attribuire al regno di Creso, si avrebbe un gap cronologi17
137
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
dell’avviso che siano state scelte monete utili a rappresentare la circolazione monetale del momento della fondazione, i creseidi d’oro, le uniche monete d’oro del tempo, ed alcune monete greche arcaiche, che facilmente potevano pervenire tra le mani dei Persiani tramite i loro floridi commerci sullo Ionio. Tuttavia non è possibile nutrire a riguardo una certezza assoluta. Possiamo certamente ritenere, invece, che nell’ambito della politica di grandezza e di propaganda politica di Dario I, manifestatasi, ad esempio, tramite la realizzazione del palazzo reale a Persepolis o della grande iscrizione con rilievo di Bisutun, fosse anche stata programmata la creazione di un sistema monetale 20 “universale” nella diffusione, duraturo e forte nella qualità dell’intrinseco, portatore fra i sudditi ed i suoi nemici di un’immagine di re guerriero e cacciatore, invincibile agli occhi degli uomini. I Greci, non a caso, chiamavano le monete persiane anche “arcieri” ()28&)!$), con un certo, mi pare, riverente rispetto (cfr. Plut. Artax. 20). Ricordiamo che l’uso di moneta aurea, nel mondo greco, sarà sempre solo sporadico ed eccezionale almeno fino a Filippo II il Macedone, 21 che, dopo il 355, emise un’abbondante quantità di monete in oro (stateri di 8,6 gr. di piede attico), grazie
allo sfruttamento intensivo delle miniere del Pangeo e di Crenides, con cui poté prezzolare una grande quantità di mercenari e di sostegni politici (cfr. Diod. XVI, 8, 6-7). Queste monete diventeranno ben presto famose col nome di 9$:1;< ;#$2$, “filippi.” Nella produzione di moneta aurea, dunque, solo la monarchia macedone fu in grado di rivaleggiare col Gran Re. Anche i ripostigli monetali, oltre che le fonti letterarie ed epigrafiche, testimoniano il successo della moneta regale achemenide, 22 diffusa abbondantemente dentro e fuori il limite dell’impero, dal momento della sua creazione sin dopo la conquista di Babilonia da parte di Alessandro Magno, che anzi proseguì anche dopo il 331 a coniare monete con le stesse tipologie. 23 La fama del darico in Grecia fu tanto grande, che un documento contabile ateniese, del 355 a.C., registra gli stateri di Filippo col nome curioso di “filippi darici,” evidentemente perché non vi fosse confusione sul fatto che essi erano proprio d’oro. 24 Solo in età romana per indicare le monete greche d’oro emesse dai re ellenistici si userà il nome generico di nummi philippei, 25 ma il poeta Ausonio, ad esempio, nel IV sec., si riferisce ai solidi costantiniani ancora con il termine di darii. 26
20
lo studio di NICOLET - PIERRE 1999, in particolare le pp. 296-299. 24 IG II2, 1526, l. 22-23. 25 Ad esempio, Livio, XXXIV, 52, 4-10, in occasione del trionfo di Flamininus; Orazio, Ep. II, 1, 234. Si veda LE RIDER 2001, pp. 199-200, che raccoglie una serie di fonti. Aggiungo che Giovanni di Efeso, che scrisse in siriaco le Vite dei Santi Orientali nel VI sec., usa il termine “darici” quando si riferisce a monete d’oro: vedi BROOKS 2003, pp. 548, 551 (Vita di Theodoro Castrensis), 600 (Vita di Giacomo di Edessa). 26 Ausonio, Ep. V, 23: ergo aut praedictos iam nunc rescribe darios.
Sono emblematiche le parole di Erodoto IV, 166: !"#72,- =;$30>?2,)!- >,@>&(0,2,- A+0)2B- :$;?(3!$ )2B)2- )C- >D- E::F- #G@- H!($:#7- %!)#"I!(>?,2,JJJ /"0(12,- %!3!"4)!)2,- K;#L*(!'- ='- )C- 50,!)4)!)2, ,&>$(>!-=%&L!)2J “Dario desiderava lasciare come proprio ricordo qualcosa che non fosse mai stato compiuto da altro re… fatto liquefare dell’oro rendendolo purissimo ne batté moneta.” Sulla regalità Achemenide si veda PANAINO 2003b, in particolare le pp. 334-336. 21 LE RIDER 2001, pp. 196-200; MELVILLE JONES 1999. 22 CARRADICE 1987, pp. 79 e 87. 23 A proposito di queste emissioni babilonesi si veda 138
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
Monete Partiche Le monete partiche più antiche della collezione bolognese risalgono a Mithradates II (123-88 a.C.), sotto il regno del quale avvennero importanti cambiamenti rispetto alle emissioni precedenti. Da un punto di vista iconografico, infatti, Mithradates II inizialmente compare ancora ellenizzato, 27 indossa infatti il semplice diadema regale legato attorno alla testa, il volto è rivolto verso destra, non porta la barba lunga, e la scritta del rovescio, dove campeggia una divinità greca femminile, è disposta lungo quattro linee parallele, secondo il modello seleucide. 28 Successivamente, forse verso il 115 a.C., il ritratto, sempre con diadema, si volve definitivamente a sinistra, e la figura del rovescio sulle dracme, interpretato come Arsakes, l’eponimo fondatore della dinastia, in un primo tempo siede sull’omphalos (cat. n.4), come Apollo sulle monete greche, poi su un trono (cat. n.5). Dall’osservazione di questi particolari si può affermare che gli elementi iranici andavano prevalendo su quelli greci, in modo da conferire una nuova fisionomia alla regalità arsacide.
Tale processo di “neoiranismo” dei Parti, su cui tanto ha insistito il Wolski, 29 raggiunge una tappa importante nella fase successiva della monetazione di Mithradates, verso il 105-100 a.C., quando egli adotta sulle monete, in luogo di Basileus Megalos Arsakes Epiphanes, il titolo completo di !"#$%&" !"#$%&' (%)!$*+ !,"!-*+ %.#/!'*+", ed inizia a portare sul capo una mitra o tiara, perlinata e decorata al centro da una stella (cat. n.5). 30 Mithradates, infatti, avrebbe assunto il titolo di “Re dei Re” verso il 109 a.C., in base ad alcune tavolette cuneiformi, 31 e conseguentemente lo avrebbe apposto, per primo, anche sulle monete. È necessario tuttavia rilevare che, se sulle monete il titolo di “Re dei Re” venne introdotto da Mithradates II, già Mithradates I se ne sarebbe fregiato verso il 140 a.C., come testimonia l’iscrizione del rilievo rupestre di Xung-i Naur0z1 (mtrdt MLKYN MLK, Mithradates Re dei Re), che celebra la vittoria su Kamnaskires satrapo di Susa. 32 La presenza della mitra come copricapo regale al posto del solo diadema,
27
un ulteriore accrescimento della potenza di Roma… ma, al suo posto, non ha creato niente.” Consiglio la lettura del recente volume a cura di J. Wiesehöfer, Das Partherreich und Seine Zeugnisse. The Arsacid Empire: Sources and Documentation. Beiträge des internationalen Colloquiums (Eutin 27-30 Juni 1996), Stuttgart 1998; inoltre sono preziose le considerazioni ed i riferimenti bibliografici di GNOLI 1998, pp. 115-117, circa la fondata ed ampia affermazione nella moderna storiografia di un rinascimento iranico sotto i Parti. 30 Sulle corone partiche si vedano PECK 1993, pp. 408-413; CURTIS 1998, pp. 61-74; PIRAS 2000, pp. 18-19. 31 SELLWOOD 1983, p. 285. 32 SCHMITT 1998, p. 168; WOLSKI 1993, pp. 97-99; PANAINO 2001, pp. 113-114.
Ricordo che Mithradates I iniziò a fregiarsi, su tetradrammi emessi nella neo-conquistata Seleucia sul Tigris, del titolo di 9$:?::@,, “amico dei Greci,” certamente non per supino filellenismo ma per compiacere la popolazione greca. Si vedano SELLWOOD 1980, p. 42, tipo 13.1; 1983, p. 282; WOLSKI 1983; WIESEHÖFER 1996, p. 60; D2BROWA 1998, p. 40. 28 SELLWOOD 1980, p. 65, tipo 23.1. 29 WOLSKI 1993, pp. 97-121. L’impostazione del Wolski è stata aspramente criticata come una “moda” da SIMONETTA 1979, per il suo eccessivo “iranismo partico,” mi pare con argomentazioni di assai discutibile profondità, come quando scrive, a p. 36: “Che cosa ci hanno lasciato cinque secoli di impero partico…? Molte monete, qualche rudere, qualche tomba “a pantofola,” un po’ di oggetti d’oro, d’argento, d’avorio,” o ancora, a p. 37: “la loro potenza ha avuto sostanzialmente una funzione negativa: ha impedito
139
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
portato legato sopra la mitra, si può intendere come manifestazione del potere partico e del rafforzamento interno della regalità, che esprime una dimensione universale sia nella titolatura che mediante la comparsa di motivi astrali nell’iconografia. Il sole e la luna sono affiancati al capo dei parricidi di Phraates III, Mithradates III (57-54 a.C.) e Orodes II (57-38 a.C.) (cat. nn.6-9). Come Phraates III essi non portano la tiara ma solo il diadema, con l’aggiunta importante dei due luminari, e mi domando se, almeno inizialmente, la complessa simbologia astrale, che compare sulle ultime emissioni di Mithradates III, 33 non alluda alla spartizione del regno fra i due fratelli. La co-reggenza fu comunque breve, e Mithradates, al quale mancò l’aiuto del governatore di Syria, Gabinius, dovette soccombere ad Orodes, che era sostenuto dalla potente famiglia dei S!r"n. 34 Le emissioni di Orodes II furono numerose e testimoniano che l’impero partico era florido dopo la sconfitta romana a Carrhae, della quale però non vi è alcun chiaro riferimento nella monetazione. Molte delle sue monete recano o un crescente, o una stella ed un crescente, o due stelle ed un crescente ai lati del capo (cat. n.9). 35 Sellwood 36 ha notato che tale proliferare di simboli astrali poteva essere in qualche modo utile a differenziare le emissioni successive all’interno delle zecche. Ritengo questa ipotesi plausibile, e, in un certo senso, ho avanzato un’interpretazione simile anche per la
monetazione sasanide, 37 dove si ha l’impressione che le diverse combinazioni di lune e stelle fossero finalizzate anche a distinguere le monete di un sovrano da quelle di un altro. La comparsa di simboli astrali in modo sempre più numeroso è stata utilizzata dal Sellwood per elaborare una cronologia relativa delle emissioni di Phraates IV 38 (38-2 a.C.), nella quale a volte la stella solare si può riscontrare anche al rovescio, 39 posta alle spalle di Arsakes. Non si deve comunque dimenticare che zecche diverse potrebbero aver adottato questi simboli in tempi diversi. Il tipo più frequente presenta un’aquila con diadema nel becco, dietro la testa di Phraates, e, di fronte, una stella entro crescente (cat. nn.11-13). 40 Complessivamente, comunque, Phraates IV adottò un’iconografia simile a quella del padre Orodes, facendosi raffigurare anch’egli con la verruca sulla fronte, che divenne così un tratto distintivo della famiglia reale arsacide, e con la stessa titolatura greca, 41 che rimase virtualmente invariata sino alla fine della dinastia, sebbene di fatto fosse poi incomprensibile. Volagases I (51-78 d.C.), per differenziarsi dal figlio ribelle Vardanes II (5558 d.C.), iniziò a porre le sue iniziali (wl per wlgšy), in aramaico, sulle monete. 42 Ma una scritta completa in caratteri aramaici, accompagnata dalla leggenda greca corrotta, comparirà solo a partire da Mithradates IV, verso il 140 d.C. (mtrdt MLK’ / Mithradates re). Volagases IV (147-191) coniò alcune monete, ad Edes-
33
36
SELLWOOD 1980, p. 129, 41.17. Surenas, il grande condottiero che sconfisse Crasso a Carrhae nel 53, avrebbe infatti battuto a Seleucia sul Tigris Mithradates, nel 54, ed incoronato personalmente come re Orodes, avvalendosi di un privilegio familiare ereditario ed antico (Plut. Crass. XXI, 8). Sulla campagna di Carrhae, si veda BIVAR 1983b, pp. 48-58. 35 SELLWOOD 1980, p. 153, tipo 48.8. 34
140
SELLWOOD 1980, p. 123; 1983, p. 290; 1996, p. 78. GARIBOLDI 2003, p. 20. 38 SELLWOOD 1996, p. 81. 39 SELLWOOD 1980, p. 174, tipo 53.3. 40 SELLWOOD 1980, p. 177, tipo 54.7. 41 !"#$%&" !"#$%&' !,"!-*+ %+%,)%3*+ 4#-!#*+ %.#/!'*+" /#$%$$5'*". 42 SELLWOOD 1980, p. 231, tipo 71.1; ALRAM 1986, p. 127. 37
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
sa, con una leggenda partica (’ršk wlgšy MLKYN MLK’ / Arsace Volagases Re dei Re). 43 Gli ultimi re parti continuarono l’uso del bilinguismo sino alla caduta della dinastia sotto Volagases VI (cat. n.32) e Artabanos IV. Nella collezione bolognese sono interessanti, inoltre, alcuni tetradrammi della zecca di Seleucia sul Tigris, l’unica zecca che coniò questo tipo di nominale per l’impero partico, 44 sui quali è possibile leggere l’esatto anno di emissione secondo l’era seleucide (cat. nn.18-19), che iniziò con il mese Dios (ottobre) del 312 a.C. Il mese di coniazione, sfortunatamente, spesso si trova fuori dal conio delle monete. L’anno compare anche sui nominali in bronzo, sempre della zecca di Seleucia (cat. nn. 20, 26), che presentano iconografie più varie rispetto alle monete in argento, anche se usualmente si rifanno a tipologie greche (come Tyche), analogamente a quanto accade per i bronzi partici di Susa. Le Rider ha studiato una gran quantità di bronzi partici dagli scavi di Seleucia, mostrando come le emissioni, sebbene non fossero annuali, ma andassero ad ondate successive, siano comunque abbondanti sino al 127/128 d.C., 45 per poi decrescere, ma senza mai scomparire, nel corso dell’ultimo secolo di dominazione partica. Merita una menzione a parte il tetradramma bronzeo della zecca di Spasinu di Caracene, nella Mesopotamia meridio-
nale (cat. n.33). Il regno di Caracene, resosi indipendente dai Parti con la rivolta del satrapo Hyspaosines nel 125/124 a.C., continuò a coniare monete, con qualche interruzione, sino al primo quarto del terzo secolo d.C. 46 Il nostro tetradramma appartiene all’ultima fase monetale del regno indipendente di Caracene, quando ormai l’uso del greco era stato abbandonato in favore di leggende aramaico-eterografiche, disposte circolarmente, di assai difficile lettura. 47 Anche per l’iconografia, questa moneta segna una svolta rispetto alle emissioni caracene precedenti, che solitamente recano al rovescio Herakles seduto, e seguono nelle date il calendario seleucide. Sul dritto della moneta n.33 compare un busto di re barbuto e diademato, con tiara a calotta, non decorata, e sfortunatamente la leggenda è risultata, sino ad ora, incomprensibile. 48 Al rovescio, figura una testa barbuta, forse un re successore, poiché non reca alcuna insegna regale, ed inoltre, la scritta definisce il personaggio, Maga, come figlio di un certo re Atam6bi6z (Attambelos VI ?), secondo la lettura che ha dato De Morgan 49 (ATaMABIAZ), oppure Athabiaos (A[s]tab’iaz), secondo Hill. 50 I Sasanidi probabilmente misero fine all’autonomia di questo importante regno sul Golfo Persico, che ci mostra, pur nel suo declino storico, evidenti segnali di una rinascita della cultura iranica in quelle regioni.
43
47
ALRAM 1986, p. 133, nn. 419-420. Seleucia sul Tigris fu attiva come zecca per i Parti dal 140 circa a.C., quando venne strappata a Demetrio II da Mithradates I. Vedi SELLWOOD 1983, p. 282; D2BROWA 1998, pp. 38-39. 45 LE RIDER 1999, p. 74. 46 Per una introduzione alla monetazione della Caracene: SELLWOOD 1983, pp. 310-314; LE RIDER 1959. 44
Un parallelo abbandono del greco in favore dell’aramaico avvenne nel II sec d.C. anche nelle monete elimee. Vedi VARDANIAN 1999, pp. 122-123; ALRAM 1986, pp. 160-161. 48 ALRAM 1986, p. 161. 49 DE MORGAN 1923-1936, pp. 226-227. 50 HILL 1922, p. CCVI-CCVIII; SELLWOOD 1983, p. 317. 141
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
Monete Sasanidi La collezione del Medagliere di Bologna possiede solo 5 monete sasanidi: due dracme di Š6buhr I, ed una di Kaw6d I, Xusraw I e Ohrmazd IV. Le due monete di Š6buhr, pur essendo simili, provengono certamente da due conî differenti. Infatti, la n.34 presenta al rovescio le fiamme dell’altare di Ahuramazd6, dritte, e la colonna è liscia, mentre la n.35 ha le fiamme ondulate e sulla colonna vi è il simbolo dell’“erede” regale (un anello sormontato da un crescente: Alram - Gyselen 2003, p. 258). Anche nelle scritte si riscontrano alcune diversità: la n.35, ad esempio, omette quasi interamente dalla leggenda del dritto la parola mazd"sn/ mazdeo, tranne la m"m, certamente perché l’incisore non ha trovato spazio sufficiente sul conio per incidere la titolatura completa, ed è stato così costretto ad obliterarne una parte. Notiamo che i capelli dietro la nuca di Š6buhr arrivano a lambire la perlinatura, non lasciando spazio alla leggenda di girare completamente attorno alla figura, come invece possiamo osservare sulla n.34. Simili inconvenienti occorrevano di sovente sulle monete sasanidi, poiché sui conî prima veniva disegnato il busto del re, poi si incidevano le scritte, negli spazi liberi. Se il disegno della figura era troppo esuberante, le scritte venivano forzatamente abbreviate. In altri casi ancora, vi possono essere anche errori dovuti alla scarsa conoscenza della lingua da parte dell’incisore, che doveva vero-
similmente seguire un modello prestabilito. 51 Possiamo osservare, inoltre, che la scritta del rovescio della n.35, dur # Š buhr, “il fuoco di Š6buhr,” è invertita rispetto all’ordine usuale sulle monete, che prevede l’apposizione del nome del re a sinistra dell’altare (come sulla n.34) e non a destra. Le ultime monete sasanidi non presentano particolarità di eccezione. La n.36 è una dracma di Kaw6d del I regno (488-497), coniata prima dell’usurpazione di Zam6sp (497-499), per cui al dritto è il nome del re (kw’t, in alto a destra), senza la formula augurale abz$n/ crescita, che invece verrà aggiunta sulle monete del secondo regno (499-531). Tale formula, propria della religione zoroastriana, augura al re che il suo xwarrah, o splendore regale, possa aumentare e non venire mai meno. A partire dal secondo anno di regno di Xusraw II (590/91-628), questa scritta verrà indicata comunemente tramite l’eterogramma aramaico GDE (xwarrah) e ’pzwty (abz!d), “possa lo Splendore crescere.” 52 Al rovescio della moneta n.36, sulla destra dell’altare, si trova l’indicazione abbreviata della zecca, 53 in questo caso SK (sakast n), e sulla sinistra il nome del re ripetuto, che sarà poi sostituito canonicamente, dall’undicesimo anno di regno, 54 dall’indicazione dell’anno di regno di Kaw6d. Sotto questo re avvenne infatti una standardizzazione dei tipi e delle leggende, che lascia spazio a poche va-
51
che, si vedano, in particolare, GYSELEN 1979 e 1989, che si avvale dell’apporto significativo della sigillografia sasanide. 54 GÖBL 1971, p. 23.
GÖBL 1971, pp. 15-16; 1983 b, pp. 297-298. Sullo xwarrah si veda, da ultimo, GNOLI 1999. Sulla politica propagandistica di Xusraw II, riflessa dalle monete: DARYAEE 1997. 53 Sullo scioglimento delle abbreviazioni delle zec52
142
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
rianti nelle monete dei successori. 55 Notiamo, ad esempio, che suo figlio, Xusraw I (cat. n.37), pone al dritto delle monete, fuori dal margine della perlinatura, tre crescenti lunari in posizione cardinale 56 (a ore 3, 6, 9), mentre Kaw6d
I, dal secondo regno, aveva già introdotto il motivo della sole entro crescente, che comparirà sempre 57 sulle monete sasanidi sino alla fine della dinastia con Yazdagird III (632-651 d.C.), ed anche dopo, sulle monete arabo-sasanidi. 58
55
57
GARIBOLDI 2003, pp. 21-22. Sulle importanti e profonde implicazioni astrali della regalità sasanide, PANAINO Astral Characters (in c.s.) e PANAINO 2003a, pp. 277-280; GARIBOLDI 2003, pp. 18-19. 56
Fa eccezione Wahr6m VI (590-591), che usa, come Xusraw I, il crescente senza sole. 58 GYSELEN 2000; GARIBOLDI 2003, cat. nn. 67-68, pp. 52-53.
B IBLIOGRAFIA A BGARIANS M.T. - S ELLWOOD D.G. (1971) A Hoard of Early Parthian Drachms, The Numismatic Chronicle 11, pp. 103-134 (Pl. 20-23). A LBUM S. - B ATES M. - F LOOR W. (1993) Coins and Coinage. In particolare: The Achaemenids, Encyclopaedia Iranica, VI, 1, London-Costa Mesa, pp. 14-16. A LRAM M. (1986) Nomina Propria Iranica in Nummis. Iranisches Personennamenbuch IV, Wien. A LRAM M. (1987a) Arsacid Coinage, Encyclopaedia Iranica, II, London-Costa Mesa, pp. 536-540. A LRAM M. (1987b) Die Vorbildwirkung der arsakidischen Münzprägung, Litterae Numismaticae Vindobonenses 3, pp. 117-142. A LRAM M. (1993) Dareikos und Siglos. Ein neuer Schatzfund achaimenidischer Sigloi aus Kleinasien, Circulation des monnaies des marchandises et des biens (ed. R. Gyselen), Res Orientales V, Bures-sur-Yvette, pp. 23-53. A LRAM M. (1998) Stand und Aufgaben der Arsakidischen Numismatik, Das Partherreich und Seine Zeugnisse. The Arsacid Empire: Sources and Documentation. Beiträge des internationalen Colloquiums (Eutin 27-30 Juni 1996), Stuttgart, pp. 365387. A LRAM M. – G YSELEN R. (2003) Sylloge Nummorum Sasanidarum. Band 1: Ardashir I – Shapur I, Wien. B IVAR A. D. H. (1983a) Achaemenid Coins, Weights and Measures, The Cambridge History of Iran 2, Cambridge, pp. 610-639. B IVAR A. D. H. (1983b) The Political History of Iran under the Arsacids, The Cambridge History of Iran 3 (1), Cambridge, pp. 21-99. B ROOKS E. W. (2003) John of Ephesus. Lives of the Eastern Saints III. Patrologia Orientalis, T. XIX – F. 2, Brepols (ed. or. Paris 1925). 143
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
C ARRADICE I. (1987) The Regal Coinage of the Persian Empire, Coinage and Administration in the Athenian and Persian Empires. The Ninth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary History (ed. I. Carradice), Oxford, pp. 73-107. D 2BROWA E. (1998) Philhellên. Mithridate I er et les Grecs, Electrum 2, pp. 35-44. D ARYAEE T. (1997) The Use of Religio-Political Propaganda on the coinage of Xusr7 II, American Journal of Numismatics 9, pp. 41-53. D E M ORGAN J. (1923-1936) Manuel de Numismatique Orientale, Paris. D ESCAT R. (1995) Darius I er et la monnaie, Annali dell’Istituto Italiano di Numismatica 42, pp. 9-20. F RYE R. N. (1964) The Charisma of Kingship in Ancient Iran, Iranica Antiqua IV, pp. 36-54. G ARDNER P. (1878) A Catalogue of Greek Coins in the British Museum. The Seleucid Kings of Syria, London. G ARIBOLDI A. (2000) Simboli e ideologia del potere in età romana, La corona e i simboli del potere, Rimini, pp. 31-63. G ARIBOLDI A. (2003) La monetazione sasanide nelle Civiche Raccolte Numismatiche di Milano, Milano. G NOLI G H . (1989) The Idea of Iran. An Essay of its Origin. Serie Orientale Roma LXII, Rome. G NOLI G H . (1998) L’Iran tardoantico e la regalità sassanide, Mediterraneo Antico I, 1, pp. 115-139. G NOLI G H . (1999) Farr(ah), Encyclopaedia Iranica IX, London-Costa Mesa, pp. 312319. G ÖBL R. (1971) Sasanian Numismatics, Braunschweig. G ÖBL R. (1978) Antike Numismatik, I-II, München. G ÖBL R. (1983a) Sasanian Coins, The Cambridge History of Iran 3 (1), Cambridge, pp. 322-336. G ÖBL R. (1983b) Die Titel der ersten beiden S6s6niden auf ihren Münzen, Anzeiger der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 120, pp. 290-298 (Taf. I-III). G YSELEN R. (1979) Ateliers monétaires et cachets officiels sasanides, Studia Iranica 8/2, pp. 189-212. G YSELEN R. (1989) Ateliers monétaires et organisation administrative sassanides, Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Numismatics, London 1986, pp. 517525. G YSELEN R. (2000) Arab-Sasanian Copper Coinage, Wien. G YSELEN R. (2002) Nouveaux matériaux pour la géographie historique de l’empire sassanide: sceaux administratifs de la collection Ahmad Saeedi, Cahier de Studia Iranica 24, Paris. H ERZFELD E. (1938) Notes on the Achaemenid Coinage, Transactions of the International Numismatic Congress, London, pp. 413-416. H ILL G. F. (1922) A Catalogue of the Greek Coins in the British Museum. Arabia, Mesopotamia, Persia, London. 144
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
L E R IDER G. (1959) Monnaies de Characène, Syria 36, pp. 229-253 (Pl. 19-22). L E R IDER G., G ÖBL R., M ILES G. C., W ALKER J. (1960) Numismatique Susienne. Mémoires de la mission archéologique en Iran, Tome XXXVII, Paris. L E R IDER G. (1965) Suse sous les Séleucides et les Parthes. Mémoires de la mission archéologique en Iran, Tome XXXVIII, Paris. L E R IDER G. (1999) Séleucie du Tigre. Les monnaies Séleucides et Parthes, Monografie di Mesopotamia VI, Firenze. L E R IDER G. (2001) La naissance de la monnaie. Pratiques monétaires de l’Orient ancien, Paris. L UKONIN V. G. (1983) Political, Social and Administrative Institutions, Taxes and Trade, The Cambridge History of Iran 3 (2), Cambridge, pp. 681-746. M ELVILLE J ONES J. R. (1993) Testimonia Numaria I. Greek and Latin Texts concerning Ancient Greek Coinage, London. M ELVILLE J ONES J. R. (1999) Ancient Greek Gold Coinage up to the Time of Philip of Macedon, Travaux de numismatique grecque offerts a Georges Le Rider (ed. M. Amandry - S. Hurter), London, pp. 257-275. M ORIGI G OVI C. (1986) Il medagliere del Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna. Storia della sua formazione, Deputazione di Storia Patria per le Province di Romagna XXXVI, pp. 87-103. N ICOLET -P IERRE H. (1999) Argent et or frappés en Babylonie entre 331 et 311 ou de Mazdai à Séleucos, Travaux de numismatique grecque offerts a Georges Le Rider (ed. M. Amandry - S. Hurter), London, pp. 285-305. P ANAINO A. (2001) Greci e Iranici: confronto e conflitti, I Greci. Storia Cultura Arte Società (a cura di S. Settis). 3 - I Greci oltre la Grecia, Torino, pp. 79-136. P ANAINO A. (2003a) The Ba86n of the Fratarakas: Gods or “divine” Kings?, Religious Themes and Texts of pre-Islamic Iran and Central Asia. Studies in Honour of Professor Gherardo Gnoli on the Occasion of his 65 th Birthday on 6th December 2002. Edited by Carlo G. Cereti, Mauro Maggi and Elio Provasi, Wiesbaden, pp. 265-288. P ANAINO A. (2003b) Herodotus I,96-101: Deioces’ conquest of power and the foundation of sacred royalty, Continuity of Empire (?) Assyria, Media, Persia. Edited by Giovanni B. Lanfranchi, Michael Roaf, Robert Rollinger, Padova, pp. 327-338. P ANAINO A., Astral Characters of Kingship in the Sasanian and Byzantine Worlds, Atti del Convegno sul tema: La Persia e Bisanzio. Accademia dei Lincei e IsIAO, Roma (in c.s.). P ANVINI R OSATI F. (1963) Arte e civiltà nella moneta greca. Catalogo della mostra, Bologna. R OBINSON E. S. G. (1958) The Beginnings of Achaemenid Coinage, The Numismatic Chronicle, pp. 187-193. R OOT M. C. (1988) Evidence from Persepolis, The Numismatic Chronicle, pp. 1-12. S CHMITT R. (1998) Partische Sprach-und Namenüberlieferung aus arsakidischer Zeit, Das Partherreich und Seine Zeugnisse. The Arsacid Empire: Sources and Documentation. Beiträge des internationalen colloquiums (Eutin 27-30 Juni 1996), Stuttgart, pp. 163-204. 145
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
S ELLWOOD D. (1980 2 ) An Introduction to the Coinage of Parthia, London. S ELLWOOD D. (1983) Numismatics, The Cambridge History of Iran 3 (1). The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods, Cambridge, pp. 279-321. S ELLWOOD D. (1996) The “Victory” Drachms of Phraates IV, American Journal of Numismatics 7-8 (1995-96), pp. 75-81 (Pl. 12). S IMONETTA A. M. (1968) La monetazione partica dal 247 al 122 a.C., Rivista Italiana di Numismatica LXX, pp. 11-64 (Tav. 1-6). S IMONETTA A. M. (2001) A Proposed Revision of the Attributions of the Parthian Coins Struck during the So-called “Dark Age” and Its Historical Significance, East and West 51, pp. 69-108. S IMONETTA B. (1979) Le monete quale documentazione dell’atteggiamento dei Parti di fronte all’influsso greco ed a quello romano, Rivista Italiana di Numismatica, pp. 3548. SNG Copenhagen = Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. The Royal Collection of Coins and Medals. Danish National Museum. Volume Seven, Cyprus to India, West Milford 1982. T UPLIN Ch. (1987) The Administration of the Achaemenid Empire, Coinage and Administration in the Athenian and Persian Empires. The Ninth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary History (ed. by I. Carradice), Oxford, pp. 109-166. T UPLIN Ch. (1989) The Coinage of Aryandes, L’or perse et l’histoire grecque. Revue des études anciennes 91 (1/2), pp. 61-82. V ARDANIAN R. (1999) La monetazione di bronzo elimea del II sec. D.C. Problemi di classificazione e datazione, Parthica 1, pp. 117-134. V ARGYAS P. (2000) Darius I and the Daric reconsidered, Iranica Antiqua 35, pp. 33-46. W IESEHÖFER J. (1994) Die ‘dunklen Jahrhunderte’ der Persis. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Kultur von F rs in hellenistischer Zeit (330-149 v.Chr.). Zetemata 90. München. W IESEHÖFER J. (1996) “King of Kings” and “Philhellên”: Kingship in Arsacid Iran, Aspects of Hellenistic Kingship, Aarhus, pp. 55-66. W IESEHÖFER J. (2001 2 ) Ancient Persia, London-New York. W OLSKI J. (1983) Sur le «philhellenisme» des Arsacides, Geriòn 1, pp. 145-156. W OLSKI J. (1990) Le titre «Roi des Rois» dans l’idéologie monarchique des Arsacides, From Alexander the Great to Kül Tegin (ed. by J. Harmatta) Budapest, pp. 11-18. W OLSKI J. (1993) L’empire des Arsacides, Acta Iranica 32, Lovanii. W ROTH W. (1903) A Catalogue of the Greek Coins in the British Museum. Catalogue of the coins of Parthia, London. Z OURNATZI A. (2000) The Processing of Gold and Silver Tax in the Achaemenid Empire: Herodotus 3.96.2 and the Archaeological Realities, Studia Iranica 29, pp. 241271.
146
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
C ATALOGO
Monete Achemenidi Tipo III b (dopo il 480 a.C.) Zecca incerta (Sardi?) Darico D. Il re, barbuto, indossa una corona merlata ed un kandys, avanza verso d., tiene una lancia nella mano d. e un arco nella s., la faretra sulla spalla d. R. Punzonatura rettangolare. Bibl. Gen.: L E R IDER 2001, Pl. V, 13; C ARRADICE 1987, Pl. XIII, 27. Bibl. Spec.: P ANVINI R OSATI 1963, n. 15. 1- AU gr. 8, 21; mm. 14; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53401. Simile alla precedente Bibl. Gen.: L E R IDER 2001, Pl. V, 13; C ARRADICE 1987, Pl. XIII, 27. Bibl. Spec.: P ANVINI R OSATI 1963, n. 14. 2- AU gr. 8, 17; mm. 14; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53400. Simile alla precedente Bibl. Gen.: L E R IDER 2001, Pl. V, 13; C ARRADICE 1987, Pl. XIII, 27. Bibl. Spec.: P ANVINI R OSATI 1963, n. 16. 3- AU gr. 7, 60; mm. 14; 0. N. Inv.: Verzaglia Rusconi 71598.
Monete Partiche MITHRADATES II (123-88 a.C.) 115 a.C. circa Zecca di Ecbatana? Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Mithradates a s., con veste perlinata e torques al collo desinente a protome equina. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. sull’Omphalos. !"#$%&"// (%)!$*+// !,"!-*+// %.#/!'*+" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 24/10. 4- AR gr. 3, 19; mm. 21; 0. N. inv.: Palagi 53412.
147
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
MITHRADATES II (123-88 a.C.) 100 a.C. circa Zecca di Rhagae ? Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Mithradates a s., con veste perlinata e torques al collo. Indossa una tiara decorata al centro da un motivo a stella. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. !"#$%&"// !"#$%&'// (%)!$*+// !,"!-*+/ %.#/!'*+" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 28/1. 5- AR gr. 3, 59; mm. 20; 0. N. inv.: Palagi 53413. ORODES II (57-38 a.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Orodes a s., con veste perlinata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// [%+%,)%3*+]/ 4#-![#*+// %.#/!'*+" /#$%$$5'*"] Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 45/9. 6- AR gr. 3, 36; mm. 19; 0. N. inv.: Palagi 53410. ORODES II (57-38 a.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Orodes a s., con veste perlinata e torques al collo. Nel campo, a d., crescente. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. [ !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)%3*+]/ 4#-!#*[+]// %.#/!'*+"/ [/#]$%$$[5'*"] Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 46/8. 7- AR gr. 2, 77; mm. 19; 0. N. inv.: Palagi 53423. ORODES II (57-38 a.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana (?) Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Orodes a s., con veste perlinata e torques al collo. Verruca sulla fronte. Nel campo, a d., crescente. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca illeggibile. [ !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ /#$%$$5'*"] 148
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 46/8. 8- AR gr. 2, 74 (moneta forata); mm. 18; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53422. ORODES II (57-38 a.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Orodes a s., con veste perlinata e torques al collo. Verruca sulla fronte. Nel campo, a d., crescente e motivo a stella, a s., motivo a stella. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca, a s., àncora. !"#$%[&"]/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ [/#$]%$$5'[*"] Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 48/6. 9- AR gr. 3, 38; mm. 19; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53419. PHRAATES IV (38-2 a.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Phraates a s., con veste perlinata e collana al collo. Verruca sulla fronte. Nel campo, a d., aquila con diadema nel becco. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$[%&"]/ !"#$%[&']// [!,"!-*+]// [%]+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ [/#]$%$$5'*" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 52/10. 10- AR gr. 3, 06; mm. 18; 0. N. Inv.: Collez. universitaria incerta 85863. PHRAATES IV (38-2 a.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Phraates a s., con veste perlinata e collana al collo. Verruca sulla fronte. Nel campo, a d., aquila con diadema nel becco, a s., motivo a stella e crescente. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ /#$%$$5'*" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 54/7. 11- AR gr. 3, 83; mm. 19; 0. N. Inv.: Collez. universitaria incerta 85864.
149
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
PHRAATES IV (38-2 a.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Phraates a s., con veste perlinata e collana al collo. Verruca sulla fronte. Nel campo, a d., aquila con diadema nel becco, a s., motivo a stella e crescente. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// [!,"!-*+]// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ /#$%$$5'*" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 54/7. 12- AR gr. 3, 24; mm. 18; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53415. PHRAATES IV (38-2 a.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Phraates a s., con veste perlinata e collana al collo. Verruca sulla fronte. Nel campo, a d., aquila con diadema nel becco, a s., motivo a stella e crescente. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// [!,"!-*+]// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ [/#]$%$$5'*" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 54/7. 13- AR gr. 3, 13; mm. 18; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53420. ARTABANOS II (10-40 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Artabanos a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// [%.#/]!'*+"/ [/#$%$$5'*"] Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 61/7. 14- AR gr. 2, 93; mm. 19; 0. N. Inv.: collez. acquisti-doni 70754. ARTABANOS II (10-40 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Artabanos a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. 150
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
!"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ /#$%$$5'*" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 63/6. 15- AR gr. 3, 39; mm. 20; 10. N. Inv.: Palagi 53408. ARTABANOS II (10-40 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Artabanos a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ /#$%$$H'*" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 63/6. 16- AR gr. 2, 84; mm. 21; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53407. GOTARZES II (40-51 d.C.) Zecca di Seleucia sul Tigri Tetradramma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Gotarzes a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. A s., il Re seduto in trono a d.; a d., Tyche, in piedi a s., con cornucopia nella mano s., e diadema nella d. Nel campo, in alto, anno di regno illeggibile. [ !"]#$%[&"]/ !"#$%&'// !,"![-*+]/ %+%,)%3[*+]// 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'[*+"]/ [/#$]%$$[5'*"]; mese di coniazione fuori dal conio. Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 65/?. 17- AR gr. 12, 64; mm. 27; 0. N. Inv.: Collez. universitaria 85866. VARDANES II (55-58 d.C.) 55/56 d.C. Zecca di Seleucia sul Tigri Tetradramma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Vardanes a s., con verruca sulla fronte. Indossa una veste decorata e torques al collo. R. A d., il Re seduto in trono a s.; a s., Tyche, in piedi a d., con scettro nella mano s., e diadema nella d. Nel campo, in alto, anno di regno 9:3 (367). [ !"#$%&"]/ !"#$%&[']// [!,"!-*+]/ %+%,)%[3*+]// [4#-!#*+]// %.#/!'[*+"]/ [/#$]%$$[5'*"]; mese di coniazione fuori dal conio. Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 69/1-6. 18- AR gr. 13, 72; mm. 27; 0. N. Inv.: Collez. universitaria 49243. VARDANES II (55-58 d.C.) 55/56 d.C. 151
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
Zecca di Seleucia sul Tigri Tetradramma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Vardanes a s., con verruca sulla fronte. Indossa una veste decorata e torques al collo. R. A d., il Re seduto in trono a s.; a s., Tyche, in piedi a d., con scettro nella mano s., e diadema nella d. Nel campo, in alto, anno di regno 9:3 (367). [ !"#$%&"]/ !"#$%&[']// [!,"!-*+]/ %+%,)%[3*+]// [4#-!#*+]// %.#/!'[*+"]/ [/#$%]$$[5'*"]; mese di coniazione fuori dal conio. Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 69/1-6. 19- AR gr. 12, 15; mm. 26; 0. N. Inv.: Collez. universitaria 49244. PAKOROS II (77-105 d.C.) 82/83 d.C. Zecca di Seleucia sul Tigri Dichalkos D. Busto diademato di Pakoros a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo; a s., anno di regno, 4MT (394) R. Busto turrito e drappeggiato di Tyche a d., nel campo, a d., A Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 75/8; SNG Copenhagen VII, Parthia, Pl. 6, n. 210. L E RIDER 1999, p. 32 n. 56 (Pl. 5, 56 a-c). 20- AE gr. 2, 68; mm. 15; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53427. VOLAGASES III (105-147 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Volagases a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$[%&"]/ !"#$[%&']// [!,"!-*+]// [%+%,)%3*+]/ 4#-!#*+// [%].#/!'*+"/ /#$%$$5;*["] (sic!)* Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 78/2. 21- AR gr. 3, 13; mm. 21; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53411. * La leggenda greca diviene sempre più corrotta. VOLAGASES III (105-147 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Volagases a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. [ ]!"#$[%&"]/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// [%+%,)%3*+]/ 4#-!#*+// [%.]#/!'*+"/ [/#$%]$$5;*" Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 78/3. 152
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
22- AR gr. 3, 25; mm. 20; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53414. VOLAGASES III (105-147 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Volagases a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. !"#$%&["]/ !"#$%&'// !,["!-*+]// [%+%,)%3*+]/ 4#-!#*+// [%].#/!'*+["]/ [/#$%$$5'*"] Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 78/3. 23- AR gr. 2, 93; mm. 19; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53416. VOLAGASES III (105-147 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Volagases a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. [ !"#$%&"]/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)[%3*+]/ 4#-!#*+// [%.]#/!'*+"/ [/#$%$$5'*"] Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 78/3. 24- AR gr. 2, 86; mm. 21; 0. N. Inv.: Collez. universitaria 49242. VOLAGASES III (105-147 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Volagases a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. Leggenda greca corrotta { !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+// %+%,)%3*+/ 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ /#$%$$5'*"} Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 78/3. 25- AR gr. 2, 78; mm. 18; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53421. OSROES I (109-129 d.C.) 127/128 d.C. Zecca di Seleucia sul Tigri Dichalkos D. Busto diademato di Osroes a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. Indossa una tiara crestata, sotto la quale fuoriesce una grande crocchia. 153
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
R. Busto turrito e drappeggiato di Tyche a d., con ramo di palma, a s., anno di regno, <$+ (439). Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 80/18; SNG Copenhagen VII, Parthia, Pl. 7, n. 225. L E RIDER 1999, p. 38, n. 73 (Pl. 6, 73 a-b). 26- AE gr. 3, 35; mm. 16; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53426. VOLAGASES IV (147-191 d.C.) Zecca di Seleucia sul Tigri Tetradramma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Volagases a s. Indossa una tiara crestata, veste decorata e torques al collo. Nel campo, a d., R. A d., il Re seduto in trono a s.; a s., Tyche, in piedi a d., con scettro nella mano s., e diadema nella d. Nel campo, in alto, anno di regno illeggibile. [ !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&']// [!,"!-*+/ *$!)!"*+]// [4#-!#*+]// [%.]#/!'[*+"]/ [/#$%$$5'*"]; mese di coniazione in esergo, […]%([..] (Panemos ?) Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 84/?; A LRAM 1986, n. 417 (Tf. 14). 27- AR gr. 12, 48; mm. 24; 0. N. Inv.: Collez. universitaria 85876. OSROES II (190 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Osroes a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. Indossa una tiara crestata con perlinatura laterale. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. Leggenda greca corrotta. In alto, in caratteri aramaici, [h]wsrw MLKA Osroes š h Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 85/1; A LRAM 1986, n. 421 (Tf. 14) 28- AR gr. 3, 15; mm. 19; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53417. OSROES II (190 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Osroes a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. Indossa una tiara crestata con perlinatura laterale. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. Leggenda greca corrotta. In alto, in caratteri aramaici, [hwsrw] ML[KA] Osroes š h Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 85/1; A LRAM 1986, n. 421 (Tf. 14) 29- AR gr. 3, 00 (moneta forata); mm. 19; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53418. 154
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
OSROES II (190 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Osroes a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. Indossa una tiara crestata con perlinatura laterale. R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. Leggenda greca corrotta. In alto, in caratteri aramaici, hwsrw M[LKA] Osroes š h Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 85/1; A LRAM 1986, n. 421 (Tf. 14) 30- AR gr. 2, 97; mm. 20; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53409. VOLAGASES VI (208-222 d.C.) Zecca di Seleucia sul Tigri Tetradramma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Volagases a s. Indossa una tiara crestata con un corno sul retro, veste decorata e torques al collo. Nel campo, a d., R. A d., il Re seduto in trono a s.; a s., Tyche, in piedi a d., con scettro nella mano s., e diadema nella d. Nel campo, in alto, anno di regno illeggibile. [ !"#$%&"/ !"#$%&'// !,"!-*+/ *$!)!"*+// 4#-!#*+// %.#/!'*+"/ /#$%$$5'*"]; mese di coniazione in esergo illeggibile. Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 88/1-17; A LRAM 1986, n. 425 (Tf. 14); L E R IDER 1999, p. 66, nn. 771-772 (Pl. 11, 772). 31- AR gr. 11, 93; mm. 24; 0. N. Inv.: Collez. universitaria 49245. VOLAGASES VI (208-222 d.C.) Zecca di Ecbatana Dracma D. Busto diademato e barbuto di Volagases a s., con veste decorata e torques al collo. Indossa una tiara crestata con decorazione laterale. Nel campo, a d., in caratteri aramaici, wl (Vol) R. Arsace con arco nella mano d., seduto a d. su trono. Nel campo, a d., monogramma di zecca. Leggenda greca corrotta. In alto, in caratteri aramaici, [wlgšy MLK]A Volagases š h Bibl. Gen.: S ELLWOOD 1980, 88/19; A LRAM 1986, n. 426 (Tf. 14) 32- AR gr. 2, 59; mm. 19; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53424.
155
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
Caracene (Mesopotamia meridionale) ATAM BI Z e MAGA (?) (195-210 d.C. circa) Spasinu Tetradramma D. Busto di re barbuto a d., indossa tiara a calotta non decorata, diadema e manto. Scritta in caratteri aramaici illeggibile. R. Testa barbuta di Maga a d., con capigliatura arrangiata in cinque voluminosi boccoli. A d., in alto, m’g zy ’tm’by’zy; a s., in alto, [M]LKA Maga # Atam bi z š h Maga (figlio) del re Atam6bi6z. Bibl. Gen.: A LRAM 1986, n. 510; S ELLWOOD 1983, Pl. 14, 5; D E M ORGAN 1923-1936, pp. 226-227, fig. 272. 33- AE gr. 15, 53; mm. 27; 0. N. Inv.: Palagi 53425.
Monete Sasanidi Š BUHR I (241-272 d.C.) Zecca incerta Dracma D. mzdysn bgy šhpwhry MLKAn MLKA ’yl ’n MNW ctry MN yzd ’n mazd"sn bay Š buhr š h n š h "r n k" %ihr az yazd n Š6buhr, dio mazdeo, Re dei Re degli Iranici, la cui stirpe (discende) dagli Dei. Busto coronato di Š6buhr I a d. R. NWR’ ZY; a d.; šh[pwh]ry; a s. dur # Š buhr Il fuoco di Š6buhr Altare del fuoco con, ai lati, due attendenti in piedi a d. Tengono ciascuno nelle mani una lancia ed una spada. Bibl. Gen.: G ÖBL 1971, II, 23; A LRAM 1986, n. 689. 34- AR gr. 4,03 (moneta forata); mm. 26; 3. N. Inv.: Palagi 53404. Š BUHR I (241-272 d.C.) Zecca incerta Dracma D. m{zdysn} bgy šhpwhry MLKAn MLKA ’yl ’n MNW ctry MN yzd ’n mazd"sn bay Š buhr š h n š h "r n k" %ihr az yazd n Š6buhr, dio mazdeo, Re dei Re degli Iranici, la cui stirpe (discende) dagli Dei. Busto coronato di Š6buhr I a d. R. NWR’ ZY; a s.; š[hpw]hry; a d. dur # Š buhr Il fuoco di Š6buhr
156
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
Altare del fuoco con, ai lati, due attendenti in piedi a d. Tengono ciascuno nelle mani una lancia ed una spada. Lungo il fusto della colonna, simbolo dell’“erede” regale. Bibl. Gen.: G ÖBL 1971, II, 23; A LRAM 1986, n. 689. 35- AR gr. 3, 91; mm. 24; 9. N. Inv.: Palagi 53406. KAW D I (Primo regno: 488-497 d.C.) Zecca SK (Sakast n, Sist6n ?) Dracma D. kw’t; a d. Kaw6d Busto coronato di Kaw6d I a d. Trecce della corona voltate all’insù. Nel campo, a s., stella. Sopra le spalle, a s. e a d., due crescenti. R. kw’t, a s.; a d., sk Kaw6d Altare del fuoco con, ai lati, due attendenti senza spada rivolti verso l’altare. A s. e a d. del fuoco, in alto, una stella ed un crescente. Bibl. Gen.: G ÖBL 1971, XI, 183; A LRAM 1986, n. 892. 36- AR gr. 3, 69 (moneta forata); mm. 27; 3. N. Inv.: Palagi 53405. XUSRAW I (531-579 d.C.) Zecca AHM (Hamad n, Media) Dracma D. h[wslwb], a d.; ’p[zwn], a s. Xusraw abz7n Xusraw; crescita. Busto coronato di Xusraw I a d. Nel campo, a s. e a d., stella. Sopra le spalle, a s. e a d., due crescenti. Fuori dal bordo perlinato, a s., a d., ed in basso, crescente. R. anno illeggibile, a s.; a d., ’hm (ahm). Altare del fuoco con, ai lati, due attendenti in piedi di fronte, con corta spada puntata al suolo. A s. e a d. del fuoco, in alto, una stella ed un crescente. Bibl. Gen.: G ÖBL 1971, XII, 196/198; A LRAM 1986, n. 907. 37- AR gr. 3,14 (moneta forata); mm. 28; 3. N. Inv.: Palagi 53403. OHRMAZD IV (579-590 d.C.) Anno 6 (584/585 d.C.) Zecca MY (M"š n, Khuzist6n ?) Dracma D. ’whlm[zd], a d.; ’pzwn, a s. Ohrmazd abz$n Ohrmazd; crescita Busto coronato di Ohrmazd IV a d. Nel campo, a s. e a d., stella. Sopra le spalle, a s. e a d., due crescenti. Fuori dal bordo perlinato, a s., a d., ed in basso, stella entro crescente. 157
G ARIBOLDI
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEOLOGICO DI B OLOGNA
R. ŠT’, a s.; a d., my šaš (6) Altare del fuoco con, ai lati, due attendenti in piedi di fronte, con corta spada puntata al suolo. A s. e a d. del fuoco, in alto, una stella ed un crescente. Bibl. Gen.: G ÖBL 1971, XII, 200/202; A LRAM 1986, n. 909. 38- AR gr. 3, 97; mm. 32; 9. N. Inv.: Palagi 53402.
Raffronto fra i numeri di Catalogo e i numeri di Inventario delle monete: Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat. 158
n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n. n.
1 = Palagi 53401 2 = Palagi 53400 3 = Verzaglia Rusconi 71598 4 = Palagi 53412 5 = Palagi 53413 6 = Palagi 53410 7 = Palagi 53423 8 = Palagi 53422 9 = Palagi 53419 10 = Collez. universitaria incerta 85863 11 = Collez. universitaria incerta 85864 12 = Palagi 53415 13 = Palagi 53420 14 = Collez. acquisti-doni 70754 15 = Palagi 53408 16 = Palagi 53407 17 = Collez. universitaria 85866 18 = Collez. universitaria 49243 19 = Collez. universitaria 49244 20 = Palagi 53427 21 = Palagi 53411 22 = Palagi 53414 23 = Palagi 53416 24 = Collez. universitaria 49242 25 = Palagi 53421 26 = Palagi 53426 27 = Collez. universitaria 85876 28 = Palagi 53417 29 = Palagi 53418 30 = Palagi 53409 31 = Collez. universitaria 49245 32 = Palagi 53424 33 = Palagi 53425 34 = Palagi 53404
G ARIBOLDI
Cat. Cat. Cat. Cat.
n. n. n. n.
35 36 37 38
= = = =
Palagi Palagi Palagi Palagi
M ONETE DELL ’I RAN PREISLAMICO DAL M EDAGLIERE DEL M USEO C IVICO A RCHEO LOGICO DI B OLOGNA
53406 53405 53403 53402
159
K ARTTUNEN
K LAUS K ARTTUNEN
E XPANSION OF O RIENTAL S TUDIES IN THE E ARLY 19 TH C ENTURY
Helsinki
Expansion of Oriental Studies in the Early 19th Century*
W
hile the first roots of Oriental studies in the West go back to the 18th century and even earlier, it is clear that the first half of the 19th century is a sort of “Achsenzeit,” with important breakthroughs and fundamental methodological developments in almost every field of the wide area of studies dealing with the languages and civilisations of Asia and North Africa. On a general level, this is seen in the growing specialisation: In the 18th century and even at the beginning of the 19th, it was still common that individual scholars tried to encompass the whole vast area in their studies, 1 while by 1850 everyone hoping to be taken seriously as a scholar was only representing one or, at most, two fields. 2 The beginnings of Grotefend’s 3 deci-
pherment of Old Persian cuneiform writing go back to the 1790s, but in the first decades of the 19th century it was still possible to put forth the serious claim that the cuneiform writing in fact consists of stylised Cuphic script and explain a Behistun relief as a representation of a cross and twelve apostles. 4 By the middle of the 19th century, after the work of Grotefend, Rawlinson and others, 5 Old Persian was more or less completely understood and the Akkadian and the Elamite tablets were already beginning to reveal their secrets. At the same time, the fieldwork of Botta and Layard had initiated Mesopotamian archaeology. 6 The centuries of fantastic and entirely erroneous speculation about the character of hieroglyphic writing 7 came to an abrupt end in 1822 when Champollion
* An asterisk before a book title denotes that I have not seen it myself. Margot Stout Whiting has kindly corrected my English. 1 For instance, the names of Joseph de Guignes (1721-1800), Louis-Mathieu Langlès (1763-1824), and Julius von Klaproth (1783-1835) come easily to mind. 2 There still were (and even now are) combinations of such related fields as Egyptology and Assyriology, Hebrew and Arabic, Indology and Iranian studies. 3 Georg Friedrich Grotefend (1775-1853). His decipherment was first presented to the Göttingische Gelehrte Gesellschaft by the classical scholar and historian Thomas Christian Tychsen (1758-1834) and published as a summary in Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen in 1802. The second, more complete version, was appended to the second edition of A. H. L. Heeren’s (1760-1842) famous history, Ideen über die
Politik, den Verkehr und den Handel der vornehmsten Völker der alten Welt. 1805. 4 A. A. H. Lichtenstein (1753-1816): *Tentamen palaeographiae Assyro-Persicae. 1803; Paul-Ange-Louis de Gardane (1765-1822): *Journal d’un voyage... Paris 1809. 5 Henry Creswicke Rawlinson (1810-1895). In addition, names such as Rasmus Rask (1787-1832), Eugène Burnouf (1801-1852), Christian Lassen (1800-1876), Edward Hincks (1792-1866), Félicien (Caignart) de Saulcy (1807-1880), and Jules Oppert (1825-1905) deserve to be mentioned here. 6 The French Paul-Émile Botta (1802-1870) and the British Henry Austin Layard (1817-1894) both started excavations in Mesopotamia in the 1840s. 7 The most famous figure in the history of this speculation is, of course, Father Athanasius Kircher (1601-1680).
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
161
K ARTTUNEN
E XPANSION OF O RIENTAL S TUDIES IN THE E ARLY 19 TH C ENTURY
published his famous Lettre à M. Dacier 8 presenting his decipherment of the hieroglyphs of the Rosetta Stone. 9 The stone itself was among the finds of Napoleon’s expedition and the publication of the scholarly results of this expedition, Description de l’Egypte, 10 made ancient Egypt really popular. Before the middle of the century, Demotic writing had been deciphered by Brugsch 11 and the first archaeological expeditions 12 had laid the foundation for Egyptological field research. While the roots of Hebrew (and Aramaic) studies go back to the 16th century and even earlier 13 – and some valuable work was indeed done during the following centuries 14 – the defective understanding of the true nature of the Semitic languages together with the Biblical idea of Hebrew as the parent of all languages had much hampered serious study. The famous Hebräische Grammatik of Gesenius 15 appeared in 1813, three years after the popular dictionary by the same
author. For the sake of brevity, I will just refer in passing to the new developments in textual criticism and source analysis, to the ‘Wissenschaft des Judentums,’ to the beginnings of topographical and archaeological fieldwork in Palestine, 16 as well as to the development of comparative Semitic linguistics and of Semitic epigraphy. 17 The Arabic studies in the West – with some beginnings in the Middle Ages – had started in the 16th century, but after the solid foundation laid in the 17th century, 18 little progress was made and a critical scholar such as Reiske 19 remained a solitary figure. In the beginning of the 19th century, Silvestre de Sacy 20 and his numerous pupils initiated a new era characterised by rapid evolution in grammatical and lexicographical 21 as well as in textual and historical studies. 22 In Iranian studies, too, beside the Old Persian cuneiform mentioned above, there were important new developments. The Avesta was already known at the end
8 Jean François Champollion le jeune (1790-1832): Lettre à M. Dacier, relative à l’alphabet des hiéroglyphes phonétiques, employés par les Egyptiens pour inscrire sur leur monuments les noms des souverains grecs et romains. Paris 1822. 9 Some preliminary observations were earlier published by Johan Georg Zoëga (1755-1809), Johan David Åkerblad (1763-1819), and Thomas Young (1773-1829). 10 Description de l’Égypte: ou recueil des observations et des recherches qui ont été faites en Égypte pendant l’Expédition de l’Armée française. Eight volumes of text and 12 of plates, Paris 1809-22. General editor was François Jomard (1777-1862). 11 Heinrich Karl Brugsch (1827-1894). His earlier work on the subject was completed in his *Grammaire démotique. 1855. 12 Champollion 1828-29, Lepsius 1842-45, Mariette 1850-54. 13 The most famous names being, perhaps, Johann Reuchlin (1455-1522) and Sebastian Münster (14891552). 14 I have personally found Samuel Bochart’s (15991667) learned study Hierozooicon (1661) very useful. 15 Heinrich Friedrich Wilhelm Gesenius (1786-1842). 16 Especially by Edward Robinson (1794-1863) be-
ginning in 1838. 17 This development did in fact begin in the 18th century. Abbé Jean-Jacques Barthélemy (1716-1795) presented the decipherment of the Palmyran inscriptions in 1754 (publ. Mémoires de littérature of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 26, 1759; independently also by John Swinton [1703-1777] in *Philosophical Transactions 1754 & 1766) and of the Phoenicean in 1758 (publ. Ibid. 30, 1764). 18 Especially the grammar of Thomas Erpenius (1584-1624)) in 1613 and the Arabic-Latin dictionary of Jacobus Golius (1596-1667) in 1653. 19 Johann Jakob Reiske (1716-1774) was a brilliant specialist in Greek and Arabic historical literature whom his contemporaries were unable to appreciate. 20 Antoine Isaac Silvestre de Sacy (1758-1838). Note that Silvestre is part of the surname. 21 Silvestre de Sacy: Grammaire arabe. Paris 1810, Georg Wilhelm Freytag (1788-1861): Lexicon ArabicoLatinum. Halle 1830-37. 22 At least Étienne Quatremère (1782-1857), Joseph Toussaint Reinaud (1795-1867), Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer (1801-1888), and Edward William Lane (1801-1876; not a pupil of Silvestre de Sacy) deserve mention here.
162
K ARTTUNEN
E XPANSION OF O RIENTAL S TUDIES IN THE E ARLY 19 TH C ENTURY
of the 18th century through the translation by Anquetil-Duperron, 23 who had learnt the language and obtained manuscripts in Surat in the 1760s. However, the majority of scholars received the text translated by Anquetil-Duperron with great suspicion; some even accused the translator of deliberate deception while others explained the Avestan language as a sort of corrupt late Sanskrit. 24 Only the new development of Sanskrit philology, leading to the birth of comparative IndoEuropean linguistics, together with the decipherment of the Old Persian inscriptions, made it possible for Rask (1826) and Burnouf (1833ff.) to establish the role of Avestan as an ancient Iranian language and of the Avesta as a genuine corpus of early Zoroastrian literature. It is suitable for our present theme that the first complete text edition of the Avesta was published in the middle of the century by Westergaard, 25 who had himself acquired a number of Avestan and Middle Persian manuscripts in Iran and India. In Middle Persian studies, Silvestre de Sacy’s early epigraphical breakthrough in 1793 26 was followed by a similar achievement with literary Pahlavi in 1835, when Quatremère showed, with the
help of Arabic sources, the idea behind the Uzv reš, which until then had been ununderstandable for scholars. The first Western edition of a Pahlavi text (Bundahišn) was published, again by Westergaard, in 1851. After some preliminary attempts by missionaries and travellers, the first flourishing of Indology took place far from Europe, in the 1790s in British Calcutta. 27 Early Calcutta publications were often republished or translated in Europe where they soon found an eager readership. The very first academic chair of Sanskrit was founded in 1814 in the Collège de France and the next January A. L. de Chézy 28 started his teaching. Franz Bopp’s famous books Conjugationssystem 1816 and Nala 1819 29 strongly promoted the study of Sanskrit and gave rise to the completely new field of comparative Indo-European linguistics. Around 1850 there were nearly 20 Professors of Sanskrit (or nominally Professors of Oriental Studies, mainly teaching and studying Sanskrit) in European universities, 30 and some monumental works still in use, such as the gveda edition by Max Müller and the multi-volume SanskritGerman dictionary by Böhtlingk and
23
28
Abraham-Hyacinthe Anquetil-Duperron (17311805): Le Zend-Avesta, ouvrage de Zoroastre. 1-3. P. 1762-69. French translation with a “Discours préliminaire” of 500 pages including a description of his travels, and various appendices. There was also a *German translation by Kleuker, Riga 1775, and of Vol. 1 by J. G. Purmann 1776. 24 The last to hold to this opinion was the German Indologist Peter von Bohlen (1796-1840) in 1831. 25 Niels Ludvig Westergaard (1815-1878): *Zendavesta or the religious books of the Zoroastrians. Copenhagen 1852-54. 26 His *“Mémoires sur diverses Antiquités de la Perse,” Journal des Savans 1793, contains, inter alia, the decipherment of Sasanian inscriptions. 27 Sanskrit was first studied, among Europeans in Bengal, by men such as Charles Wilkins (1749/501836), Sir William Jones (1746-1794), Henry Thomas Colebrooke (1765-1837), and Horace Hayman Wilson (1784/86-1860).
Antoine Léonard de Chézy (1773-1832). Franz Bopp (1791-1867): Ueber das Conjugationssystem der Sanskritsprache in Vergleichung mit jenem der griechischen, lateinischen, persischen und germanischen. Nebst Episoden des Ramajan und Mahabharat. Frankfurt a.M. 1816; Nalus, carmen samscritum e Mahabharato. London 1819 (text edition with Latin translation). 30 The teaching advanced as follows: Paris 1815, Bonn 1818, Berlin 1821, Königsberg 1825, Munich 1826, London 1927, Breslau, Halle and Oxford 1833, Göttingen 1834, St. Petersburg 1835 (with intervals), Greifswald 1840 (1824), Kazan, Leipzig and Leuven 1841, Tübingen 1845, Copenhagen 1845 (1831), Vienna 1846, and Prague 1850. In addition, Sanskrit was taught by Professors of other subjects, e.g., at the universities of Jena in the 1820s, Leiden in the early 1830s, Helsinki 1835, Uppsala 1838. During the next twenty or thirty years many Italian and other German universities founded a chair for Sanskrit. 29
163
K ARTTUNEN
E XPANSION OF O RIENTAL S TUDIES IN THE E ARLY 19 TH C ENTURY
Roth, were well on the way to publication. 31 East Asian studies do not properly belong to the sphere of M ELAMMU , but in the present discussion they cannot be left completely out. There was, in fact, a flourishing tradition of Sinology since the 17th century, but this was mainly achieved by the Jesuits and some other Catholic missionaries working in China, and their few followers in Europe did not count as much more than interested dilettantes. Thus Fourmont’s Grammatica Sinica 32 was full of learned speculation, often far from correct, but it did not really teach the language. This was done in the manuscript grammar written by the Jesuit Prémare 33 and from this book young Abel-Rémusat started his Sinological studies. The influential Baron Silvestre de Sacy, himself a famous scholar already mentioned several times, was a sort of godfather of Asian studies in early 19th century Paris. As early as in 1795, he had, together with Langlès and others, founded the famous school of languages, École spéciale des langues orientales vivantes, still operating under the revised name of INALCO. It was he who took young Champollion under his wing, and it was through his influence that two new chairs were founded at the Collège de France for two other protegés of his, Sanskrit for Chézy and Chinese for AbelRémusat. Through the work of Abel-
Rémusat and his pupil and successor Stanislas Julien, 34 Sinology became a fully academic discipline. It remains to round off the first part of my discussion with a few words on Japan. After a period of early Jesuit activity, Japan had been since 1650, and still was, a closed country, and two or three travel books were the only ones to offer some new information. 35 But now the new interest in Asian studies was reflected even in Japanese studies. The old books of Jesuits were dusted off, republished and studied. Nevertheless, the real expansion of Western Japanology belongs to the second half of the 19th century. It was necessary to give this survey in order to show that there really was an exceptional expansion of Asian studies in the first half of the 19th century. There are, however, other surveys, often more detailed, written by others and even by myself. At present, I think it is more important to make an attempt to find out the reasons for and common elements of this development. On a general level, the rise of a new concept of the university certainly had an important rôle. In the 18th century, even an institution like the Collège de France (then called the Collège royal), though originally founded for the promotion of liberal arts, had petrified into a sort of scholasticism, and most universities were little more than theological colleges. As far as there existed any real desire for
31
portant Jesuit Sinologists include, e.g., Martino Martini (1614-1661), Prospero Intorcetta (1625-1696), Philippe Couplet (1628-1692), François Noël (16511729), Antoine Gaubil (1689-1759), and Joseph Amiot (1718-1794). 34 Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat (1788-1832); AignanStanislas Julien (1797/99-1873). 35 Especially those by Engelbert Kämpfer (16511716), Carl Peter Thunberg (1743-1828), Isaac Titsingh (1745-1812), and Philipp Franz von Siebold (1796-1866).
Friedrich Max Müller (1823-1900): Rigveda. Sa!hit and Pada texts and S ya"a’s commentary and index. 1-6. 1849-74; Otto Nikolaus von Böhtlingk (1815-1904) and Rudolf Roth (1821-1895): SanskritWörterbuch nebst allen Nachträgen. 1-7. St. Petersburg 1853-1875 (the so-called “Petersburger Wörterbuch” or “PW”). 32 Étienne Fourmont (1683-1745): Linguae Sinarum Mandarinicae hieroglyphicae grammatica duplex. Paris 1742. 33 Joseph-Henri Prémare (c. 1670-1735); other im164
K ARTTUNEN
E XPANSION OF O RIENTAL S TUDIES IN THE E ARLY 19 TH C ENTURY
knowledge and passion for research, it was mainly found outside the universities, in the learned societies and academies. 36 It is customary to connect the new concept of the university as the seat of learning and humanist values with Germany and particularly with Wilhelm von Humboldt, and this certainly contributed to the rapid growth of Oriental studies in German universities, a development often headed by Bonn and Berlin. However, the paramount position in Oriental studies unquestionably belonged to Paris. After the French Revolution, there was not much left of the dusty scholasticism of the ancien régime and even during the repressing days of the Restoration, the atmosphere of intellectual exchange and search – and often even heated controversy – seems to have been extremely stimulating. At least as far as Asian studies are concerned, the Sorbonne was not very important, the activities concentrated around the old Collège de France and the new École des langues orientales vivantes. 37 In Indology, a pattern was soon established in Germany and in Northern and Eastern European countries: after one had learned the basics at one’s own university, it was time to go to Paris, where the advanced learning was, 38 and then to England, where the rich manuscript collections brought from India allowed independent research work. In the same way, Paris was the Mecca for Arabic
studies, attracting students from all parts of Europe. There was a time when there was hardly any Professor of Arabic in Europe, worthy of being taken seriously, who had not been among the students of Silvestre de Sacy. In addition to the universities, we must also note the societies. The 18th century was still a time of large general societies, but now many fields felt the need of their own organ. Although general according to their statutes, 39 the colonial societies of Batavia and Calcutta are usually counted as the first among Oriental societies. The Royal Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen was founded in 1778, and The Asiatick Society, later known as the (Royal) Asiatic Society of Bengal, in 1784. In Europe, this activity again concentrates in the first half of the 19th century. The French Société Asiatique is the oldest, founded in 1823, and was soon followed by the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland in 1828, the American Oriental Society in 1842, and Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft in 1845. 40 Their respective journals soon became an important channel of publication of new information and research. The world was changing, not only in Europe, but also in Asia and North Africa. Travelling was slowly becoming less dangerous and less time-consuming. While the majority of Oriental scholars still never left Europe, journeys for study and exploration were rapidly increasing. The
36
“hindoustanie”) was founded in 1830 for JosephHéliodore Garcin de Tassy (1794-1878). 38 This was mainly due to Chézy’s brilliant successor Eugène Burnouf. 39 In early years, their meetings and publications actually often dealt with the study of nature and other such fields. 40 Società Asiatica Italiana apparently only in the 1880s.
Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres in France, Accademia dei Lincei in Italy, the Prussian Academy and the Göttingen Society in Germany, the Royal Society in the U.K., and the Imperial Academy in Russia are good examples. 37 The word “vivantes” was not taken too literally. Silvestre de Sacy taught classical Arabic and the Professor of Persian concentrated on classical literature. However, there also was a chair for “arabe vulgaire” as early as 1803 and one for Urdu (called
165
K ARTTUNEN
E XPANSION OF O RIENTAL S TUDIES IN THE E ARLY 19 TH C ENTURY
expanding military and colonial interests of European powers (mainly Britain and France) also brought a great number of Westerners to the East, and, as a more or less unintended by-product, turned some of them into scholars. In addition, some local governments like those of Muhammad Ali’s Egypt and the Sikh kingdom in the Pañj b employed many European soldiers and specialists. By 1850, there was already a vast literature describing both the antiquities and the present situations of Egypt, Palaestina, Turkey, Mesopotamia and India, and, in a few cases, also of Arabia, Iran, Tibet and China. It would be easy to explain the whole development of Oriental studies in the Saidian sense as a side issue of colonialism. But although Said’s ideas can by no means be ignored, this would be just the kind of oversimplification that often troubles Said’s arguments. In most cases, the scholars were interested in Asia before the soldiers were. With the exception of British India, 41 the colonial involvement in Asia was still at the initial stage. Moreover, all this happened before Western racism was developed as a formal doctrine by Count de Gobineau and others. Unlike their colleagues at the end of the century, the early 19th century Orientalists were not yet fully convinced of the supposedly complete intellectual, spiritual and, of course, scientific and technological superiority of the West. To some extent, they were still capable of meeting Asians on the same level; they could still believe that the West could learn something from the literatures of
India, Arabia and China. This leads us to Orientalism, not in the Saidian, but in the Schwabian sense. Side by side with Oriental scholarship was the “Orient-as-fashion,” in literature, art and thought, 42 and while it certainly was a source of interest and motivation, it also led, with its highly romantic interpretation, to a seriously distorted idea. But while the general idea of the Orient was often seen through this Romantic mist, it seems that, in many cases, scholarship preceded and criticised it rather than blindly followed its ideas, which a little expertise could easily put in their place. Here we can also note that early 19th century scholarship was, with the obvious exception of Hebrew, mainly secular in character. The church was not much interested and the time of missionary scholars, working in the field or after returning home, really came after the middle of the century. We must also keep in mind that the great flourishing of scholarship in this period was by no means restricted to Asian studies, which in fact are only a sideline to the intellectual activity of the time. Technology and science, but also philology, linguistics and history were all rapidly advancing. Perhaps the most important part of this was the development of strict and more or less reliable methodologies. The rise of new methods and disciplines such as archaeology, textual criticism, 43 critical evaluation of sources, comparative linguistics, and the history of religions strongly contributed to the development of Asian studies. What had been before was frag-
41
hauer can be mentioned here. 43 The roots of textual criticism as a part of classical philology lie far back in the Renaissance and even Hellenism (Alexandrian school), but even here the first half of the 19th century meant a new age in the way of methodology.
And here the relative open-mindedness of many late 18th - early 19th century officers is in striking contrast to the situation in the middle and at the end of the 19th century. 42 Names such as J. W. von Goethe, Lord Byron, Friedrich Rückert, Heinrich Heine, and A. Schopen166
K ARTTUNEN
mentary, often one-sided and represented the confused interests of some individual scholars, most of them long ago forgotten; what resulted was a series of well-
E XPANSION OF O RIENTAL S TUDIES IN THE E ARLY 19 TH C ENTURY
defined and methodologically more or less sound disciplines eagerly pursued by a great number of scholars in many countries.
R EFERENCES Karttunen, Klaus (1992) Itää etsimässä. Eurooppalaisen Aasian-tutkimuksen historia. Helsinki (“In Search for the East. A History of European Research on Asia,” English edition planned). Pedersen, Holger (1962) The Discovery of Language. Linguistic Science in the 19th Century. Translated by John Webster Spargo. Bloomington (first published in English 1931, in Danish 1924). Said, Edward W. (1978) Orientalism (paperback edition of 1985 used). Schwab, Raymond (1950) La renaissance orientale. Paris.
167
L EVINE
B ARUCH A. L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
New York
The Jewish Ket"bb#h as a ‘Dialogue Document’: The Continuity of a Cuneiform Tradition
1.1 Pursuing the theme of the continuity of Mesopotamian civilization in the area of law, it is my intention to trace certain formal features of the Jewish ket"bb#h “writ of marriage” of Roman times to their Mesopotamian roots. The present investigation follows upon my earlier contribution to M ELAMMU III, in which I discussed the important role of Aramaic in the transmission of Mesopotamian legal institutions, examining telling terms and formulas illustrative of this process (Levine 2002). Here, I will focus on a specific component of Rabbinic law, the institution of marriage, and apply the same comparative methodology to a particular type of legal document, the Jewish ket"bb#h This is a subject of extensive scope, and it will be possible to engage only a few of its aspects in the present study. And yet, I hope to reinforce, step by step, the general conclusion that the corpus of Rabbinic literature constitutes, in addition to all else, a repository of Mesopotamian civilization. 1.2 The starting point is the differentiation of two styles, or forms employed in the composition of cuneiform contracts in the first millennium B.C.E., the objective and the subjective, or ‘dialogue’ form. The objective form records that a legal action has taken place, or will take place, by reference to one or more of the parties in the third- person. The subjective form exhibits a first-person orientation, and in most cases, a second-person A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
address, or reference, as well. Most significant is the fact that it reports (we could say, “quotes”) the oral declarations of at least one of the parties. Martha Roth (1989: 1-2), in the introduction to her edition of Neo-Babylonian marriage agreements, notes the increasing utilization of the subjective form in various types of cuneiform legal documents, including marriage agreements, during the first millennium, B.C.E., replacing the older objective form. In fact, all but six of the forty-five marriage agreements in Roth’s collection are of the dialogue type. Now, aside from all else, the Jewish ket"bb#h of Roman times is a highly developed example of the ‘dialogue document,’ since throughout, it records the verbal statements of the prospective husband who proposes marriage to a woman, and states his commitments to her, and to her children. 1.3 It is an appropriate time to discuss the formation of the Jewish ket"bb#h, a document prescribed in the Mishnah, the great compendium of Rabbinic law. Recent discoveries in the Judean desert, at Murabba at and Na!al "ever on the Dead Sea, have made available for the first time several actual documents of this type, dating from the late first . to the early second centuries C.E. The best preserved of these is Papyrus Yadin 10, known as “Babatha’s Ket"bb#h,” dated to between 122-125 CE. In her Textbook, Ada Yardeni (2000, I: 119-124) registers
169
L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
the other three as Mur 20 and 21; N# 11. As for the Mishnah, it was published in Palestine in the early third century, CE, but much of its essential content was extant earlier in various compilations, so that the Judean Desert evidence may be regarded as fairly contemporary with the provisions of the Mishnah. Although composed in Hebrew, the Mishnah cites key passages of the ket"bb#h (as well as of the bill of divorce, the g$#) in the Aramaic that was most often employed for such documents. The complete text of a ket"bb#h is not preserved in Rabbinic sources, but we know a good deal about its formulation and provisions from these very citations in the Mishnah, and from other Rabbinic sources. Several Jewish marriage contracts, written in Greek have also been discovered in the Judean desert, but none of them is of the ‘dialogue’ type, which may be significant. In the present study we will not proceed beyond the Tannaitic period, that represented by the Mishnah and Tosefta, but it is important to emphasize that considerable further development of the ket"bb#h, as a dialogue document, occurred in the ensuing centuries of the Rabbinic period, continuing into Medieval times. The reader is directed to the comprehensive study of Medieval Palestinian ket"bbôt from the Cairo Genizah by Mordechai Friedman (1980), who edits many exemplars, as well as providing an in-depth treatment of the history and formation of the ket"bb#h. In fact, the ket"bb#h is still in use at the present time, and has been throughout the centuries. 1.4 Once the comparison has been made on a synchronic level between the Judean Desert documents and the Mishnah, we can attempt to trace certain components of the early Rabbinic ket"bb#h – terms, formulas, and constitutive provi-
170
sions – to earlier Aramaic versions of this type of document, and by this route to Mesopotamian sources, as well. Comparative analysis of the several marriage contracts found among the Aramaic legal papyri from the Jewish military colony at Elephantine of the fifth century B.C.E, with Neo-Babylonian, cuneiform marriage agreements will prove instructive in this regard. The Elephantine contracts are well developed examples of the ‘dialogue document’, and show definite affinities with their Neo-Babylonian counterparts. Our control of the Elephantine materials has been greatly enhanced by the collated editions of B. Porten and A. Yardeni (1989; henceforth: TAD II). The fortyfive Neo-Babylonian marriage agreements, edited by Roth, date from 635 B.C.E. to 203 B.C.E., and many of them come from the reigns of Nabonidus and Darius I. Their proximity in time to the Aramaic, Elephantine marriage contracts, as well as the features they share with them, make of the latter an important link in the transmission of Mesopotamian legal practices, and may suggest how and when Mesopotamian features were appropriated by Aramaic scribes. 1.5 Our preference for the Neo-Babylonian marriage agreements does not in any way imply that the Aramaic formulary at Elephantine did not draw upon many earlier features of cuneiform law. E.J. Brill has recently reissued Yochanan Muffs’ pioneering work, Studies in the Aramaic Legal Papyri from Elephantine, originally published in 1969, to which I have written a Prolegomenon (Muffs 2002). That work expanded on what Muffs calls “the Assyriological approach,” and makes the case for the continuity of the provincial, or peripheral legal traditions of the second millennium into the Achemenid period, and thereafter. Muffs also points to more proximate sources of
L EVINE
Aramaic law in the Neo-Assyrian period. Our choice of Neo-Babylonian documents for comparison primarily reflects our present interest in the ‘dialogue document.’ 1.6 In terms of the Jewish legal tradition, specifically, it is to be noted that whereas Deuteronomy 24 (vs. 1-2), explicitly ordains a writ of divorce, there is
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
no comparable law in the Torah requiring a written contract of marriage. This absence occasioned considerable debate in Rabbinic circles regarding the original authority of the ket"bb#h, as to whether it was Mosaic or Rabbinic, and has made it all the more fascinating to search for actual antecedents of the early Rabbinic ket"bb#h.
Babatha’s Ketubbah (Papyrus Yadin 10) and the Mishnah, Ketubbot 4:7-12 2.1 The best way to begin is through a synchronic comparison of the Judean Desert evidence with the basic Rabbinic prescriptions; more precisely, of P. Yadin 10, with the provisions of the Mishnah, Ket"bbôt 4:7-12. A full edition of P. Yadin 10, with epigraphic notes and commentary, is now available in YardeniLevine 2002: 118-141, and is based on its initial publication by J.C. Greenfield
and A. Yardeni (1994). Some specific readings and issues of legal interpretation remain unresolved, mostly due to lacunae. 2.2 Following is an outline of Babatha’s ket"bb#h, based on preferred readings and probable restorations, with cross-referencing to other marriage contracts from the Judean Desert assemblage.
1) Date, and names of groom and bride, including the name of the town of Ein Gedi, where one, or both parties resided. This section is poorly preserved, but its content can be reliably surmised (lines 1-4). In line 3 we are able to read the pronoun !" “you” (secondperson, feminine), which indicates that the ‘dialogue’ pattern commenced with the opening statement. We may assume that the verb #$" “he said” occurred in line 2 or 3. What he says is cited as the formal proposal. 2) The groom proposes to the bride, addressing her in the second-person feminine singular:
%"& [ ( ] )%( ),($ ' [ %&+ ( !"* / ) ] !"* [ %* %() / %* '%() %& ] “That you be to me/ Be to me as a wife/ for wife-hood according to the law of Moses and the Judeans/Jews” ( line 4, and cf. Mur 20:3; N# 11:2). 3) The groom pledges support: in the form of food, clothing and domicile for his wife, while referring to the ket"bb#h as a binding contract:
.*1" . 0 +0( . [ /+$ ] ( .* )! [ !"- ] ( “And I will feed you and clothe you, and pursuant to your ket"bb#h, I will bring you into my house.” ( line 5) 4) The groom acknowledges his wife’s claim on him for the sum of 400 denarii, the amount of the dowry (Greek pherné), on which she may draw at any time, in addition to her
171
L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
basic support (lines 5-9, cf. Mur 20:4-6 [broken], N# 11:3[?]). Further on, first in lines 11 and following, where the text is broken, and then again in lines 17-18, the groom affirms that all that he owns is pledged to the payment of this claim:
. 0 +* '%0#1( (%"#3" "!2" %&( %* % %" %& ] '% [ /+! *+( “And all properties that I possess and that I will acquire are guaranteed and pledged to (the payment) of your ket"bb#h” (cf. Mur 20:11-12; apparently repeated, or resumed in lines 17-18). 5) The groom pledges to ransom his wife if she is captured:
) !"* %* .!0 [ % "( ] %/+! '$ % %0 '$ .!2#5" ( %%0 , =) %% 0, 4" ( “And if you are taken captive, I will redeem you from my “house” and properties, and I will restore you as a wife” (lines 10-11, cf. Mur 20:6). 6) The groom guarantees the inheritance rights of male children, and support for female children born out of the marriage. The statement regarding male children is missing in the lacuna of lines 12-13, but should be restored there (cf. Mur 20:8-9, 21:12-14). The statement governing female children is reasonably well preserved:
'%*10* ( [ 0/! ] % %& '$- [ &1 %/+0 '$( ] % %0 '$ '!- $( "0 % "() [ ] ' [ 0 ] 2! ' [ !0 “Female children shall reside and continue to be provided for from my “house,” and from my properties until such time as they are married to husbands” (lines 13-14, cf. Mur 20:7-9 [broken]; Mur 21:10-12). 7) The groom pledges to provide domicile and support for his wife after his death, pending payment of the ket"bb#h claim by his heirs:
. 0 + 7/+ .* ' !$* % #% '(06% %& '$- &1 %/+! '$ % %0 '$ '!- $( "0 % '%() . “You will reside, and (continue to be) provided for from my “house” and from my properties until such time as my heirs will agree to pay you the ‘silver’ of your ket"bb#h.” (lines 15-16, cf. Mur 20:9-11; Mur 21:12-14). 8) The groom pledges, addressing his wife in the second person, that he will replace the relevant document on demand (lines 16-17, cf. Mur 20:13-14, 21:19). 9) A resumptive declaration by the groom, in the first-person, that he is bound by the above, stated terms of the agreement (line 18, cf. Mur 21:17 [broken]): 10) Endorsement (line 19). The legible part of the line states:
#-1*" #0 )&()% *1 '(1$, # [ 0 ] ) 00* “[ ](due) to Babatha, (vacat) daughter of Shim on, (incumbent) upon Yehudah, son of El azar.” This endorsement served as a docket, visible on the fold of the document. It identified the principals, and confirmed the debt that the groom owed the bride. 11) Seal, and signatures of the groom and bride, and of three witnesses (lines 20-26). There is also a partially legible fragment whose function is unclear. In line 23, the entry [)]#$$ “by [her] verbal order” has been reliably restored. In context, this reflects the fact that Babatha was illiterate, and had instructed someone to sign on her behalf. That person’s name is illegible.
172
L EVINE
Comparative Analysis 2.3 Before proceeding, a word of explanation is in order about the term ket"bb#h, itself. In the Aramaic of Papyrus Yadin 10, lines 5, 11,16, the marriage document is repeatedly called . 0 + “your writ of marriage,” written defectively without a waw, and the same spelling is evident in Mur 21:10, 13 where we find .% 0 + . This defective spelling is also attested in the Aramaic passages from the ket"bb#h cited in M. Ket. 4:7-12 (see below). When taken as a Hebrew term, it is spelled both plene and defectiva, depending on manuscript traditions. On the spelling and pointing of the Hebrew term in Jewish literary sources, see BenYehudah, Thesaurus, 2552-2553, s.v. )0 + , note 1, by N.H. Tur-Sinai, who explains that in many manuscript traditions this term is consistently written plene with a waw, even though the beth is pointed with a dagesh. Its sense is clear: “writ, a written document.” It may represent a feminine realization of 0 + (=ket#b) “writ,” which, as an Aramaic term, is well attested in the Official Aramaic of Elephantine (DNWSI 546-547, s.v. ktb 2. ). Functionally, the term )0(() + often connotes “dowry claim.” More precisely, it will refer to the amount in silver, and/or the total value of property written into the ket"bb#h, for which the husband incurred financial accountability at the time of marriage, in other words, to the dowry claim against the husband as stated in the ket"bb#h, not merely to the document, itself. Thus, in P. Yadin 10, line 11 .[ ]0 +[(] means the same as: . 0 + 7/+ “the silver of your writ (of marriage),” in line 16.
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
2.4 Attention should be paid to what is not provided for in Babatha’s ket"bb#h. As an example, divorce is not explicitly projected as the cause for the eventual dissolution of the marriage, only the husband’s demise. Many other contingencies that are frequently anticipated in ancient Near Eastern and Jewish marriage contracts are likewise not addressed explicitly – childlessness, the taking of a second wife, the prior death of the wife, and more. This is actually characteristic of ancient marriage agreements, generally; they vary greatly in their scope and coverage. Notwithstanding, we can establish a considerable number of precise correlations between Babatha’s ketubbah and the Mishnah. Methodologically, it is of great value to be able to correlate scholastic, or canonical texts with actual legal documents of the same period and provenance. 2.5 Five of the provisions from Babatha’s ket"bb#h, outlined above, are set forth in Mishnah, Ket"bbôt 4:7-12, in almost the exact terms, and in the ‘dialogue’ form; they are likewise addressed to the intended bride in the secondperson feminine. The Mishnah, as a corpus of law, states these provisions conditionally and negatively. Thus: )* 0 + "* “If he (= the groom) did not write for her (= the bride).” That is to say: If the ket"bb#h document failed to specify any of the several requisite provisions, the court would automatically enforce them. This is because they represent entitlements; in the language of the Mishnah: '%& %0 %"! “A condition (imposed) by the court.” We may thus reconstruct the main statements of the Rabbinic ket"bb#h from the Mishnah’s requirements, while conceding that these five provisions do not comprise the entire ket"bb#h, only what was considered to be sine qua non.
173
L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
2.6
The Mishnaic provisions are stated as follows:
a) The pledging of all of the groom’s assets to the ket"bb#h claim: 4%"#3" %* %"& '%/+! *+ .% 0 +* “All properties that I possess are guaranteed to (the payment) of your ket"bb#h.” b) Guarantee of ransom and restoration if the wife is captured: .%!0 ("( .%!2#5" %"0 , 4" ( !"* %* . “If you are captured I will redeem you and restore you to me in the role of wife.” c) Guarantee of inheritance rights for male children (cf. no. 6, above, almost certainly to be restored in Papyrus Yadin 10, lines 12-13): .% 0 + 7/+ '( #% '(!" %"!$ %+%* '(()%& '%#+& '%!0 '()%3" 41& '()2*(3 *1 # % “(As for ) male children whom you will have by me, they shall inherit the sum of your ket"bb#h, in addition to their share that is (due them) together with their brothers. d) Guarantee of support for female children: '!- $( % %00 '0 % '%()% %"!$ %+%* '%()%& '02! '!0 '%#08* '+/! %& &+ %/+!$ “Female children whom you will have from me shall be residing in my house and be given sustenance from my properties until they are married to husbands.” " e) Guarantee of widow’s right to domicile after the death of her husband: "0 % ") % %00 . (!$*" &8$ %$% *8 %/+!$ "!- $( % %00 “You shall continue to reside in my house, and be provided for from my properties all the duration of your widowhood, in my house.”
In M. Ket. 4:12 we read that, in the matter of a widow’s right to reside in her late husband’s house, the Judeans added the following proviso to the ket"bb#h: .% 0 + .%* ' %* '%,#(%) (6#%, &1 “Until (such time as) the heirs will agree to pay you (the sum of) your ket"bb#h.” This statement qualifies as a fairly literal Hebrew translation of the Aramaic of P. Yadin 10, line 16, cited in 2.3, 7), above. 2.7 It may be relevant to mention that in an Aramaic deed of gift from Na!al "ever (P. Yadin 7), dated 120 C.E., a similar residence restriction is imposed on a widow. That document is also a prime example of the ‘dialogue’ form, since the father of the family speaks in the first person, and addresses his wife in the second person throughout. In that deed, which has the character of a living trust, Babatha’s father, Shim on, bestows all of his worldly possessions, present and future, upon his wife, Miryam, such gift to take effect at the time of his death. The gift is granted on condition that so long as Shim on lives, he shall continue to own and derive all benefits accruing from them. An ancillary provision affects the couple’s daughter, Babatha, who is referred to as: "! #0 " 00 . “Babatha, our daughter.” In the event she is widowed in the course of time she may reside in a 174
designated building on the premises, with customary rights of entry and egress. This applies, however, only so long as she remains a widow: )9%*, "*( )%,# "*( *10 () " %0* (*1!$* "() “But, she shall not have the rightful authority to bring a husband into that house” (P. Yadin 7, line 26, Yardeni-Levine 2002: 85). 2.8 A fascinating subject for study is the groom’s proposal, reliably restored in P. Yadin 10, line 4, and better preserved in Mur 20, and N# 11. The formula %[ "] ) !"* %* "() “You will be to me as a wife to me” is preserved in Mur 20:3, [accepting the restoration by Milik, in DJD II, 120], and in NS 11:2 we can read: [) !"]* %* '%() %& “That you be to me as a wife.” The reading of the term for “wife” (or: “wifehood”) in P. Yadin 10, line 4 is unclear. Both the noun ) !" “wife,” in its various realizations, and the abstract form ( !" “wife-hood, marriage,” are possible. This proposal is not a subject of concern in M. Ket. 4:7-12, but was undoubtedly part of the early Rabbinic ket"bb#h. Such proposals have a long tradition in the ancient Near East, and are typical of the subjective, or ‘dialogue type’ of legal documents. They became standard in the later versions of the ket"bb#h, and are probably anticipated at Elephantine. (See
L EVINE
below, under 3.5). 2.9 The phrase %"&()%( ),($ &+ “according to the law of Moses and the Judeans,” in Babatha’s ket"bb#h, developed into the more familiar phrase *"#,%( ),$ &+ “according to the law of Moses and Israel,” which became standard in the traditional ket"bb#h. And yet, reference to “Judean” law was current in the early Rabbinic period It is expressed in the Mishnah by the clause: *1 #0(1) %&()%( ),$ & “One who transgresses (fem.) against the law of Moses and Jewish (law),” in M. Ket. 7:1. A wife who transgresses in this manner forfeits her ket"bb#h settlement, because she has failed to uphold the terms of her marriage. 2.10 There are further comparisons with Rabbinic practice that could be cited, such as the formalities of dating and witnessing. Suffice it to say that Pa-
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
pyrus Yadin 10 and the Mishnah sources correspond with each other to a remarkable degree, both in substance and formulation. This should put to rest any doubts concerning the realism of the Mishnah’s ket"bb#h provisions; we can now demonstrate that they largely reflect contemporary Jewish practice. We can also attest to the composition of the early Rabbinic ket"bb#h as a ‘dialogue document’. 2.11 Actually, most of the legal documents discovered in the Judean Desert are of the ‘dialogue’ type. Restricting ourselves to the Yadin Collection from Na!al "ever, we note that two of the three Hebrew legal texts (P. Yadin 45 and 46) are of the dialogue’ type, as are all of the Nabatean-Aramaic legal texts P. Yadin 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9), and all but one of the Aramaic legal texts (P. Yadin 7, 8, 42, 47- ‘dialogue’; P. Yadin 43- objective).
Marriage Agreements of the ‘Dialogue’ Type at Elephantine (Aramaic) and in Neo-Babylonian Cuneiform 3.1 Before taking up the Elephantine marriage contracts, we would do well to explain how we see them as fitting into the ongoing development of later Jewish law. The community whose life is reflected in the Elephantine legal papyri was a Jewish community, to be sure, but an enigmatic one, in some respects. Our approach has been informed by the pioneering study of Jacob N. Epstein, Notizen zu den jüdisch-aramäischen Papyri von Assuan (1908). Epstein was one of the great masters of modern Talmud scholarship, and at the same time, a consummate Aramaist, who was one of the first to attempt analysis of the Elephantine legal papyri. His methodology was very uncomplicated: He simply allowed the evidence to speak for itself!
The verdict was eminently clear: The terminology and formulary of the Elephantine Aramaic texts are, in fact, replete with analogues to Talmudic law, which, for its part, drew not only on Israelite-Jewish antecedents, but, as it became possible to show, on the Aramaic common law. 3.2 A corollary question pertains to the reception of cuneiform law in firstmillennium Israel, during the formative period of biblical law; and in due course, the reception of Aramaic law, as well. In some instances, we may be dealing with cuneiform elements already appropriated into biblical law, so that their presence in the Elephantine papyri was not the result of direct transfer from cuneiform law. It is uncertain as to how much of what we 175
L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
know as biblical law and practice was also known to the Jews of Elephantine. This question certainly applies to our understanding of the Judean Desert contracts and the laws of the Mishnah, which explicitly resonate with Torah law. It is because of such considerations that precise, formal comparisons are so important. It is not merely a matter of the substance of the law, but of the formulation of legal documents, and their composition. 3.3 For Elephantine, we take as our text of reference TAD II, B3.8, dated October, 420 B.C.E., while noting that its essential provisions are similar to the other two complete exemplars, B2:6, dated 445 B.C.E., and B3:3, dated 449 B.C.E. Four additional fragments of Aramaic marriage contracts are registered in TAD II as B6.1-4. These are all elaborate contracts, containing many derivative and distinctive provisions. Given the extent of the Neo-Babylonian evidence, edited by Martha Roth, it will not be necessary to select a single exemplar for analysis.
I. The Formal Proposal of Marriage and Related Declarations 3.4 The complexity of this component in ‘dialogue documents’ has already been commented upon above (Comparative Analysis). One variable in its formulation pertains to the orientation of the proposal. P. Yadin 10 and the Tannaitic sources express a direct proposal; the groom speaks to the bride, herself, in the second person. It happens that all of the Elephantine contracts that we possess express an indirect proposal, generating third person address. The groom, or one speaking for him, such as his father, addresses one who is legally responsible for the intended bride, her father, mother, brother, or the like. That this was traditional is indicated by the fact that all but two (Roth, nos. 2 and 25) of the dialogue agreements in Roth’s collection express an indirect proposal. For purposes of comparison, Roth, no. 25 (Borsippa, 486 B.C.E.), containing one of the exceptional direct proposals, is particularly instructive:
PN A-šú PN a-na < f >tab-lu-<$u> DUMU.SAL-su šá PN (ki-a-am) iq-bi-im-ma al-[k]i-im lu DAM.[at]-ti “PN son of PN to Tablutu spoke (as follows): ‘Come to me! May you be a wife!’” (lines 1-3).
The assent of the bride is then recorded: (ár-ki) < f >tab-lu-$u a-na PN taš-me-e a-n[a áš-šu-ti ](?) it-ti PN tu-uš-bu “Thereupon, Tablutu to PN consented. She will reside together with PN as wife” (lines 4-5).
In Roth, no. 2, the direct proposal reads in part: lu-ú áš-šá-tum %at&'[ti] “May you be a wife” (line 6).
3.5 We must realize that we are dealing with a syntactic difference between Akkadian, on the one hand, and Aramaic (and Hebrew, as well), on the other. The latter normally (though not always) employ the verb h-y-h / h-w-h “to be” in 176
formulas connoting assumption of marital status, whereas Akkadian consistently does not. In the Judean desert formula, a woman “becomes” a wife (h-w-h l-), and further, she belongs to someone, so that we often have “to become a wife to X.” A
L EVINE
variation on the Aramaic formula can be inferred from the divorce provisions of the Elephantine marriage contracts. Although none of the known Elephantine marriage contracts contains direct address by the groom to the bride, we may infer from the negative statements of the husband and wife in their respective initiations of divorce how a direct proposal of marriage would read. In the negative mode, the husband declares: %* )() "* !" “She shall not be to me a wife.” For her part, the wife declares: .* )()" "* !" “I shall not be to you a wife” (TAD II, B3.8:22, 25). A direct proposal from groom to bride, in the positive mode, if we had it, would undoubtedly read: %* %() !" “Be to me a wife.” Taking account of the aforementioned syntactic difference, the Neo-Babylonian and the Ara(a)
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
maic formulas are very close to each other. 3.6 In Tannaitic sources, the Mishnah and Tosefta, we find, in place of proposals, a series of oral declarations, which are not part of the written ket"bb#h, per se, They state the fact of marriage as fait accompli: One of several such declarations states: " %"* %* " %#) “Behold, you are to me as a wife” (Tosefta, Qiddûshîn, 1:1, ed. S. Lieberman (1973: 276). Lieberman notes the manuscript variant: *"! (.. “for wife-hood, in marriage.” This is not a proposal of marriage, but a declaration confirming the acceptance of such a proposal. We learn this from documents expressing the indirect proposal. Let us compare the syntax of the indirect marriage proposal at Elephantine with that of most of the NeoBabylonian marriage agreements:
TAD II, B3.8- Elephantine:
)!"( %
!" %) %* ) 0)%( ( !"* . 3" )$, 1$,%()% ',!* .!$ *",( . %00 .%*1 % " )!" 4*1 &1 )!- "$(% '$ [ ) ] *10
I came to you, in your house, and I asked from you Ms. Yehoyishma, by name, your sister, for wife-hood, and you gave her to me. She is my wife, and I am her husband from this day and forever (lines 3-4, cf.). (b) Roth, no.11- Nabonidus (535-539 B.C.E): PN, A-šú šá PN, a-na IGI PN, A-šú šá PN il-lik-ma ka-am-mu iq-bi um-ma: f ba-zi-ti NINka nu-maš-ti bi in-nam-ma lu-ú DAM ši-i PN iš-me-šú-ma. f ba-zi-ti NIN-su nu-maš-ti a-na DAM-ú-tu id-da-áš-šú f ba-zi-ti DAM PN ši-i. PN, son of PN, came before PN, son of PN, and spoke as follows: “Baziti, your sister, the lass, please give to me. Let her be a wife!” PN consented to him, and gave him Baziti, his sister, the lass, for wife-hood. Baziti, she is the wife of PN (lines 1-9).
3.7 Note that in the Aramaic of Elephantine, marriage is declared to exist without recourse to the verb h-w-h; the woman in question does not “become” a wife, but is rather declared to be a wife after her hand was sought from her brother. Cf. the negation of this status in
Hosea 2:4: )*10 "* %+!"( % ," "* "%) %+ “For she is not my wife, and I am not her husband.” 3.8 It is interesting to find in one of the Neo-Babylonian marriage agreements a personal elaboration on the usual ‘dialogue’ statements. Thus, Roth, no. 3:
DUMU-ú-a ia-a-nu DUMU ú-ba-( f kul-la-a DUMU.SAL-ka bi-nam-ma lu-ú DAM-a ši-i
177
L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
“I have no sons. I seek a son. Please give me Kulla, your daughter. Let her be a wife” (lines 4-7).
3.9 As for the status of marriage, itself, it is termed ašš"tu in Akkadian, and ( !" (’intû- feminine, absolute) in Aramaic. Thus, on the VERSO (line 45) of B3.8 from Elephantine we read: “The document of wife-hood ( ( !" #5/ ) which Ananiah, son of Meshullam wrote for Yehoyishma .” In the declaration just cited above, from B3.8, the groom states that he is asking for the bride ( !"* “for wife-hood, marriage.” Aramaic ( !" has long been recognized as a calque of Akkadian ašš"tu. In fact, an Aramaic docket of the Neo-Assyrian period from Nineveh, probably to be dated to the early seventh century B.C.E., already attests the Old Aramaic, abstract form ’št (=’aššût, ’iššût) “marriage, wife-hood” (Fales 1986: 203). Later on, we find the Hebrew term (,%" “wife-hood, marriage” in the Mishnah (Ned#rîm 8:1) and
elsewhere in Tannaitic literature.
II. Other elements of dialogue 3.10 In none of the Neo-Babylonian marriage agreements does the ‘dialogue’ form extend beyond the proposal of marriage, itself, and related declarations. In the Elephantine Aramaic marriage contracts, however, recourse to the dialogue form extends to other provisions. We have already referred to statements initiating divorce so as to clarify their manner of expressing the status of marriage (see above, 4.3). But there is more to such statements. If the husband should rise up in the assembly ( )&1 ) to declare his intention to divorce his wife, he would say: :
!" %* )() "* 1$,%()% %
!"* %!,
“I ‘hate’ my wife, Yehoyishma; she shall not be a wife to me” (B3.8, lines 21-22).
In parallel fashion, if the wife should initiate divorce, she would declare: !" .* )()" "* . %!, “I ‘hate’ you; I will not be a wife to you!” (B3.8, line 25).
The contrast between the objective form and the ‘dialogue document’ can be shown by citing an actual third-person formulation of the very same statements in a neo-Assyrian marriage conveyance, which, like the Elephantine marriage con-
tracts, provides for mutual divorce. After recording that a certain man has given his daughter in marriage to a man, the document conditionally projects the initiation of divorce:
šum-ma mí )u-bi-t[ú a-n]a (?) PN ta-ze-e-ra “If Ms. #ub:tu should hate PN-” šum-ma PN %MÍ-šu& e-zi-ra “If PN should hate his wife-” (Postgate 1976: 105, no. 14, lines 47-50).
3.11 In the Elephantine marriage contracts we also find first person, dialogue statements affirming that the m%har has
178
been paid. This usually follows directly upon the marriage proposal and the declaration of marital status. Thus, B3:8,
L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
lines 4-5: (80 . [ 00* ] 0 [ %9( ] .%*1 *1 … 7/+ 1$,%()% . 3" #)$ .* 0)%( “I have paid you the m%har of Yehoyishma , your sister, silver in X-amount; it has come into you (=you have received it) and your heart is satisfied with it.”
3.12 There are further elements of ‘dialogue’ at Elephantine. Should the wife’s brother, who had initially provided her dowry, ever seek to reclaim it,
he would not to be allowed to do so; he remains obligated. The projected statement of the brother to his sister, the wife, reads as follows:
($) *6!)" %06 '1+ 1$,%()%* 0)% '$3#0 )*" " [ % ] /+! “These properties I gave to Yehoyishma as a gift of affection; Now, I desire to retrieve them!” (B3.8, lines 41-42).
In another instance, the orientation of the document actually shifts to the first person in stating specific provisions, and
even contains internal quotations. Thus B2.6, lines 31-35:
') . “ )%395$ %* &* %- '!0 ()* '!#3" '!0( )% < 3 > 95$ ')* )#3" ) !" %* % %" ” : #$" *+" "*( %/+! # [ !)" ] *+" "*( … 7/+ )%395$* ' !" “ )%!0( )%395$ ')* '#3" ) !"( ( [ ! ] 0 %* % %" ” : #$" "+*$ %!0"0 … 7 [ /+ ] )%395$* ' !" [ )!- ] "#5/ *02* )!$ ($) &1) ')( . )%395$ '$ %!%!2( And I will be unable to say: “I have another wife besides Miphta!iah, and other sons besides the sons Miphta!iah may bear me.” If I say: “I have a wife and sons other than Miphta!iah and her sons,” I must pay Miphta!iah silver in X-amount, according to the royal standard. And I will be unable to release my properties and possessions from Miphta!iah. And should I expropriate them from her in contravention of this document, I must further pay Miphta!iah silver in X-amount, according to the royal standard. (Cf. B3.3:13-14).
It would seem, therefore, that the ‘dialogue document,’ the form that dominates in the Neo-Babylonian cuneiform repertory, underwent significant development in the Elephantine Aramaic marriage contracts. Such development is evident not
only in marriage contracts but in other types of Aramaic legal documents, as well. It represents an overall trend, one that has persisted throughout the centuries, and which fully impacted the Jewish ket"bb#h.
A BBREVIATIONS AND R EFERENCE B IBLIOGRAPHY Ben-Yehudah, Thesuarus Eliezer Ben-Yehudah, Dictionary and Thesaurus of the Hebrew Language, ed. N.H. Tur-Sinai, 8 vols., New York: Thomas Yoseloff, 1960. DJD II Discoveries in the Judean Desert, vol. 2, Les Grottes de Murabba‘at,
179
L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961; Textes Hebreux et Araméens, by J.T. Milik. DNWSI Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions, by J. Hoftijzer, K. Jongeling, 2 vols., Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995. Epstein, J.N. (1908) “Notizen zu den jüdisch-aramäischen Papyri von Assuan,” Jahrbuch der Jüdisch-Literarischen Gesellschaft 6, 359-373. Fales, F.M. (1986) Aramaic epigraphs on clay tablets of the Neo-Assyrian period, Roma: Università degli Studi “La Sapienza.” Friedman, M. (1980) Jewish Marriage in Palestine; A Cairo Geniza Study, 2 vols., Tel-Aviv and New York: Tel-Aviv University and the Jewish Theological Seminary. Greenfield, J.C., Yardeni, A. (1994) “Babatha’s Ketubba,” by Y. Yadin, J.C. Greenfield, A. Yardeni, Israel Exploration Journal 44, 75-105. Ket. = The tractate Ket"bbôt of the Mishnah. Levine, B.A. (2002) “On the Role of Aramaic in the Transmission of Mesopotamian Legal Institutions,” Ideologies as Intercultural Phenomena (Melammu Symposia III), by A. Panaino, G. Pettinato, 157-166. M. = “Mishnah” (when it precedes the name of the tractate). As: M. Ket. Muffs, Y. (2002)
Studies in the Aramaic Legal Papyri from Elephantine, reissue of 1969 publication, with Prolegomenon by B.A. Levine, Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Mur = “Murabba at,” the site of discoveries on the Dead Sea (see under DJD, above). N# = Na*al #e’elim (Wadi Seiyal). Site of discoveries on the Dead Sea. P. = “Papyrus,” as in: “P. Yadin” + no. Porten, B., Yardeni, A. (1989) Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, 2, Contracts, Jerusalem: Hebrew University (abbreviated as TAD II). Postgate, J.N. (1976) Fifty neo-assyrian legal documents, Warminster.
180
L EVINE
T HE J EWISH K ET BB!H AS A ‘D IALOGUE DOCUMENT ’
Roth, M.T. (1989) Babylonian Marriage Agreements 7 th -3 rd Centuries B.C., Alter Orient und Altes Testament 222, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag Butzon & Becker Kevelaer. TAD II = Porten-Yardeni 1989, above. Tosefta The Tosefta, The Order of Nashim, ed. S. Liebermanr, New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary, 1973. Yardeni, A. (2000) Textbook of Aramaic, Hebrew, and Nabataean Documentary Texts from the Judaean Desert, 2 vols., Jerusalem: Hebrew University-Ben-Zion Dinur Center. Yardeni, A., Levine, B.A. (2002) “The Documents from the Bar-Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters; Hebrew, Aramaic, and Nabaean-Aramaic Papyri,” Judean Desert Studies III, by Y. Yadin, J.C. Greeenfield, A. Yardeni, and B.A. Levine, Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.
181
O DISHO
E DWARD Y. O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT MO DEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZATION
Chicago
Assyrian (Aramaic): A Recent Model for its Maintenance and Revitalization* 1. Introductory Remarks
I
n previous research works pertaining to the survival and maintenance of the Assyrian language, 1 it was concluded that the Assyrian language has been undergoing serious erosion especially among its speakers in diaspora. Although the focus has thus far been on its speakers in the United States since they represent one of the largest population concentrations of the Assyrians, the erosion has been equally serious in the native homelands of the language in the Middle East including Iraq, Iran and Syria. 2 The erosion has been so acute that some investigators have listed Assyrian (Neo-Aramaic) among the endangered languages that face disappearance or are vulnerable to it. 3 Several reasons have been adduced to account for this deterioration in the use and status of Assyrian. 4 Foremost among those reasons were the collapse of the geographic and social barriers (boundaries) and the ensuing
massive immersion of the Assyrians in the languages of the majorities with which they coexisted. The immersion usually assumed two forms; either through largescale migration into the majority language-dominant urban areas [especially, Arabic, Turkish and Farsi] or through even larger scale immigration to foreign countries in Europe, North America and Australia and the domination of, especially, the English language. It was in light of the above evidence and observations that the author was led to conclude that “The survival of Aramaic [Assyrian] requires some sort of geographical concentration of population, formal schooling or massive tutoring in the native language and continuation of literary publications.” 5 At the time, this conclusion necessitated the addition of the following footnote:
*
France, 1999b, published in R.M. Whiting (ed.), Mythology and Mythologies (Melammu Symposia II), Helsinki 2001, pp. 137-148; “Assyrian Language Maintenance and Erosion in U.S.: a World War I Family Case Study,” in Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies,” Vol. 13:1, 1999a; “ADM’s Educational Policy: A Serious Project of Assyrian Language Maintenance,” Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies, Vol. 15:1, 2001. 2 Odisho, “Bilingualism and Multilingualism…,” 1993; “The Ethnic, Linguistic…,” 1999b; “Assyrian Language Maintenance…,” 1999a. 3 Jonathan Owens, …, forthcoming. 4 Odisho, 1993: 195-7. 5 Odisho, 1999a: 4-5.
Assyrian, Syriac and Aramaic are used interchangeably since they all refer to the same language; each appellation is used in the context of this paper when it is most appropriate. This usage is to impress a sense of unity and oneness and to avoid a ridiculous dispute over appellations. 1 Edward Y. Odisho, “Bilingualism and Multilingualism among Assyrians: a Case of Language Erosion and Demise,” in Semitica: Serta Philologica Constantino Tsereteli Dicata, ed R. Contini, F. Pennacchietti and M. Tosco (Torino: Silvio Zamorani Editore, 1993); “The Ethnic, Linguistic and Cultural Identity of Modern Assyrians,” paper presented at the Second Annual Meeting of the Assyrian and Babylonian Intellectual Heritage Project (Melammu), Paris/ A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
“For the last few years, the leadership of the Assyrian Democratic Movement which
183
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT M ODEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZAT ION
is part of the governmental coalition in the self-rule region in the North of Iraq has adopted and initiated instruction in content areas at both elementary and secondary levels in the Assyrian language. This is a very important step with farreaching consequences for a realistic maintenance of language as a communicative tool for generations to come.” 6
The bulk of this paper will focus primarily on the efforts of language maintenance in Iraq; only occasionally, will other regions be brought into focus when their relevance is inevitable. This restriction on the domain of this research is attributed to two reasons. Firstly, the broadening of the domain to incorporate all language maintenance attempts in all the Assyrian-speaking regions will stretch the research beyond its specific objective. Secondly, this specific objective was triggered by the recent educational project of the Assyrian Democratic Movement 7 [abbreviated hereafter as ADM]. Within the self-rule region in the North of Iraq, ADM has initiated an educational system in which Assyrian is either the primary language of instruction or is a language item required by all the Assyrian students. In the first case, all instruction is administered in Assyrian, while Kurdish and Arabic are taught as the regional languages with English as a foreign language to facilitate inter-community and cross-language communica-
tion. In the latter case, the instruction is administered in Kurdish, while Assyrian is a language requirement restricted to the Assyrian students. In other words, ADM has been afforded a unique opportunity to create and implement a curriculum of instruction which promotes the use of the Assyrian language as the primary medium of instruction in all content areas or is, at least, taught as a subject. This unique situation of granting the Assyrians the opportunity to practice their human rights in conducting the education of their children in the native language is, hopefully, the result of the growing democratic awareness among the Kurdish majority in their treatment of the other native and/or ethnic nationalities coexisting with them. This paper will have three areas of emphasis: firstly, the structural nature of ADM’s educational project; secondly, its effectiveness in native language maintenance and revitalization compared to other past attempts; and thirdly, its long-term future significance for the maintenance and revitalization of Assyrian as a language of culture and civilization that had a brilliant past. However, since the assessment of ADM’s educational project will be strictly in objective sociolinguistic terms some clarification of the terminology involved is inevitable.
2. Language Erosion and Maintenance: Clarification of Terminology The terms language erosion and language maintenance are used in a general sense; the former indicates the deteriora-
tion in the conditions of a language as a medium of communication, while the latter indicates the healthy continuation
6
ans. In spite of its relatively recent formation in 1979 it has become highly favorable by the masses of the Assyrian population.
Odisho, 1999a: 4, ft.6. It is, perhaps, the most organized and popular political movement in the modern history of the Assyri7
184
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT MO DEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZATION
of its use as a medium of communication. In order to further specify the basic terms, one needs more supplementary terms and attributes to achieve that. For instance, to better denote erosion one needs to understand the concept of language loss or shift and language disappearance or death. “Language shift is used in literature to refer to a downward language movement. That is, there is lessening of the number of speakers of a language, a decreasing saturation of language speakers in the population, a loss in language proficiency, or decreasing use of that language in different domains. The last stages of language shift are called language death.” 8 In other words, a language begins first to suffer from erosion the cumulative effect of which is language shift or loss. Realistically, a language as a system does not disappear or die. However, when its natives cease to use it then the language is said to be functionally dead even if it is occasionally resuscitated through its orthography [its writing system]. As for language maintenance, Baker describes it as the process that “usually refers to relative language stability in the number and distribution of its speakers, its proficient usage in children and adults, and to the retention and use of the language in specific domains (e.g. home, school, religion).” 9 Linguistically speaking, there are at least two distinct patterns of language erosion and loss that are applicable to all languages. The first pattern applies when two languages come into contact with each other, but maintain their domains,
borders and functions leading to a longlasting situation of bilingualism among the speakers of both languages. According to this pattern, it takes a long time, perhaps centuries, for one of the languages to erode and succumb to the other. The second pattern applies when two languages come into contact, but one of them [usually the minority language] is suddenly immersed in the other one [usually the majority language] thus speedily losing its domain, borders and functions. In this pattern, bilingualism may emerge, but it is predominantly a one-sided bilingualism confined to the minority. The successive dominance of languages in Mesopotamia [Sumerian, Akkadian, Aramaic, Arabic] and the survival of the Assyrian language until this very day, despite its severe erosion through the dominance of Arabic, are typically representative of the first pattern. The second pattern is commonly attested, such as in the United States, where the ethnic languages suffer from shift and loss within three generations of their exposure to English and the mainstream society. 10 The latter pattern is highly applicable to the case of the Assyrian ethnic communities in the United States, in particular, and those in Europe and Australia, in general. 11 However, in both patterns when the ethnic groups or minorities sense the imminent danger of erosion and the subsequent threat to the maintenance of their languages, they attempt to counter the erosion and halt the shift and reverse it if possible. The reversal may involve processes of different degrees of intensity and scale such as revival and
8
Spanish and English among Hispanic Youth in Dade County (Miami) Florida: a Sociolinguistic Study.” Language and Education. Vol. 6:1, 13-32, 1992. 11 Odisho, 1993 and 2000.
Colin Baker, Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters 1997), 43. 9 Baker, 1997, 43. 10 R. Garcia and C.F. Diaz, “The Status and Use of
185
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT M ODEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZAT ION
revitalization. According to Paulston, Chen and Connerty, language revival is reserved for the giving of new life to a dead language [such as the revival of Hebrew], while language revitalization is the imparting of new vigor to an existing language, often by increasing the do-
mains where the language is used. 12 This distinction by Paulston, et alii between revival and revitalization is very practical for this study since the project being described and evaluated here is a typical example of language revitalization.
3. Language Reversal and Revitalization younger generation to learn the language and use it.
Baker rightly points out that Fishman has made a major contribution to the theory of language reversal. 13 Fishman (1991) provides a list of priorities to halt language decline and attempt to reverse language shift. 14 This list Fishman called Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS) for threatened languages. The scale is divided into 8 stages, the higher the number on the scale the more threatened a language is. 15 In order to assess where on the scale one can place the current condition of the Assyrian language, one needs to reveal the characteristics of each stage. The following outline of the characteristics of each stage is based on Baker, 1997.
Stage 6. This is the most pivotal and crucial stage for language survival. The language is passed to the next generation. There is native language communication across the three generations: grandparents, parents and children. If the language is used within the family, it is highly likely to be used in the street, neighborhood and other religious and cultural events in the community. This stage essentially concerns the informal use of a language in the home and community and predominantly through oral skills. Stage 5. It occurs when the minority language in the home, school and community goes beyond oracy to literacy. First, literacy in the minority language is seen to be important because it facilitates alternative means of communication, especially across distance and time. Second, the image and status of minority language is elevated when it is present in pint; besides, speakers may not always be at the mercy of the majority language media. Third, literacy ensures a much wider variety of functions for a minority language. When formal education and schooling is in the majority language, then literacy in the minority language
Stage 8. Is the worst condition a language can be in. Only a few of the older generations are able to speak the language, but because they are socially isolated and geographically scattered active interaction is rarely possible. Stage 7. Language is used on a daily communication basis, but usually by older generation. There is a discontinuity in language production by the younger generation; there is no choice but to communicate in the majority language. The aim here is to strive to help the
12 C. Paulston, C. Chen and M. Connerty, “Language Regenesis: A Conceptual Overview of Language Revival, Revitalization and Reversal.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. Vol. 14:4, 275-286, 1993.
186
13
Baker, 1997, 63. J. Fishman, Reversing Language Shift. Clevedon: Multilingual Affairs, 1991[cited in Baker, 1997]. 15 Baker, 1997, 68. 14
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT MO DEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZATION
instruction may be achieved through local community effort through complete parochial schools, weekend and/ or evening classes.
Stages 8 through 5 are the minimum and basic requirements for halting the language shift and then its reversal. In those stages, language reversal is primarily in its oral form and if literacy is involved then it is usually through informal schooling and education. Stage 4. At this stage formal and largescale minority language medium education is sought. It may be through private schools, but usually state-sponsored schools are the target. Maximum benefit is attained if minority language education is compulsory. Stage 3. When the minority language is established in the local community and is used in administering some economic activities independent of the majority language. Stage 2. During this stage the minority language is used in some governmental institutions e.g., health, postal, courts, police services. Attempt is also made to secure certain hours on the national
radio and television. Stage 1. Some use of minority language available in higher education, central government and national media.
Generally speaking, Fishman’s scale seems to be quite pertinent to the overall characterization and assessment of the conditions of the Assyrian language erosion and maintenance; however, in order for this scale to be more effectively applicable, Fishman’s assertion that the stages are not meant to be strictly sequential and dependent on each other in the order in which they appear, should be seriously considered. Besides, “Fishman’s eight stages must be seen as overlapping and interacting. In language revival, it is not the case of going one-step or stage at a time. The myriad of factors in language reversal link together in complex patterns” 16 In light of the above two clarifications on the application of the scale, it is expected that the scale will not only be pertinent to the conditions of the Assyrian language, but also effective in the description and assessment of those conditions.
4. Past and Present Survival Conditions of Assyrian Language As early as the 8th century B.C., the Aramaic [Assyrian] language and its alphabetic writing competed with the Akkadian/Assyrian language and its syllabic writing throughout Beth Nahrain, in general, and in Assyria, in particular. Once Aramaic prevailed, it reigned unchallenged as the native language or the common language of all the peoples of the Middle East until the Arab invasion in the 7th century A.D. 17 With the Arab
conquests and their domination of Mesopotamia, Aramaic began a steady decline as a literary language, though still persisting as a spoken language.18 The Mongol invasion of Beth Nahrain dealt another severe blow to Aramaic, and those who spoke it suffered successive persecutions that forced them to take refuge in the mountains of today’s Kurdistan and the plains of Urmi and Mosul. 19 For at least six centuries following the Mongol inva-
16
18
17
Baker, 1997, 73. Roux, 1964.
19
Atiya, 1968. Arthur Maclean, 1895. 187
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT M ODEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZAT ION
sion, speakers of Aramaic remained in a state of rigid geographic isolation and intellectual hibernation. Their language lost its prestigious status with increased acceleration, illiteracy pervaded among its speakers and their regional and tribal vernaculars prevailed. Their geographic isolation from the rest of the outside world was not ended until the arrival of the European missionaries around early 19th century. Regardless of the religious ambitions of the missionaries, if it had not been for their services in the revitalization of literacy among the Assyrians, the Assyrian language would have been in serious danger of disappearance since then. However, for a better portrayal of the survival situation of the Assyrian language since the advent of the missionaries until the present day, it would be convenient to look at this long period of time, which is almost equivalent to two centuries, in terms of three phases each one of which represents a serious attempt or model at the revitalization of the Assyrian language. These three models represent the periods of 1800-1918, 1918-1991 and 1991-Present, respectively. The survival condition of the Assyrian language in the countries of diaspora, mainly European and North American, is considered the fourth model. Details of 1800-1918 and 1918-1991 models have been documented in an earlier publication (Odisho, 2001); thus, the focus here will be predominantly on the 1991-Present model.
4.1. 1991-Present: the ADM Project In the immediate aftermath of the Gulf War in 1991 and Saddam’s assault on the self-rule region, no one would ever predict that most of the refugees would return to their villages. Even more un188
predictable was the fact that ADM would take a brilliant leadership role in resettling most of the Assyrian-speakers in their villages and initiating an unprecedented endeavor for a comprehensive native-language educational system. These courageous steps did not only retain the hinterland of the Assyrian language and culture, but also laid out a blueprint for further serious and systematic linguistic and cultural revitalization. As pointed out earlier on, there are three areas of emphasis in this paper: firstly, the structural nature of ADM’s educational project; secondly, its effectiveness in native language maintenance compared to other attempts and means; and thirdly, its longterm future significance for the maintenance of Assyrian as an ancient language of culture and civilization.
4.1.1. Structural Nature of ADM Project and its Scale Initially, the project began with the implementation of instruction in Assyrian at the elementary level, which required the preparation of buildings, teachers and textbooks. Because the emphasis of this study is on the humanitarian, linguistic and cultural aspects, the material aspects, though very important in the successful implementation of any educational project, will not be dealt with here. As for the professionally qualified teachers, there was a general shortage, but the deficiency was specifically felt in the linguistic and professional preparedness of teachers in handling comprehensive instruction in the Assyrian language covering a wide array of content areas: mathematics, natural sciences, social sciences and humanities. The deficiency was attributed, in general, to the high percentage of illiteracy in the native lan-
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT MO DEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZATION
guage among the speakers of Assyrian as well as the rapidly decreasing fluency in their oral skills due to the pervasive dominance of Arabic. Faced with this serious language deficiency, ADM’s leadership initiated intensive language proficiency courses for the teachers. 20 As for the textbooks, especially in content areas, they were almost non-existent. Thus, there was a serious urgency for creating them primarily by translating appropriate textbooks existing in Arabic for other parts of Iraq. Where and when appropriate, such textbooks have been properly edited and modified to be in line with the Assyrian cultural, national and patriotic goals. 21 So with barely convenient school buildings, with continuing teacher preparation and in-service training, and with modest quality textbooks the project of Assyrianizing the educational curriculum was practically implemented in 1993. 22 Since then, there has been improvement in school buildings, in the language preparedness of the teachers and in textbooks quality and content. By the academic year 1997-1998, 47 textbooks were printed in Assyrian covering all subjects included in the curriculum. 23 One of the most important facts to be known about ADM’s project is that there are two categories of schools in which the Assyrian language is involved. The first category involves schools in which the Assyrian language is only taught as a language throughout the elementary school with a range of 4-6 hours per week. Altogether, in Erbil and Duhok there are 12 such elementary schools with a total of 1915 students. There are also six high schools with a total of 484
students. The second category involves schools in which the whole curriculum is administered in Assyrian. There are 15 such elementary schools with a total of 1560 students and one high school with a total of 319 students. There is also an Annex school, Ashurban, in Diyana with only seven students. Based on the available data, 24 there are 11 elementary schools. [1st through 6th grades] in the province of Erbil, 7 of them in Ainkawa, 2 in Shaqlawa and 1 in each Diyana and Koysinjaq. Altogether, they accommodate 1560 students with almost equal ratio of females to males. In the province of Duhok, there are 16 elementary schools, 4 in the center of Duhok and the rest in its other principalities. Altogether, they accommodate 1843 students with almost equal numbers of males and females. Thus, the overall number of the students covered by the Assyrian language instruction in both categories is presently 4285. For a systematic view of facts and figures about the schools incorporated in the project see table 1 below. There are several principal points that are embedded in the above statistics whose relevant significance to the overall maintenance and revitalization of the Assyrian language will be dealt with in the context of the extended discussion that will soon follow. One such very interesting and principal point to notice is the high percentage of females, which is almost equal to males. A second point is the areas with the largest concentrations of students, which happen to be in Ainkawa of Erbil and in the center of Duhok. The relevance of such concentrations will arise when language mixing
20
21
These courses continue due to the increasing demand for qualified Assyrian language teachers. For details, see Syriac Education in the North of Iraq: Facts and Figures. San Diego: Friends of the Syriac Education, 2000.
Syriac Education in the North of Iraq, p. 24. Ibid, p. 20. 23 Syriac Education in the North of Iraq, p. 25. 24 ; also, Syriac Education in the North of Iraq, pp. 22-3. 22
189
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT M ODEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZAT ION
and leveling of the different dialects of Assyrian is dealt with. These schools are all run by the Directorate General of Syriac Teaching, which is a body in the hierarchy of the Ministry of Education in
the self-rule region. 25 The Directorate is responsible for the overall administration, curriculum design, teacher training, and textbooks preparation for the Assyrian language instruction.
Category # 1 Language Teaching Elementary School Erbil Duhok Total
9 3 12
Student
1483 432 1915
Category # 2 Content Teaching High School
Student
6 0 6
484 0 484
Elementary School
2 13 15
Student
149 1411 1560
High School
1 1 2
Student
7 319 326
Table 1. Number of students, categories of schools and provinces involved in the ADM Assyrian language project.
Students admitted to the first grade of the elementary schools in 1991-1992 finished their 6th grade 26 in 1997 and were ready to proceed to the intermediate school [7th through 9th grades], which had not been established yet. ADM worked hard to avoid the disruption in the chain of educational progress. There was reluctance on the part of the central government of the self-rule region to approve the concept of an intermediate school, let alone sponsoring it financially. The reluctance was partially based on legal grounds in the sense that the law restricted the instruction in Assyrian to the elementary school level only. The legal grounds were further reinforced, allegedly, on the basis of the deficiency in the educational cadre required at this level of instruction. However, after further deliberations, a compromise was reached and in December 1998 the Ministry of Education granted the permission to es-
tablish a private intermediate school under the Ministry’s supervision, but without its financial commitment. Thus, ADM had to find the ways and means of financing the administration of the intermediate school named Nisibin 27 Intermediate School. 28 Due to the extreme importance of this level school, the Assyrian Aid Society [AAS], an all-Assyrian public organization based in the United States, had to assume the full responsibility of running the school financially and administratively. For the academic year 1998/9, the school had 319 (7th & 8th grades only) students 102 of them were housed in dormitories. This is a huge financial and administrative burden to shoulder by a young organization, which depends primarily on individual donations from Assyrians throughout the world. However, the full sponsorship of this intermediate level school and other on-coming higher levels of Assyrian lan-
25 Previously, it was only a Directorate. Recently, it was upgraded officially by the Ministry of Education to the level of a Directorate General. 26 The pre-college educational system in Iraq in the self-rule region consists of 6 grades in the Elementary School, followed by 3 grades in the Intermediate School and 3 grades in the High School. 27 A famous city of early Assyrian Christianity located near the Syrian-Turkish borders best known
best known as a center of scholarship. 28 A smaller Annex Intermediate School, Ashurban, serves the Assyrian students in the region of Diyana. Also, just recently, a third Intermediate School, Orhai, opened its doors in November 2000 to educate students in the region of Sarsank and its vicinities. For further details, see Bahra, No. 143, November 2000; also, Syriac Education in the North of Iraq, p. 54.
190
O DISHO
guage instruction by the government of the self-rule is a political decision that is contingent on the future enhancement of the democratic self-rule and its policy towards ethnic nationalities in the region. The context of such political decisions will be revisited in due time when future assessment of this project becomes pertinent.
4.1.2. Effectiveness of the Project in Language Maintenance and Revitalization In order to assess the effectiveness of the project, one has to consider the following criteria [to be abbreviated as C]: 1. Is the native language taught as a subject [as a language] only or both as a subject and as a medium for instruction in content areas [for all subjects]? 2. Is the native language the only [or dominant] language of instruction or is the instruction bilingual together with the majority language? 3. How many hours per week is the native language used in instruction [both subject and content]? Less than 5 hours per week implies very limited language instruction usually a weekend class or afternoon class, while more than 20 hours per week immediately implies subject and content instruction over several days of the week. 4. At what level of proficiency is the native language instruction conducted? If most of the instruction is confined to the basic skills of oracy and literacy, such as the learning of the alphabet letters/ diacritical marks, the pronunciation of sounds and the initial familiarity with the decoding skills [listening and reading] and encoding skills [speaking and writing], then the instruction is at a low level of proficiency. 5. Is the language of instruction the same language used at home? 6. Is the language of instruction the only [or dominant] language used in the na-
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT MO DEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZATION
tive community? 7. Does the native language have strong representation in most mass media or at least a reasonable representation in some of them? 8. Is the native language used in higher education instruction?
Of the above criteria, the ADM project undoubtedly secures the first 6 criteria and is already on its way to secure C7. In fact, C7 is only strongly applicable to ADM project compared to previous models of language maintenance because the community has its own mass media outlets, which are functional on daily basis and for prolonged hours. C8 is not applicable to any model including ADM because in no phase of native language instruction the Assyrians have had the opportunity to develop their own higher education, let alone implement it in the native language. A more holistic assessment of the effectiveness of ADM’s model should realistically be in terms of the cumulative hours it affords for the actual use of the native tongue in authentic communication both spoken and written. The major characteristics of ADM project listed in the next section definitely secure the maximum hours for the active intergenerational oral and written circulation of the native language.
4.1.3. Long-Term Effectiveness of ADM’s Project for Assyrian Language Maintenance and Revitalization Hypothetically, it is quite plausible to predict the future effectiveness of ADM’s project for the Assyrian language maintenance and revitalization because there is sufficient educational and linguistic evidence on the basis of which the prediction is to be made. However, realisti191
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT M ODEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZAT ION
cally, such a prediction is very difficult to make since the whole future of the self-rule government is bound to the future politics and geo-politics of the region. If the self-rule is not protected or even further developed, and if the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein is not replaced with a democratic rule in Iraq under which the national, political, cultural and linguistic rights of the non-Arab ethnic nationalities are guaranteed and protected, the whole future of democracy, not just the Assyrian language maintenance, in the region will be doomed. Besides, ADM’s project has still to be treated as experimental since it is only a mere one-decade old. Nevertheless, there should be no objection to proceed forward to formulate a prediction that is premised on the available educational and linguistic evidence. ADM’s model for language maintenance distinguishes itself from other models in the following features: a) ADM’s model is unique in that it is the first time the instruction in the native language is administered through a central organ called the Directorate General of Syriac Education, which is a body of the Ministry of Education of the self-rule government. The Directorate is in charge of designing and implementing the instructional curriculum. 29 b) Instruction in the native language is a major pillar of the national political and linguistic agenda of ADM and one of its primary strategic goals. c) The curriculum is uniformly implemented by native speakers of the language in all the Assyrian-speaking areas
29
Recently, the government of the self-rule region has been seriously engaged in planning for a campaign for the eradication of illiteracy. See Bahra [ADM’s central newspaper], No. 137, July 2000. At this stage, it is not known if the campaign will be conducted in the native languages of the ethnic nationalities involved. If the latter condition is implemented, it will, undoubtedly, imply further belief in 192
within the region. d) Language instruction is authentically contextualized in the triangular environment of school, home and community, which is the best habitat for the maintenance of a language. To further highlight the significance of this feature, one has to assume that school only is not capable of realistic language maintenance without the continuous support of the community and home. It is the latter two that actually preserve the oral circulation of a given language. In other words, a realistic maintenance and revitalization of a language requires the active and complementary collaboration of three sources of language generation: community, home and school with each source activating the language and recycling it into the other source. The best symbolic representation is the recycling logo where each arrow of the three curved arrows leads generatively into the next source thus completing the generative cycle. Figure 1 below is a schematic representation of the generative cycle for language revitalization and maintenance. e) Language usage represents a complete array of communicative and educational functions in all fields of life and knowledge at all formal and informal modes, especially the modes of what have recently been identified as Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills [BICS] vs. Cognitive/Academic Language Proficiency [CALP]. 30 The two modes are simply identified as conversational language and academic language, respectively. f) Females represent almost 50% of the total learners, which is a ratio that has never been reached in the known history of modern Assyrians. This very high representation in ADM’s model has significant bearing on the maintenance of the native language because it will lead to a
human rights and democracy by the central government as well as a huge step in the direction of promoting and consolidating the ethnic languages including the Assyrian language. 30 For details see Jim Cummins. Bilingualism and Special Education: Issues in Assessment and Pedagogy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 1984.
O DISHO
high percentage of native-language literate mothers a condition which is the most conducive for children’s acquisition of
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT MO DEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZATION
the oral and literacy skills of the mother tongue.
Home
School Community
Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the three sources of language generative cycle required for the maintenance and revitalization of a language. g) Native language promotion is intimately associated with the promotion of the native cultural heritage. The Directorate General of Syriac Education has a twin body under the name of the Directorate of Assyrian Culture. h) Native language instruction is strongly propagated and reinforced through the mass media that ADM administers in the form of newspapers, magazines, radio/ television broadcasting and most recently electronic media. i) ADM’s project is a tremendous effort in the direction of dialect leveling which linguistically implies the reduction of the differences among those dialects through
enhancing their commonality and coherence. This process of dialect leveling will eventually promote a standard koine variety of the Assyrian language. The ADM project affords the second serious attempt at bringing all the tribal and regional dialects into contact with each other to contribute to a more standardized koine among the different speakers of Assyrian language including the socalled Assyrians, Chaldeans and Syrians.31 This trend of language leveling and standardization is the best linguistic and cultural service the speakers of a language can afford themselves as a people to consolidate their nationalistic identity.
5. Concluding Remarks The focus of this study has been on the modern history of the Assyrians and the conditions of the survival, maintenance
and revitalization of their language as an important dimension of the preservation of their ethnic, historical and national
31
affording the Koine with the most linguistically appropriate lexical items and grammatical patterns. Third, loanwords from other local languages are being distinctly reduced. It is, indeed, so refreshing to listen to the newscasters from Ainkawa, for instance, using a standardized variety of Assyrian and at the same time maintaining some distinctive features of their own dialect.
Based on this writer’s observations of the variety of language used by television/radio stations run by ADM, language and dialect leveling have already progressed tremendously. Interestingly, the process of leveling is dominated by three trends. First, all the dialects are being enriched and embellished by lexical and grammatical borrowings from the standard Assyrian language. Second, all the dialects are
193
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT M ODEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZAT ION
identity. Although the Assyrians have been overwhelmed by other peoples and civilizations and have been a minority for long centuries, they have still been able to maintain their native language and identity. They managed to do so for three major reasons. Firstly, their literary, liturgical and linguistic heritage was too prodigious and impressive to lose its impact instantaneously. Secondly, their geographic isolation mainly in the mountainous regions of Turkey, though very harsh, served as physical borders that, in turn, created a buffer zone to protect them against linguistic and cultural absorption by other surrounding majority languages and cultures. Thirdly, their religious identity as a Christian island in the midst of an Islamic sea formed the social boundary and kept the whole community close to each other. Thus, this social isolation reinforced the geographic isolation and both helped the Assyrians to maintain their language and culture as much intact as possible and as long as possible. For all the above reasons, they were, in fact, like the ‘Basques’ 32 of Europe. By early 19th century and with the arrival of the Christian missionaries, their language was at its worst condition. Literacy skills were almost non-existent among the ordinary populace and their daily speech was fragmented into hundreds of regional and tribal dialects with no trace, whatsoever, of a standard medium of communication. As was mentioned earlier on, the missionaries succeeded in creating a Standard Written Language which did not only serve as the literacy tool, but also as the foundation for the future emergence
of a common koine of oral communication that cut across all the tribal and regional dialects and helped to drastically standardize the oral language. This was the most significant milestone in the modern history of the Assyrians that was achieved during the period of 1800-1918; it salvaged the language from an early and imminent danger of extinction and helped to maintain it until this very day. During the second phase, there were two major linguistic achievements: firstly, the actual emergence of a common koine of oral communication; secondly, the firm establishment of SWL through the publication of literature and language materials and the extensive semi-formal and informal native language education activities that reached their peak during 1950s and 1960s, plateaued off in 1970s and seriously decelerated in 1980s. The political and socio-economic tragedies and turmoil resulting from the civil war between the Iraqi government and the Kurds, the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the eruption of the Iraq-Iran War followed by the Gulf War created the worst conditions for the maintenance of the Assyrian language. Almost half of the population of the Assyrian-speakers were displaced most of whom sought refuge in other countries while others returned to their villages in the north under very difficult economic conditions. It is in these tragic circumstances, the leadership role of ADM was put to test. Their experience in political and nationalistic struggle and the mobilization of people since 1979 paid off. ADM played a brilliant leadership role in resettling most of the remaining Assyrian-speakers in their
32
European. Regardless of their minority status, they have managed to maintain their language, culture and identity for long centuries mainly due to geographic and social isolation.
Is a small national minority that inhabits the western Pyrenees Mountains between Spain and France. The Basques are one of the few ethnic and nationalistic groups in Europe whose language is not Indo194
O DISHO
villages and initiating an unprecedented endeavor for a comprehensive nativelanguage educational system after the Gulf War. The first decade in the life of ADM’s native language education project has already been assessed throughout this study in comparison with other previous endeavors. ADM’s project surpasses all the previous attempts in effectiveness of language maintenance and revitalization. Its significance is not just based on its achievements, but also on the strategic incorporation of native language education in the overall political and national agenda which treats language as the most central pillar of unity and solidarity across all Assyrian language dialects, religious denominations and regional and political inclinations and biases. ADM’s political and nationalistic horizons are not defined to embrace only the natives who have been traditionally subsumed under the appellation ‘Assyrians’; rather, its new horizons are meant to be inclusive of all the Assyrians regardless of their religious, dialectal, historical and regional differences. This strategic politico-nationalistic trend is unprecedented in the modern history of the Assyrians. This trend does not seem to have emerged out of political convenience, but rather out of philosophical conviction which is detected in ADM’s political literature, the composition of its political leadership and rank-and-file, and its daily political, economic and educational operations. As the focus of this study is on the native language education and language maintenance, the significance of ADM’s educational project presently lies in the fact that raising a new generation of young literates in Assyrian will prolong the life of the language up to three future generations because by the time this new
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT MO DEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZATION
generation departs, its impact will be felt on at least the next two generations. However, as for a future long-term assessment of ADM’s project, it is clouded with unpredictability. There are two major factors that dictate the unpredictability. Firstly, the volatility of the overall political scenario in the region, of which ADM is a part, makes the success of the education project contingent on the future political developments. If the region remains autonomous, as it has been for the last decade, the Assyrian language project will most likely continue to survive and improve. If the autonomy collapses, primarily due to external interference by Saddam Hussein’s regime then everything is vulnerable to disruption and discontinuation. Secondly, the future nature of the working relationships between the Kurds as the majority in the region and the Assyrians as a minority is equally essential in this regard. At least for the last fifty years, the relationship between the Kurds and Assyrians has been very cordial and the coalition has been fairly effective. Since 1961 when the late Mustafa Barzani led his revolt against the Iraqi central government, the Assyrians, in general, have been supportive of the Kurds for their human rights and autonomous rule. In fact, many Assyrians have fought sideby-side with the Pesh Merga and several have fallen as martyrs on the battlefield in defense of the Kurdish cause. Certainly, throughout their long history as neighbors, their relationship had undergone periods of tension and, at times, even instances of bloody skirmishes. However, that was in the past and the two neighbors should earnestly embark on assessing their present and future. Now is the time when both sides should begin to plan for the development of a prospective working and survival rela-
195
O DISHO
A SSYRIAN (A RAMAIC ): A R ECENT M ODEL FOR ITS M AINTENANCE AND R EVITALIZAT ION
tionship that is long-term in duration and strategic in nature. Such a long-term and strategic alliance is quite conceivable in light of the history, political ambitions and sufferings of both peoples. Historically, both peoples are the descendents of two of the most ancient native peoples of the region. Politically, the two peoples have been denied their political rights for autonomy and even independence for long centuries and most recently after World War I as evidenced by the terms of the treaties of Sevres (1920) and Lausanne (1923). In terms of suffering, both have been maltreated by ultranationalistic majorities in the countries in which they have been residing – Turkey, Iran and Iraq. All those common characteristics and long coexistence in the region have allowed them to share a folkloric culture that is quite similar. The folkloric commonality is best evidenced through the costumes they wear, foods they serve, lyrics they sing and rhythms they dance. In planning this long-term and strategic alliance and solidarity between the Kurds
33
Bahra, No. 141, July 2000.
196
and Assyrians, both sides should be realistic and honest with each other. It is certainly true that the Kurds have a much larger population and, therefore, they constitute a majority. However, being a majority does not disqualify it from being democratic and humanitarian to the other ethnic nationalities [Assyrians, Arabs, Turkmanis, Armenians, among others] that coexist within its geographic and political jurisdiction. The Kurds should remember the lesson they learned from their recent past when they were treated as minorities and treated very undemocratically. Along this philosophical and political line of thinking, it is extremely encouraging to read that the national leader of the Kurds, Mr. Masoud Barzani, calls upon the non-Kurdish ethnic groups to identify themselves as ethnic nationalities rather than ethnic minorities. 33 From the democratic perspective and in terms of human rights such words by Barzani must be very soothing to the souls of the other nationalities coexisting with their Kurdish brothers.
O GNIBENE
P AOLO O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
Ravenna
The Ossetic Studies in 17th and 18th Centuries: from the Travel Notes to the First Ossetic Grammars.
M
arcus Annaeus Lucanus in the Bellum civile wrote: duros aeterni Martis Alanos and you can hardly find, in ancient authors, more appropriate words to describe the Alans’ “way of life.” 1 There are a lot of written indications asserting the existence of Alans in ancient authors, as well as in the sources of the late antiquity and in several sources in oriental languages. 2 The problem about the Urheimat of the Alans cannot be considered solved yet – many pages have already been written on this matter and many pages will be written in the near future – but nowadays we
are at least able to outline the history of Alans from I century AD up to the Mongol invasion. Many evidences of Alan tribes living in Northern Caucasus are conserved and a region in Northern Caucasus is still called in Vaxušti Bagratiwni’s Geography Alanet‘i ( ! "#$%), 3 moreover, the “state” called by the Soviet historiography “Medieval Alania” flourished here. 4 However, even if not all the scholars agree with the hypothesis of the existence of an Alan state in Northern Caucasus in 13th century – and it is very likely that Alania at that time was only a conglomeration of tribes – some events like
1
and hydronymy (cf. river’s names Don, Dnepr, Dnestr etc.), in ancient times Iranian peoples lived in Southern Russia and Ukraine’s plains. Numerous personal names found in the inscriptions of the Greek colonies located in the northern coast of the Black Sea can be explained from Iranic and in particular from Ossetic forms. The Iranic element in Southern Russia has been studied particularly by Max Vasmer and Ladislav Zgusta. Cf. Zgusta 1956 and Vasmer 1923. It is necessary to remember that up to the 12th century, when Southern Russia was a territory inhabited by nomadic peoples speaking Turkish languages (Pe(enegi and then Polovcy), the village of Sugrov is remembered in Cuman territory. The name sugrov can be explained from Ossetic (Digor) surx-qæw (red village): cf. Miller 1887: 67; in this village the Russian princes captured Jasynja and many Alans. About the position of the Sovietic historiography on Medieval Alania see: Vaneev 1959; information about the Alans who lived in Northern Caucasus can be found in several sources by Arabic authors, but especially these Arabic evidences gave an opening to a lot of enquiries about the value of the term “alans.”
Luc. Civ. 8, 223. In the Latin sources they are named Al n!, in late authors Hal n!, Ancient Greeks called them &'()*+, in Arabic we find !" (Al n), in Middle Persian we can read ’l’n’n BBA and in Parthic ’l’nn TROA to point out the Dar'jal Pass (dar-i Al n n = Alan’s gate), in Syriac Alan y", in Hebrew #$% (Alan), in Catalan los alans, in Georgian ( ! "#$%) Alanet‘i that is a region situated in the NE of Svanetia, in Ar). menian ,-./01 (Alank‘), in Chinese Alan ( They are also called As: see Georgian (23#$%) oset‘i, Mongolian Asud, Chinese Asu, Arabic and Persian #s, Hungarian Jász, Medieval Latin As, Assi, Azzi etc. The problem of the ethnic name *al[l]&n is well discussed in: Alemany 2000: 1-10. About the Alans in the ancient authors see also Kulakovskij 1899; for a history of the Alans in the West see Bachrach 1973. We can find sources indicating the presence of Alans in many languages: Latin, Greek, Arabic, Armenian, Catalan, Georgian, Hebrew, Parthic, Middle Persian, Bactrian, Persian, Mongolian, Russian, Syriac, Chinese, 'agatay etc. 3 Vaxušti 1842. 4 According to ancient authors, but also to toponymy 2
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
197
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
4äbä and Sübä'ätäi’s military expedition in 1222, 5 the other Mongolian incursions in this region and the deportation of part of the Alan people to China, substantially contributed to the disappearance of the Alans from the scene of history. 6 Russian chronicles mentioned them for the last time before the year 1277-1278 7 and their name disappeared around the same time from georgian chronicles too. Only in 19th century, works by J. Klaproth and V.F. Miller showed clearly the relation between Alans and Ossetians 8 but unfortunately these works also opened the way to the so called “Alan question,” i.e. an endless discussion about the cultural heritage of the Alans. 9 The 20th century contributed enormously to the development of the Ossetic studies: every researcher approaching such a field of studies knows perfectly well that nowadays the bibliography is quite wide. Nevertheless, it is not useless
to try to follow the first stages of these studies and try to outline their development from the end of 17th century up to the second half of 19th century especially because several of these first works, though very important and interesting, have been forgotten and it is not possible to find them quoted in any recent bibliography. In a work dedicated to V.I. Abaev in occasion of his 80th birthday, M.I. Isaev wrote: “the first stage, prescientific, in Ossetic studies is based on the information about Ossetians and their language in many travellers’ notes dated 17th-19th century.” 10 No doubt can arise about the fact that these travellers’ notes have a prescientific character, but in any case they contain several interesting features which are useful to the history of Ossetic studies too. The nature and utility of these works are, in fact, heterogeneous: some of these writings confine them-
5
occasu solis equos et alia mirabilia. Scripta in Cambalec in anno Rati, mense sexto, tertia die lunationis.” The Alans say: “/.../ Hoc autem Sanctitate Vestrae sit notum, quod longo tempore fuimus informati in fide catholica, et salubriter gubernati, et consolati plurimum per legatum vestrum fratrem Iohannem, valentem, sanctum, et sufficientem virum, qui tamen mortus est ante octo annos /.../ Quare supplicamus sapientiae vestrae, quod mittatis nobis bonum, sufficientem ac sapientem legatum, qui curam habeat de animabus nostris et quod cito veniat /.../ et ideo recomendatis nos sibi, filios vestros, et fratres, et fideles alios, qui sunt in imperio eius”: Wadding 1733: 209-214; see also: Didebulidze 1981 and HAMM 1962. 7 $%&'()*+ (' ,'*-.%*%/*-'01 *()*-1 [Voskresenskaja letopis'] (6785 = 1277 A.D.): “*+,-. /0 12. 23 456078 90+:;<0607= >3.?3@5 1= 13A+; +5 B2C, . >6.2<;>.@5 D;2
4äbä and Sübä'ätäi’s expedition through Caucasus has been examinated in my report “Pochod Džebe i Subedeja na zapad: isto(niki pervogo alano-mongol'skogo sraženija” read at the XXXV ICANAS, Budapest 1997 (to be published in 2004 on Nartamongæ, Vladikavkaz); numerous written indications about this expedition can be found in Arabic, Persian, Armenian, Georgian, Russian, Chinese, Mongolian and 'agatay sources. 6 A part of the Alans was deported to China. About 30.000 Alans entered the Chinese imperial guard during the Yuan dynasty. This fact is reported by Peregrinus from Castello: “/.../ item quidam christiani boni qui dicuntur Alani XXX milibus a Rege maximo stipendio accipientes ipsi et familie eorum ad fr. Iohannem recurrunt. Et ipse eos confortat et predicat”: Peregrinus from Castello, Ep. // Wyngaert 1929: 365368. To)an Temur’s (cin. Shùn Dì) letter to the Pope speaks about these Alans too: “/.../ Nos mittimus nuntium nostrum Andream Francum cum quindecim sociis ad Papam, Dominum christianorum in Franchiam ultra septem maria, ubi sol occidit, ad aperiendam viam nunciis saepe mittendis per nos ad Papam et per Papam ad nos, et ad rogandum ipsum Papam, ut mittat nobis suam benedictionem et in orationibus sanctis semper memoriam faciat de nobis. Et quod Alanos servitores nostros, filios suos christianos, habeat recommendatos. Item quod adducant nobis ab 198
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
selves to a short mention of Alan population; others give a detailed description of the places where they lived, of their traditions and customs. Sometimes we can find complete sentences the Alans pronounced in particular cases of life. It is necessary to remember that in this region, unlike Southern Caucasus, writing systems were not a widespread phenomenon and for many languages of the area a writing system was created, usually on the basis of the cyrillic alphabet, only during the 19th century and this was the case of Ossetic too. Ossetic was written for the first time at the end of 18th century using the Cyrillic alphabet adapted to the specific requirements of an iranian language deeply influenced by the caucasic substratum 11 also in the phonemic system. In Southern Ossetia at the beginning of 19th century Georgian alphabet was used to write Ossetic: this alphabet was in any case closer to the needs of Ossetic at least for the possibility to express the Caucasic glottals by means of a single letter. 12 A more suitable new alphabet – though a variant of cyrillic and graphically still quite complex, was elaborated in the 40s of 19th century and it is known as “old Sjögren-Miller writing system.” 13 In 17th-century works we can still meet the term “alans.” It is clear that at that time the name “alan” has not any ethnic value, but just a geographic one.
This is, for example, the case of Arcangelo Lamberti 14 and Nicolaas Witsen’s writings; Witsen travelled from Moscow to Northern and Southern Caucasus and crossed Little Kabarda, Ossetia and Georgia. In 1692 he published a book in Amsterdam in which he gave precious information about Caucasian peoples. Moreover the book included a little dictionary of about 90-s words in different languages of the region. 15 The Alans are mentioned in the “Notice to the Grand Duke of Tuscany Cosimus the 3rd about the Moscovia.” Here we can read that Alans are a population strictly related to the Circassians. 16 In P. Chardin’s travel work on Persia the smaller tribe near the Colchis is called Alans. 17 We have to wait for the last decades of 18th century to find more precise notices. We are still working with travel notes, but some of them are very detailed. Städer’s work is chronologically the first we meet and it is also among the most detailed ones. It speaks widely about the Ossetians and especially about the Digors. 18 Unfortunately it has been neglected for a long time, in spite of its importance for the history of Ossetic studies. In the works of that period we cannot find yet any reference to the Alans, but we begin to meet information about the Irons and Digors. At that time when an author spoke about the Alans it was only to wonder what had
11
work related to the Ossetians have been published for the first time in Russian in: OGRIP 1967: 27-69. Digoria is the most western region of Northern Ossetia. It is a mountain region, quite poor and it distinguishes itself from the rest of Ossetia for religious beliefs too. The greater part of its inhabitants are Muslims. Islam penetrated this region from Kabarda. The language of the region, called Digoron, is one of the main dialects of Ossetic and it is well known for its very archaic and conservative features. Digors have probably to be identified with the Aš-Tigor that we can find asserted in an Armenian geography of VII century attributed to Ananias Širakac‘i.
Cf. the first book written in Ossetic using cyrillic alphabet: NU 1798. 12 Cyrillic uses two letters to express these phonemes: *=, >=, <=, G=, 4=, H= while in Georgian we find: 5, 6, $, 7, 8; for the first printed book with Georgian letters see: Molitvennik 1820. 13 For a table with the various writing systems adopted for the Ossetic language and his transliteration see: Christol 1989: 80. 14 Lamberti 1654 15 Witsen 1692. 16 OGRIP 1967: 22. 17 Chardin 1686. 18 Städer, Dnevnik, unpublished; the parts of this
199
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
happened to this population and where they are now. This is, for example, the case of Jan Potocki’s writings. Städer’s travel notes are written in German and they are conserved in the archives of the Asiatic Institute at St. Petersburg’s Academy of Sciences. This work has been only partially translated into Russian and published in Moscow. A detailed description of the Ossetic ritual which is celebrated when a man is struck by lightning is conserved as well as the exact words pronounced by the people who formed a circle around the victim. 19 Fate decided in a different way with I.A. Güldenstädt’s work which was written after seven years of wandering in the region of Astrachan and in Caucasus 20 and it became quite popular when it was edited by J. Klaproth. Güldenstädt also compiled a glossary of at least 320 Ossetic words. He was entrusted with the Ossetic section of the so-called Comparative dictionaries of all the languages and idioms, a four tomes edition published in St. Petersburg in 1786. 21 In 1796, in St. Petersburg a work written in German by J. Reineggs was published. It included among other things many Ossetic words and also a dictionary with Ossetic numerals. 22 Some years later this
work was followed by a monography by Pallas. 23 It is however sure that the most important and well-known work of this period is Klaproth’s Reise. 24 It is interesting to remember that in the Soviet Union Jan Potocki’s work has been completely neglected. 25 The linguistic material reported by Klaproth includes at least 200 words in a little Ossetic dictionary besides what can be considered a very elementary attempt of Ossetic grammar. 26 In 1822, in his Memoire, he hypothesized that Ossetians must be identified with the Alans of the Middle Ages. 27 The first attempt to draw up an Ossetic grammar, undertaken by Klaproth, is an insubstantial one (for dimensions too), the first Ossetic grammar was in fact published only 30 years later. Sjögren’s Ossetic grammar was published in 1844 in St. Petersburg. 28 During the period of time between Sjögren’s grammar and V.F. Miller’s Osetinskie 5tjudy a considerable number of studies was published. Beside the studies on Ossetic grammar many scholars began to collect the socalled Narts epos and in general a new field of studies related to Ossetic traditions (festivals, calendars, religion) was created. 29 Real studies about Ossetic appeared at
19 The words pronounced in this occasion are: “I JE5.! JE8?06 H3>>5A” [O Elai! el'dær (oppaj]. They have been difficult to be interpreted until now. This formula is also reported by Gatiev as: “3A 5E5A, 3A 5E?56C 43>>5A” [Oj alaj, oj aldary coppaj] and by 'ursin “3A 43>>5A, G;45; 43>>5A” [oj coppaj, xucaw coppaj], in these last two cases these words are pronounced in occasion of the cypp6rs’ holiday. See: Gatiev 1876, 'ursin 1925, but also Abaev 1958 and Alborov 1979. 20 Güldenstädt 1787-1791. This edition did not include part of the material collected during the travels. A new edition with a commentary was assembled by J. Klaproth at the beginning of the 19th century, while a Russian translation was published in St. Petersburg in 1809: Güldenstädt 1809. Some inedited parts were published for the first time in: OGRIP 1967: 70-88.
21
200
Pallas 1786-1789; SSVJa 1786-1789. Reineggs 1796. 23 Pallas 1799-1801. 24 Klaproth 1812-1814. 25 Potocki 1829. 26 Klaproth 1814; the material used for this Ossetic grammar was taken from the first Ossetic book printed in Moscow in 1798; it is, of course, a first attempt, and it has a very modest value, as it was already underlined by Sjögren 1844: IX 27 Klaproth 1822. 28 Sjögren 1844. 29 Studies about Ossetic language: Rosen 1846; Schleicher 1848; Müller 1861; Iosif 1862; Müller 1863; Iosif 1864; Müller 1864; Lerch 1864; OT 1868; Stackelberg 1886; Stackelberg 1888; Hübschmann 1879; Miller 1881; Miller 1882, Miller 1887; Hübschmann 1887; Hübschmann 18872; studies 22
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
the beginning of 19th century and they moved along three main directives: 1. Studies about Ossetic language (grammars and problems concerning the settlement of Ossetic grammar: phonemic system, noun, verb, syntax; identification of Ossetic as a North-Eastern Iranian language and its importance for the Iranic and Indo-European studies); 2. Relation between Alans and Ossetians (including the problem of the settlement of Alan tribes in Northern Caucasus and the way they followed to reach Caucasus) 30 ; 3. Epos of the Narts (transcription, analysis and comparison of the different traditions conserved in Ossetia and among the other ethnic groups of Caucasus).
The contribution of 19th century to the development of Ossetic studies cannot be in any case considered insignificant, though many of the works published in the first seventy years of the century are nowadays ignored or neglected. A good example of this is given by the case of V.F. Miller’s Ossetic Studies: the book has never been translated from Russian into any other western european language during the last 120 years. It is not difficult to understand that the roots of many of 20th century discoveries in the Ossetic studies go back to a recent past and that in many cases we are just facing a rediscovery or a reinterpretation of something that had already been found out.
about traditions, feasts, calendars, religion: Beridze 1850; Berzenov 1850; Berzenov 18502; Berzenov 18503; Berzenov 1852; Berzenov 18522; Berzenov 18523; 'o(išvili 1884; Gassiev 1868; Gassiev 18682; Gatiev 1872; Gatiev 1876; K 1885; Janovskij 1830; Kovalevskij 1886; Ku(erevskij 1848; Lavrov 1874; Lavrov 1875; Miller 18822; Perevalenko 1853; Pfaf 1871; Pfaf 18712; Pfaf 1872; Šanaev 1870, Šanaev 18702; Šanaev 1876; Saint Martin 1850; Sjögren 1843, Sjögren 1846; Tchostov 1868; Tolstov 1875; TV 1870; Žuskaev 1855; Žuskaev 18552.
30
For a long time the main discussion concerned the way followed by the Alans to reach the Northern Caucasus: did they come from south – that means that the Alans crossed the Caucasus – or from a northern way? In the third part of Ossetic Studies V.F. Miller, analysing Ossetic lexicon, showed that they came from north. The presence of numerous borrowings from the Ural-Altaic languages, that is an evidence of a quite long contact with these peoples, makes Miller’s hypothesis very probable: Miller 1887: 12-13.
B IBLIOGRAPHY A BAEV , V.I. = /KL501, M.N./ (1958) 7*&'.)-'-8&)0'9':);%*-)< *9',=.+ '*%&)/*-':' >?@-= [IstorikoOtimologi(eskij slovar' osetinskogo jazyka], t. I, Moskva-Leningrad. A LBOROV , B.A. = /KE13631, M.K./ (1979) “N+:;@2*30 :5E806?C . 320<.+2*30 5E56?C” [Ingušskoe gal'erdy i osetinskoe alardy]. Nekotorye Voprosy Osetinskoj Filologii, Stat'i i issledovanija ob osetinskom jazyke i fol'klore, Ordžonikidze: 52-141. A LEMANY , A. (2000) Sources on the Alans. A Critical Compilation, Leiden-Boston-Köln.
201
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
A NANIAS Š IRAKAC ‘ I = /9:;.0.<:=1,>/ [Ašxarhac‘oyc‘] = ,?@.;./ (1850) “P5@*.6:. ; 320<.+” [Waškirgi u osetin]. Kavkaz, N° 75. B ERZENOV , N.G. = /Q06-0+31, R.S./ (1850) “R31CA :3? ; 320<.+” [Novyj god u osetin]. Kavkaz, N° 2. (1850 2 ) “I20<.+2*.A 3L6,? 2.?0+., 706<10431” [Osetinskij obrjad sidenja mertvecov]. Kavkaz, N° 7. “IH06*. I20<..” [O(erki Osetii]. Kavkaz, N° 17. (1850 3 ) (1852) “T565*<06, +651C, 3LCH5., 60E.:.,, 215?8L5, >3G363+C, :32<0>6..72<13, *63137U0+.0 . >637C@E0++32<8 ; ?.:36401” [Charakter, nravy, oby(ai, religija, svad'ba, pochorony, gostepriimstvo, krovomš(enie i promyšlennost' u digorcev]. Zakavkazskij Vestnik, N° 39-40. (1852 2 ) “N- 132>37.+5+.A 3L I20<..” [Iz vospominanij ob Osetii]. Kavkaz, N° 5, 67. (1852 3 ) “N- -5>.23* 3L I20<..” [Iz zapisok ob Osetii]. Kavkaz, N° 65. C HARDIN , J. (1686) Journal du voyage du chevalier Chardin en Perse et aux Indes Orientales, par la Mer Noire et par la Colchide. I re partie, qui contient le voyage de Paris à Ispahan, Amsterdam C HRISTOL , A. (1989) Des Scythes aux Ossètes, Mont-Saint-Aignan. ' O'IŠVILI , G. = /F2F%GH%!%=1I>/ (1884) “V65-?+.*. 1 I20<..” [Prazdniki v Osetii]. Kavkaz, N° 3. ' URSIN , G.F. = /W;62.+, S.X./ (1925) “I20<.+C. Y<+3:65Z.H02*.A 3H06*” [Osetiny. [tnografi(eskij o(erk]. Trudy Zakavkazskoj NauAnoj Associacii, I, vyp.1, Tiflis. D IDEBULIDZE , Z.Š. = /J%J#CK!%E#=1L>G>/ (1981) “N- .2<36.. 260?+010*313A *;E8<;6C +563?31 \0106+3:3 ]51*5-5” [Iz istorii srednevekovoj kul'tury narodov Severnogo Kavkaza]. Gruzinoseverokavkazskie vzaimootnošenija [3 5 DMH#!23…….], Tbilisi: 105-120. G ASSIEV , A. = /S522.01, K./ (1868) “M06315+., 320<.+” [Verovanija osetin]. Terskie Vedomosti, N° 12. (1868 2 ) “I20<.+C. [email protected] *;E8< . >[email protected] 60E.:.3-+CA .+?.Z060+<.-7” [Osetiny. Drevnejšij kul't i pozdnejšij religioznyj indiferentizm]. Terskie Vedomosti, N° 1. G ATIEV , B. = /S5<.01, M./ (1872) “\;0106., . >60?65-2;?*. ; 320<.+” [Sueverija i predrazsudki u osetin]. Terskie Vedomosti, N° 1-6.
202
O GNIBENE
(1876)
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
“\;0106., . >60?65-2;?*. ; 320<.+” [Sueverija i predrazsudki u osetin]. Sbornik Svedenij o Kavkazskich Gorcach, Tiflis: 1-83.
G ÜLDENSTÄDT , I.A. (1787-91) Reisen durch Russland und im caucasischen Gebürge, auf Befehl der russisch-kayserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften herausgegeben von P.S. Pallas, Sankt Peterburg. (1809) B%':.=C);%*-'% ) *&=&)*&);%*-'% '()*=/)% B.1?)) ) D=,-=?=. 7? (1&%E%*&,)> ... =-=F%0)-= 7.G. BH9+F%/E&%F&=... , 1770, 1771, 1772 ) 1773 :: [GeografiAeskoe i statistiAeskoe opisanie Gruzii i Kavkaza. Iz putešestvija... akademika I. A. Gjul'denštedta...v 1770, 1771, 1772 i 1773 gg], Sankt Peterburg. HAMM (1962)
N.BO.O./1 .PQ:R;/S;T1 UA/PA-/S;:1 U.V:/1 [Haykakan a^biwrnerW mon^olneri masin], Moskva.
H ÜBSCHMANN , H. (1879) “Iranische Studien.” Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung, Band XXIV, N. F. Band IV: 396-413. (1887) Etymologie und Lautlehre der ossetischen Sprache, mit Nachträgen und Berichtigungen und einem Index, Strassburg. (1887 2 ) “Ossetische Nominalbildung.” ZDMG, t. XLI: 319-346. I OSIF = /N32.Z/ (1862) I*%&)/*-J< K1-,=.+ *L .1**-)0L (%.%,'F'0L. \32<51.E= 56G.75+?6.<= — [Osetinskij bukvar' s russkim perevodom. Sostavil archimandrit —], Tiflis. (1864) I*%&)/*-J< K1-,=.+ *L .1**-)0L (%.%,'F'0L. M<3630 23*65U0++30 .-?5+_0 [Osetinskij bukvar' s russkim perevodom. Vtoroe sokraš(ennoe izdanie], Tiflis. I SAEV , M.I. = /N2501, 9.N./ (1980) M=*' GK=%,. D 80-9%&)H *' F/> .'NF%/)> [Vaso Abaev. K 80-letiju so dnja roždenija], Ordžonikidze. J ANOVSKIJ , A. = /B+312*.A, K./ (1830) I20<.,. IL3-60+.0 6322.A2*.G 1E5?0+.A -5 ]51*5-37 Obozrenie rossijskich vladenij za Kavkazom], t. II, SPb.
[Osetija.
K = Kavkaz = /]51*5-/ (1885) “V65-?+.*. 1 I20<..” [Prazdniki v Osetii]. —, N° 2. K LAPROTH , J. (1812-14) Reise in den Kaukasus und nach Georgien unternommen in den Jahren 1807 und 1808, Halle-Berlin. (1814) Kaukasische Sprachen, Anhang zur Reise in den Kaukasus, Halle-Berlin (1822) “Memoire dans lequel on prouve l’identité des Ossètes, peuplade du Caucase, avec les Alains du moyen age.” Nouvelles Annales des Voyages, de la géographie et de l’histoire, XVI (première série): 243-256. K OVALEVSKIJ , M. = /]315E012*.A, 9./ (1886) \316070++CA 3LCH5A . ?601+.A -5*3+ [Sovremennyj oby(aj i drevnij zakon], Moskva. 203
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
K ULAKOVSKIJ , J U . = /];E5*312*.A, `./ (1899) G9=/@ (' *,%F%/)>0 -9=**);%*-)O ) ,)?=/&)<*-)O ()*=&%9%< (Alany po svedenijam klassi(eskich i vizantijskich pisatelej), Kiev. K U'EREVSKIJ , S. = /];H06012*.A, \./ (1848) “I20<.+2*.A >65-?+.* G36-G36” Zakavkazskij Vestnik, N° 17-18.
[Osetinskij
prazdnik
xor-xor].
L AMBERTI , A. (1654) Relatione della Colchide hoggi detta Mengrelia, nella quale si tratta dell’origine, costumi e cose naturali di quei paesi, del P. D. Archangelo Lamberti, Napoli L AVROV , L.I. = /a51631, a.N./ (1874) “b570<*. 3L I20<.. . 320<.+5G” [Zametki ob Osetii i osetinach]. Terskie Vedomosti, N° 20, 22, 30, 32-33, 35-36, 39, 43, 50. (1875) “b570<*. 3L I20<.. . 320<.+5G” [Zametki ob Osetii i osetinach]. Terskie Vedomosti, N° 2-3, 8-9. L ERCH (1864)
“Ueber das Plurasuffix im ossetischen.” Bullet. de l’Ac. d. Sc. de St.Petersb., t. VIII: 43-50.
M ILLER , V.F. = /9.EE06, M.X./ (1881) I*%&)/*-)% 8&HF@ [Osetinskie 5tjudy], (. I, Moskva. (1882) I*%&)/*-)% 8&HF@ [Osetinskie 5tjudy], (. II, Moskva. “W06
204
P=;=9+/'% 1;%/)% ;%9',%-'0, O'&>Q)0 1;)&)*> -/): R'N%*&,%//':' 2)*=/)> [Na(al'noe u(enie (elovekom, chotjaš(im u(itisja knig Božestvennogo Pisanija], Moskva.
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
O GNIBENE , P. (2001) “Gli Alani nelle cronache russe.” Slavia 3/2001: 27-38. OGRIP (1967)
OPN (1940)
OT (1868)
I*%&)/@ :9=?=0) .1**-)O ) )/'*&.=//@O (1&%E%*&,%//)-', (S111S1S ,,) [Osetiny glazami russkich i inostrannych putešestvennikov (XIIIXIX vv)], Ordžonikidze. I*%&)/@ ,' ,&'.'< ('9',)/% ST11 ,. (' /=K9HF%/)>0 (1&%E%*&,%//)-= U&%F%.= [Osetiny vo vtoroj polovine XVII v. po nabljudenijam putešestvennika Štedera], Ordžonikidze. I20<.+2*.0 <0*2.23* N7>. K*5?07.. R5;*, IV, Sankt Peterburg.
P ALLAS , P.S. = /V5EE52, V.\/ (1786-89) Linguarum totius orbis vocabularia comparativa Augustissimae [Catharinae] cura collecta. Sectionis primae linguas Europae et Asiae, complexae... Petropoli. (1799-1801) Bemerkungen auf einer Reise in die südlichen Statthaltersschaften des russischen Reichs in den Jahren 1793 und 1794, Leipzig. P EREGRINUS FROM C ASTELLO Epistula fr. Peregrini Episcopi Zaytunensis. Wyngaert (1929): 365-368. Ep. P EREVALENKO , V. = /V06015E0+*3, M./ (1853) “I20<.+2*.A >65-?+.* G36-G36” [Osetinskij prazdnik xor-xor]. Kavkaz, N° 39. P FAF , V.B. = /VZ5Z, M.Q./ (1871) “95<06.5EC ?E, ?601+0A .2<36.. 320<.+” [Materialy dlja drevnej istorii osetin]. Sbornik Svedenij o Kavkazskich Gorcach, V, otd. II, Tiflis. (1871 2 ) “V;<0@02<1.0 >3 ;U0E8,7 \0106+3A I20<..” [Putešestvie po uš(el'jam Severnoj Osetii]. Sbornik Svedenij o Kavkaze, I, Tiflis. (1872) “Y<+3E3:.H02*30 .22E0?315+.0 3L 320<.+5G” [[tnologi(eskoe issledovanie ob osetinach]. Sbornik Svedenij o Kavkaze, II, Tiflis. PON (1967)
2.')*O'NF%/)% '*%&)/*-':' /=.'F= [Proischoždenie osetinskogo naroda], Ordžonikidze.
P OTOCKI , J. (1829) Voyage dans les steps [sic] d’Astrakhan et du Caucase. Histoire primitive des peoples qui ont habité anciennement ces contrées. Nouveau périple du Pont-Euxin, par le Cte —. Ouvrages publiés et accompagnés de notes et de tables par M. Klaproth, Paris. PSRL (1856)
2'9/'% *'K.=/)% .1**-)O 9%&'()*%< [Polnoe sobranie russkich letopisej], t. VII, Sankt Peterburg. 205
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
R EINEGGS , J. = /D0A+0::2, g./ (1796) Allgemeine historisch-topographische Beschreibung des Kaukasus aus dessen nachgelassenen Papieren gesammelt und herausgegeben von Friedrich Enoch Schröder. Ier Theil. M*%'KQ%% )*&'.)-'-&'(':.=C);%*-'% '()*=/)% D=,-=?= [VseobšAee istoriko-topografiAeskoe opisanie Kavkaza], Sankt Peterburg. R OSEN , G. (1846)
“Ueber die Ossetische Sprache.” Philologische und historische Abhandlungen AW: 361-401.
S AINT M ARTIN , V. DE (1850) Études de géographie ancienne et d’ethnographie asiatique. Études ethnographiques et historiques sur les peoples nomads qui se sont succédé au nord du Caucase dans les six premier siècles de notre ere. Les Alains, Paris. Š ANAEV , D. = /f5+501, F./ (1870) “I20<.+2*.0 +563?+C0 2*5-5+.,” [Osetinskie narodnye skazanija]. Sbornik Svedenij o Kavkazskich Gorcach, III, otd. II, Tiflis: 1-40. (1870 2 ) “\15?8L5 ; 20106+CG 320<.+” [Svad'ba u severnych osetin]. Sbornik Svedenij o Kavkazskich Gorcach, IV, otd. III, Tiflis: 1-30. Š ANAEV , G. = /f5+501, S./ (1876) “N- 320<.+2*.G 2*5-5+.A 3 +56<5G” [Iz osetinskich skazanij o nartach]. Sbornik Svedenij o Kavkazskich Gorcach, IV, otd. III, Tiflis. S CHLEICHER , A. (1848) Zur vergleichenden Sprachgeschichte, Bonn. S JÖGREN , A.J. =/f0:60+, K.g./ (1843) “D0E.:.3-+C0 106315+., 320<.+, .+:;@0A . .G 23>E070++.*31 >6. 65-+CG 2E;H5,G” [Religioznye verovanija osetin, ingušej i ich soplemmenikov pri raznych slu(ajach]. Majak, t. VII, SPb. (1844) Iron ävzagaxur, das ist ossetische Sprachlehre, nebst kurzem ossetischdeutschen und deutsch-ossetischen Worterbüche, SPb; —, I*%&)/*-=> :.=00=&)-= * -.=&-)0 *9',=.%0 '*%&)/*-'-.'**)<*-)0 ) .'**)<*-''*%&)/*-)0 [Osetinskaja grammatika s kratkim slovarem osetinskorossijskim i rossijsko-osetinskim], SPb. (1846) “D0E.:.3-+C0 106315+., 320<.+, .+:;@0A . .G 23>E070++.*31 >6. 65-+CG 2E;H5,G” [Religioznye verovanija osetin, ingušej i ich soplemennikov pri raznych slu(ajach]. Kavkaz, N° 27-30. SSVJa (1787)
3.=,/)&%9+/@% *9',=.) ,*%O >?@-', ) /=.%;)<, *'K.=//@% F%*/)V%H ,*%,@*';=<E%< '*'K@ [Sravnitel'nye slovari vsech jazykov i nareAij, sobrannye desniceju vsevysoAajšej osoby], Sankt Peterburg. (Cf. Pallas)
S TACKELBERG , R. VON (1886) Beiträge zur Syntax des Ossetischen, Strassburg. (1888) “Ossetica.” ZDMG, t. XLII: 416-420.
206
O GNIBENE
O SSETIC S TUDIES IN 17 TH AND 18 TH C ENTURIES
S TÄDER = /f<0?06/ Dnevnik = W/%,/)- (1&%E%*&,)> )? (':.=/);/'< -.%('*&) X'?F'- ,' ,/1&.%//)% 0%*&/'*&) D=,-=?=, (.%F(.)/>&':' , 1781 :'F1 [Dnevnik putešestvija iz pograniAnoj kreposti Mozdok vo vnutrennie mestnosti Kavkaza, predprinjatogo v 1781 godu], Archiv Instituta Azii AN SSSR Leningrad. T CHOSTOV , I. = /hG32<31, N./ (1868) “M06315+., 320<.+” [Verovanija osetin]. Terskie Vedomosti, N° 12. T HOMSON , R.W. (1996) Rewriting Caucasian History. The Medieval Armenian Adaptation of the Georgian Chronicles. The Original Georgian Texts and the Armenian Adaptation. Translated with Introduction and Commentary by —, Oxford. T OLSTOV , V.S. = /h3E2<31, M.\./ (1875) “V30-?*5 1 I20<.i 1 1847 :.” [Poezdka v Osetiju v 1847 g.]. Russkij Archiv, Kn. 2, N° 58, Moskva. TV = Terskie Vedomosti = /h062*.0 M0?3732<./ (1870) “I20<.+C” [Osetiny], N° 49. V ANEEV , Z.N. = /M5+001, b.R./ (1959) 3.%F/%,%-',=> G9=/)> [Srednevekovaja Alanija], Stalinir. V AXUŠTI B AGRATIWNI (1842) Description géographique de la Géorgie par le Tsarevitch Wakhoucht: publiée d’après l’original de l’Académie, S.-Péterbourg. W ADDING , L. (1733) Annales Minorum seu trium ordinum a s. Francisco institutorum auctore A. R. P. Luca Waddingo Hiberno S. T. lectore jubilato & ordinis chronologo. Tomus septimus, editio secunda, locupletior, accuratior. Opera et studio r.mi p. Josephi Mariae Fonseca ab Ebora, S. T. lect. jub. s. & u. inquisit. consultoris, S. C. consistor vot. episcop. examinat. ord. min. in cismont. fam. tam oserv. quam refor. & discalc. comiss. gen. & c., Romae, typis Rochi Bernabò, superiorum permissu, cum privilegio Summi Ponteficis. W ITSEN , N. (1692) Noord en Oost Tartarye, ofte bondigh ontwerp van eenige dier landen, en volken, zo als voormaels bekent zyn geweest: beneffens verscheyde tot noch toe onbekende, en meest nooit voorheen beschreve Tartersche en naburige gewesten in de noorder en oosterlykste gedeelten van Asia en Europa, Amsterdam. W YNGAERT , A. van den (1929) Itinera et relationes fratrum minorum saeculi XIII et XIV, Apud Collegium S. Bonaventurae, Ad Claras Aquas (Quaracchi). Ž USKAEV , S. = /j;2*501, \./ (1855) “K<.+5:, >65-?+.* ; 320<.+ >060? +5H5<.07 20+3*325 . /5<1C” [Atynæg, prazdnik u osetin pered na(atiem senokosa i žatvy]. Zakavkazskij Vestnik, N° 32. 2 (1855 ) “V3G363+C ; 320<.+-5EE5?/.6401” [Pochorony u osetin-alladžircev]. Zakavkazskij Vestnik, N° 9. 207
P ANAINO
A NTONIO P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Ravenna
Trends and Problems concerning the Mutual Relations between Iranian Pre-Islamic and Jewish Cultures* Dedicated to the dear memory of Jes Peter Asmussen
Introduction
T
he number and importance of the events which have so frequently put in contact Iranians and Jews starting from the Achaemenid period onwards are so significant and seminal that they aroused a deep scholarly discussion, much of it debated and controversial. This is particularly the case with historico-religious studies, especially the evaluation of perceived mutual influences – real or not – between Mazdeism 1 and post-exilic Judaism. It would be impossible to collect in a single article a complete and analytical summary of all the data and in particular of all the secondary literature in order to offer a new and definitive solution of this problem.
The following notes and reflections, to the contrary, aim to present the reader with the most significant moments of the historical connection between two of the most important civilizations of the ancient world, along with the way in which these events are currently being studied. In the final part, I will try to sum up the most difficult and tantalizing problems connected with the question of the mutual “influences” in order to evaluate the “reasons” lying behind the debate and the plausibility of the different solutions, not without the hidden hope of proposing some new perspectives for future research.
* The present article is based on a revised, enlarged and updated version of two chapters (“L’ecumene iranica nella storia del popolo ebraico; La questione delle mutue influenze tra mondo iranico e giudaico,” pp. 62-83) contained in my “L’ecumene iranica e lo Zoroastrismo nel loro sviluppo storico,” published in Atti del Seminario invernale “Il popolo del ritorno: l’epoca persiana e la Bibbia.” Lucca, 25-27 gennaio 2000. Biblia, Associazione laica di cultura biblica, Firenze 2001b, pp. 13-100. 1 For the history of the Zoroastrian religion see Bau-
sani, 1959; Bianchi, 1958; Boyce, 1975; 1982; 1992; Boyce - Grenet, 1991; Christensen, 1928; 1941; Duchesne-Guillemin, 1953; 1962; 1972; Gnoli, 1991a; 1994a; 2000; Gray, 1929; Humbach, 1984; Jackson, 1899; 1928; Kellens, 1991; Lommel, 1930; Moulton, 1913; Nyberg, 1938; Panaino, 1990; 1992; 1994; 2001a; Pettazzoni, 1920; Widengren, 1968; Zaehner, 1955; 1956; 1961. For the Greek sources regarding Zoroaster and the Mazdean religion see Clemen, 1920a; 1920b; Fox - Pemberton, 1928.
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
209
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
A Short Historical Overview Although we cannot exclude episodic contacts with peoples linguistically and culturally Iranian 2 before the fall of Jerusalem (587) under Nabucodonosor II (604-562), it is during the “Babylonian captivity” (587-538) that – with the elimination of any form, actual or only formal, of political autonomy – Israel was incorporated into the Babylonian kingdom. In this way, new conditions for direct contact with Iranian culture were opened. In this period, the Persians were only in a subordinate position with respect to the Medes, from whom they had become free, thanks also to the alliance with Babylon, only in the years between 555 and 550 BC, when the last Median king, Astyages, was taken prisoner by Cyrus II. This change determined a new political phase in which the two remaining leading forces – Persians and Babylonians – very soon would enter into conflict. In 539, Cyrus was able to conquer the city of Babylon without any significant military operation. 3 Through these events, the condition of the Jewish people radically changed. Among the most important consequences of this new political state we cannot forget the return
to Israel of some Jews and the reconstruction of the Temple of Jerusalem (edict of Cyrus; cf. Ezra, I, 1-4; Chron. 36, 23). All these events, narrated in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, 4 are very famous but at the same time raise a great number of chronological and exegetical problems on which I will not enter here. 5 I would only like to recall that, although a caravan, led by Zorobabel and Jeshua, in year 537 went home, where it joined the rest of the primitive community, which had remained in Jerusalem, the definitive reconstruction of the temple (520-516) actually started only under the kingdom of Darius I (522-585). The reconstruction of the walls of the town, directed by Nehemiah, was realized between 445 and 443 while, under Artaxerxes II in 398, a second caravan of Jews led by Ezra came back to the Jewish homeland. As Dunand (1968) has shown, the socalled edict of tolerance issued by Cyrus should be understood in the Persian framework of a general political program aiming at enforcing the Egyptian border. 6 The reconstruction of the temple of Jerusalem and the city walls, as well as the
2
3
About the general history of Pre-Islamic Iran see Frye, 1984; Wiesehöfer, 1996; 1999. About the Achaemenid period see Briant, 1996; Dandamayev, 1992; Dandamayev - Lukonin, 1989; Gnoli, 1974; Olmstead, 1948; for the Achaemenid inscriptions see Kent, 1953; Brandenstein - Mayrhofer, 1964; see also Schmitt, 1991 and (for the Aramaic version of the Bisutun inscription) Greenfield - Porten, 1982. For the Elamite tablets found in Persepolis see Cameron, 1948; Hallock, 1969. A fresh evaluation of the Achaemenid sources has been offered by Lecoq, 1997. About the Parthian and Sasanian periods see Christensen, 1907; 1944; Frye, 1993; Gnoli, 1971; 1984; 1989; 1994b; Schippmann, 1980; 1990; Wolski, 1993. See also Galling, 1964.
210
On the political meaning of the text contained in the cylinder of Cyrus see Eilers, 1974, von Soden, 1983, and Harmatta, 1974. Cf. also Bickerman, 197696 and J. Lewy, 1945-46. 4 Pelaia, 1960; Aberbach, 1993: 105-127; Rudolph, 1949; Kellermann, 1967; Shaked, 1984: 313; Yamauchi, 1990: 253-266, 272-278. See also Ackroyd, 1970: 173-196, and Smith, 1968. 5 The authenticity of Cyrus’ edict had been questioned by some scholars, but strongly defended by Bickerman (1976-86); see also the supportive discussion by Netzer (1974) and the complex evaluation of the problem by Ackroyd (1990). Cf. also Wiesehöfer, 1999: 26, Stoyanov, 2000: 325-326, n. 134. 6 See also Posener, 1936.
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
presence (confirmed by various archaeological data) of significant works of foundation and restoration of a chain of military fortifications along the path connecting the Gulf of Issos to Palestine confirm the coincidence of political interests between the Achaemenid leadership and the strategic role of the Jewish community. Also significant is the strong military collaboration offered to the Persian army by the Jews in Egypt; for instance, the Jewish garrison on the island of Elephantina (near the town of Aswan, slightly north of the first cataract of the Nile). We know that this colony was strongly linked to the temple of the God Yahu, although it turns out to have been involved in various apparently heterodox and peculiar rituals and doctrines, concerning for instance the worship of a divine triad. 7 This can perhaps be explained by the relatively high antiquity of this Jewish community, residing in Egypt long before Cambyses’s conquest. In any case this community remained on the side of the Persians even in the most difficult moments, and this fact underlines the strong complementarity of political interests between the two peoples. 8 I believe that it would be important to recall that many Jews remained in the western lands of the Persian empire and, most of them, in Babylonia, where they represented a very seminal community, the impact of which would remain remarkable also in later periods, 9 in particular after the final destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem.
The Parthian (or Arsacid) period, 10 from the second half of the third century B.C. to the first half of the third century A.D., was no doubt very positive for the Jewish community living in Babylon and in the limits of the Iranian world. The Parthians, in fact, following the habit of the Seleucids did not exert special pressure of religious significance on the Jews, although we have to remark that our sources remain scanty until the second century B.C. Also very important for its consequences on the history of Judaism and of early Christianity was the short conquest of Palestine by the Parthians from 41 to 39 B.C. Of this brief domination, at least in comparison with the following Roman domination, there remained a favourable memory that is visible, e.g., in the idea that the return of the Parthian cavalry would announce the arrival of Messiah. 11 Thus we cannot exclude that the Evangelic reference in Matthew (2, 1-12) to some Magi coming from the Orient was evoking, of course in “informed” minds, a positive and sympathetic attitude towards the Iranian wisdom and the Parthians, who at that time were the leading dynasty in Iran. 12 Although of lesser importance we may remark that in the same period some members of the royal dynasty governing a buffer-state of Adiabene, located between the Roman and the Parthian borders (but in reality a vassal of the Arsacids), were converted to Judaism. Notable among these nobles was Queen Helen and her son Izates. 13
7
11
See Römer, 2002: 20. Olmstead, 1948: 364-366; 465-467 (It.tr. 1982: 304-306); Bresciani, 1985: 510-512, 517-518; see also Bresciani, 1958; 1995. Cf. also Verger, 1965, passim and Cowley, 1923. 9 The Iranian influence on the Jewish legal traditions has been discussed by Frye, 1967. 10 See now Wolski, 1993; cf. Schippmann, 1980. 8
See Neusner, 1983: 911; cf. Widengren, 1957: 199-200; Shaked, 1984. 12 On the Magi in Matthaeus see now Panaino, 1999 (with additional bibliography). 13 Cf. Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, XX, 35 (and passim); see Widengren, 1957: 200-201; Millar, 1994: 493.
211
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
If on the one hand, the Arsacid power became strategically relevant from the point of view of the Jews in a clearly anti-Roman perspective, 14 on the other hand, from the Parthian perspective the Jewish community assumed a continuously growing political importance both inside and outside the Arsacid domains. Without entering into details on all aspects of the role played by the Jews in the intricate framework of the inner feudal struggles that distinguished the Parthian period (we can just mention the brief revolts of Anileus and his brother Asineus between 20 and 35 A.D. in the area of Nehardea), 15 the presence of Palestinian bands and groups hostile to the Romans occurs many times in the sources. From 70 A.D. ca, under the kingdom of Vologeses I, the Parthians introduced the institutional position of the exilarch (r š g!l"t!). In this way, the Jews obtained an independent authority endowed with political, administrative and juridical powers, but, at the same time, the Parthians were able to guarantee the loyalty of the Jewish community, thus controlling any extremist trends or possible insurrections. Such a function – particularly after the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem and the introduction of a patriarcatus under Roman control – assumed a moral and political authority also over the Palestinian Jews, who in a few cases sought the opinion or the intervention of the r š g!l"t! (also in matters of religious and calendrical order). Thus the Mesopotamian area became a significant cultural centre of Judaism, particularly after the unsuccessful Palestinian revolt of 135, led by
Bar Kokhba. 16 It is worth noting that, during the Sasanian period, this community remained substantially faithful to the official power. Apart from several persecutions and some general changes in Persian politics (see below), it lived in relatively good circumstances, which evidently made possible the production by the Jewish sages of the code of the Mišnah and, around the end of the sixth and the beginning of the seventh century, the final edition of the Babylonian Talmud. 17 The power of the r š g!l"t! grew during the second century, when many Jews entered the restricted class of the Parthian nobility. The decisions taken by the r š g!l"t! were imposed inside the community through independent military forces and it was also possible for him to inflict the death penalty. We will also point out that a number of “Parthian” officers were actually Jews, a fact which aroused new forms of collaboration and synecism; it is not rare to find Parthian administrators of Jewish religion but with Iranian names. The same phenomenon is also known for Seleucid times, when it is possible to find out Greek names in the onomastics of the Jewish community). Although paradoxical, in politicoreligious matters, the Parthians actually were closer to the pragmatic behaviour of the Achaemenid period than to the later religious zeal of the Sasanian kings. With the ascent to power of Ardaxš r I (224239/49; dead in 240/41) and the complete defeat of the last Parthian king Ardaw!n IV (213-224), a radical change in the history of the Near East and of Central
14 See Hinnells, 1976; Shaked, 1984; Boyce-Grenet, 1991: 447; cf. Neusner, 1986: 3-7; Böklen, 1902: 91-115. 15 Cf. Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, XVIII, 310-389;
see Widengren, 1957: 203-204. 16 See Wiesehöfer, 1999: 101. 17 See Wiesehöfer, 1999: 117.
212
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Asia took place. The rise of the Sasanian dynasty represented for Iranian lands the definitive entrance into Late Antiquity. Led by a political programme aimed at the exaltation of their “Aryanity” and its oldest ethno-religious values, the Sasanians imposed a more centralized form of power than that of the Parthians and they exerted stronger controls on religious minorities. The Sasanian period would also be characterized by the progressive construction of a Mazdean Church with its organization and hierarchy, which would try to impose ortodox faith and a religious canon (i.e. the Avesta). 18 The power of the clergy became extremely strong by time, so that it became very significant in political affairs such as the choice of the king. These privileges, of course, cannot be ascribed without distinction to all the periods of the Sasanian kingdom. On the contrary, under the first kings, particularly under Š!buhr I (239/40-270/72), although the authority of the Mazdean clergy was never under discussion, the prerogatives of the Š!h!n Š!h did not suffer limitations. Š!buhr did not refuse to offer his favour and protection to the prophet Mani and he maintained respect for the other religious minorities. In the very case of the tolerance offered to the Manichaeans, whose preaching was directed at Christians and Jews, we see not only the result of the political autonomy of royal power from the religious authorities (as supposed by M.-L. Chaumont, 1988), 19 but also of a kind of universalistic attitude. In fact, according to the historic
paradigm suggested by Gnoli (1984), the Manichaean religion, that in Iran pretended to be a direct descendant of Zoroaster’s revelation, offered many political advantages, thanks to its camaleontic versatility, to a king who hoped to realize a programme of universal and multicultural domain. On the contrary it would have been very difficult to impose the Mazdean religion on the West as well as Central Asia. It was closely linked to Iranian national identity, whereas Manichaeism offered a fresh opportunity to enter and seduce different religious cultures thanks to its mimetic and interchangeable Gnostic language. The crisis which eventually exploded between universalism and nationalism in Iran found its conclusion with the victory of the Mazdean Church, as paradigmatically shown by the death penalty inflicted on Mani (274 or 277) during the reign of Wahr!m I (273-276/77). 20 This sentence had been urgently sought by the landed aristocracy, in close alliance with the clergy, because the Manichaen religion was so boldily hostile to the agricultural works that it damaged in the landowners’ economic interests. 21 In the case of the Jewish community, the change of dynasty and the rise of the Sasanians were doubtless experienced with suffering. 22 The functions of the exiliarch were not abolished, but his prerogatives and autonomy were severely reduced and limited. Ardaš r had no special reasons compelling him to maintain a different treatment of the Jews. In fact, during Sasanian rule the remarkable
18
21
About the Avestan literature see Geldner, 1904 (see also his edition of the Avesta, 1889-1896); Kellens, 1989; Panaino, 1998. See also Wolff, 1910. About the composition of the Avestan Canon see Hoffmann - Narten, 1989. 19 See also the older work of Labourt, 1904. 20 See Sundermann, 1987: 50-53, 76-77.
On this problem see my contribution (Commerce and Conflicts of Religions in Sasanian Iran between Religious Identity and Political Ideology) in the press for the Fifth Melammu Symposion (Innsbruck 2002). 22 See Widengren, 1961; Neusner, 1983; 1986; Brody, 1990.
213
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
political and diplomatic roles played by the Jews under the Parthians declined enormously. In addition to some persecutions and violence against the synagogues and special restrictions in religious matters – e.g., limitations on the use of fire during Hebrew rituals and interdiction against ritual baths and inhumations of corpses instead of the standard Mazdean exposition of dead bodies –, already under Š!buhr I a new agreement was established with the leader of the Jewish community, Samuel, who was forced to accept Persian law and the imposition of taxes. In addition, Samuel gave his loyalty to the king after the death of about 12.000 Jews, fallen during the siege of the town of CesareaMazaca (260-261), in order to obtain better conditions from the Persian leadership. 23 It is impossible to follow in all their detail the events concerning the Hebrew community during the entire Sasanian history. In the case of the third century, it is sufficient to recall that the declarations of the great priest Kird r about the persecutions of Christians, Manichaeans and Jews, do not result, in the precise case of the Jewish community, directly and undoubtedly confirmed from other sources. 24 Although the kingdom of Yazdgird I (399-420) is considered from the sources as still favourable to the Jewish minority – Yazdgird actually married Š"š!n-d"xt or G!sy!n-d"xt, daughter of the exiliarch, perhaps Kahana I (400-415) 25 – it was under Yazdgird II (439-457) and P#r"z (459-484) that we see a notable reverse in Sasanian religious politics. According to Rabbinic tradition, Yazdgird II delivered an anti-
Judaic decree which imposed the abrogation of the šabbat, closed the Hebrew school, and finally put to death or exiled several rabbis. In 486 in the town of Esfah!n, where the Armenian Jews had been deported under Š!buhr II (309379), 26 a most violent putsch against their community took place, probably after an assault on two Zoroastrian priests. The reason behind this change in Sasanian politics towards the Jews seems to be linked to turmoil in the Jewish community because of enthusiastic expectation of the Messiah, who, according to some prophecies, was to appear 400 years after the fall of the Temple of Jerusalem of 68 A.D. (according to the “wrong” dating of some rabbis), i.e. projected immanently for 468 A.D. Yet Sasanian politics with respect to the Jews shifted yet again. In 570 A.D., under Xusraw An"šag-ruw!n (Xusraw I, 531-579), Yemen was added to the Sasanian satellites. Although this act served a wider political aim of a contrast against the Ethiopians, who were allied with the Byzantines in the contemporary geopolitical chessboard, it was actually decided in order to support the powerful Jewish community of Yemen. 27 After a harsh period of difficulties, when nevertheless tolerance and reasonably good relations were generally maintained, a new prophecy, made by a Babylonian Jew, in 640, announced the coming of the Messiah, provoking a rebellion and the immediate reaction of Persian authorities. By this time, however, the general political situation of the Sasanian empire was compromised and the arrival of the Arab invaders soon after would be welcomed by Jews and Christians.
23
26
Widengren, 1961: 133-134. Widengren, 1961: 130-131; Gignoux, 1991: 69-70. 25 See Darmesteter, 1893b; 1889: 41-53; Widengren, 1961: 139-141. 24
214
Widengren, 1961: 134-138. Cf. also Russell, 1987a. 27 Bosworth, 1983: 604-609.
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
The Question of the Mutual Influences between Pre-Islamic and Jewish Religious Cultures It should be clear that the problem we are now entering is certainly tantalizing. Its discussion is made more complicated and challenging by the high number, complexity and ambiguity of the pertinent sources (from the Avesta, and the Pahlavi books to the Biblical and Talmudic literature, etc.), which cover an enormous span of time and involve a tremendous mass of historical and archaeological data from the Near East and ancient and mediaeval Iran. In addition, we must consider that any discussion regarding the possible impact of an Iranian religion (or of different religious trends of Iranian origin) on the Jewish and, in part, on the Christian religions, raises additional difficulties and suspects to do with theological, confessional and political issues. Last but not least, we cannot avoid taking into account the tragic fact that, during the nineteenth and early twenties centuries, the study of the Iranian world and its prehistory, in particular that of the arya-s, was, in the case of some famous scholars (as for the Iranologist and Semitist Paul De Lagarde, a very good scholar, yet also the inspirer of H. St. Chamberlain), 28 directly involved in the establishment of racist ideas, 29 which
later generated the criminal myth of Arianity and the superiority of the IndoEuropaean ethnos, with the disastrous consequences we all know. Thus any treatment of the problem has to clear up in advance some old prejudices. We come back now to the early period 30 of Avestan studies, when, particularly in the Illuministic milieu, it was thought that Zoroaster’s message might represent a special revelation of ethical, moral, and philosophical significance to be contrasted with the Judaeo-Christian traditions and scriptures or even that it might contain their actual origin. 31 The first versions of the Avestan and Pahlavi texts produced such a disappointment that they generated a number of polemics as well as the accusation of falsification against the first translator of the Avesta, the poor and absolutely innocent Anquetil Duperron. He was accused of having falsified the very texts of the Iranian prophet. 32 On the opposite side, we can see trends such as that started and well represented by the Abbé Paul Foucher, 33 who tried to make Zoroaster a disciple of the Biblical prophets. By the way, such a trend, which was present also in Voltaire, 34 was revived on different bases
28
32 See also Sarton, 1938; cf. also the still now interesting biography of Anquetil Duperron written by Schwab (1934). See also Stausberg, 1998, II: 790837. 33 His most important work was the Traité historique de la Religion des Perses, in 14 parts, published in the “Mémoires de l’Académie des inscriptions,” vols. from 25 (1759) till the 39 (1777). See also Pettazzoni, 1920: 79, 124, n. 46. 34 Voltaire, 1828: 481.
See Lukács, 19593: 706-709, 715-716. An interesting discussion about De Lagarde’s impact on the cultural background of the Third Reich has been written by Mosse, 1964, with a detailed bibliography. 29 See also Wiesehöfer, 1988. 30 For the various speculations connecting Iran and Israel before the first translations of the Avestan sources we refer to Stausberg, 1998, I-II, passim. 31 See the synthesis offered by Duchesne-Guillemin, 1958: 11-17. See also Stausberg, 1998, I and II.
215
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
by two famous Iranologists: Friedrich Spiegel 35 and Raffaele Pettazzoni.36 Spiegel emphasized the presence of a direct impact of Abraham on Zoroaster, which occurred in Harran, on the way from Ur to Palestine, then part of an area associated with the Avestan airyana- va jah- “the Arian space,” the homeland of the Aryans and of Zoroaster. 37 Pettazzoni assumed a two-way influence: the Messianic ideas were transferred from the Jews to the Iranians while dualism followed the opposite path. We have to take into consideration that, according to these scholars, Zara$uštra was of western Iranian origin. Thus he grew up and lived in a Median framework around the seventh century B.C., in a region and in an epoch when direct contact was possible with Pre-exilic Judaism and Jews of the Babylonian captivity. Another famous Iranologist, James Darmesteter, in the third volume of his monumental translation of the Avesta, 38 advanced the risky thesis that the G!#!s would have been elaborated in an already “dead” sacred language, between the first century B.C. and the first century A.D. under the direct influence of Neoplatonic ideas and, in particular, of Philon’s thought. Then, the core of Zoroastrian literature would be only the reflex of a Hellenizing Judaism, with the Logos separated from the divinity and inserted between God and the world. Consequently, the duality 39 m n$g / g t%g of the Iranian speculations
would correspond to that between the world of the ideas and its reflection in the mundane. In particular Darmesteter supposed (1893a: LVI) that Vohu Manah was the Iranian “translation” of the Logos of Philon, and that the other !"#a 40 Sp"$tas directly represented some special “forces” (%&'() or *+,-µ.)/) corresponding to divine abstractions. In addition, Darmesteter suggested (1893a: LVIILXII) the presence of a strong Jewish influence, although in a form to be considered depending on the Neoplatonic tradition, on the structure and external form of the Zoroastrian religion: both the Pentateuch and the Avesta involve a series of dialogues between a human legislator and his god (“Yahweh saith to Moses” / “Saith Ahura Mazd! to the Spit!ma Zara$uštra”); Yahweh creates the world in six days, while Ahura Mazd! in six successive periods 41 ; in both traditions, humanity descended from a primordial couple, in which the very name of the male partner means “man” (Hebr. adam, and Av. ma ya-) 42 ; in both religions the first sin is committed by these two primordial beings. The Semitic idea of the universal flood corresponds with the Avestan account of Yima’s descent in the vara (a sort of refuge) with a third of humanity 43 ; and the earth is divided among the three sons of Noah in the Bible and of 0ra#taona in the Avesta. This kind of comparative analysis, however, did not answer some heavy objections, in par-
35
39
36
40
Spiegel, 1871, I: 446-485. Pettazzoni, 1920: 76-84. 37 The actual identification of such a mythical land has been much debated; Benveniste associated it with the Sogdiana, while Henning (1951) and MacKenzie (1988) have suggested the Choresmia as the original homeland of the Avestan people; Gnoli (1967) originally proposed the identification with the S st!n, but now he prefers a wider area in any case located in Eastern Iran between the S st!n and the Sogdiana; cf. Gnoli, 1989; 1991; 1994: 473-474. 38 Darmesteter, 1893a: XLIX-C. 216
Gnoli, 1963; Shaked, 1971. About the so called Mazdean “Entities” see Geiger, 1916; Narten, 1982; 1984; 1985; Kellens, 1991. Cfr. also Dumézil, 1945. 41 Just the opposite opinion was suggested by Tiele, 1903: 245. 42 About this comparison see already Spiegel, 1871, I: 473-474. 43 See again Spiegel, 1987, I: 478-479, but cf. Kohut, 1871, who to the contrary tries to show the impact of Zoroastrian culture on the traditions regarding Adam in the Talmudic and Midrashic literature.
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
ticular that of linguistic evidence. According to data emerging from IndoEuropean and Indo-Iranian linguistics studies, the G!$ic language is clearly more archaic 44 and the composition of the G!$!s in a very late period does not seem likely. The apparent similarities between the texts do not necessarily indicate a direct connection between Jews and Iranians, but could instead be the product of ideas already widespread among other Mesopotamian peoples. 45 On these premises, it is easy to imagine how, with the continuous evolution of the Avestan studies and with a better knowledge of the languages of PreIslamic Iran, the problem of the intellectual and historical relations between Iranians and Jews (starting from their liberation from Babylon thanks to Cyrus the Great’s edict) has progressively assumed a more complex scientific dignity and a theoretical and historiographic importance. The most important points in the debate, however, did not change in the following years. A trend of studies, which gradually became more nuancé, tried to suggest a deep impact of the Iranian religious tradition, particularly of Mazdean dualism, on a number of doctrines attested to in post-exilic Judaism and, through this mediation, in the Christian tradition. These influences would have been visible
in the angelology, demonology and progressive development of the personality of Satan. For instance, the name of the demon Asmodaeus seems to be derived from an Avestan syntagmatic sequence like *a šm$ da uu$ “the demon A#šma.” 46 I would like to underline the fact that the progressive monotheistic trend attested in the religion of Israel involved the refusal of all the other divinities who were considered as chimeras 47 ; it could be paralleled with the same phenomenon attested in the G!$ic literature, where, according to Gershevitch, 48 the Old Iranian da vas became only “Hirngespinste.” The role and image of the individual protective angel have been connected with that of the Avestan Frava%is. 49 Other examples are: the eschatology and the doctrine of the final retribution of merits and sins; the theme of the resurrection of the dead; the importance attributed to ritual purity and to precautions against external contaminations and pollutions 50 ; and, although it is still a matter of debate, the background of the so-called “ascent of Isaiah.” 51 We should also mention the doctrine of the wait for the final Saviour, which has been, for textual reasons to do with the Evangelic Magi, connected to the Iranian conception of the Saošya$t(s).52 The reader will find the first arguments supporting the presence of these influences in the works, 53 not all of them
44
1969; 1979; 1984. Kellens, 1996; Panaino, 1997. On the hymn to the Frava#is see Malandra, 1971. 50 See Williams, 1994. 51 See in particular Smith, 1963; Shaked (1984: 314) suggests that the terminology attested in Isaiah 45, could be connected with an Iranian background; cf. also Gnoli, 1983 and Russell, 1994. 52 Literally “who will make prosperous (the existence),” future participle of the verb s" “to prosper” (intransitive), but assuming also the eschatologic role of future and final “saviour” (see now the fresh discussion by Hintze, 1995). Cf. also Messina, 1930 and in particular 1933. 53 See also Duchesne-Guillemin, 1958:86-102.
The most important modern translation of the G!#!s have been edited by Humbach, 1959; 1991. Kellens - Pirart, 1988, 1990, 1991; Insler, 1975. 45 Such a farfetched thesis of Darmesteter was later followed only by M.-J. Lagrange (1904). 46 Bartholomae, 1904: 35-36. See also Pines, 1982. 47 See in particular Römer, 2002: 19-20. 48 I. Gershevitch, “Die Sonne das Beste,” in Mithraic Studies, ed. by J.R. Hinnells, Manchester 1975, pp. 68-89, in particular p. 79. 49 A kind of feminine protective spirit, created before the corporeal life, but active (although weaker) after life, who accompanies each human being during his life. See Söderblom, 1901; Pavry, 1929; Gignoux,
217
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
of equal value and rigour, of scholars such as Alexander Kohut [Ueber die jüdische Angelologie und Daemonologie in ihrer Abhängigkeit von Parsismus, Leipzig 1866 (an article which received favour among the Parsis and was translated into English by K.R. Cama with the title: The Jewish Angelology and Demonology based upon Parsism, Bombay 188083 (in four parts); reprinted in K.R. Cama, 1970, II: 161-276); Was hat die talmudische Eschatologie aus den Parsismus aufgenommen? in “ZDMG,” 21, 1867, pp. 552-591; and Die talmudische-midraschische Adamssage in ihrer Rückbeziehung auf die persische Yima- und Meshiasage, kritisch beleuchtet, in “ZDMG,” 25, 1871, pp. 59-94], C.P. Tiele (Die Kosmogonie des Avesta und Genesis I. in “Archiv für Religionswissenschaft,” 6, 1903, pp. 244-246), Ernst Böklen (Die Verwandtschaft der jüdisch-christlichen mit der Parsischen Eschatologie, Göttingen 1902), Th.K. Cheyne (Possible Zoroastrian Influences on the Religion of Israel, in “Expository Times,” 2/9, 1891, pp. 202-208; 2/10, pp. 224-228; 2/11, pp. 248-253; and The Book of Psalms; its Origins and its Relation to Zoroastrianism, in Semitic Studies in Memory of A. Kohut, Berlin 1897, pp. 111-119), Erik Stave (Über den Einfluss des Parsismus auf Judentum, ein Versuch. Haarlem 1898), Lawrence Mills (Zara#uštra, Philo, the Achemenids and Israel, Leipzig 1906 and Our own Religion in ancient Persia, Leipzig 1913), Jivanji Jamshedji Modi (Angelology. A few traits common to Zoroastrianism, Hebrewism and Christianity, in “Dante Papers,” 7, 1914, pp. 150-159), Charles Autran (Mithra, Zoroastre et la préhistoire aryenne du Christianisme,
Paris 1935, pp. 161-269). We ought to mention the strong presence in this debate of the so-called Religionsgeschichtliche Schule, which plants in Iranian doctrines one of the most important elements of the Gnostic thought in Late Antiquity. Thus it is not peculiar to find among the followers of the thesis of the “Iranian influence” on Judaism scholars like Wilhelm Bousset (Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter, Tübingen 1926), 54 Rudolpf Otto (Reich Gottes und Menschensohn, Tübingen 1940 2 ), and in a later period also Geo Widengren (Quelques rapports entre Juifs et Iraniens à l’époque des Parthes, in “Vetus Testamentum.” Suppl. IV, 1957, pp. 197-241; Iranisch-semitische Kulturbegegnung in parthischer Zeit. Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Forschung der Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Heft 70. Köln und Opladen 1960; and The Status of the Jews in the Sassanian Empire, in “Iranica Antiqua,” I, 1961, pp. 117-162). Supportive of an Iranian influence, but with moderation and prudence, was also the approach of Alfred Bertholet (Das religionsgeschichtliche Problem des Spätjudentums, Tübingen 1909; and Zur Frage des Verhältnisses von persischen und jüdischen Auferstehungsglauben, in Festschrift Andreas, Leipzig 1916, pp. 51-62). On the opposite side, we find a good number of “negative” answers to the question of the Iranian influence, although, with many individual nuances and proportions, and expressed not only by specialists of Hebrew and Semitic languages but also by Iranologists. Among them we can mention the reverend James Hope Moulton (Early Zoroastrianism, London 1913), the bishop Nathan
54 Bousset in this work in particular tries to discuss the demonology (1926: 336-340) and the eschatology (together with the apocalyptics; 1926: 506-516).
About the Saošya$t see already Kohut, 1867: 570577 and in particular Böklen, 1902: 91-115. Cf. now Hintze, 1995.
218
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Söderblom (La Vie future d’après le mazdéisme à la lumière des croyances parallèles dans les autres religions: étude d’eschatologie comparée, Paris 1901, but see also his article-review of the works of J. Weiss (1900), E. Böklen (1902) and W. Bousset 55 entitled Notes sur les relations du Judaisme avec le Parsisme à propos de travaux récents, in “RHR,” 48, 1903, pp. 372-378) and J. Scheftelowitz (Die altpersische Religion und das Judentum, Gießen 1920). We touched above on James Darmesteter and his doctrine about the dependence of the Zoroastrian G!#!s on the philosophy of Philon the Jew, but we should add that Darmesteter’s extreme theory found support in M.-J. Lagrange (La religion des Perses, la réforme de Zoroastre et le Judaisme, in “Revue biblique,” 87, 1904, pp. 27-55; 188-212). Another sceptic was M. Gaster (Parsiism and Judaism, in Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. IX, Edinburgh 1917, pp. 637-640). A deeply elaborated negative evaluation has been expressed in an important volume by a famous scholar and Catholic cardinal of Vienna, Franz König (Zarathustras Jenseitsvorstellungen und das Alte Testament, Wien - Freiburg - Basel 1964, pp. 267-285), who has raised a number of objections about the identification of elements of the Achaemenid religion which are supposed to have had an impact on the Jewish tradition. As I declared at the beginning, the aim of the present work can neither be an analytical discussion of all the mentioned works 56 nor a new critical evaluation of the sources, which would be beyond my
strenght and competence. Instead, it seems to me that the general problem might be – and should be – placed on a different ground from which, perhaps, new approaches could be assessed. In the preceding pages I hope to have made clear that politically significant inter-dependance exists between the histories of the Iranian and Jewish worlds (and, in turn, the Judaeo-Christian world). Such a link is not limited to episodic and rare moments, incidentally connected with the fall of Babylon in the hands of Cyrus; at the same time we cannot deny that the new political architecture built up by the Achaemenids, whose king, the same Cyrus, was called in the Bible the “Lord’s Anointed” (Deutero-Isaiah, 41, 3), 57 did not raise any special interest among intellectuals and religious men in the Hebrew community. On the contrary it is clear that the concept of Yahweh as an universalistic God, who is the same of the Persians, appears in this period; he is the God who promises a future of peace around the reconstructed Temple, as Römer has rightly remarked. 58 The subsequent episodes connected with the reconstruction of the Temple of Jerusalem, during the Achaemenid period, as well as the complex dialectic which emerged during the Parthian period with the institution of the exiliarch, and the strong anti-Roman politics of the Arsacids and their successors, the Sasanians, cannot have been insignificant for the Jewish world and culture. On these subjects there is no doubt; these relations are confirmed by the later identification, developed in a Jewish framework, of the wise Baruch with Zoroaster, 59 and by the
55
57
Söderblom’s review was dedicated to the first edition (1903) of the work of Bousset Die Religion des Judentums, here quoted according to the third and definitive edition by H. Gressmann. 56 Unfortunately I was not able to see G.W. Carter, Zoroastrianism and Judaism, Boston 1918. An useful bibliography has been published by Gnoli 1998: 112-113.
See, e.g., Briant 1996, pp. 56-58. Römer, 2002: 67, 74. 59 Apud Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, I, 15, 71; Bousset, 1907: 379; Reitzenstein, 1921: 101-102, 264; Bidez-Cumont, 1938, I: 49-50; II: 129-13; 132-133; Widengren, 1957: 219-220. 58
219
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
increasing presence of many Iranian loanwords in the Hebrew and Aramaic languages 60 spoken by the community of the Second Temple as well as the introduction of many linguistic calques based on Iranian models. 61 More difficult and uncertain is the actual demonstration, in particular from the philological point of view, of a direct influence on the theological and religious framework. In this regard I doubt that we could – as for instance it was done by Kohut 62 – demonstrate a direct and close correspondence between the Avestan entities (i.e. the !&#a Sp&$tas) 63 and the most important angels of the Biblical tradition. In my opinion this idea is not only too bold and inconclusive but also very ingenuous and superficial. In a religious context, a possible influence cannot be explained in terms of agglutination of entire conceptual blocks. Such a phenomenon happens very rarely and, in these cases, imitations are evident also in their direct denomination. More often, in the framework of a long and continuous contact between different civilizations and cultures we can see a process of knowledge, assimilation and adaptation of foreign patterns. Sometimes, when these extraneous ideas are not openly criticized or resisted with hostility as extraneous “viruses,” they can produce speculations and stimulate the elaboration of new categories. Take, for in-
stance, the question about the origin of the figure of Satan, who sometimes becomes an hypostatization of the evil 64 : whether he is the punctual mirror image of A1ra Mainyu or simply the product of a completely independent process of development. To date, the theory has been advanced, discussed and analyzed in inadequate or simplistic terms. It seems to me that a more solid approach would be reflecting on the fact that the image and role of the rebel angel underwent an evolution in the inner context of Jewish religious literature, progressively assuming a more evident and in various aspects more personalized dimension. Bearing this in mind, we should examine the possibility that this development was in great part the fruit of an autonomous reflection within Judaism, which came to draw on contemporary parallel Iranian concepts maturing independently, yet recognisable 65 and perhaps appreciated 66 and absorbed as elaborations. 67 In other words, rather than deciding between interreligious impact or isolated development within a religious structure, we should consider a kind of evolution of ideas within a particular community’s consciousness which also takes up, or at least is stimulated by, compatible elements from other communities which are both physically and in consciousness in close proximity. Through this approach I am not trying to take a comfortable and
60 About the importance of the Aramaic language in the Achaemenid period see Hallock, 1985; cf. also Bowman, 1970. With regard to the so called “Nebenüberlieferungen” in general see Hinz, 1973; 1975. 61 Shaked, 1984: 308-313. 62 1866: 17-48 (Engl. tr: by Cama, 1970: 180-217). 63 On the !&%' Sp&$tas see Geiger, 1916; Dumézil, 1945; Narten, 1982; 1986. Kellens, 1991. 64 See Römer, 2002: 83-85. 65 For instance, Moulton’s objections (1913: 306) about the fact that Ahreman would not actually be “the prince of this world,” do not seem pertinent in
the case of the Zoroastrian doctrine, but concerns most fittingly the Zurvanite orientation, where the earthly kingdom was temporarily attributed to Ahreman. 66 See in particular the prudent and equilibrate evaluation of the problem given by Stoyanov, 2000: 56-64. 67 In favour of an Iranian influence we can see scholars like Alexander (1999), Cohn (1993) Coudert (1993), J.B. Russell (1977); see also the discussion by Kluger, 1967, Forsyth, 1987: 108-109, and Day, 1988.
220
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
ambiguous position, where any theory would be possible. I believe that the kind of approach I suggest is prudent but methodologically strong. If, on the one hand, we can establish on the basis of historical data that the peoples here taken into consideration lived in a particular condition of cultural, social, political, ideological and religious contact, we cannot, on the other hand, particularly in the historico-religious framework, assume that ideological and religious patterns existing simultaneously have not been involved with each other, but on the contrary have remained “cataphract” and impermeable, as if they were in isolation. The fact that the Post-exilic tradition shows a number of transformations and the presence of new trends does not mean that all these changes were strictly the result of a foreign element, extraneous to the basic culture of the Jewish peoples; rather, their presence compels us to take into consideration the possible impact or influence of other contemporary traditions which could have stimulated a dialectic reflex in a close or related cultural context. The impact of Iranian dualism seems to be present in texts such as the I Chronicles, 21, 1, where Satan is the protagonist of evil, although he cannot be considered completely independent from the power of god. In fact, these dualistic trends were countered in the DeuteroIsaiah, where (45, 1-7), in a framework in which Cyrus is presented as God’s Messiah, and the Persian power appears at the service of the God of Jacob; here,
Yahweh is the God who created light and darkness, welfare and adversity, nothing existing outside of himself, a statement strongly distinguishing Jewish monotheism from the Mazdean idea of evil as an extra-cosmic power. 68 Take for instance the clearly Iranianized framework, – no doubt evidence of the geographic milieu of the Book of Tobiah; apart from the recurring mention of lands and towns such as Media, Ecbatana and Raga, we know that the most plausible period for its composition is between the third and the second century B.C., during the Parthian age. 69 These data, however, would be insignificant if we did not remark that the demon Asmodaeus (Tb. 3, 8; ()*+,-.+/; cf. 012341 in the Talmud and in the Midrâšîm 70 ) not only seems to have an Iranian name – an idea still under debate but growing in consensus 71 – but also that he behaves in a way fitting in a Mazdean ideological framework (he kills one after the other the seven brothers of Sarah, before they can copulate with her; Tb. 3, 79), where chastity and sterility are considered big sins, and where one of the most important aims of the demons is to block or to destroy the process of reproduction and continuation of life (recall the G!$ic antagonism between “life” and “[impossibility] of living”). It seems to me more productive to reflect on the wider context (and in particular on the fact that the entire story is located in Ecbatana) in which such an influence could have been developed with fresh trends. Any attempt to deduce a complete
68
Widengren, 1957: 215; Shaked, 1984: 318. Against the association between the Avestan demon of the fury (a šma-, m., “fury”) and Asmodeus see already Lagrange, 1904: 210 and in particular Scheftelowitz, 1920: 61, who explains its etymology through the root šmd “apostatize.” For a relatively fresh and supportive evaluation of the Iranian backgound see Pines, 1970.
See Römer, 2002: 85-86. Cf. now Liverani, 2003: 223-234. 69 Widengren, 1957: 215-216; 1961: 118; cf. Moulton, 1913: 327-329. Shaked, 1984: 313-317. 70 Cf. Jastrow, 1903, I: 129; Cheyne, 1899. 71 Cf. Kohut, 1866: 72-78 (tr. di Cama, 1970: 251266); Moulton, 1913: 250-252; Gray, 1929: 186 with additional bibliography; Autran, 1935: 205-206;
221
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Iranian derivation of Jewish angelology and demonology would be nonsensical, because – as for instance Marco Bussagli (1991: 13-31) has remarked (and as discussed) 72 –, it is difficult to deny the presence of other elements, such as those deriving from the Mesopotamian world. More significant is the comparison between the Talmudic representation of the Archangels, displayed on the two sides of God’s throne, and the Zoroastrian representation, well known thanks to the Iranian Bundahišn (chap. XXVI, 8). 73 This parallel was mentioned by Kohut (1866: 25) and reconsidered by Jackson (1898); though the fact that both sources are very late it presents us with some doubts about the direction of the influence. However, we must also consider the interesting fact that even scholars such as Duchesne-Guillemin, 74 substantially less favourable to accepting direct derivations between Judaism and Mazdeism, have remarked, for instance, that the names of the eunuchs of Assueros (Esther I, 10) not only show a strong Iranian derivation, but also in some cases can be associated with the very names of certain !"#a Sp"$tas. 75 Although this datum could be an external and formal fact, partly derived from misunderstandings and imprecise adaptations – for instance it is very peculiar to see divine entities reduced to the status of servants of King Xerxes – its presence confirms
an evident cultural exchange and mutual impact between both religions. Another fitting case to which various studies have been dedicated concerns the presence in the apocryphal (Christian and Hebrew) literatures of a good spirit opposed to a bad one. Such a doctrine seems to have been received in other contexts (e.g., the Testament of Judah, the Fourth Gospel, etc.), but it is explicitly evoked in the Manual of Discipline from Qumran. In this particular case, the presence of an influence of an Iranian pattern, properly Zoroastrian or perhaps Zurvanite, has been referred to also outside the club of specialists of Iranian studies. 76 The problem, certainly difficult, deserves to be underlined, because it cannot be set aside from the later results emerging in the Christian tradition, where Satan actually becomes the “god of this century” (Paul, II Cor. 4, 4: 56789/ :+;6 -<=>+/6 :+?:+@; deus huius saeculi) and the “prince of this world” (John, 12, 31: 56ABCD>6:+;6EF)*+@6:+?:+@; princeps huius mundi). 77 The possible Zurvanite elements of this doctrine cannot be separated from some later speculations (which, in their own turn, could be ascribed to a close tradition) concerning the stereotyped ages of the three Evangelical Magi (the first young, the second middleaged and the third old), who represent the three periods of human life, but also the three forms of Zurvan-G, 78 ac-
72 More strictly concerning the subjects discussed in this article is the contribution by Stroumsa, 1994. Cf. also Shaked, 1984: 317-318. 73 See Anklesaria, 1956: 212-213. About the Bundahišn see now MacKenzie, 1989. 74 Cf., e.g., Duchesne-Guillemin, 1958: 71-84. See also Russell, 1990. 75 Cf. Duchesne-Guillemin, 1978: 60-63; but see on the problem of the Persian names in the Book of Esther the following contributions by: Mayer, 1961; Gehman, 1924; Millard, 1977; Moore, 1982; Shaked, 1982: 292-303; Yamauchi, 1990: 226-239; Russell,
1990; Skjærvø, 1994: 500-501; Hinze, 1994. 76 On this subject see Duchesne-Guillemin, 1978: 64-67, with additional bibliography. 77 See Gnoli, 1983: 158. 78 See in general Zaehner, 1955; on the origin of Zurvanisme see Gignoux (1981) and Shaked (1979: XXXIV) suggesting a late date, but contra Gnoli (1991b). For the Indian parallels see Scheftelowitz, 1929; see also Junker, 1923; Degani, 1961 and Gnoli, 1994a: 544-545. For a comparison between Iranian and Judaic millenarism see also Gignoux, 1990.
222
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
cording to the interpretation and adaptation of a heterodox doctrine, surely of remarkable antiquity. 79 Also important is the possible Iranian derivation of a series of notions appearing in the Slavonic Book of Enoch, such as the concept of progressive creation of the world, from the visible state (g t%g) to the invisible (m n$g), and the existence of two different times, the eternal and the limited. 80 Recently, Yuri Stoyanov, during one of his talks in Ravenna emphasized this already: “R. Otto and Pines have called attention to the evident Zoroastrian echoes in the allusion to the ‘Animal Soul’ accusing man (58: 4) in the apocalypse and its timespeculations on the ‘Aion of Creation’ and the ‘Great Aion’ (65: 1-8), which adds Iranian influences to the abovementioned ones influences emanating from sources outside of Judaism.” He also remarked that: “The trinity of God and the two principles of light and darkness, respectively Adoil and Arkhas, has also been compared to the Zurvanite trinity of Zurvan, Ohrmazd and Ahriman, given the fact that the speculations on time display an obvious Iranian, probably Zurvanite impact on the Apocalypse.” To what extent the Iranian tradition concerning the Frava#i (a feminine double of the individual personality, a spiritualguide and protector, existing prior to the individual birth) could have stimulated the Christian doctrine of the guardian angel, 81 as well as that of the couple of angelic figures accompanying the human being, remains the subject of investigation which requires a new evaluation of all the sources with methodological pru-
dence and without confessional prejudices, where nobody should be afraid of losing something, if a foreign influence would result plausible or implausible. Certainly seminal, but on a more fundamental level, is the problem of the possible connections between Zoroastrianism and Judaism in the framework of the doctrines regarding the so-called post mortem dimension. 82 The complex Mazdean concept of the final judgment and the subsequent introduction to a paradisiacal or infernal condition (a&huš vahišt$ “the best existence” vs. a&huš acišt$ “the worst existence”; gar$ d!m!na- “the house of the song (of welcome)” vs. druj$ d!m!na- “the house of lie”) 83 – a doctrine of G!$ic origin to which we have already referred – has often been mentioned as an idea which could have influenced the evolution of the Jewish concept of the afterlife. We see, starting from the Post-exilic period, a significant evolution from an undefined and grey Še’"l, an undetermined abode of the dead, towards a new concept of the afterlife, based on the dualistic distinction between Hell and Paradise and the diffusion of the idea of a final retribution of sins and merits. 84 The subject is unlimited, because it involves the entire history of both traditions and represents one of the key points of the querelle concerning the importance of the relations between these two religious cultures. Thus we simply point out that, in a larger or in a minor form, the entire bibliography about these general themes (discussed in the previous pages) with its enormous number of arguments on both
79
83
Panaino, 1999: 33, 47, n. 12, with additional bibliography. 80 Shaked, 1984: 320-321. See also Pines, 1970. 81 Moulton, 1913: 324-325; Autran, 1935: 208-209. See also Söderblom, 1899. 82 Cf. Clemen, 1912: 168-174.
Cf. Jackson, 1928: 147-149; see also Bartholomae, 1904: 512-513; 1090-1092; cf. Kellens-Pirart (1990: 238, 262, sub d'm!na-). 84 See the comparisons, notwithstanding the skeptical evaluation, listed by König, 1964: 277-279.
223
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
sides, compels us to pursue this tantalizing subject, which we cannot analytically evaluate here. The invitation to further analysis is all the more crucial, given that different positions in the debate are not always absolute and sometimes yield on certain point. Consider, for instance, the Zoroastrian idea of the resurrection of the dead, a doctrine already evident in the Avestan framework, and which seems to have been ignored in the oldest Jewish literature. Even Söderblom (1901: 315316), who was skeptical about the significance of the Iranian impact on Judaism, considered the connection in this context reasonable, although with some prudent restrictions (see also the works of Mills, Cheyne e Stave). 85 Before the final considerations, it seems to me necessary to underline the fact that, among the themes of special interest, we have that of the origin of “Iranian apocalyptic” in a wider sense. 86 Iranian apocalyptic seems to be derived from an independent background of eschatological ideas 87 ; yet, after the studies of Ph. Gignoux 88 and more recently Carlo Cereti, 89 dedicated in particular to the later elements attested in the Pahlavi sources of the ninth century A.D., the presence of influences of Judaeo-Christian and Islamic origin is no doubt evident. While the eschatological doctrines concerning the individual destiny of the soul
are well described and carefully documented in the older Zoroastrian sources (such as the doctrine regarding the function of sacrifices as a means for attaining safety and eternity), 90 the development of a real apocalyptic, considered in the general framework of a “literary genre,” is only the fruit of a later phenomenon and reflects the impact of Judaeo-Christian cultures, superimposing further refinements on an already established doctrine. It seems to me very fitting for this contribution to give only a summary of the Pahlavi sources belonging to the Sasanian and post Sasanian periods which refer to the Jewish community, 91 because, in spite of the absorption of elements of Judaism described above, we find strong criticism of Judaism (yah"d%h) and Jews (yah"d) 92 ; yet seen in the context of their times, these attacks may have been aimed at other religions as well. In fact, in the changed conditions of the Mazdean Church after the fall of the Sasanian dynasty under Isl!m, in particular during the ninth and tenth centuries, the priests and wise Zoroastrians became more prudent. Thus, in the Š!yast n -Š!yast, VI, 7 (West, 1880: 196) Jews and Christians are put together with the Zend g and peoples “of the bad religion” (ak-d n%h), and the D nkard (in which the Torah is said to contain nothing but the words of the demons, while the Jewish Scripture is held
85 In many studies a particular point is heavily underlined, the fact that, according to the Jewish tradition, the resurrection does not seem to be possible for all the dead, but only for “your dead,” i.e., the right Jews, in other words only the dead of Yahveh. See already Söderblom (1901: 316-321) and Widengren (1957: 226-233). 86 Moulton (1913: 326-327) supposes an Iranian influence on the Revelation of John (20, 2, 7-10; 8, 712, 9, 15), but the comparison would be fitting only in the case of some passages attested in the Bundahišn (such as those of the liberation of the snake Aži Dah!ka and of the fall of G"zihr, the celestial
dragon); see also Autran, 1935: 215-234, 235-250. 87 See Shaked, 1984: 321-324; 1994: 27-51. Cf. Kellens, 1994; 1995. 88 Gignoux, 1985-88; 1986; 1999. 89 Cereti, 1995b: 11-27; 1995c; 1996. A different point of view has been suggested by Widengren Hultgård - Philonenko, 1995. 90 See Kellens, 1994. 91 On this subject see Gray, 1905a; 1905b; 1915; Darmesteter, 1889; de Menasce, 1945: 176-181; Widengren, 1961; Shaked, 1990: 85-104. 92 Cf. Widengren, 1961: 121.
224
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
to have been composed by Aži Dah!ka [Dk, III, 227, 229, 288], 93 a demonic being with the body of a dragon, who lived in Babylon), also contains very negative references to Christians and Manichaeans. Perhaps we can see here a polemic reference to the most famed Talmudic academic centres of the Sasanian period which were located in Sura, Pumbedita and Nehardea. 94 Two chapters (XIII and XIV) of the Škand-gum!n%g Wiz!r turn out to be very significant, because they contain a detailed criticism of the Jewish religion (with a good number of direct quotations from the Pentateuch, Isaiah, the Psalms, and other texts), from the point of view of the Zoroastrian doctrine of the ninth century A.D., for which the best source is still the edition and the penetrating commentary by Jean de Menasce. 95 It is again to the deep intuition of Father de Menasce (1969) that we owe the plausible suggestion that, behind many accusations delivered against the Mosaic religion, was the intention to target the Isl!mic monotheism, which, after the fall of the Sasanians to the Arabs, 96 was formally excluded from any open or direct criticism. This hypothesis seems no doubt attractive, because it explains the anti-Judaic references (or at least many of them) as a kind of coded attack on Isl!m. Some centuries later, when the Zoroastrian communities became only a
pale minority, in order to obtain a larger space of tolerance in the framework of the “peoples of the book,” some Mazdean wise men would try to superimpose and mix the image and personality of Zoroaster with that of Abraham, even though the Jewish patriarch was previously considered under a dark light in Pahlavi literature. 97 A different subject is that of the very important Judaeo-Persian literature, fruit of a seminal community still living today in Iran, about which I will give only some basic bibliographic references in note. 98 In conclusion, I would like to express the wish that, although the present contribution is surely not sufficient, it could stimulate a wider reflection on the significance of the religious thought developed in the Iranian Pre-Islamic world, and at the same time a deeper analysis, perhaps through a reconsideration of the historiographical problems, of the controversial, but sometimes ignored problem of the “mutual” influences between the religious cultures of Iran and of the Jewish world. It is very improbable that the final word might ever be written on such a question, but a good step forward would be that of approaching such a target with clarity and prudent attention. It is surely a fitting subject for the M ELAMMU scholarly community.
93
1943. For an overview of the Pahlavi literature see now Cereti, 2001. 98 Important are the essays on Judaeo-Persian written by G. Lazard (many of the are now collected in Lazard, 1995: 27-48, 107-121, 123-132, 157-152); see also Asmussen, 1970 and Gnoli, 1964 (on the inscriptions of G2r) all containing a large and useful bibliography.
Cf. de Menasce, 1945: 240, 242, 284-285; Shaked, 1990: 94-99. 94 Gray, 1905a; 1905b: 180-181; 1915: 562b. 95 1945: 175-203. See now the contribution of Shapira, 2001. 96 See Gabrieli, 1996. 97 Russell (1987b: 60). For the main problems concerning the late Zoroastrian literature see Bailey,
225
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
B IBLIOGRAPHIC R EFERENCES Aberbach, D. (1993) I Profeti e la storia. Il tema dell’imperialismo nello sviluppo della cultura ebraica (750-500 a.C.). Genova. Ackroyd, R. (1970) Israel under Babylon and Persia. Oxford. Ackroyd, P.R. (1990) The Biblical Portrayal of Achaemenid Rulers. In Achaemenid History V. The Roots of the European Tradition. Leiden, pp. 1-16. Alexander, P.S. (1999) Demonology in the Dead Sea Scrolls. In The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years. Ed. by P.W. Flint and J. VanderKam. Leiden, pp. 331-354. Anklesaria, B.T. (1956) Zand-Ak!s%h. Iranian or Greater Bundahišn. Transliteration and Translation in English. Bombay. Asmussen, J.P. (1970) Studier i Jødisk Persisk Litteratur. København. Autran, Ch. (1935) Mithra, Zoroastre et la préhistoire aryenne du christianisme. Paris. Bailey, H.W. (1943) Zoroastrian Problems in the Ninth-Century Books. Oxford. Bartholomae, Chr. (1904) Altiranisches Wörterbuch. Strassburg. Bartholomae, Chr. (1906) Zum Altiranischen Wörterbuch. Nacharbeiten und Vorarbeiten. Beiheft zum XIX Band der Indogermanischen Forschungen. Strassburg. Bausani, A. (1959) Persia religiosa da Zaratustra a Bahâ’u’llâh. Milano. Benveniste, E. (1929) The Persian Religion according to the Chief Greek Texts. Paris. Benveniste, E. (1938) Les Mages dans l’Ancien Iran. Paris. Bertholet, A. (1909) Das religionsgeschichtliche Problem des Spätjudentums. Tübingen. Bertholet, A. (1916) Zur Frage des Verhältnisses von persischem und jüdischem Auferstehungsglauben. In Festschrift Friedrich Carl Andreas zur Vollendung des siebzigsten Lebensjahres am 14. April. Leipzig, pp. 51-62. Bianchi, U. (1958) Zam!n i (hrmazd. Torino. Bickerman, E.J. (1976-96) The Edict of Cyrus in Ezra. In Studies in Jewish and Christian History. 3 vols. Leiden, Vol. 1, pp. 72-108. Bidez, J. – Cumont, F. (1938) Les Mages hellénisés. Zoroastre, Ostanès et Hystaspe d’après la tradition grecque. 2 voll. Paris. Böklen, E. (1902) Die Verwandtschaft der jüdisch-christlichen mit der Parsischen Eschatologie. Göttingen. Bosworth, C.E. (1983) Iran and the Arabs before Islam. In The Cambridge History of Iran. Vol. III/2. Cambridge pp. 593-612. Bousset, W. (1907) Hauptprobleme der Gnosis. Göttingen. Bousset, W. (1926) Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter. 3rd ed. revised by U. Gressmann. Tübingen.
226
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Boyce, M. (1975) A History of Zoroastrianism, I. The Early Period. Leiden-Köln. Boyce, M. (1982) A History of Zoroastrianism, II. Under the Achaemenians. LeidenKöln. Boyce, M. (1992) Zoroastrianism: Its Antiquity and Constant Vigour. Costa Mesa, California-New York. Boyce, M. – Grenet, Fr. (1991) A History of Zoroastrianism. Vol. III. Zoroastrianism under Macedonian and Roman Rule. With a Contribution by R. Beck. Leiden. Bowman, R.A. (1970) Aramaic Ritual Texts from Persepolis. Chicago. Brandenstein, W. – Mayrhofer, M. (1964) Handbuch des Altpersischen, Wiesbaden. Bresciani, E. (1958) La satrapia d’Egitto. RSO, 7, 1958, pp. 132-188. Bresciani, E. (1985) The Persian occupation of Egypt. In The Cambidge History of Iran. Vol. II. Cambridge, pp. 502-528. Bresciani, E. (1995) Cambyse, Darius I et le droit des temples égyptiens. Meditérraniens, pp. 103-113. Briant, P. (1996) Histoire de l’Empire Perse. Paris. Brody, R. (1990) Judaism in the Sasanian Empire. Irano-Judaica II. Jerusalem, pp. 52-62. Bussagli, M. (1991) Storia degli Angeli. Racconto di immagini e di idee. Milano. Cama, K.R. (1970) The Collected Works of K.R. Cama. Volume II. Bombay. Cameron, G.G. (1948) Persepolis Treasury Tablets. Chicago. Cannizzaro, F.A. (1916) Il Vendidad. Messina (ristampa Milano 1990). Carter, G.W. (1918) Zoroastrianism and Judaism. Boston. Cereti, C. (1995a) Pad%riftan % d n and the Turn of the Millennium. East and West, 45, 1/4, pp. 321-327. Cereti, C. (1995b) The Zand % Wahman Yasn. A Zoroastrian Apocalypse. Roma. Cereti, C. (1995c) La figura del redentore futuro nei testi iranici zoroastriani; aspetti dell’evoluzione di un mito. AION, 55/1, pp. 33-81. Cereti, C. (1996) Again on Wahr!m warz!wand. In La Persia e l’Asia Centrale da Alessandro al X secolo. Atti dei Convegni Lincei 127. Roma, pp. 629-639. Cereti, C. (2001) La Letteratura pahlavi. Introduzione ai testi con riferimento alla storia degli studi e alla tradizione manoscritta. Milano. Chaumont, M.-L. (1988) La christianisation de l’Empire iranien des origines aux grandes persécutions du IV e siècle. Lovanii. Cheyne, Th.K. (1891) Possible Zoroastrian Influences on the Religion of Israel. Expository Times, 2/9, pp. 202-208; 2/10, pp. 224-228; 2/11, pp. 248-253. Cheyne, Th.K. (1897) The Book of Psalms; its Origins and its Relation to Zoroastrianism, pp. 111-119. Semitic Studies in Memory of A. Kohut. Ed. by G.A. Kohut. Berlin. Cheyne, Th.K. (1899) Asmodeus. In Encyclopædia biblica. Vol. I. Ed. by Th.K. Cheyne, J.S. Black. London, col. 342. Christensen, A. (1907) L’empire des Sassanides. Le peuple, l’état, la cour. København. 227
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Christensen, A. (1928) Études sur le Zoroastrisme de la Perse antique. Copenhagen. Christensen, A. (1941) Essai sur la démonologie iranienne. Copenhagen. Christensen, A. (1944 2 ) L’Iran sous les Sassanides. København. Clemen, C. (1912) Primitive Christianity and its Non-Jewish Sources. Translated by R.G. Nisbet. Edinburgh. Clemen, C. (1920a) Die griechischen und lateinischen Nachrichten über die persische Religion. Giessen. Clemen, C. (1920b) Fontes Historiae Religionis Persicae. Bonn. Cohn, N. (1993) Cosmos, Chaos and the World to Come. New Haven and London. Coudert, A. (1993) Angel. In The Encyclopaedia of Religion. Ed. by M. Eliade. Complete and unabridged edition 1993. Vol. I. New York, pp. 283-284. Cowley, A. (1923) Aramaic papyri of the fifth century B.C. Oxford. Dandamayev, M.A. (1992) Iranians in Achaemenid Babylonia. Costa Mesa and New York. Dandamayev, M.A. – Lukonin, V.G., (1989) The culture and social institutions of ancient Iran. Cambridge. Darmesteter, J. (1889) Textes pehlevis relatifs au Judaisme. Revue des Études Juives, 18, pp. 1-15; 19, pp. 41-56. Darmesteter, J. (1892-93a) Le Zend-Avesta. 3 voll. Paris. Darmesteter, J. (1893b) La Reine Shasyân Dôxt. Actes du du VIII e Congrès International des Orientalistes. Deuxière partie, Leyden, pp. 193-198. Day, J. (1988) An Adversary in Heaven: s!t!n in the Hebrew Bible. Atlanta. Degani, E. (1961) G da Omero ad Aristotele. Padova. Dunand, M. (1968) La Défense du Front Méditerranéen de l’empire achéménide. In The Role of the Phoenicians in the Interactions of Mediterranean Civilizations. Ed. by W. Ward. Beirut. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1953) Ormazd et Ahriman. L’aventure dualiste dans l’antiquité. Paris. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1958) The Western Response to Zoroaster. Oxford. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1962) La religion de l’Iran ancien. Paris. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1972) La religion des Achéménides. In Beiträge zur Achämenidengeschichte, herausgegeben von G. Walser. Historia, Heft 18. Wiesbaden, pp. 5982. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1978) Opera Minora. Vol. III. Iran - Grèce - Israël - etc. Téhéran. Dumézil, G. (1945) Naissance d’Archanges. (Jupiter Mars Quirinus, III). Essai sur la formation de la théologie zoroastrienne. Paris. Eilers, W. (1974) Le texte cunéiforme du cylindre de Cyrus. In Commémoration Cyrus. Hommage Universel. Vol. 2. Acta Iranica 2, Téhéran-Liège, pp. 25-34. Forsyth, N. (1987) The Old Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth. Princeton.
228
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Fox, W.Sh. – Pemberton, E.E.K. (1928) Passages in Greek and Latin Literature relating to Zoroaster and Zoroastrianism. Bombay. Frye, R.N. (1967) Iran und Israel. In Festschrift für Wilhelm Eilers. Wiesbaden, pp. 74-85. Frye, R.N. (1984) The History of Ancient Iran. München. Frye, R.N. (1993) The Golden Age of Persia. The Arabs in East. London. Gabrieli, F. (1996) Maometto e le grandi conquiste arabe. Ia ed. Milano 1967 (reprinted, Roma). Galling, K. (1964) Studien zur Geschichte Israels im Persischen Zeitalter. Tübingen. Garbini, G. (1984) Universalismo iranico e Israele. Henoch, 6, pp. 293-312. Gaster, M. (1917) Parsiism and Judaism. In Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics. Vol. IX. Ed. by J. Hastings. Edinburgh, pp. 637-640. Gehman, H.S. (1924) Notes on the Persian Words in the Book of Esther. Journal of Biblical Literature, 43, p. 327. Geiger, W. (1916) Die6 Am! a Sp!"tas. Ihr Wesen und ihre ursprüngliche Bedeutung. Wien. Geldner, K.F. (1889-1896) Avesta, the Sacred Books of the Parsis. 3 voll. Stuttgart. Geldner, K.F. (1904) Awestalitteratur. In Grundriss der Iranischen Philologie. Vol. II, Strassburg, pp. 1-52. Gershevitch, I. (1975) Die Sonne das Beste. In Mithraic Studies. Ed. by J.R. Hinnells. Manchester, pp. 68-89. Gignoux, Ph. (1969) L’enfer et le paradis d’après les sources pehlevies. Journal Asiatique, 256, pp. 219-245. Gignoux, Ph. (1979) «Corps osseaux et âme osseuse»: essai sur le chamanisme dans l’Iran ancien. Journal Asiatique, 267, pp. 41-79. Gignoux, Ph. (1981) La conception du temps dans l’Iran ancien. In Cinquième et sixième Colloques d’Histoire des Religions, Orsay, pp. 101-115. Gignoux, Ph. (1984) Le Livre d’Ard! V%r!z. Paris. Gignoux, Ph. (1985-88) L’apocalyptique iranienne est-elle vraiment la source d’autres apocalypses? AAASH, 31, pp. 67-78. Gignoux, Ph. (1986) Nouveaux regards sur l’apocalyptique iranienne. Comptes-rendus des Séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-lettres. Paris, pp. 334-346. Gignoux, Ph. (1990) Hexaéméron et Millénarisme: Quelques motifs de comparaison entre Mazdéisme et Judaïsme. Irano-Judaica II. Jerusalem, pp. 72-84. Gignoux, Ph. (1991) Les quatre inscriptions du Mage Kird%r. Texte et concordances. Paris. Gignoux, Ph. (1999) L’apocalyptique iranienne est-elle vraiment ancienne? RHR, 216/2, pp. 213-227. Gnoli, Gh. (1963) Osservazioni sulla dottrina mazdaica della creazione. AION, n.s. 13, pp. 163-193. Gnoli, Gh. (1964) Le iscrizioni giudeo-persiane del )"r (Afghanistan). Roma.
229
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Gnoli, Gh. (1967) Ricerche storiche sul S%st!n antico. Roma. Gnoli, Gh. (1971) Politica religiosa e concezione della regalità sotto i Sassanidi. In La Persia nel Medioevo. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Roma, pp. 225-251. Gnoli, Gh. (1974) Politica religiosa e concezione della regalità sotto gli Achemenidi. In Gurur!jamañjarik!. Studi in onore di G. Tucci. Vol. I. Napoli, pp. 24-88. Gnoli, Gh. (1983) Questioni comparative sull’ascensione d’Isaia: la tradizione iranica. In Isaia, il Diletto e la Chiesa. Visione ed esegesi profetica cristiano-primitiva nell’Ascensione d’Isaia. A cura di M. Pesce. Brescia, pp. 117-128. Gnoli, Gh. (1984) Universalismo e nazionalismo nell’Iran del III secolo. In Incontro di Religioni in Asia tra il III e il X secolo d.C., a cura di L. Lanciotti, Firenze, pp. 31-54. Gnoli, Gh. (1989) The Idea of Iran. Roma. Gnoli, Gh. (1991a) L’Iran antico e lo Zoroastrismo. In L’uomo indoeuropeo e il sacro. Milano, pp. 105-147. Gnoli, Gh. (1991b) Considerazioni sulla dottrina del tempo e del dualismo. In Il Tempo e l’Uomo. Atti della IX Settimana di Seminari Interdisciplinari (Arcavacata 11 - 14 giugno 1990), Cosenza, pp. 9-16. Gnoli, Gh. (1993) Ahura Mazd! and Angra Mainyu. In The Encyclopaedia of Religion. Ed. by M. Eliade. Complete and unabridged edition 1993. Vol. I. New York, pp. 157-159. Gnoli, Gh. (1994a) Le religioni dell’Iran antico e Zoroastro (Parte I). La religione zoroastriana (Parte II). In Storia delle religioni. Vol. 1. Le religioni antiche. RomaBari, pp. 455-565. Gnoli, Gh. (1994b) Iranic Identity as a Historical Problem: the Beginning of a National Awareness under the Achaemenians. In The East and the Meaning of History. International Conference (23-27 November 1992). Roma, pp. 147-167. Gnoli, Gh. (1998) Ebraismo e cultura iranica. In Ebrei in Asia e Africa. Il contributo della diaspora alle culture e allo sviluppo dell’Asia, dell’Africa e del Mondo Mediterraneo. Cagliari 15-16 Maggio 1995. Quaderni dell’Istituto di Studi Africani e Orientali, 3 (aprile 1998). (Orientalia Karalitana). Cagliari, pp. 103-114. Gnoli, Gh. (2000) Zoroaster in History. UCLA. Los Angeles. Gray, L.H. (1905a) The Jews in Pahlavi Literature. In The Jewish Encyclopedia. Vol. IX. New York, pp. 462-465. Gray, L.H. (1905b) The Jews in Pahlavi Literature. In Actes du XIV e Congrès International des Orientalistes. Alger 1905. Première partie. Algiers, pp. 177-192. Gray, L.H. (1915) Jews in Zoroastrianism. In Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics. Vol. VII. Ed. by J. Hastings. Edinburgh, pp. 561-562. Gray, L.H. (1929) The Foundations of the Iranian Religions. Bombay. Greenfield, J.C. – Porten, B. (1982) The Bisitun Inscription of Darius the Great. Aramaic Version. Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum. Part I. Vol. V. London. Hallock, R.T. (1969) Persepolis Fortification Tablets. Chicago. Hallock, R.T. (1985) Aramaic in the Achaemenid Empire. In The Cambridge History of Iran. Vol. 2. Cambridge pp. 698-713.
230
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Harmatta, J. (1974) Les modèles littéraires de l’édit babylonien de Cyrus, in Commémoration Cyrus. Hommage Universel, vol. I, Acta Iranica 1. Téhéran - Liège, pp. 29-44. Hartman, S.S. (1953) Gay$mart. Uppsala. Hinnells, J.R. (1976) Zoroastrian influence on the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Journal of the K.R. Cama Oriental Institute, 45, pp. 1-80. Hintze, A. (1994) The Greek and Hebrew Versions of the Book of Esther and Its Iranian background. Irano-Judaica III. Jerusalem, pp. 34-39. Hintze, A. (1995) The Rise of the Saviour in the Avesta. In Iran und Turfan. Beiträge Berliner Wissenschaftler, Werner Sundermann zum 60. Geburtstag gewidmet, Wiesbaden, pp. 77-97. Hinz, W. (1973) Neue Wege im Altpersischen. Wiesbaden. Hinz, W. (1975) Altiranisches Sprachgut der Nebenüberlieferungen. Wiesabden. Hoffmann, K. – Narten, J. (1989) Der Sasanidische Archetypus. Wiesbaden. Humbach, H. (1959) Die Gathas des Zarathustra. 2 voll. Heidelberg. Humbach, H. (1984) A Western Approach to Zarathustra. Bombay. Humbach, H. (1991) The G!th!s of Zarathushtra and the Other Old Avestan Texts. 2 voll. Heidelberg. Insler, S. (1975) The G!th!s of Zarathustra. Acta Iranica 8. Téhéran-Liège. Jackson, A.V.W. (1898) A Bief Note on the Amshaspands, or a Contribution to the Zoroastrian Angelology. Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, 1, pp. 363-367. Jackson, A.V.W. (1899) Zoroaster the Prophet of Ancient Iran. New York. Jackson, A.V.W. (1928) Zoroastrian Studies. New York. Jastrow, M. (1903) A dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the midrashic literature. Brooklyn, NY. Junker, H.F. (1923) Über iranische Quellen der hellenistischen Aion-Vorstellung. Leipzig. Kellens, J. (1989) Avesta. In Encyclopædia Iranica. Vol. III, New York, pp. 35-44. Kellens, J. (1991) Zoroastre et l’Avesta ancien. Quatre leçons au Collège de France. Paris. Kellens, J. (1994) L’escatologie mazdéenne ancienne. Irano-Judaica III. Jerusalem, pp. 49-53. Kellens, J. (1995) L’âme entre le cadavre et le paradis. Journal Asiatique, 283/1, pp. 19-56. Kellens, J. – Pirart, E. (1988, 1990, 1991) Les textes vieil-avestiques. Wiesbaden. Kellermann, U. (1967) Nehemia Quellen, Überlieferungen und Geschichte. Berlin. Kent, R.G. (1953 2 ) Old Persian. Grammar, Texts, Lexicon. New Haven. Kluger, R.S. (1967) Satan in the Old Testament. Tr. by H. Nagel. Evanston. König, F.Ch. (1964) Zarathustras Jenseitsvorstellungen und das Alte Testament. Wien Freiburg - Basel.
231
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Kohut, A. (1866) Ueber die jüdische Angelologie und Daemonologie in ihrer Abhängigkeit von Parsismus. Abh. der D.M.G. IV, n. 3. Leipzig [The Jewish Angelology and Demonology based upon Parsism. Translated from the German by K.R. Cama, Bombay 1880-83 (in four parts); reprinted in K.R. Cama, 1970, II: 161-276)]. Kohut, A. (1867) Was hat die talmudische Eschatologie aus dem Parsismus aufgenommen? ZDMG, 21, pp. 552-591. Kohut, A. (1871) Die talmudisch-midraschische Adamssage in ihrer Rückbeziehung auf die persische Yima- und Meshiasage, kritisch beleuchtet. ZDMG, 25, pp. 59-94. Labourt, J. (1904) Le christianisme dans l’Empire perse sous la dynastie sassanide. Paris. Lagrange, M.-J. (1904) La religion des Perses, la réforme de Zoroastre et le Judaisme. Revue biblique, 87, pp. 27-55; 188-212. Langdon, S. (1934) Babylonian and Hebrew Demonology with reference to the supposed borrowing of Persian Dualism in Judaism and Christianity. JRAS, pp. 45-58. Lazard, G. (1995) La formation de la langue persane. Paris. Lecoq, P. (1997) Les inscriptions de la Perse achéménide. Paris. Lewy, H. (1949) The Babylonian Background of the Kay Kâûs Legend. Archiv Orientální, 17, pp. 28-109. Lewy, J. (1945-46) The Late Assyro-Babylonian Cult of the Moon and its Culmination at the Time of Nabonidus. Hebrew Union College Annual, 19, pp. 405-489. Liverani, M. (2003) Oltre la Bibbia. Storia antica di Israele. Roma - Bari. Lommel, H. (1927) Die Yäšt’s des Awesta übersetzt und eingeleitet. Göttingen-Leipzig. Lommel, H. (1930) Die Religion Zarathustras nach dem Awesta dargestellt. Tübingen. Lukács, G. (1959 3 ) La distruzione della ragione. Torino (Die Zerstörung der Vernunft, Berlin). MacKenzie, D.N. (1988) Khwarezmian and Avestan. East and West, 38, pp. 81-92. MacKenzie, D.N. (1989) Bundahišn. In Encyclopædia Iranica. Vol. IV, fasc. 5, New York, pp. 547-551. Malandra, W.W. (1971) The Fravaši Yašt. Introduction, Text, Translation and Commentary. University of Pennsylvania. University Microfilms. Ann Arbor (Michigan). Marrazza, M. (2002) Osservazioni su accadismi e persianismi nel libro di Esdra. Materia giudaica, VII/2, 283-298. Mayer, R. (1961) Iranischer Beitrag zu Problemen des Daniels- und Esther-Buches. In Lex tua Veritas: Festschrift für H. Junker. Herausgegeben von H. Gross und F. Mussner. Trier, pp. 127-135. Menasce, J. de (1969) Jews and Judaism in the Third Book of the D#nkart. In K.R. Cama Oriental Institute Golden Jubilee Volume. Bombay, pp. 45-48. Menasce, J. de (1973) Le troisième livre du D nkart. Paris. Messina, G. (1930) Der Ursprung der Magier und die zarathuštrische Religion. Roma. Messina, G. (1933) I Magi a Betlemme e una predizione di Zoroastro. Roma. Millar, F. (1994) The Roman Near East. 31 BC - AD 337. Cambridge (Mass.) - London.
232
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Millard, A.R. (1977) The Persian Names in Esther and the Reliability of the Hebrew Text. Journal of Biblical Literature, 96, p. 484. Mills, L. (1906) Zara#uštra, Philo, the Achemenids and Israel. Leipzig. Mills, L. (1913) Our own Religion in ancient Persia ... presenting the Zend Avesta as collated with the Pre-Christian exilic Pharisaism. London. Modi, J.J. (1914) Angelology. A few traits common to Zoroastrianism, Hebrewism and Christianity. Dante Papers, 7, pp. 150-159. Moore, C.A. (1982) Studies in the Book of Esther. New York. Mosse, G.L. (1964) The Crysis of German Ideology. New York. Moulton, J.H. (1913) Early Zoroastrianism. London. Narten, J. (1982) Die Am! a Sp!"tas im Avesta. Wiesbaden. Narten, J. (1985) Avestisch «frauua%i-». Indo-Iranian Journal, 28, pp. 35-48. Narten, J. (1986) Der Yasna Hapta&h!iti. Wiesbaden. Netzer, A. (1974) Some Notes on the Characterization of Cyrus the Great in Jewish and Judeo-Persian Writings. In Commémoration Cyrus. Hommage Universel. Téhéran Liège, vol. II, pp. 35-52. Neusner, J. (1983) Jews in Iran. In The Cambridge History of Iran. Vol. III/2. Cambridge, pp. 909-923. Neusner, J. (1986) Israel’s Politics in Sasanian Iran. Lanham - New York - London. Nyberg, H.S. (1929/1931) Questions de cosmogonie et de cosmologie mazdéennes. Journal Asiatique, 214, pp. 129-310; 219, pp. 1-1134, 193-244. Nyberg, H.S. (1938) Die Religionen des alten Iran. Leipzig. Olmstead, A. (1948) History of the Persian Empire. Chicago. Otto, R. (1940 2 ) Reich Gottes und Menschensohn. Tübingen. Panaino, A. (1990b) La religione zoroastriana. Guida critica e bibliografica. Postfazione a F.A. Cannizzaro, Vendidad, Milano, pp. 235-300. Panaino, A. (1992) Philologia Avestica I. ahura*!ta- / mazda*!ta-. Aula Orientalis, 10, pp. 199-209. Panaino, A. (1994) Figure femminili divine e demoniache nell’Iran antico. In Miti di origine, miti di caduta e presenza del femminino nella loro evoluzione interpretativa. Ricerche Storico-Bibliche, 1994, 1-2, pp. 47-70. Panaino, A. (1998) Avesta. In Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Bd. 1, Tübingen 1998, coll. 1024-1026. Panaino, A. (1999) I Magi e la ricerca del Salvatore. In I tre saggi e la stella. Mito e realtà dei Re Magi. Rimini, pp. 31-60. Panaino, A. (2001a) Il contributo del mondo iranico preislamico al pensiero filosofico. In Filosofie nel tempo. A cura di P. Salandini e R. Lolli. Opera diretta da G. Penzo, vol. I. Dalle origini al XVI secolo d.C. Roma, pp. 41-83. Panaino, A. (2001b) L’ecumene iranica e lo Zoroastrismo nel loro sviluppo storico,” published in Atti del Seminario invernale Il popolo del ritorno: l’epoca persiana e la
233
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Bibbia. Lucca, 25-27 gennaio 2000. Biblia, Associazione laica di cultura biblica, Firenze 2001, pp. 13-100. Pavry, J.C. (1929) The Zoroastrian Doctrine of the Future Life from Death to the Individual Judgement. New York. Pelaia, B.M. (1960) Esdra e Neemia. A cura di B.M. Pelaia. Torino - Roma. Pettazzoni, R. (1920) La religione di Zarathustra nella storia religiosa dell’Iran. Bologna. Pines, Sh. (1970) Eschatology and the Concept of Time in the Slavonic Book of Enoch. In Types of Remption. Ed. by R.J.Z. Werblowsky and C.J. Bleeker. Leiden, pp. 72-87. Pines, Sh. (1982) Wrath and Creatures of Wrath in Pahlavi, Jewish and New Testament. Irano-Judaica. Jerusalem, pp. 76-82. Posener, O. (1936) La première domination perse en Egypte. “Bibliothèque d’étude,” 11, Le Caire. Römer, Th. (2002) I Lati oscuri di Dio. Crudeltà e violenza nell’Antico Testamento. Traduzione di F.J. Comba (Dieu obscure. Le sexe, la cruauté et la violence dans l’Ancien Testament, Genève 1996). Torino. Rudolph, W. (1949) Esra und Nehemiah. Tübingen. Russell, J.B. (1977) The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity. Ithaca. New York. Russell, J.R. (1987a) Zoroastrianism in Armenia. Cambridge (Ma.). Russell, J.R. (1987b) Our Father Abraham and the Magi. Journal of the K.R. Cama Oriental Institute, 54, pp. 57-73. Russell, J.R. (1987c) An Irano-Judaic Correspondence. Journal of the K.R. Cama Oriental Institute, 54, pp. 81-84. Russell, J.R. (1990) Zoroastrian Elements in the Book of Esther. Irano-Judaica II. Jerusalem, pp. 33-40. Russell, J.R. (1994) The Ascensio Isaiae and Iran. Irano-Judaica III. Jerusalem, pp. 63-71. Sarton, G. (1938) Anquetil-Duperron (1731-1805). Osiris, 3, pp. 193-223. Scheftelowitz, J. (1920) Die altpersische Religion und das Judentum (Unterschiede, Uebereinstimmungen und gegenseitige Beeinflussungen). Giessen. Scheftelowitz, J. (1929) Die Zeit als Schicksalgottheit in der indischen und iranischen Religion. Stuttgart. Schippmann, K. (1980) Grundzüge der parthischen Geschichte. Darmstadt. Schippmann, K. (1990), Grundzüge der Geschichte des sasanidisches Reiches. Darmstadt. Schmitt, R. (1991) The Bisitun Inscriptions of Darius the Great. Old Persian Text. Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum. London. Schwab, R. (1934) Vie d’Anquetil-Duperron. Paris. Shaked, Sh. (1971) The Notions «m#n"g» and «g#t g» in the Pahlavi Texts and their relation to Eschatology. Acta Orientalia, 33, pp. 59-61. Shaked, Sh. (1972) Qumran and Iran: further consideration. IOS, 2, pp. 433-446.
234
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Shaked, Sh. (1979) The Wisdom of the Sasanian Sages. Boulder (Colorado). Shaked, Sh. (1984) Iranian influence on Judaism: first century B.C.E. to second century C.E., pp. 308-325. Cambridge History of Judaism. Vol. I. Cambridge. Shaked, Sh. (1982) Two Judaeo-Iranian Contributions: Iranian Functions in the Book of Esther. – Irano-Judaica. Studies relating to Jewish Contacts with Persian Culture throughout the Ages. Irano-Judaica. Jerusalem, pp. 292-322. Shaked, Sh. (1990) Zoroastrian Polemics against Jews in the Sasanian and Early Islamic Period. Irano-Judaica II. Jerusalem, pp. 85-104. Shaked, Sh. (1994) Dualism in Transformation. London. Shapira, D. (2001) On Biblical Quotations in Pahlavi. Henoch, 23, pp. 175-183. Skjærvø, P.O. (1994) Recensione di Yamauchi (1994). JAOS, 114/3, pp. 499-504. Smith, M. (1963) Isaiah and the Persians. JAOS, 83, pp. 415-421. Smith, M. (1968) Palestinian Judaism in the Persian Period. In The Greeks and the Persians from the Sixth to the Fourth Centuries. Ed. by H. Bengston. London, pp. 386-401. Soden, W. von (1983) Kyros und Nabonid. Propaganda und Gegenpropaganda. In Kunst, Kultur und Geschichte der Achämenidenzeit und ihr Fortleben. AMI, Ergänzungsband 10. Berlin, pp. 61-68. Söderblom, N. (1899) Les Fravashis. RHR, 39, pp. 229-260, 374-418. Söderblom, N. (1901) La Vie future d’après le mazdéisme à la lumière des croyances parallèles dans les autres religions: étude d’eschatologie comparée. Paris. Söderblom, N. (1903) Notes sur les relations du Judaisme avec le Parsisme à propos de travaux récents. RHR, 48, pp. 372-378. Spiegel, F. (1871-1878) Erânische Alterthumskunde. 3 voll. Leipzig. Stave, E. (1898) Über den Einfluss des Parsismus auf Judentum, ein Versuch. Haarlem. Stoyanov, J. (2000) The Other God. Dualist Religion from Antiquity to the Cathar Heresy. New Haven - London. Stroumsa, G.G. (1994) Zoroastrian Origin to the Sefirot? Irano-Judaica III. Jerusalem, pp. 17-33. Sundermann, W. (1987) Studien zur kirchengeschichtlichen Literatur der iranischen Manichäern. Altorientalische Forschungen, 14/1, pp. 41-107. Tiele, C.P. (1903) Die Kosmogonie des Avesta und Genesis I. Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, 6, pp. 244-246. Verger, A. (1965) Ricerche giuridiche sui papiri aramaici di Elefantina. Roma. Voltaire [= F.M. Arouet] (1828) Dictionnaire philosophique. Paris. Weiss, J. (1900 2 ) Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes. Göttingen. West, E.W. (1880) Pahlavi Texts. Part I. The Bundahis-Bahman Yast, and Sh!yast l!Sh!yast. SBE 5. Oxford. Widengren, G. (1957) Quelques rapports entre Juifs et Iraniens à l’époque des Parthes. Vetus Testamentum. Suppl. IV, pp. 197-241.
235
P ANAINO
R ELATIONS BETWEEN I RANIAN P RE -I SL AMIC AND J EWISH C ULTURES
Widengren, G. (1960) Iranisch-semitische Kulturbegegnung in parthischer Zeit. Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Forschung der Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Heft 70. Köln und Opladen. Widengren, G. (1961) The Status of the Jews in the Sassanian Empire. Iranica Antiqua, I, pp. 117-162. Widengren G. (1968) Les religions de l’Iran. Paris. Widengren, G. – Hultgård, A. Philonenko, M. (1995) Apocalyptique iranienne et dualisme qoumrânien. Paris. Wiesehöfer, J. (1988) Das Bild der Achaimeniden in der Zeit des Nationalsozialismus. In Achaemenid History III. Method and Theory. Proceedings of the London 1985 Achaemenid History Workshop. Leiden, pp. 1-14. Wiesehöfer, J. (1990) Zur Geschichte der Begriffe ‘Arier’ und ‘Arisch’ in der deutschen Sprachwissenschaft und Althistorie des 19. und der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts. In Achaemenid History VII. The roots of the European tradition. Proceedings of the 1987 Groningen Achaemenid History workshop. Leiden, pp. 149165. Wiesehöfer, J. (1996) Ancient Persia. London - New York. Wiesehöfer, J. (1999) Das frühe Persien. Geschichte eines antiken Weltreichs. München. Williams, A.V. (1994) Zoroastrian and Judaic Purity Laws. Reflections on the Viability of a Sociological Interpretation. Irano-Judaica III. Jerusalem, pp. 72-89. Winston, D. (1966) The Iranian Component in the Bible, Apocrypha and Qumran: A Review of the Evidence. HR, 5, pp. 183-216. Wolff, F. (1910) Avesta, die heiligen Bücher der Parsen. Leipzig. Wolski, J. (1993) L’empire des Arsacides. Acta Iranica 32. Leiden. Yamauchi, E.M. (1990) Persia and the Bible. Grand Rapids (Mich.). Zaehner, R.C. (1955) Zurvan. A Zoroastrian Dilemma. Oxford. Zaehner, R.C. (1956) The Teachings of the Magi. A Compendium of Zoroastrian Beliefs. London. Zaehner, R.C. (1961) The Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism. London.
236
P ARPOLA
S IMO P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJEC T
Helsinki
Back to Delitzsch and Jeremias: The Relevance of the Pan-Babylonian School to the MELAMMU Project
lmost exactly one hundred years ago, perhaps at this very hour, the German Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch started preparing his famous series of lectures entitled “Babel und Bibel.” 1 His purpose was to demonstrate, on the basis of recent discoveries and in conjunction with the opening of German excavations at Babylon, the relevance of cuneiform studies to Biblical research in particular and the history of Western culture in general. 2 We all know, at least in rough outline, how this enterprise ended. 3 All of the three lectures, especially the first two, generated enormous interest and a fierce public debate. The first two lectures were delivered on 13 January 1902 and 12 January 1903 respectively in the presence of the German emperor Wilhelm II himself, and were published in printings of more than 60,000 and 45,000 copies each. They were reviewed in more than 1350 short and 300 long newspaper and journal articles and in 28 pamphlets in Germany alone; in addition, there were reviews and debate in several
A
other countries. The reactions varied from enthusiastic acceptance to violent attacks against Delitzsch’s ideas; they came from the man of the street as well as from historians, theologians, clergymen, biblical scholars, philosophers, and orientalists. Delitzsch took pains to answer to the most important criticism briefly in the published versions of the lectures, but noted that the majority of the feedback was scientifically substandard and not worthy of reply. 4 The third and final lecture was delivered on 27 October 1904. It was no longer attended by the Kaiser, who, disturbed by some theological implications of the second lecture, 5 had publicly distanced himself from Delitzsch’s views and advised him to stay within Assyriology and leave “religion as such” to others. This was widely (though wrongly!) interpreted as a deathblow to the substance of Delitzsch’s argument and, much to the disappointment of the general public, as an end of the whole Babel-Bibel debate. 6 In reality, however, the debate continued after the
1
5
Cf. Delitzsch’s letter to Karl Bruckmann cited in Lehmann 1994: 285, dated 12.XI.’01, which shows that he had been already working on the lecture for some time in November 1901. 2 Delitzsch 1902: 3-4. 3 For an excellent in-depth presentation and analysis of the Babel-Bibel controversy, making extensive use of unpublished documents in the literary remains of Delitzsch and others, see Lehmann 1994. 4 Cf. Delitzsch 19032: 47-48. A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
Ironically, the conclusion of the lecture shows that it had been intended as a positive response to a recent speech of Wilhelm II calling for “Weiterbildung der Religion.” See Lehmann 1994: 217-219. 6 Lehmann 1994: 250f. Contrary to what is/was commonly thought, Delitzsch never lost the favour of the Kaiser but the two men remained on friendly terms until the death of Delitzsch (see Lehmann 1994: 242 and 355).
237
P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJECT
third lecture as well and was extended to new, much wider horizons. Soon after the first Babel-Bibel lecture, a student of Delitzsch, Hugo Winckler, had published a small book entitled Die babylonische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zur unsrigen (“The Babylonian Culture in its Relationship to Ours”). This booklet of 52 pages was immediately reprinted, and inaugurated a long series of other books produced in the course of the next ten years by a small group of German scholars subsequently to be known as the “pan-Babylonians” (German: Panbabylonisten). Beside Winckler, the “founder” of the pan-Babylonian school, the “group” initially consisted only of two other Assyriologists, Alfred Jeremias and Heinrich Zimmern, both of whom likewise were former students of Delitzsch and active in Leipzig, 7 although later on it also included Ernst Weidner, a student of Jeremias. 8 A further former student of Delitzsch, Peter Jensen, who published his controversial book Das Gilgamesch-Epos in der Welt-
literatur at the same time as Winckler and Jeremias were writing, is often also associated with the pan-Babylonian school. This is a mistake, however, as Jensen and the pan-Babylonians were on inimical terms and the latter, especially their most prolific representative, Alfred Jeremias, sharply dissociated themselves from Jensen’s ideas and writings. 9 The pan-Babylonians took as their point of departure Eduard Stucken’s mythological studies of the late 19th century, which they developed further. Their basic contention was that the astral mythologies and conceptions of the ancient peoples all over the world were borrowed from the cradle of all astrological knowledge, Babylonia, and that this lore was part of a larger system, a comprehensive, coherent world-view that had taken its shape in prehistoric times and is first attested, already fully developed, in ancient Babylonia. The central tenets of this world-view were circulated as esoteric secrets and included the following 10 :
7 Jeremias was a great admirer of Winckler who embraced and defended his views wholeheartedly; Zimmern was more critical in his evaluation of Winckler’s theories. 8 The group also included a non-Assyriologist, August Wünsche, a colleague of Jeremias specialising in Judaism and Jewish mysticism, who contributed four articles to the pan-Babylonian series Ex Oriente Lux in 1904-1906. The founder of Finnish Assyriology, Knut Tallqvist, who got his Assyriological training in Leipzig under Delitzsch, may also be considered a pan-Babylonian based on his intercultural studies in the early twenties and thirties. 9 See Lehmann 1994: 46 and Jeremias 1913: 7 n. 2. Eberhard Schrader can be counted to the panBabylonians (cf. Rollinger 1999: 382) only insofar as the third, revised edition of his Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament was essentially the work of Winckler and Zimmern. 10 See basically Winckler 1902: 49 and Jeremias 1913: 9. Note, however, the following important qualification of Wincker’s model in Zimmern 1909: 309: “We have to deal, in the first place, with the following question: Are we to hold, with Winckler especially, that the religion of the Babylonians and their theory of the universe in general are to be regarded, at the time when our sources begin, i.e. about B.C. 3000, as es-
sentially complete a fixed system, based on astronomical principles, which arose in a period which, for us, is entirely prehistoric. Or, are the undoubted traces of the systematizing of the religion, which are found in our sources, only the product of a comparatively late period? ... The present writer feels compelled, from his study and interpretation of the sources, to adopt an intermediate theory between the two extremes just mentioned. It seems to him undeniable that there was among the Babylonians, even at an early date, a tendency to reduce the world of the gods to a single system, and to carry out the law of correspondence between [...] the macrocosm and the microcosm. At the same time, he does not feel inclined to exclude the element of historical evolution from the actually known period of Assyro-Babylonian history to the same extent as Winckler does... Moreover, to a far larger extent than Winckler is disposed to admit, we seem to have to deal in the Babylonian religion with unreconciled differences, due partly to widely deviating local cults which once existed... We cannot, then, speak of a finished scheme as present in the Bab. Weltanschauung and consequently in its religion. At the same time, it must be conceded that Winckler’s reconstruction of a Bab. Weltanschauung has in many ways, in spite of its onesidedness and evident exaggeration, made possible a better understanding of the religion of the Babylonians.”
238
P ARPOLA
1. The visible world is to be understood as a materialization of or an emanation from the transcendent God. 2. God is one, but manifested in a multiplicity of forms. 3. All mundane existence reflects celestial order. 4. All knowledge about the cosmos and its organization is based on divine revelation received at the beginning of time, and 5. Knowledge of the heavens is the source of all wisdom.
These, and other theses of the panBabylonians were publicized and backed up in a great number of monographs produced within a short period of time. Between 1903 and 1908, Winckler and Jeremias alone published a total of 19 books and pamphlets relating to the subject (not counting the former’s strictly Assyriological publications). The central theses were presented to the general public by Winckler in a book entitled Die babylonische Geisteskultur, published in 1907, and in several penetrating studies by Jeremias, such as Das Alte Testament im Lichte des Alten Orients (1904), Babylonisches im Neuen Testament (1905) and particularly Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur (1913). As indicated by these titles, the work of the pan-Babylonians continued the Babel-Bibel debate. It also immediately became the target of similar vehement attacks and criticism. The critics expectedly attacked the alleged great antiquity of Babylonian astronomy and the spread of Babylonian doctrines all over the world in remote antiquity. 11 The Mesopotamian world-view, as reconstructed by the pan-Babylonians, also came under attack; it was declared a methodically flawed projection of phenomena and
11 12
E.g., Kugler 1910. Jeremias 1902, 1907, 1908a; Winckler 1906a,
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJEC T
doctrines specific to the Hellenistic age and late antiquity backwards in time. Winckler and Jeremias sought to refute such criticism by carefully documented arguments, also adducing new evidence in support of their theories, e.g. from the recent excavations of the Hittite capital, Hattuša. 12 They also defiantly adopted the designation pan-Babylonians coined by their critics as their own, claiming that none of the pillars on which their theory rested had been shaken in the least by the criticism. 13 The long and bitter debate came to an end with the death of Winckler in 1913, just before the appearance of Jeremias’s magnum opus, Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur and the outbreak of the First World War. True, Jeremias’s brilliant student Ernst Weidner still contributed a final piece to it two years later with the publication of his Handbuch der babylonischen Astronomie; but the book had actually been completed earlier and had been in press since 1913. Jeremias himself continued his work after the war, preparing updated editions of his principal works and publishing several new monographs in the pan-Babylonian tradition, the last of which (Der Kosmos von Sumer, 1932), appeared only three years before his death; but in effect, the panBabylonian polemics had ended with World War I, and it was well over by the thirties. The pan-Babylonians thus passed away defiant and unshaken in their central theses. However, although they left a stunning legacy in the field of intercultural studies, they did not find many followers. In 1926, Zimmern’s student and successor, Benno Landsberger, sowed the seeds of a major turning point in Assy-
1907b. 13 Jeremias 1913: VII and 7. 239
P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJECT
riological studies. In his inaugural lecture at Leipzig, Landsberger distanced himself from the work of his predecessors 14 and outlined his own research programme, which stressed the “conceptual autonomy” (Eigenbegrifflichkeit) of the Mesopotamian civilisation and insisted that it should be reconstructed in its own terms and basically with recourse to the cuneiform evidence only. 1 5 Although Landsberger by no means denied the value of comparative studies, 16 the subsequent almost exclusive implementation of his heuristic method in Assyriology effectively paralysed interdisciplinary study of Mesopotamian religion for several decades. 1 7 Today, 72 years after the appearance of the second, completely revised edition of Jeremias’s Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur, this work remains the only systematic, welldocumented attempt to reconstruct the Mesopotamian world-view and correlate it with other comparable systems in the ancient world. While it cannot be said that cross-cultural studies are completely lacking in Assyriology since the panBabylonians, it is certainly true that there has been little effort to correlate Mesopotamian intellectual culture with the outside world since them. And that is not all. Not only has the work of the panBabylonians not been continued; it has also been largely forgotten; and if not forgotten, then tainted with a stamp of questionability that has made many serious scholars shun away from it as
something “suspicious.” Who nowadays reads Jeremias and Winckler, or for that matter, Delitzsch? Even the most recent, revised editions of their works are in many respects hopelessly out of date today. They refer to antiquated and/or defective editions of texts, and use name forms and chronological schemes that have long since been shown to be incorrect. 18 Worse still, their authors have been summarily branded as tendentious racists or charlatans with grossly exaggerated, fantastic claims. 19 Recent, on the whole factual, accounts of the Babel-Bibel debate paint a picture of Delitzsch as an embittered man imbued with Aryan ideology and trying to present Christianity as an ultimately Aryan religion. 20 In consequence, the main theses of the pan-Babylonians have been ridiculed and effectively rejected or turned upside down during the past decades. The recent revised edition of the Oxford Classical Dictionary, for example, expressly denies that there was any Mesopotamian mysticism before Hellenistic times. 2 1 Thus, whereas the pan-Babylonians maintained that Babylonian mysticism deeply influenced the entire ancient world, the current mainstream view is different and in fact diametrically opposed to theirs. Similarly, claims that the ancient Mesopotamians entertained a belief in resurrection from the dead, or a monotheistic concept of God, as maintained by the pan-Babylonians, have long been an
14
ential. It is no coincidence, for example, that I. J. Gelb’s famous article, where he urged Assyriologists to concentrate on the study of onions instead of religion (Gelb 1965), was published in a Festschrift presented to Landsberger. 18 E.g., “Ninib” for Ninurta, and 2850 as the approximate year of accession of Sargon the Great. 19 Cf., e.g., König 1954. 20 Huffmon 1983: 318; Larsen 1995: 103-105. 21 Gordon 1996.
Landsberger 1926: 356-357 = 1976: 5-7. Ironically, at the beginning of the lecture he praises both Delitzsch and Zimmern highly and refers to them as “men to whom our science owes most.” See also below. 15 Landsberger 1926: 358 = 1976: 6-7. 16 See Landsberger 1926: 357 = 1976: 6, and cf. n. 28 below. 17 Of course, Landsberger was not alone responsible for this development, but his views were very influ240
P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJEC T
anathema in Assyriology. Presenting such views in print is nowadays widely felt as dangerous in scholarly circles, as it automatically leads to association with the ideas of the pan-Babylonians, and thus to being stigmatised as a scholar of dubious judgement and outdated views. This is a paradoxical and, in many respects, surreal situation, as the diffusionist model of cultural evolution espoused by Delitzsch and the panBabylonians has by no means been proven wrong by later research. 22 On the contrary, the central contention of the pan-Babylonians, namely that Mesopotamian ideas, knowledge, and systems of thought were widely diffused throughout the ancient world since the earliest times, has by now become a firmly established fact, and can be extensively documented today. And how could it be otherwise? The ancient Mesopotamians did not live in a vacuum, but in constant interaction with their neighbours, and it is but natural that ideas and knowledge from Mesopotamia spread to the surrounding world, just as the Mesopotamians (of course) also received significant impulses from the outside world. Hence, it is not enough to study the Mesopotamian civilisation as an alien, isolated system only to be understood in its own terms, as such an approach artificially separates Mesopotamia from the rest of the world and obscures its pivotal role in the genesis and growth of a cultural oikumene that has kept growing and continually expanding to the present day. Since our knowledge of the past is fragmentary, it is essential that the available
Mesopotamian data be systematically correlated with other relevant (interdisciplinary) evidence to yield a deeper and more diversified understanding of the past. Interdisciplinary data are often mutually complementary and can thus significantly contribute to the understanding of the past, usually to the benefit of more than one discipline. Since cultural borrowings, like loanwords, are subject to variation from culture to culture on the surface level, different frames of reference often leading to surprisingly different modes of expression of the same ideas, 23 intercultural studies require considerable interdisciplinary competence, good critical judgement and sound methodology in order to produce viable results. 24 In view of the overwhelmingly negative acceptance of their work, it is ironical to note that the pan-Babylonians, as a whole, meet this requirement far better than most of their critics. Winckler, Zimmern, Jeremias and Weidner were all highly competent Assyriologists who had an excellent first-hand command of cuneiform sources of all types and periods, even by today’s standards. In addition, they had good knowledge of many fields of ancient Near Eastern studies and were well informed in astronomy, astrology, comparative mythology, biblical studies, classics, ethnology, and the relevant methodologies. Jeremias was a trained Christian theologian. Their teacher, Delitzsch, not only was the leading Assyriologist but also one of the leadings Semitists of his time. The school of Delitzsch laid great stress on sound methodology, scientific accu-
22
basis of isolated superficial similarities only; the similarities between the phenomena compared have to be historically and geographically feasible, systematic, functional, and specific enough to justify the hypothesis of a common origin.
Cf. Albright 1964: 50 and 309; Oppenheim 1964: 333-334; Beaulieu 2002: 14-15. 23 See, e.g., Panaino 2001 and the article of Grottanelli in the same volume. 24 Needless to say, historical connections between intercultural phenomena cannot be established on the
241
P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJECT
Reading the Babel-Bibel lectures today, it is almost unbelievable that they could have stirred such emotions and opposition as they did in their time. Many of the things presented in them have since then become firmly established parts of Assyriological and even general knowledge. What is more, the facts are presented in the same clear, intelligent and accurate manner that is also characteristic of Delitzsch’s scientific work. Along with established facts, he does present challenging ideas and interpretations that are still fresh and worth pursuing even today. However, he does not press them, but leaves the final judgement about them to future research. Despite allegations to contrary, it is difficult to find any racism or bitterness in the lectures. 26 The only occurrence of the word “Aryan” there is at the beginning of the first lecture, where Delitzsch discusses a drawing of Assurbanipal’s queen made by Billerbeck and remarks: “Wohl möglich, dass diese Gemahlin Sardanapals eine Prinzessin arischen Geblüts ist und blondhaarig zu denken.” But such remarks must be understood within the context of the time, when
racial theories were in vogue everywhere, not from the perspective of later times! There is nothing in the lectures even remotely suggesting that Delitzsch wanted to promote the idea of an Aryan Jesus. In the third lecture, he does (rightly) emphasise the (often overlooked) fact that the population of Galilee included a strong Babylonian element, but his point was to draw attention to the relevance of cuneiform evidence for New Testament studies, not to suggest a new racist interpretation of Christianity. 27 It is true that one can detect a certain change of tone and an occasional sarcasm in the last two lectures. But that is understandable considering the vicious and mostly totally unjustified feedback that the lectures received. It is also true that Delitzsch’s personal religious convictions surface here and there, and that he occasionally presents ideas that are difficult to endorse or sustain. But on the whole the tone of the lectures remains factual and the quality of information contained in them remarkably high throughout. The same can be said about the writings of Hugo Winckler, Alfred Jeremias and the other pan-Babylonians. One can disagree with the details of their reconstruction of the Mesopotamian worldview and its supposed spread all over the world, and many parts of their theories are certainly subject to refinement, adjustment and correction in light of the evidence that has become available afterwards. But the facts collected by them are on the whole presented accurately and reliably, and have not lost their validity. As far as the reconstruction of Mesopotamian esoteric thought is concerned, my own conclusions, based on a
25
27
racy and the importance of carefully documenting all scientific assertions. In his famous lecture already referred to, Landsberger says of Delitzsch: In their enthusiasm of discovery the early decipherers often imbued the simple monuments with too much of their own ideas and so gave Assyriology a reputation for fancifulness. Friedrich Delitzsch imposed on this freely creative fantasy the fetters of sound methodology and laid the foundations of our philology by quiet, persevering work, uninfluenced by sensationalism. 25
26
Landsberger 1976: 5 = 1926: 356. Lehmann 1904: 268.
242
See Delitzsch 1905: 11, 56f.
P ARPOLA
different approach and a different set of data, in many essential points agree with theirs. 28 It seems to me that the negative attitude to the work of the pan-Babylonians, like the emotions stirred by the BabelBibel lectures, largely stems from careless and/or ideologically biased reading of their writings and insufficient firsthand knowledge of Mesopotamian primary sources, rather than impartial study of the actual facts. I cannot but concur with Marie Pancratius who, in response to Cumont’s slighting evaluation of the work of the pan-Babylonians, wrote in 1913: Even one who – like the reviewer – has never stood in the ranks of the panBabylonians, must protest against such a summary. A feuilletonist may not resist the temptation of it; but if a scholar like F. Cumont wishes to judge a group of scholars before a circle of laymen, he must know their work otherwise than just from disputatious writings. Even if the paths which a scholar undaunted by error boldly cleared to an unknown land unfolding from a new, constantly increasing documentation taking us into an ever more distant past, would not seem to lead where they should lead – even Columbus did not discover India – they have nevertheless led to a more diversified orientation, and broad vistas and overviews. And how many stimuli have come from the pan-Babylonian idea – even beyond the confines of Assyriology! I am reminded of the strong impulse that comparative mythology received from it.
28
My scholarly work has from the beginning been guided by Landsberger’s heuristic method, as can be easily seen from my analysis of the correspondence of Neo-Assyrian scholars (Parpola 1983). However, I also attach considerable importance to the comparative method and the use of interdisciplinary evidence (cf. Parpola 1997). These methods are not mutually exclusive but complementary: as stressed by Landsberger (1976: 7 = 1926: 358), interdisciplinary evidence is vital for the success of the heuristic method. There is, of course, an order of priority in which the two methods must be applied. The heuristic method
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJEC T
Even if one does not want to believe in Babylon as the source of all the myths of the world nor in the uniquely mythologizing power of the Aryans or the hoary antiquity of the sky myth, one must acknowledge an admirable work achievement valuable, in any case, as a preliminary work and fresh effort to penetrate the riddles of myth… Such a successful hypothesis can impossibly be placed in the same line with a futile soap bubble. 29
Naturally, much in the writings of the pan-Babylonians is obsolete and redundant today. Nevertheless, I believe their work is still valuable and should by no means be overlooked or summarily discarded. Apart from the fact that it is the only systematic attempt to date to reconstruct the Mesopotamian world-view in a coherent manner, it also contains a great deal of cuneiform data correlated with parallel evidence from other Near Eastern and classical traditions, much of which is not found or discussed in later Assyriological publications. From the viewpoint of the M ELAMMU project and intercultural studies in general, it is absolutely essential that these data be checked for their reliability, brought up to date and made available in a revised form – otherwise they will remain accessible exclusively through the writings of the pan-Babylonians, and will, en faute de mieux, continue being cited in this form indefinitely. I intend to go through all interdisciplinary publications of the pan-Babylo-
comes first; only after the Mesopotamian data have been thoroughly analysed in their own right, can they be successfully compared with cross-cultural data, which naturally must also be well explored (cf. Landsberger 1976: 6 = 1926: 357). While Delitzsch and the pan-Babylonians may have laid greater stress on the comparative method, their extensive first-hand familiarity with the cuneiform sources makes it certain that they had by no means neglected the heuristic approach. 29 Pancratius 1913: 405 (my translation).
243
P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJECT
nians, extract from them data that can be considered valid, and have them incorporated in the M ELAMMU database now under construction. This way, the pioneering work of the pan-Babylonians will not get lost but can be put at the service of the scholarly world and the general public. The aim of this enterprise, which certainly is not an easy one but will take time and effort, is not to prove or disprove the theories of the pan-Babylonians but simply to take advantage of their pioneering work. The M ELAMMU
project does not advocate a Mesopotamia-centred view of cultural evolution but studies the interaction of Mesopotamian culture with other cultures over a broad time scale. The pan-Babylonians have already collected and analysed much of the relevant evidence, which is not always easy to identify, and sooner or later it will be necessary to readdress the issues raised by them in light of the evidence available today. I believe it makes sense to check out their evidence and give it the credit that it deserves.
B IBLIOGRAPHY Albright, William F. (1964) History, Archaeology and Christian Humanism. New York. Beaulieu, Paul-Alain (2002) “W. F. Albright and Assyriology,” Near Eastern Archaeology 65, 11-16. Cumont, Franz (1912) Astrology and Religion among the Greeks and Romans. New York. Delitzsch, Friedrich (1902) Babel und Bibel. Ein Vortrag. Leipzig (52 pp). Second and third editions (78 pp.), 1903; 4th ed. (81 pp.), 1903; 5th ed. (82 pp.), 1905; 6th ed. (80 pp.), 1921. (1903) Zweiter Vortrag über Babel und Bibel. Stuttgart (48 pp). Second edition, 1903; 3rd ed. (50 pp.), 1903; 4th ed. (62 pp.), 1904. (1905) Babel und Bibel. Dritter (Schluss-)Vortrag. Stuttgart. 69 pp. (1907) Mehr Licht. Die bedeutsamsten Ergebnisse der babylonisch-assyrischen Grabungen. Leipzig. Gelb, I. J. (1965) “The Philadelphia Onion Archive,” in H. G. Güterbock and T. Jacobsen (eds.), Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on his Seventy-Fifth Birthday April 21, 1965 (Assyriological Studies 16, Chicago and London), 57-62. Gordon, Richard L. (1996) “Mysteries,” in Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth (eds.), The Oxford Classical Dictionary, Third Edition (Oxford), 1017-1018. Huffmon, Herbert B. (1983) “Babel und Bibel: The Encounter Between Babylon and the Bible,” Michigan Quarterly Review 22, 309-320. Jensen, Peter (1890) Die Kosmogonie der Babylonier. Studien und Materialien. Strassburg. (1906) Das Gilgamesh-Epos in der Weltliteratur, Bd. I. Strassburg. (1909) Moses, Jesus, Paulus. Drei Varianten des babylonischen Gottmenschen Gilgamesch. Eine Anklage wider die Theologen, ein Apell für die Leien. Frankfurt. 244
P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJEC T
(1928) Das Gilgamesh-Epos in der Weltliteratur, Bd. II. Marburg a. L. Jeremias, Alfred (1902) Im Kampfe um Babel und Bibel. Ein Wort zur Verständingung und Abwehr (vierte, abermals erweiterte Auflage 1903). Leipzig. (1903a) Hölle und Paradies bei den Babyloniern. Leipzig. (1903b) Abraham als Babylonier, Joseph als Ägypter. Leipzig. (1904a) Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients. Handbuch zur biblischorientalischen Altertumskunde. Leipzig. (1904b) Monotheistische Strömungen innerhalb der babylonischen Religion. Leipzig. (1905) Babylonisches im Neuen Testament. Leipzig. (1906) Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients. Handbuch zur biblischorientalischen Altertumskunde (zweite Auflage). Leipzig. (1907) Die Panbabylonisten. Der alte Orient und die ägyptische Religion. Im Kampfe um den Alten Orient 1. Leipzig. (1908a) Das Alter der babylonischen Astronomie. Im Kampfe um den Alten Orient 3. Leipzig. (1908b) Der Einfluss Babyloniens auf das Verständnis des Alten Testaments. Biblische Zeit- und Streitfragen 4, 2. Berlin. (1913) Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur. Leipzig. XVI, 366 pp. (1927) Die ausserbiblische Erlöserwartung. Berlin. (1929a) Die Weltanschauung der Sumerer. Der Alte Orient 27, 4. Leipzig. (1929b) Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur. Zweite, völlig erneuerte Auflage. Berlin. XVIII, 508 pp. (1930) “Panbabylonismus,” in Kurt Galling (ed.), Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Band 4, 879-880. (1931a) Der Schleier von Sumer bis heute. Der Alte Orient 31, 1/2. Leipzig. (1931b) Die Biblische Erlöserwartung. Berlin. (1932) Der Kosmos von Sumer. Der Alte Orient 32, 1. Leipzig. König, Franz (1954) “Babel-Bibel, fünfzig Jahre später. Ein Schulbeispiel für den Irrweg einer voreingenommenen Wissenschaft,” Wort und Wahrheit 7, 677-686. Kugler, Franz Xaver (1910) Im Bannkreis Babylons. Panbabylonistische Konstruktionen und religionsgeschichtliche Tatsachen. Münster. Landsberger, Benno (1926) “Die Eigenbegrifflichkeit der babylonischen Welt. Ein Vortrag,” Islamica 2, 355-372. (1965) Reprint of Landsberger 1926 with a “Nachwort,” in B. Landsberger/W. von Soden, Die Eigenbegrifflichkeit der babylonischen Welt/Leistung und Grenze sumerischer und babylonischer Wissenschaft (Darmstadt), 1-19. (1976) The Conceptual Autonomy of the Babylonian World (transl. T. Jacobsen, B. Foster and H. von Siebenthal). Monographs on the Ancient Near East 1/4. Malibu. Larsen, Mogens Trolle (1995) “The ‘Babel/Bible’ Controversy and Its Aftermath,” in J. Sasson et al. (eds.), Civilizations of the Ancient Near East (New York), 95-106.
245
P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJECT
Lehmann, Reinhard G. (1992) “Jeremias, Alfred,” in W. Bautz (ed.), BiographischBibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, Bd. 3 (Herzberg), 43-49. (1994) Friedrich Delitzsch und der Babel-Bibel-Streit. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 133. Freiburg/Schweitz. Lewis, Theodore J. (2002) “The ‘Babel-Bibel’ Controversy,” Near Eastern Archaeology 65, 14. Oppenheim, A. Leo (1964) Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead Civilization. Chicago and London. Panaino, Antonio (2001) “Between Mesopotamia and India: Some Remarks about the Unicorn Cycle in Iran,” in R.M. Whiting (ed.), Mythology and Mythologies. Melammu Symposia 2 (Helsinki), 149-179. Pancritius, Marie (1913) Review of Cumont 1912, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1913/9, 404-405. Parpola, Simo (1983) Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, Part II: Commentary and Appendices. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 5/2. Neukirchen-Vluyn. (1997) Assyrian Prophecies. State Archives of Assyria 9. Helsinki. Rollinger, Robert (1999) “Babel-Bibel-Streit und Panbabylonismus,” Der Neue Pauly 13, 380-382. Tallqvist, Knut (1920a) Madonnas förhistoria. Populärvetenskaplika skrifter utgivna av Finska Orient-Sällskapet, Svensk serie N:o1. Helsingfors. (1920b) Konungen med Guds nåde (King by the Grace of God). Populärvetenskaplika skrifter utgivna av Finska Orient-Sällskapet, Svensk serie N:o 2. Helsingfors. (1938) Kuu ja ihminen (Man and the Moon). Suomen Itämaisen Seuran kansantajuisia julkaisuja 9. Helsinki. (1943) Eläinrata (The Zodiac). Suomen Itämaisen Seuran kansantajuisia julkaisuja 10. Helsinki. Weidner, Ernst F. (1912) “Zum Alter der babylonischen Astronomie,” Babyloniaca 6, 129-134. (1913) “Die Entdeckung der Präzession, eine Geistestat babylonischer Astronomen,” Babyloniaca 7, 1-19. (1914) Alter und Bedeutung der babylonischen Astronomie und Astrallehre, nebst Studien über Fixsternhimmel und Kalender. Im Kampfe um den Alten Orient 4. Leipzig. (1915) Handbuch der babylonischen Astronomie. Assyriologische Bibliothek 23. Leipzig. Winckler, Hugo (1901) Himmels- und Weltenbild der Babylonier als Grundlage der Weltanschauung und Mythologie aller Völker. Leipzig. (1902) Die babylonische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zur unsrigen. Leipzig. (1903b) Himmels- und Weltenbild der Babylonier als Grundlage der Weltanschauung und Mythologie aller Völker. Zweite durchgesehene und erweiterte Auflage. Der Alte Orient 3, 2/3. Leipzig.
246
P ARPOLA
T HE R ELEVANCE OF THE P AN -B ABYLONIAN S CHOOL TO THE M ELAMMU P ROJEC T
(1905a) Die Euphratländer und das Mittelmeer. Der Alte Orient 7, 2. Leipzig. (1905b) Die Weltanschauung des alten Orients. Ex Oriente Lux 1, 1. Leipzig. (1906a) Der alte Orient und die Bibel nebst einem Anhang Babel und Bibel–Bibel und Babel. Ex Oriente Lux 2, 1. Leipzig. (1906b) Altorientalische Geschichts-Auffassung. Ex Oriente Lux 2, 2. Leipzig. (1906c) Der alte Orient und die Geschichtsforschung. MVAG 1906, 1. Berlin. (1906d) Religionsgeschichtlicher und geschichtlicher Orient. Eine Prüfung der Voraussetzungen der religionsgeschichtlicher Betrachtung des Alten Testaments. Leipzig. (1906e) Die babylonische Weltschöpfung. Der Alte Orient 8, 1. Leipzig. (1907a) Die babylonische Geisteskultur. Leipzig. (1907b) Die jüngsten Kämpfer wider den Panbabylonismus. Im Kampfe um den Alten Orient 2. Leipzig. Wünsche, August (1904) “Zu Babel und Bibel,” Vierteljahresschrift für Bibelkunde 2, 222-227. (1905) Die Sagen vom Lebensbaum und Lebenswasser, altorientalische Mythen. Ex Oriente Lux 1, 2. Leipzig. (1906a) Salomos Thron und Hippodrom: Abbilder des babylonischen Himmelsbildes. Ex Oriente Lux 2, 3. Leipzig. (1906b) Schöpfung und Sündenfall des ersten Menschenpaares im jüdischen und moslemischen Sagenkreise mit Berücksichtigung auf die Überlieferungen in der Keilschrift-Literatur. Ex Oriente Lux 2, 4. Leipzig. Zimmern, Heinrich (1903a) Keilinschriften und Bibel nach ihrem religionsgeschichtlichen Zusammenhang. Ein Leitfaden zur Orientierung im sog. Babel-Bibel-Streit mit Einbeziehung auch der neutestamentlichen Probleme. Berlin. (1903b) “Religion und Sprache,” in Eberhard Schrader (ed.), Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament, mit Ausdehnung auf die Apokryfen, Pseudepigraphen und das Neue Testament neu bearbeitet von H. Zimmern und H. Winckler (Leipzig), 343-654. (1903c) Biblische und babylonische Urgeschichte. Der Alte Orient 2, 3. Leipzig. (1909) “Babylonians and Assyrians,” in James Hastings (ed.), Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. 2 (Edinburgh), 309-319. (1910) Zum Streit um die “Christusmythe.” Das babylonische Material in seinen Hauptpunkten dargestellt. Berlin. (1915) Akkadische Fremdwörter als Beweis für babylonischen Kultureinfluss. Leipzig.
247
P IRAS
A NDREA P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
Ravenna
Mesopotamian Sacred Marriage and Pre-Islamic Iran*
he Mesopotamian heritage of the Achaemenid culture is a well established fact that deserves no particular mention in a foreword or introductory remarks. Nevertheless, the legacy of such a cultural background is sometimes curious with regard to some aspects which developed contrastive evolutions inside the Iranian milieu. A specimen of this trend is surely the cultural pattern of the sacred marriage, composed of a mythical scenario and a ritual drama creating a deep impression on the mind and feelings, with ideological consequences in the sacral legitimation of the Mesopotamian kingship. The recent contribution of Martti Nissinen (2001) is the better updated essay about the Mesopotamian sacred marriage (or hieros gamos) and its rich and flourishing literature – describing the sacred union between two divinities (mythology) as well as between human and divine beings (ritual) performed by a priestess and a god, or by the king and a goddess. This religious phaenomenon has Sumerian origins and dates back to the late third and early second millennium B.C. and later attested in the cultural history of Mesopotamia and of the Babylonian and Assyrian periods during more than half a millennium, from the 8th through the 2nd century B.C. In spite of the possibility of a strong impact and scenography we have to admit
a curious lack of evidence of this cultural pattern with regard to the Pre-Islamic Iranian royal ideology: as a matter of fact, no Iranian text – Avesta, Achaemenid inscriptions (6th-4th B.C.), Sasanian inscriptions (3th-4th A.D.) – records any hint comparable to the Mesopotamian literary tradition of hymns and prayers focused on the encounter (and not necessarily ‘intercourse’) between the goddess and the king; and we can affirm the same for the Middle Persian literature of the Pahlavi texts – of late composition (9th A.D.) even if dating back to a more ancient period of conception. Probably all this depends on the priestly autorship (as we shall see below) pertaining this kind of religious texts – i.e. the Avesta and the Zoroastrian Pahlavi texts – but we can also recognize a similar trend of oblivion in the Achaemenid royal inscriptions, secular and ideological documents par excellence characterized by a multishaped literary framework, with a degree of zoroastrianization mixed with different cultural levels related to the Indo-Iranian heritage (and backwards, to the Indo-Europaean one, in some cases) and Near Eastern acculturations (Skjærvø 1999: 14). It sounds very strange that in spite of the massive influence played by the Mesopotamian culture in the development of the Persian civilization – in religion, arts, science, writing, architecture, law, political and administrative
* Paper delivered at the Third MELAMMU Symposium: “Ideologies as Intercultural Phenomena,” Chicago 27-31 October 2000. I wish to thank Walter
Burkert, Stefano Seminara and Joan Westenholz for their valuable help and advice.
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
249
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
organizations – this impressionistic and theatrical cult of the sacred marriage, so deeply interlaced with the glorification of the kingship, with a lot of dramatic performances, failed to grasp the Achaemenid agenda of the royal ideology and propaganda. 1 Furthermore, the possible involvement of population in some collective phases of such a ritual could certainly have been a not negligible factor – and especially in Babylon, where the couple Marduk-Zarpanitu (in the temple of Esagila) or Šamaš-Aya (in the temple of Ebabbar) were at their own home – to guarantee and increase the popular ‘audience’ and consensus, as in the case of Cyrus’ Cylinder and the Nabonidus Chronicle. These two important cuneiform documents drew a clear picture of the Achaemenid religio-political strategy of cultural absorption concerning the Mesopotamian traditions, and showing (Nabonidus Chronicle) the adoption of epitheta like bibil libbi “beloved one,” one expression of typical Mesopotamian taste, 2 connected to the emotional relationship between the god and the king (Oppenheim 1981: 537, 546) and also to the cheerful mood of the people, welcoming Cyrus’ entry with benedictions (kar bu) and shouts of joy (sam ru), praising him as the one who had saved their lives. Contrary to, in the Achaemenid pantheon there is no trace of such a divine
couple. 3 In the Achaemenid inscriptions the foremost role of divine entities is played by Ahura Mazd , with some scarce references to “other gods,” an elliptical usage of literary expressions dealing with a rhetorical device of cumulative definiton of the pantheon, with Ahura Mazd at the top, followed by “the other gods who are” (aniy ha bag ha tayai hanti [DB IV 61]). With the exception of the supreme god Ahura Mazd , and a part of the above mentioned elliptical statement, we can recognize a more articulated and threefold équipe in the Artaxerxes’ inscriptions (404-359 B.C.), in which the two other major gods of the Iranian peoples are mentioned, Mi!ra and An hit , together with Ahura Mazd : “by the favour of Ahuramazda An hit and Mi!ra this palace I built; May Ahuramazda, An hit and Mi!ra protect me from all evil, and that which I have built may they not shatter nor harm” (Artaxerxes II, Susa A; Kent 1953: 134). In taking into consideration the development of the cult of An hit during the reign of Artaxerxes II – even though her promotion dated back to the former time of Artaxerxes’ parents Darius II and Parysatis, according to Boyce (1982: 201204) – it is worth noticing to quote the Plutarch’s Greek source of Vita Artaxerxis 3, which is very late and far from Achaemenid times but really interesting
1
about a hierogamical situation by the Imperial Aramaic inscription (nr. 264 in Donner-Röllig 1971: 51; 1973: 311) of Arebsun – ancient Arabissos, Cappadocia – dated on paleographic grounds to the fifth/ fourth century B.C. and providing evidence for an Iranian-Semitic coalescence in the name of Ahura Mazd (’whrmzd) called B"l. But this inscription does not concern in a real scenario of royal initiation although it is a very important wittness for the debate on the Zoroastrian custom of the next-of-kindmarriage, a kind of sacred marriage which probably has been influenced by some mystical aspects of Mesopotamian hierogamy (Gnoli 1974: 33) and which I shall deal with it in further researches.
The episode of Antiochus IV Epiphanes – quoted by the Second Book of Maccabees (1, 13-17) – who entered the temple of Nanay in ‘Persia’ (= Susa), and under the pretext of one marriage with the goddess tried to take away the treasure of her temple, is a story that underlines the persistence of the hierogamy in the Iranian area after the Achaemenid period. But it increases the interrogative about the silence and the lack of evidences in the Iranian sources. 2 In the Sumerian hymns the king is identified with Tammuz and they are both the beloved of Ištar: šalim šarrumma šalim dumuzi šudat išt r “the king is safe, Dumuzi is safe, the beloved of Ištar” (Nissinen 2001: 117). 3 Outside the Achaemenid inscriptions, we are told 250
P IRAS
about our subject. Moreover, it is the unique document which can justify the researcher in this way of study, in tempting to reconstruct a likely outlook of a hierogamigal situation by collecting different items. By this text we are told about a “warlike goddess” ( !"#$%&'()*+) compared by Plutarch to Athena. But let Plutarch speak about the important topic of a ritual scenario connected with the inthronization of the second Artaxerxes (Artaxerxes ,-+(.-), the longest-reigning Achaemenid: The new king made an expedition to Pasargadae, that he might receive the royal initiation at the hands of the Persian priest (/!01")2# 3'0!.-). Here there is a sanctuary of a warlike goddess (415) 67# '82# $%&'()*92# 3'0:-) assumed to be Athena. Into this sanctuary the candidate for initiation must go, and after laying aside his own proper robe, must put on what Cyrus the Elder used to wear before he became king; then he must eat a figcake, chew some turpentine-wood, and drink a cup of sour milk.
Unfortunately, this is the unique source recording a Persian and Achaemenid custom of royal initiation which mentions the presence of a goddess, and there are not further hints to hypothesize other forms of close relationship between these “warlike goddess” and king Artaxerxes. Indeed, we have to suppose that according to the royal ideology of legitimation nothing but the presence of the gods was necessary to grant the divine charisma to the king, in a scenario very similar to the Sasanian rock reliefs, where the triade of gods is carved: Ahura Mazd!, Mi"ra and An!hit!, surround the king giving him the insignia of royal power. 4 Truly speaking, in order to understand
4
See Vanden Berghe (1988) for the iconographic antecedent of the Iranian royal investiture and the continuity of Mesopotamian artistic models in the Achaemenid and Sasanian times: the pattern of the
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
the expression ‘sacred marriage,’ or ‘hierogamy’ in a broader sense, it is not always necessary to imagine e real union but rather a symbolic one: the ‘reality’ of the cultic scenography is created by the dramatis personae acting as the human and the divine counterpart (sometimes in the shape of a statue) of one interplay between earth and heaven, in which the mondane component find a support, a legitimation, through the favour of the supernatural realm. The “warlike goddess” of Plutarch shows one of the main features related to An!hit!, probably borrowed by the bellicose typology of some Near Eastern goddesses (Gnoli 1974: 33-36) and continued until the Sasanian times, in the dynastic cult of F!rs (Chaumont 1958, 1965), where An!h#d the ‘Lady’ (b n!) shared with Ištar (b"ltum, b"lit ‘lady’) this honourific epithet (Eilers 1988: 715). According to the scheme traced by Carsten Colpe (1983: 845-6), the many functions of An!hit! can be scheduled in some features: one aspect of the legitimation of the sovereignity, providing the king with carisma, and enthronement (especially in later times, under the Sasanians); a general Hellenistic aspect (Syrian Philadelphia, Lydia, Cappadocia); an ethnic Iranian aspect as a personified symbol of flowing water, and a cultural Iranian aspect, mythologically related to other gods. From the Zoroastrian point of view, this classification includes all these aspects with the exception of the Hellenistic ones: in fact some Hellenistic marks developed in Asia Minor were surely unthinkable in a true Zoroastrian mentality: especially the custom of hieroduly,
investiture scene seems to have been the rock-relief of Sar-i Pul in which the king Anubanini, because of his victory, pays hommmage to Ininna/Ištar holding the power ring and giving it to the king. 251
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
connected with Anaitis (the Hellenistic portrait of An hit in Asia Minor), as we can see by reading the Anatolian inscription of Ortaköy (ancient Cappadocia) dedicated to the great goddess Anaitis Barzochara 5 ( !"# $!%&'()# "*"!&(&+& ,"-./0"-") by her temple-servants: Let the temple-servant (1234546748) Photis and Theon and Prima, also called Garse, be unscathed in all things, together with their children, throughout life.
The ambiguous label of ‘hieroduly,’ together with ‘sacred prostitution’ as well, are both difficult words to treat, and this is the same for the ‘hierogamy,’ usually classified in the range of ‘sexual rites’ (Bleeker 1975: 216-217) and so being often arbitrary evaluated only under the explicit and real sexual point of view – the most prominent item but not the unique one: the symbolic and the metaphorical side of the question should always be considered in reading the texts. A more strict criticism of the texts can show a reassessement of prejudicial component: in the case of a condemnation attested in Biblical sources towards fertility components of Cananean origins and New Year celebration (Asmussen 1957: 170-171). Most confusion may also arise from a misreading of the common Biblical metaphors of sexual misconduct to signify idolatry; but the understanding
5
See Harper (1967); according to Schmitt (1970: 210) the epithet ,93:4;<939 is a Greek rendering of a genuine Iranian form, *b zi-har! “von der hohen Har stammend,” related to the mythical mountain of An hit , the Har B=r=zaiti (Yašt 5.21). For a different explanation of such a compound (,93:4- < var!cah- “strength, energy”; -<939 < xvarr- / farnah“glory”) see Wikander (1972) 6 Even during the reign of Artaxerxes II, the Greek inscription of Sardis is particularly reliable in showing a certain attitude of Zoroastrian censorship, in order to stop the mixture of Persian cults with those of the people of western Asia Minor, interdicting the servants of the cult of Zeus Baradates from taking 252
of femal cultic personnel of Mesopotamia really excludes any hint of prostitution or sexual promiscuity for categories like the nad tum (hierodule), SU.GE-tum (lay priestess) and qadištu (holy one) and all these types of woman seem to have been highly respected (Fisher 1976: 236) Probably Wikander (1946: 89) was right in arguing that the polemic directed against the “whore” (jah ) in various Avestan passages was in fact directed against certain current forms of An hit / Anaitis’ ritual admitting this usage, but we have to understand the reality of such a phaenomenon in a true manner: as a self-offering to the goddess, 6 a votary behaviour, and self-oblation to the divinity about which we are informed again by Plutarch (Artaxerxes 27.4), recording the story of the Achaemenian noble woman Aspasia who became “the priestess of the Artemis of Ecbatana, who bears the name of Anaitis, in order that she might remain chaste for the rest of her life.” It is not easy to understand this statement and to know whether all priestess of An hit were required at Artaxerxes II epoch to be chaste for life; even if “celibacy is not in general a state respected by Zoroastrians, or regarded by them as meritorius” (Boyce 1982: 220) we cannot absolutely deny it in the social milieu of pre-Islamic Iran, given the heterogeneous composition of the Zoroastrian religion 7 through
part in the celebration of the mysteries of Sabazios, including an improper use of fire (Sokolowski 1979). Furthermore, in Sardis was attested a local aspect of Anaitis, i.e. '935>9?@#A3B2C>8. 7 The institution of hieroduly, in the meaning of a sacred service offered to the temple, is attested during the Sasanian period (Perikhanian 1983: 640-641), but the ‘slave of the temple’ (!taxš bandag) did not constitute a social category and his task was a somewhat honorary dedication to the shrine activities, and not slavery. For the Talmudic expression ‘bd’ dnwr’ ‘servant of fire’ and the relationship between Jews and Sasanian legal conceptions, see recently Macuch 2002.
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
the centuries of its cultural history, recorded in different sources and in various and multi-shaped mythological and iconographic interpretationes, switching from Iranian traits to Semitic ones and then fashioned in Greek and Hellenistic garb. The ‘prostitute’ is a word belonging to the sphere of human behaviour harshly condemmned by Zoroastrianism: in the Avestan text Ard Yašt, Aši complains to Ahura Mazd! about the “prostitute” with a barren womb, the prostitute who brings to her husband a child by another man and about the powerful man who lets the young women go unmarried (Yt. 17. 54, 57, 58). Apart from that, the “prostitute” (Avestan jahik or jah#) is a somewhat term used to designate any bad or immoral women and especially a kind of border-figure connected with sorcerers and warlike societies (Männerbünde: see Wikander 1938: 64-65, 84) performing obscure cults and immoral practices (of violence, drunkeness, ecstasy and sexual licentiousness) denounced by Zoroastrian priestly tradition. The prostitute-witch (jahi y tumaiti in the Avestan texts of Yt. 3.9, 12, 16) is a kind of woman belonging to this dark-side milieu of magic attitude and sorcery; in a similar way, even if without moral proscription, the Babylonian qadištu, a consecrated woman with peculiar status, is often counted among sorceress and witches, probably because of her involvement in exorcistic rituals (Westenholz 1989: 253). In this condemnation of a female function the Zoroastrianism recalls certain features of Judaism: in the Bible the metaphor for idolatry (Is 1:121. Jer 2:20, 3:14. Ezk 16, 23; Hos 1.3) and breaking up of the covenant bond between Yahweh and the
people is symbolised by harlotry (z$n ), even if z$n and q ed"š (holy one) are different terms (Fisher 1976: 232-233) and the condemnation of sacred prostitution seems to have been a merely prohibition of a particular class of temple personnel connected with foreign cults. But the Zoroastrianism was very strict in this case and showed a scanty degree of nuance, without semantic distinctions of terminology, in banishing the so-called ‘whore’ (jah#) and her licentious misbehaviour 8 (see Panaino 1997). Further probable hints of a hierogamical symbolism are matter of speculation, and we can deduce them from the Iranian sources like the Avesta. The priestly code of Zoroastrian holy writings is a reliable wittness of many cultural levels developed by the Zoroastrian religion during the centuries of his religious history, from the past of the eastern origin of Zarathustra and down to the westwards migration of his spiritual teachings, under the care of sages and priests known as “Magi,” very skilled in one syncretistic intellectual attitude, in getting in touch with alien faiths and beliefs. With regard to the methodology of Melammu Project, the most relevant task is concerning to the analysis of different literary strata of Ancient Iranian texts, in order to distinguish the Iranian component from the Indo-Iranian heritage and then to stress the Near Eastern contribution in this multifarious shaping of the Iranian cultural identity Although I will not discuss here the Indoeuropean methodology, focused on the so called ‘threefold structure’ of Georges Dumézil, I would like to remember that from the point of view of
8 Further inquiries should take into consideration one interesting parallel between Iranian and Mesopotamian topics: e.g. the Avestan text (Vd. 13.48) match-
ing the dog with the prostitute, which recalls the identification of the male-prostitution with the dog (Akkadian assinnu, Kornfeld 1972: 130). 253
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
the comparison of an ‘Indoeuropean poetical language’ (Indogermanische Dichtersprache) we can restore a lot of parallels and literary statements which are very useful to delucidate a certain degree of common heritage. The Indo-Iranian perspective is also very promising for drawing a sketch of comparative topics, shared by both the Ancient Indian culture and the Ancient Iranian one, and recognizable in looking up the Indo-Iranian texts like the Veda and the Avesta, with their stereotyped formulas addressed to the gods, or related to cultic prescriptions and ritual performances. But this way of thinking for the analysis of such a common store of stereotyped expressions and rhetorical employement could be more enriched by an historical approach blending in one creative mixture all these different methodological devices, in order to find further hints that a comparative and Indo-Iranian approach could not explain in full, without the multishaped heritage created by historical contacts and alien components borrowed by the Iranian people from the Mesopotamian culture. 9 In a very similar way, the historical understanding of Indian culture can by no means be limited to the Aryan and Rigvedic component: on the contrary, the flourishing of the Indian mythology of Hinduism, of the great epic of Mah bh rata and R m ya a and the formation of Tantra cults was the result of a fertile dynamic of interrelationship between the Indo-Aryan and pre-Aryan peoples. In order to exemplify this different approach to the study of Iranian texts, such as the Avesta, with a possible Mesopotamian outlook, or influence, we can
choose some narrative materials out of the Yašts, the hymns centered upon a single divinity. The Yašts dedicated to Aši or to An hit are the most instructive for showing a possible Near Eastern model at the base of their composition. These two important goddess could also explain some traits of beauty and sensuality, sharing some reliable features with other mythological typologies of Near Eastern divinities. As a matter of fact, the literary descriptions of these Avestan texts can display some portraits of goddesses within the Mesopotamian cultural frame: for example, An hit is invoked as a magnificent being in her Avestan Hymn (Yašt 5), richly arrayed in high-girt robe and with a rayed crown that immediately recalls that of Ištar (Panaino 2000: 38), while the luxury of her clothing and gold ornaments are comparable with the descriptions of the Ištar of Lagaba (Boyce 1982: 203) In the Yašt dedicated to Aši (Yašt 17) we have a sort of composition which incorporates materials reaching back to pre-Zoroastrian Iran but that were later adapted to the teachings of Zarathustra, and blended with a more recent and western stratum. In comparison with other ancient Yašt, this hymn to Aši is quite unusual for its literary qualities, especially in its sensual description of the homes of Aši’s favorites and their wives: who lie awaiting their men’s return from battle on sumptuously decorated couches, and in the concern in marital values expressed in this worldly and fashionable text recording beautiful girls, wearing wonderfully precious jewelry (Skjærvø 1986). Arthur Christensen
9 As a demonstration, the website of the Melammu Database just installed (<www.aakkl.helsinki.fi/ melammu/>) with the entries, done by myself, dedi-
cated to the Iranian-Mesopotamian contacts, can give a presentation of textual evidences. See as well Piras 2002.
254
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
(1928: 9) remarked that this description tunes very well with the refined civilization of the Achaemenid empire and with the luxurious magnificence of the Persian court, even if it is not certain that this section of Ard Yašt was composed so late. 10 Just in pre-Zoroastrian times, Aši must have been an important goddess of fertility and matrimony; she is especially linked to Mi!ra in the Yašt dedicated to Mi!ra (Mihr Yašt), where she looks as his charioteer and for this reason she is linked to Dawn and the primeval light. As the goddess of recompense she is the personification of fortune or capricious luck transformed by Zarathustra into “recompense for good deeds.” She is beautiful, tall, strong, profit-bringing, with healing powers and much intelligence. Nevertheless, her divine protection is refused to three categories of individuals who shall not receive a share in Aši’s offerings. These are the men whose semen has dried up, the “prostitute” (jahik -) who is past the age of fertility, and young men and women who have not yet reached puberty. One epithet of Aši recalls the titulature of the Mesopotamian goddess Aya (Powell 1989: 447-455), the consort of Šamaš connected with early morning light, the beautiful Dawn goddess endowed with sex-appeal who is Mistress of Joy and Rejoicings, and “joyously radiant” (Sumerian ninulšutag). In a similar way, Aši blazes in the dawning (Yt. 17.6) and is “radiant of joy” (b numaiti iti), showing a kind of sunny gladness related to the sexual beauty. Is it possible that a Mesopotamian epithet might have been fixed in the oral transmission and codification of the later Avestan texts? This is only a matter of
speculation but given the multishaped and prismatic framework of the history of literary composition, and intertextuality, of the Avestan code – including ancient Iranian narrative materials, mixed with items taken up in the westward expansion of the Iranian culture, in the contact with other conceptions and traditions – there are well-grounded reasons for such a supposition, by the time that even the older sections of the Avesta, the G th s, can be compared with Assyrian texts for a better understanding of some rhetorical peculiarities (Gnoli 1999: 613). Then, it is very likely that inside the dynamic of continuity and change of the primeval Iranian tradition the encounter with the vivid, picturesque and poetical tradition of Semitic civilizations may have provided a stock of statement increasing the Iranian vocabulary with images of sensuality and beauty, so broadly attested in Near Eastern tradition. Such an epithet of Aši “radiant of joy” can also be stressed by another reference to one atmosphere of earthly love feelings related to human beings protected by Aši herself, the divine mistress of worldly and blissfull life, bestowing rewards and gifts to her own believers, who are rich and fortunate, like those strong men ruling with possessions and abundant stores of food, living in well established dwellings rich in cattle and abundantly stocked for long inhabiting; whose couches are well spread, well perfumed, well fashioned, provided with cushions; with wives assuredly sitting expectant on couches and thinking:
10
the feast, where they joined the king’s banquet (Brosius 1996: 97).
In contrast to the Greek customs, the women at the Persian court took part in important social events like
When will the master of dwelling come to us? When shall we rejoice joyously – (Avestan ka!a iti paiti. ma) – in his beloved person? (Yt.17.10)
255
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
The experience of joy and happiness is a very characteristic topic of Zoroastrian religion and agrees perfectly with its positive attitude towards life: we read about this happiness and welfare peace on earth in the Old Persian inscriptions, where this happiness (šiy ti-) is a divine gift for the mankind or can denote a disposition of mind and one inner quality of Xerxes (šiy ta-) provided by his observance of Ahura Mazd ’s law and by his worship. In the Old Persian Achaemenid inscriptions and in the Avesta the frequency of the word and the verb is primarily concerning with the cult and its consequences in the human behaviour and feeling. In the Hymn to Aši, where this happiness is connected with her “radiant beauty” and it is also a mark of the human beings devoted to her, we can recognize a different nuance of this Zoroastrian quality of happiness with sensual implications. The same Persian name of Parysatis (Elamite Ba-ru-ši-ia-ti-iš = !"#$!%&') “with many happiness” can explain this reference of the gladness connected with the female onomastic. 11 Aši is not openly called “lady of sensuality” (nin-hi-li) like Nanaya but she seems to share with her some aspects of beauty and delight, and bestowing sensuality as in the case of the encounter with Zarathustra (Yt. 17: 21-22) in the Avestan passage translated by Skjærvø (1996: 599-600), who properly noticed this unusual aspect of the “extraordinary sensuality found in the descripton of Zarathustra and A(i”: The good )(*, the tall, spoke thus: “Stand closer to me, o upright Spitama, follower of Order! Lean against my chariot!” – He stood closer to her, Zara-
11 Kellens (1995: 36, n. 39) rightly pointed out the erotic implications of Parysatis’ name. The role of Parysatis, the wife of Darius and mother of Artaxerxes, seems to have been very important for pro-
256
thustra Spitama: he leaned against her chariot; she stroked him upward all around with the left hand and the right, with the right hand and the left, speaking thus with words: “You are beautiful, o Zarathustra, you are well-made, o Spitama. You have good calves, long arms. Glory has been placed in your body and long well-being (given) to (your) soul, as I foretold you.”
This mythological episode of Zarathustra’s entrance on the Aši’s chariot is concerning a situation of heavenly ascension, since the goddess is the charioteer of Mi!ra. Another Avestan text (H d"xt Nask 2) provides some interesting topics about a similar encounter, between the Soul (urvan) and its double, the Da"n , who appears in the form of a beautiful, radiant, white-armed, strong, high-breasted, noble-born Maiden, of glorious lineage, as beautifully in form as the most beautiful creature. The erotic feature of this story has been pointed out, for instance, by the late Geo Widengren (1968: 126), but his suggestion could be further up-to-dated by quoting the visionary journey mentioned in the Sasanian inscriptions of Kird#r (third century A.D.) which describes one ecstatic experience, the encounteer between Kird#r’s spiritual double and his D"n (= Da"n ): an otherworldly meeting very chaste but with a nuance of affection because of their putting head to head and taking each other the hands and then going along that “bright road” (r h # r"šn) towards the East, to the dawn and the gate to heavenly dwellings. The favour of the goddess implies a body language with gestures of kindness and affection, confirming by the divine grace a legitimation of the human be-
moting the devotions and the cult of Ištar / An hit and to increase the foreign influences of Mesopotamian customs (Boyce 1982: 218).
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
haviour: Aši and Zarathustra, the soul and Da"n , the double of Kird#r and the D"n. The situation of a unio mystica between different parts of consciousness and levels of soul can easily be expressed in the shape of one affective situation (or blandly sexual, or with a nuance of mild eroticism 12 ) denoting the achievement of spiritual unity and completion, by putting together the male and female polarities. 13 To sum up, talking about a trasformation of hierogamical symbolism in Zoroastrian Iran we should consider that the encounter between Zoroastrianism and Mesopotamian culture has produced an influence, inherited from the Near Eastern poetical languages, in shaping such metaphores. I do not obviously want to deny the Indo-Iranian side of this picture: the Indian texts record descriptions of the same sort, with regard to the otherworldly journey and the encounter between the immortal self ( tman) and the heavenly maidens, the Apsaras (as in the Kau$itak# Upani$ad I, 4). But given the western and syncretistic history of Zoroastrianism and the fertile contacts with Mesopotamia, that has increased the Iranian mythology with Semitic (and Helle-
nistic) cultural remaking, I incline to stress the Near Eastern side of the question, with his imagery drawing from a high poetical tradition, even if in a mutual comparison with Indo-Iranian parallels and common Dichtersprache. As a final example, if we compare the Sumerian great liturgy of Inanna and Iddin-Dagan with the Zoroastrian Pahlavi texts, we can draw some interesting correspondences with some Near Eastern equipments of love ritual, as the cella (pap hu), the nuptial chamber (hamm$tu) and the bed chamber (b%t erši). The Sumerian nuptial thalamus, adorned with the beautiful bedspread, and the embrace between the Lady and Iddin-Dagan could – in my opinion – find a parallel in the Zoroastrian Pahlavi Riv yat of D dest n # D%n#g (Chapter 25: Williams 1990 II, p. 52) where the heavenly bliss of paradisiac existence of Renovated Life (Frašegird) is:
12
polarities is another items that will need further investigations: the names of the Pahlavi onomastic like M tb$g (“having salvation through the Mother”), the dedications to Anaitis the Mother (+,%"-./0!12%&) in Asia Minor, the Armenian Anahit “Golden Mother” (oskemayr) and An h#d “father and mother of the waters” (pid ud m d # b n) in the Pahlavi texts, are all fragmentary hints that deserve a particular treatment, including Zervanite conceptions and Manichaean mythological figures (the Mother of Life).
In this sense I agree with Kellens’ statement (1999: 461) about Aši, who “en caressant Zarathushtra ne lui accorde pas une faveur érotique”: the Zoroastrianism has little to do with the explicit language of the Sumerian texts (Rubio 2001), even if in one case the ritual of the G th s implies a rough language (Y. 53. 7), showing in the ideology of the sacrifice (yasna) the deep connection between sexuality and states of consciousness (Gnoli 1965: 11) 13 The maternal symbolism of the reunion of different
As easy as when a comely maiden of 15 years and a young man of 20 years come with one another to their house and sleep upon their soft quilts (wastarag # narm), and the young man loves the girl with (all his) soul, and for them that (alone) is required “May night never become day!”
257
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
B IBLIOGRAPHY Asmussen J.P. (1957 [1958]) Bemerkungen zur sakralen Prostitution im Alten Testament. StTh 11, pp. 167-192. Bleeker C.J. (1975) Sexuality and Religion. In id. The Rainbow: A Collection of Studies in the Science of Religion, Leiden, pp. 208-224. Boyce M. (1982) A History of Zoroastrianism II. Under the Achaemenians. LeidenKöln. Brosius M. (1996) Women in Ancient Persia (559-331 BC). Oxford. Chaumont M.-L. (1958) Le culte d’An hit a Staxr et les premiers Sassanides. RHR 153, pp. 154-175. Chaumont M.-L. (1965) Le culte de la déesse An hit (Anahit) dans la religion des monarques d’Iran et d’Arménie au Ier siècle de notre ère. JA 253, pp. 167-181. Christensen A. (1928) Études sur le zoroastrisme de la Perse antique. Copenhagen. Colpe C. (1983) Development of Religious Thought. In The Cambridge History of Iran 3/2, edited by E. Yarshater, Cambridge-London, pp. 819-865. Donner H.- W. Röllig (1971) (1973) Kanaanäische und aramaische Inschriften Band I, Texte. Band II, Kommentar. Wiesbaden. Eilers W. (1988) B n%. In Encyclopædia Iranica III, edited by E. Yarshater, LondonNew York, pp. 714-715. Fauth W. (1988) Sakrale Prostitution im vorderen Orient und im Mittelmeerraum. JAK 31, pp. 24-29. Fisher E.J. (1976) Cultic Prostitution in the Ancient Near East? A Reassessment. BThB 6, 2/3, 1976, pp. 225-236. Gnoli Gh. (1965) Lo stato di “maga.” AION 15, pp. 105-117. Gnoli Gh. (1974) Politica religiosa e concezione della regalità sotto gli Achemenidi. In Gurur jamañjarik : studi in onore di Giuseppe Tucci, Napoli, pp. 23-88. Gnoli G. (1999) Nouvelles perspectives sur le contact cuturel irano-mésopotamien. CRAIBL, pp. 611-614. Harper R.P. (1967) A Dedication to the Goddess Anaitis at Ortaköy, North of Aksaray (Nitalis?). AnSt 17, p. 193. Kellens J. (1995) L’âme entre le cadavre et le paradis. JA 283, 1, pp. 19-56. Kent R.G. (1953) Old Persian. Grammar, Text, Lexicon. New Haven. Kornfeld W. (1972) Prostitution sacrée. In Dictionnaire de la Bible, suppl., VIII, coll. 1356-1374. Nissinen M. (2001) Akkadian Rituals and Poetry of Divine Love. In Mythology and Mythologies, edited by R. Whiting (Melammu Symposia II) Helsinki, pp. 93-136. Macuch M. (2002) The Talmudic Expression “Servant of the Fire” in the Light of Pahlavi Legal Source. JSAI 26 (Studies in Honour of Shaul Shaked), pp. 109-129.
258
P IRAS
M ESOPOTAMIAN S ACRED M ARRIAGE AND P RE -I SLA MIC I RAN
Oppenheim A. L. (1981) The Babylonian Evidence of Achaemenian Rule in Mesopotamia. In The Cambridge History of Iran 2, edited by I. Gershevitch, CambridgeLondon, pp. 529-587. Panaino A. (1997) n irik - e jahik - nell’aldilà zoroastriano. In Bandhu. Scritti in onore di Carlo Della Casa II, edited by Renato Arena et alii, Alessandria, pp. 831-843. Panaino A. (2000) The Mesopotamian Heritage of Achaemenian Kingship. In The Heirs of Assyria, edited by S. Aro & R. Whiting (Melammu Symposia I), Helsinki 2000, pp. 35-49. Perikhanian A. (1983) Iranian Society and Law. In The Cambridge History of Iran 3, edited by E. Yarshater, Cambridge-London, pp. 627-686. Piras A. (2002) Preliminary Remarks on M ELAMMU Database: the Continuity of Mesopotamian Culture showed by Iranological Evidences. In Ideologies as Intercultural Phenomena, edited by A. Panaino & G. Pettinato (Melammu Symposia III), Milano, pp. 205-214. Powell De Kalb M. A. (1989) A a - Eos. In DUMU-E 2 -DUB-BA-A. Studies in Honour of Åke W. Sjöberg, edited by H. Behrens et alii, Philadelphia, pp. 447-455. Rubio G. (2001) Inanna and Dumuzi: A Sumerian Love Story. JAOS 121/2, pp. 268274. Sokolowski F. (1979) !"# $%&'(": On the Mysteries in the Lydian and Phrygian Cults. ZPE 34, pp. 65-69. Schmitt R. (1970) )"(*+,"(" – ein neues An hit -Epitheton aus Kappadokien. KZ 84, pp. 207-210. Skjærvø P. O. (1986) Ard Yašt. In Encyclopædia Iranica II, edited by E. Yarshater, London-Boston, pp. 355-356. Skjærvø P. O. (1994) (1996) Zarathustra in the Avesta and in Manicheism: IranoManichaica IV. In La Persia e l’Asia Centrale da Alessandro al X secolo, Atti dei convegni lincei 127, Roma, pp. 497-628. Skjærvø P. O. (1999) Avestan Quotations in Old Persian? Literary Sources of the Old Persian Inscriptions. In Irano-Judaica IV, edited by Sh. Shaked & A. Netzer, Jerusalem, pp. 1-64. Wanden Berghe L. (1988) Les scènes d’investiture sur les reliefs rupestres de l’Ir n ancien: évolution et signification. In Orientalia Iosephi Tucci Memoriae Dicata III, edited by Gh. Gnoli & L. Lanciotti, IsMEO, Roma, pp. 1511-1531. Westenholz J. (1989) Tamar, Q!d"ša, Qadištu, and Sacred Prostitution in Mesopotamia. HThR 82/3, pp. 245-265. Widengren G. (1968) Les religions de l’Iran. Paris. Wikander S. (1938) Der arische Männerbund. Lund. Wikander S. (1946) Feuerpriester in Kleinasien und Iran. Lund. Wikander S. (1972) BAPZOXAPA. AcOr 34, pp. 13-15. Williams A.V. (1990) The Pahlavi Riv yat Accompanying the D dest n ! D"n!g, Part I and Part II. Copenhagen.
259
V IDALE
M ASSIMO V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
Ravenna
Growing in a Foreign World: For a History of the “Meluhha Villages” in Mesopotamia in the 3rd Millennium BC 1. Separating facts from conjectures
T
he presence of individuals or groups immigrated from the IndoPakistani Subcontinent in Mesopotamia in the 3rd millennium BC was recognized since the discovery of the Indus Civilization at Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro in the early ‘20ies, because in a few cases Indus-like seals were found in stratified contexts in some of the most important Sumerian cities. In 1932, C.J. Gadd opened a new line of archaeological research, collecting and publishing in a fortunate paper a series of seals from Mesopotamia (found during digs or acquired on the antiquarian market) sharing what he regarded as an “Indian style.” Gadd’s interpretation was fundamentally correct, although the series of seals he published included also specimens of what we presently identify as Dilmunite seals coming from the Gulf islands of Faylaka and Bahrein. The great seasons of extensive excavations at MohenjoDaro (Sindh, presently in Pakistan) were over, and the final report by J. Marshall (1931) had been published. Both the inscriptions and the animal icones on the major group of western seals had obvious similarities with the steatite seals unearthed by thousands in the major cities of the Indus civilization. It was on the basis of these finds, at least in a first stage, that the Indus valley civilization A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
was dated to the middle Bronze age. Since then, two generations of archaeologists and philologists have attempted to investigate the problem of the Indian communities that settled in Mesopotamia in the second half of the 3rd millennium BC. As the identification of the land of Meluhha with the coastal areas controlled by the Indus Civilization is almost universally accepted, the textual evidence dealing with individuals qualified as “men” or “sons” of Meluhha or called with the ethnonym Meluhha, living in Mesopotamia and of a “Meluhha village” established at Lagash (and presumably at other major cities as well) unexcapably points to the existence of enclaves settled by Indian immigrants (see Parpola et al. 1977; Possehl 1984: 185; for the original debate Lamberg-Karlovsky 1972). On the other hand, it soon became clear that no Mesopotamian article – for example, not a single Sumerian cylinder seal – had been recovered at MohenjoDaro (nor would have been found in later excavations at other Indus sites). As the elevated compound of Mohenjo-Daro has been excavated for about 350 houses and buildings, accounting for about 10% of the total built mounded surface, it is hardly possible that such absence is casual. On the basis of the present evidence, it is more likely that, although we 261
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
have ascertained that Indian groups travelled, traded and settled in the west, Sumerians did not travel directly to the coasts and plains of the Indus, nor they settled – at least in substantial groups – in the Indus cities. Another possible interpretation is that an ideological attitude prevented Indus traders and travellers from importing objects produced abroad and using them at home. The temptation, at this point, is to refer to the historical and contemporary brahmanical attitude according to which the outer world is considered impure and potentially polluting at a socio-ritual level. Perhaps similar ideas were at play 5000 years ago as well. But although this might appear a reasonable assumption, as you see we have shifted (almost inadvertently) from facts to a conjecture. As this attitude is a major, recurrent fault of archaeological research in the archaeology of the Indus valley, in this paper – aimed at summarizing part of the information piled since Gadd’s paper, and presently available on the question of the Meluhhan communities in Mesopotamia – I try to list under two separate headings (paragraphs 3. and 4.) what we
may accept as facts and what, for the moment being, are no more than interpretations, hypotheses and conjectures. Separating facts from interpretations is not easy, because each scholar – the present writer included – is tempted to include what he or she deems as “very likely interpretations” to some fundamental facts. Even in the title I arbitrarily assume that the Indus enclaves in Mesopotamia were identified as “Meluhha villages,” whereas the only positive evidence of this entity comes from Lagash (I did it because thus the title sounds much better). But interpretations (including what might appear to many as “wild” conjectures) might turn out important, presently or in the future, both because they may stimulate curiosity and further research, and because, if they are expressed in the proper way, they might become work hypotheses (i.e., historical interpretations capable to be scientifically tested). Actually, whenever possible, I made the effort of suggesting how these hypotheses might be tested on the field or in the archaeological materials.
2. Textual and archaeological evidence After Gadd’s paper, the second important contribution on the Indus communities in Mesopotamia was a paper by Parpola et al. (1977). This review of the texts then available containing references to Meluhha and Meluhhans was focused on 9 texts dating to Ur III times, but also included references to Sargonic texts. The general picture in this paper is the following. The maximum archaeological evidence of Indian imports and Indusrelated artefacts in Mesopotamia may be dated to latest phases of ED III (at the 262
Royal Cemetery of Ur) and immediately later to the Akkadian period, when, as widely reported, Sargon claimed with pride that under his power Meluhhan ships docked at his capital, and at least one tablet mentions a person with an Akkadian name qualified as a “the holder of a Meluhha ship.” The reconstruction of the nature of the Indo-Mesopotamian trade is a very complex and demanding issue. Presently I have not the space, nor probably the full competence to review and update the general evidence, but it is
V IDALE
widely known that, according to the literary sources, between the end of the 3rd and the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC Meluhhan ships exported to Mesopotamia precious goods among which exotic animals, such as dogs, perhaps peacocks, cocks, bovids, elephants (? Collon 1977) precious woods and royal furniture, precious stones such as carnelian, agate and lapislazuli, and metals like gold, silver and tin (among others Pettinato 1972; During Caspers 1971; Chakrabarti 1982, 1990; Tosi 1991; see also Lahiri 1992 and Potts 1994). In his famous inscriptions, Gudea, in the second half of the 22nd century BC, states that Meluhhans came with wood and other raw materials for the construction of the main temple in Lagash (see Parpola et al. 1977: 131 for references). Archaeologically, the most evident raw materials imported from India are marine shell, used for costly containers and lamps, inlay works and cylinder seals; agate, carnelian and quite possibly ivory. Hard green stones, including garnets and abrasives might also have been imported from the Subcontinent and eastern Iran (Vidale & Bianchetti 1997, 1998-1999; Heimpel et al. 1988; Vidale 2002; see also Collon 1990, Tallon 1995 and Sax 1991). Carnelian could have been imported in form of raw nodules of large size (as implied by some texts) to be transformed into long beads, or as finished products. As we shall see, recent studies would better suggest that the Indus families in Mesopotamia imported raw materials rather than finished beads (Kenoyer 1997; Kenoyer & Vidale 1992; Inizan 2000), and expediently adapted their production to the changing needs of
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
the Mesopotamian demand and markets. To the same period is ascribed a famous cylinder seal owned by a certain Su-ilisu, “Meluhha interpreter” (Sollberger 1970; Tosi 1991). Another Akkadian text records that Lu-sunzida “a man of Meluhha” paid to the servant Urur, son of Amarlu KU 10 shekels of silver as a payment for a tooth broken in a clash. The name Lu-sunzida literally means “Man of the just buffalo cow,” a name that, although rendered in Sumerian, according to the authors does not make sense in the Mesopotamian cultural sphere, and must be a translation of an Indian name; I will return later to this important point. By Ur III times, this intense trade had definitely promoted the formation of local enclaves of Indus origin. Although no written evidence suggests a direct involvement of the Lagash settlement with trade and craft production, Parpola et al. (1977: 145) think that the ethnic name points to a settlement originally founded as a trade enclave by foreign merchants. The texts indicate that Meluhhans were perceived as distinct ethnic group, living in a separate settlement but largely integrated in the contemporary Sumerian society, owning or renting land and accumulating and variously distributing their agricultural products (see below). The authors explain the absence of reference to craft production in the Ur III times hypothesizing that the Indus communities in Mesopotamia had been largely integrated in Sumerian society and had fully adopted a subsistence based upon agriculture, while a state of crisis in the motherland had disconnected the traditional longdistance trade routes and craft organizations.
263
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
3. Other relevant facts I will try now to report a series of archaeological observations, that, depending (in part) on subsequent finds, may help us to discuss and complete this historical picture. The possible interpretations and conjectures I deem as interesting for discussion and perhaps future testing are reported in a parallel series of points in the following section. 3.1 Round seals with inscriptions in Indus signs and animal figures in Indus style are reported from Mesopotamia, Failaka and Bahrein (for a recent and complete review see Peyronel 2000) (Fig. 1, 1-3). These seals are dated, on the whole and on the basis of stratigraphical considerations, within the 2 latter centuries of the 3rd millennium BC and to immediatey later times. So far, we know 2 seals with Indus bulls having cuneiform inscriptions. For Mesopotamia, the earliest known seal has a pre-Akkadian or early Akkadian inscription (hard to read and controversial: see in order Gadd 1932, Parpola et al. 1977, Peyronel 2000 with further references) (Fig. 1, 6). In contrast with the later round seals, it has a square contour with rounded corners. Reportedly, it was found on the surface of Diqdiqqah, a suburban portual settlement of Ur. Another important seal with an Indus bull and cuneiform inscription, presently at the Cabinet des Medailles of Paris, is still unpublished (and is commented below). Note also that some of the seals from Bahrein come from graves, and seals are distinctively absent from the few contemporary Indus graves excavated in the Subcontinent. A round seal in a private 1
collection, reportedly from Iran, shows an Indus bull surmounted by a protoelamite inscription (Winkelmann 1999: Fig. 1, 5). From a looted grave in Bactria comes a round chlorite seal coated with a gold foil, with a Indus bull on one side and a mythological Bactrian creature on the opposite face, without inscription (Ligabue & Salvatori nd; Fig. 1, 4). Finally, from Bactria comes also another (and anomalous) cylinder seal in lapislazuli, presently in the Schoyen collection and still unpublished, where a boar-hunting scene is accompanied by a well-carved Indus inscription. 1 All of the round seals found in the west (Mesopotamia, the Gulf, Bactria, Iran: Fig. 2) show exclusively one animal icone, a powerful bull with lowered head and short horns, with a raised muscolar mass on the shoulder often marked by series of parallel grooves. This strict selection contrasts with the standard series of square steatite seals from the Indus valley sites, which employs a series of not less than 10 different animal icones. The unicorn, accounting to about 60-70% of the total in Pakistan and India, never appears in the western round seals. In the Indus valley, the bull with lowered head and short horns comes second in frequency after the unicorn, with a percentage of about 6% of the total (Possehl 2002: 128 ff.; Franke Vogt 1991, 1992; Shah & Parpola 1991; Joshi & Parpola 1987). 3.2 The other seal with a cuneiform inscription (at the Cabinet des Medailles of Paris) bears an Indus bull with a lowered head, and has been preliminarily read by
This seal is visible at the site .
264
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
J.-J. Glassner (2002) as Ur. d Ninildum dumu Ur.gi 7 , an expression that might be preliminarily interpreted something like “Dog” – or “slave” – of Ninildum, son of “Big Dog” or “Mastiff” – or, perhaps alternatively “in charge of the mastiffs” – F. D’Agostino, personal communication). Ninildum is a secondary Mesopotamian divinity that appears in the famous “Curse of Akkad” (perhaps composed at Nippur, and dated by some authors at the times of Naram-Sin, while others in contrast suggest a Ur III dating) and in few other later texts 2 (Vidale, in print). What is clear is that Ninildum a goddess of carpentry and timber, called in later Babylonian texts “great heavenly carpenter” and “bearer of the shiny hatchet.” The identity and some possible implications of the term “Dogs” are briefly commented below (see 4.2). 3.3 A part of the signs visible on the round Indus seals found in the west are anomalous (Gadd 1932; Parpola 1994). They have no match in the lists of signs commonly recorded in Pakistan and India. It is also well known that part of the sequences of Indus signs in the round steatite seals with Indus inscriptions from Mesopotamia and the Gulf are unparalleled in Punjab and Sindh. Some of the signs (particularly the so-called “man” sign) appear in the western inscriptions with evidently anomalous frequencies. Most likely, such inscriptions report names and attributions in foreign languages. 3.4 In some Sumerian cities, such as Ur, so far excavation brought to light only such round seals with Indus inscriptions, while at Kish and Umma circulated standard square Indus seals and their sealings (see Gadd 1932, Chakrabarti
1990 and Parpola 1984 for reviews). 3.5 The last decades of research suggest that it is impossible to discuss the role of the Indus communities in the west without considering in detail some aspects of the international trade in semiprecious materials and beads. In contemporary Gujarat, carnelian, a form of agate that in nature has a distinctive dull olive-brown colour, is turned red artificially in special ceramic containers and kilns. The most important mines are still exploited in Gujarat, and the production of high quality carnelian remained for 5000 years a craft specialization of the Subcontinent, particularly in the north-western regions of Gujarat and Sindh (Kenoyer et al. 1991, 1994). There is little wonder that carnelian is quoted by the ancient texts as an important article of IndoMesopotamian trade of the 3rd and early 2nd millennium BC. Many of the carnelian beads found in the graves of the main Sumerian cities or at Susa in the second half of the 3rd millennium BC are presently interpreted as made locally by Indus craftpersons or artisans trained in an Indus technical tradition but producing shapes and decorations after the specific local demand. The local production of etched carnelian beads in Mesopotamia with Indus techniques had already been proposed in the past by J. Reade (1979: 25) who noted, among other non-Indian patterns, the presence an etched bead bearing the Mesopotamian symbol of Shamash, the sun-god (ibidem: Fig. 1, F1y. In this paper, Fig. 3, F1y). A recent study of the collections of beads from Lagash and Susa confirms that long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads and other types of carnelian beads of a quality much superior
2
Babylonian text mentioning the goddess, see the myth of Erra and Ishum in Foster 1995, and the site .
For “The Curse of Akkad” see Pezzoli-Olgiati 2000 (at the site , with bibliography. For a
265
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
to that distinguishing local products might well have been manufactured in the Indus valley (Inizan 2000; Roux & Matarasso 2000); on the other hand, the collection from Susa includes a highly sophisticated double long barrel-cylinder carnelian bead, a type unknown in the Indus valley, for which we would better hypothesize a manufacture in Susa by resident Indian beadmakers (Inizan 2000: Fig. 6). As excavations at Susa brought to light examples of cylinder-like steatite seals with Indus features (Gadd 1932; Kenoyer 1998: Fig. 1.15), long barrelcylinder seals and etched carnelian beads, these indicators strongly point to the presence of a Meluhhan “craft village” in one of the capitals of ancient Elam. J.M. Kenoyer, who has an intimate knowledge of the Indus bead technologies, after having examined samples of various types of carnelian beads from the Royal Cemetery of Ur, reports that even some bead types unknown in the Indus valley might have been manufactured by Indian craftpersons, most probably living and working at Ur: “...These clues suggest that merchants and entrepreneurs from the Indus Valley may have set up shops in cities such as Ur to market their goods and also produce objects in local designs.... It would be the earliest evidence for a pattern that came to be a norm in later historical times, when craftsmen and merchants from the Subcontinent extended their trade networks throughout West Asia as well as Southeast Asia” (Kenoyer 1998: 97; see also 1997: 272). On the whole this paleotechnological evidence is a strong argument for supporting the hypothesis that the Meluhhan communities in the west continued their original close involvement with trade, processing and selling of semiprecious stones at least from late ED III to the Akkadian period.
266
But it is impossible to tackle with the issue of the carnelian trade if we do not distinguish clearly between two quite different types of beads, namely the long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads with a light central swelling found by the hundreds in the “royal” graves excavated at Ur and the so-called etched carnelian beads. The first type is probably the most exclusive and refined type of bead ever produced in the Near East and South Asia. In the Indus Valley, the best specimens of these beads (Fig. 5, above) are distinguished by a deep and perfect red hue, by a perfect translucency, by the absence of transparent or white bands and by a perfectly axial perforation. The longest specimen reached a length of about 13 cm. At the major centers of Harappa and Mohenjo-daro, but also in minor settlements such as Allahdino, the beautiful long barrel-cylinder beads were found hoarded in buried copper vessels, arranged in gorgeous necklaces of perhaps belts with copper fittings (J.M. Kenoyer, personal communication). The idea that the beautiful long barrelcylinder carnelian beads with a distinctive central swelling found in Mesopotamia were Indian products had been originally proposed by E.J.H. Mackay (in Marshall 1931: 511 ff.). In Mesopotamia, these beads come mainly from Kish, from the Royal Cemetery of Ur, and Lagash (Inizan 2000). The spectacular finds of Ur suggest that such exclusive, costly products were monopolized and obtained by the great houses of the Sumerian cities from Indian traders and beadmakers since relatively early times, displayed and destroyed by burial in great amounts as an element of ostentation in public funerals aimed at assessing the claim of the Sumerian lords to a royal status. The bulk of long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads found in Mesopotamia may
V IDALE
be confidently dated to pre-Akkadic times (i.e., to Early Dinastic III), although some beads of this type circulated and were apparently found – as one would normally expect – even in much later contexts. Other beads of the same type are reported from Iran, at Susa and Jalalabad. In the Iranian sites, long barrelcylinder carnelian beads and etched carnelian beads may be found together (see for a general discussion Chakrabarti 1982; 1990: 31-33). Long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads had been also buried in the looted graves of Bactria; the value of their base material is also indicated by the fact that fragments of these beads were also recycled for making preciously inlaid jewels (Ligabue & Salvatori n.d.: Figs. 62, 71, 45). On the whole, long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads around the late Early Dinastic III Period (in terms of the traditional Mesopotamian “high” chronology, around 2400-2350 BC) depended upon an intensive production of carnelian originating in the Indus valley. Further research is needed to ascertain when, how and to which extent the traditional Indus technology of carnelian beads was transplanted from Gujarat and Sindh to the hypothesized workshops of the Meluhhan communities in Mesopotamia and Iran. The second type of carnelian bead is commonly defined “etched carnelian beads” (Beck 1933; Dikshit 1949; During
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
Caspers 1971, 1982; Reade 1979; Lombardo 1988) (Figs. 3, 4; Fig. 5, below). They are much smaller beads, manufactured with quite simpler techniques, but embellished by white designs (more rarely black or purple) traced on their surface. Such designs were chemically carved on the beads’ surfaces by a pyrotechnological process involving the use of alcaline juices and further cycles of high temperature heating (Mackay 1933, 1937; Bhan et al. 1994; Vidale 2000). Their cost for unit of product should have been incomparably much less than the former type. Out of the etched carnelian beads found at Ur with a reliable context, more than 40% are dated from Early Dinastic III to Early Akkadic times, the same percentage to Middle to Late Akkadic times, while only 2 finds are confidently datable to Ur III times. Thus, in terms of the traditional absolute chronology, these latter Indian imports would fall between 2450 and 2200 BC. For what the beads from Kish (the second group for its size) are concerned, they come from Early Akkadic graves, dated (always following the same traditional scheme) from 2400-2350 to 2300 BC. In other words, they are slightly later than the long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads and they evidently became popular in the Akkadian period, a circumstance that requires a proper historical explanation.
4. More interpretations and conjectures 4.1 Adopting an obvious evolutionary scheme, one is tempted to assume that the first seals to circulate in Mesopotamia (let us say between 2500-2300 BC) were the standard squarish steatite seals with Indus inscriptions and iconography; later might have been adopted seals like
the one at the British Museum, where the corners were rounded, and the titles or names possibly translated in cuneiform inscriptions and in other languages; finally, between 2200-2000, the Indus communities adopted a standard round seal where Indus signs were used to 267
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
express similar titles, names or formulas in foreign languages. The presence at Bahrein of a round seal bearing only the inscription and no bull is probably paralleled by the disappearance in the motherland of the animal icones, and by the adoption (in the Harappa sequence, in period 3C) of rectangular steatite bearing analogous simple inscriptions. The fact that the British Museum seal with the bull and cuneiform inscription comes from Diqdiqqah might be quite significant, because the settlement, although badly ransacked at the times of the excavations at Ur, was rich in in residues of craft activities. As a fluvial port and a craft centre, it might well have been a Meluhhan enclave. (I believe that if the site is still accessible and somehow preserved, in spite of the old disturbances, an archaelogist with practical experience of Indus materials and artifacts might find on surface important evidence). The recurrent and exclusive presence of the short-horned bull with lowered head in the round seals from Mesopotamia, the Gulf, Bactria and possibly the western Iranian plateau (Fig. 1), in front of the different and variable animale icones used in the normal Indus valley seals in my opinion leads to the unexcapable conclusion that this bovid had a precise meaning for the Indus communities migrating, settling and trading in the west. The unpublished cylinder lapis lazuli seal from Bactria with a hunting scene might have been a royal or anyhow aristocratic possession, rather than a standard trading tool, and this might well explain its completely different symbolic and iconographic message. There is an almost general consensus that this big bull visible in the round western seals is the Indian gaur (Bos gaurus gaurus), a powerful, wild or haftemed bovid, nearly extinguished in wide
268
regions of the Subcontinent, but the reasons why these western group identified themselves with this particular animal are quite unclear (for details on the gaur in South Asia and some highly conjectural interpretation see Vidale, in print). Presenty, the north-eastern Indian semidomesticated gaur or mithan in the Assam region and in the local Naga cultures is at the centre of complex ideological projections and ritual cycles, and it is possible that similar values were at play also in the Indus valley culture as well (Simoons 1968). Because the gaur icones in the motherland are constantly lowering their head on some kind of container or manger, and those in the western round seals often are not, I have also suggested that this absence might symbolically transform the animal’s lowered head from peaceful (eating) to aggressive (charging), and that this latter transformation would fit with the Indians’ perception of living in a foreign, potentially enemy and disruptive world. This regular association (round seals with Indus signs to the gaur icone) obviously recalls the Sumerian name Lusunzida and its meaning “Man of the just buffalo cow.” It may hardly be a case that the Indus seals in the west always show a bovid, and that the only Indian proper “name” we may confidently reconstruct for an Indus trader in Mesopotamia ascribes in positive terms this individual to a bovid. Parpola et al. interpret the expression as a proper name incorporating a reference to a traditional Indian bovine female deity unknown in Mesopotamia. While this is entirely possible, I rather wonder if Lu-sunzida does not simply refer to the symbolic icone “institutionally” adopted by the western Indus communities. True, the bovid on the seals is always male, while the name Lusunzida clearly contemplates a female-
V IDALE
centered descent. But there is at least one seal (Gadd’s nr. 18) where the gaur is substituted by two copulating bulls, thus involving sexuality and the female sex in the same semantic sphere. At any rate, after considering the name Lu-sunzida I would venture to guess that the Indus settled communities – such as those living in the Meluhha village of Lagash – might have referred to themselves as to “The people of the just gaur,” or something similar. Naturally, the association round western seals-gaur would also imply that also in the motherland the different animals visible in the standard seals referred, at least originally, to different roles and status positions within the urban social contexts. This problem is completely out of my present scope, but the implications of such evidence might be obviously important and manifold for the understanding of the Indus society per se. 4.2 The inscription in the Paris seal would confirm that Indus settlers in Mesopotamia intelligently established critical connections with local cults and temples. Besides temple oveerseers in charge of scribes and craftpersons, keepers and financers of sacred gardens, traders transporting cereals for the temples, we might have in the Paris seal a “slave” or a “dog” of Ninildum, the goddess of timber and carpentry. Wood, timber for construction, ships and wooden furniture are consistently mentioned as coming from Meluhha, and both the trade in timber and the overall industry had a strategic economic role in 3rd and early 2nd millennium economies. The find of seals in the Bahrein graves might reflect the adoption of local rituals by families of naturalized immigrants (possibly, people speaking and writing both Indian and local languages): as already stated, this practice is unknown in the few contem-
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
porary Indus graveyards so far excavated in Pakistan and India. The reference to Ninildum might have another important implication: as this seal was bought in the antiquarian market in Beirut (J.-F. Jarrige, personal communication), if it actually came from the Lebanese region – a circumstance that presently cannot be demonstrated – one might suppose that the bearer had his or her interests in the trade of the timber of the famous cedars, so actively searched for in Mesopotamia, i.e. in one of the strategic knots that tied the Mesopotamian markets with the Mediterranean coasts. If the hypothesis that seals with cuneiform inscriptions are earlier than those bearing Indus signs, this might place the Paris seal in the chronological frame of the Akkadian period, when the political and military pressure towards the “upper sea” was at its strongest peak. This is a pure conjecture, but it is fascinating, as it would widen the range and goals of the economic activities of the Indus traders to the Mediterranean coast. Incidentally, one may observe that both Ninildum and Ninmar, the two divinities worshipped or served by individuals with probable Meluhhan connections, are female goddesses. The mention of the name or title “Dog” in the Paris seal is quite unclear, but at present it might be referred to the presence of “dogs” receiveing rations of bread and beer in exchange for their services at the statal dockyards of Lagash, in late Ur III times (Zarins 2002, 2003). If the “Dogs” drinking beer and eating bread at ther royal yards are not animals, as literal translations would imply, I would seriously consider the possibility that the title identified a corp of professional guards (perhaps mercenaries, and perhaps – on the basis of the Paris seal – of Meluhhan affiliation) appointed by the
269
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
state to the dockyards; but the question needs to wait for a proper publication of the Paris seal, and to be addressed to an interested assiriologist. 4.3 While in Mesopotamia writing was cared for and taught in professional schools maintained in palaces and temples, and the relative record has been reconstructed in great detail, nothing similar was observed in the Indus valley (one might say, this is because temples and palaces have not been identified for the Indus; but, at least for the palaces, I would disagree: my ongoing research). Here – at least in the larger cities – writing seems to have been a reatively widespread function, possibly performed by consistent groups of urban scribes employed by several large, partially independent corporate groups, families or great houses. This is suggested by the find in the most important excavations of several small-scale dumps and/or activity areas with unfinished and partially inscribed steatite seals. The production of this key admistrative tool, in fact, does not appear to have been centralized by a state or urban authority, but performed at different places and houses at the same time. At home, such dispersed pattern might account for the high number of rare or isolated signs recorded for the whole writing system, as well as by the absolute lack of standardization in the seal-making technical sequences (Vidale, ongoing research). Moreover, the fact that part of the signs in the western round seals have no match in the corpora
recorded in Pakistan and India might suggest local elaboration, invention, and probably contexts of growing uncertainty in the use and trasmission of this specialized information technology by the western immigrated communities. The invention of new signs or the modification of traditional ones might have been a result of a growing effort at adapting the original writing system to the expression of foreign and quite different languages. This elaboration might well have been a part of the advanced process of acculturation described in detail in Parpola et al. 1977. But which languages, precisely, did express the “non-Indus” sequences in the western round seals in Mesopotamia or in the Gulf? Among the possibilities in Mesopotamia range semitic languages such as Akkadian or Amorrite, or Sumerian (as one would expect in the case of partially naturalized immigrants: Parpola 1986: 411). For the Gulf, Glassner (2002) found that the majority of the proper names in the inscriptions ascribed to the Dilmun and Magan have Amorrite affinities. While such Amorrite names in the Gulf in the late 3rd millennium BC would constitute an interesting historical question, I think that another possible candidate language for the Gulf inscriptions in Indus characters would be some form of protohistoric south-eastern semitic language (why not, in simpler words, a form of proto-Arabic?). 3 After all, the Dilmun civilization of the late 3rd millennium BC, with its emphasis on long-distance trade and navigation, the
3
Mohenjo-Daro. A possible explanation is that the “man” signs and its variants were used as logograms for expressing a patronimic identity. Direct descent might have been adopted as a social convention of identity in the western acculturated contexts, whereas we have nothing similar in the motherland (where, on the contrary, the most important element of affiliation might have been the social identity directly signalled by the animal icone).
It may also be observed that the more the western inscriptions diverge from the sign sequences normally observed in Punjab and Sindh, the more frequently they contain a sign representing a schematic human figure (Vidale, in print). Actually, according to my preliminary evaluations, the “man” sign with its variants appears in the western inscriptions corpus with frequencies absolutely anomalous when compared with the rarity of the same signs group at 270
V IDALE
managing of intercultural cults, and its overall non-farming subsistence, represents an early successful adaptation to the ecological and geopolitical setting of the Arabian peninsula. The social and economical evolution of the historic Arab tribes and nations would have followed for millennia similar strategies. 4.4 The fact that at Ur, so far at least, we have only round seals with Indus inscriptions, while at Kish and Umma circulated standard square Indus seals and their sealings, might imply that Sumerian cities might have had different economical attitudes and policies (in different times) towards the Indus immigrating communities. Most probably, in the complex political history of Mesopotamian states during the second half of the 3rd millennium BC, each group, community or “Meluhha village” had its own history. Trade by the means of settled enclaves at the source of the potential flow of revenue and commodities would conform to a traditional commercial patterns of later Indian trading communities; at the same time, being based upon traditional alliances and personal acquaintances between families of traders and élites of consumers of precious, exotic items, this trade would have been closely dependent upon the vagaries of local politics, and might have easily fallen as soon as such a specialized demand was dismissed, or the political fortune of an urban élite suddenly failed. 4.5 There might have been an economic and ideological opposition between long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads, requiring a careful monitoring of the production cycle, based upon the procurement of the largest carnelian nodules, the access to the peculiar stone used for Indus drill-heads (see below) and the skilled work of the best chippers and drillers, and etched carnelian beads, more
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
common ornaments that could be made sophisticated by the means of the application of common alcaline substances and pyrotechnology (Fig. 5). Just to give an impression of the possible cost of an Indus necklace or belt made of long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads, on the basis of experimental replications we calculated that the production of one of these ornaments roughly amounts to 480 days of work by an highly skilled artisan (Kenoyer 1998: 138, 161; see also Kenoyer et al. 1991, 1994; Kenoyer & Vidale 1992). No wonder that such precious beads were actively sought for and monopolized by the Sumerian élites competing for kingship at the times of the dinastic lords buried in the Royal Cemetery of Ur (late 25th-24th century BC?). In contrast, the cheaper but quite showy etched carnelian beads became popular after the conquest of Sargon. Actually, these beads are reliable indicators of the activities of the Meluhhan traders in Mesopotamia in the last centuries of the 3rd millennium BC (Figs. 2, 4). If, following the partial lists provided by D.K Chakrabarti (1990: 20 ff.), we plot the number of western steatite seals with Indus features found in the various Mesopotamian centers with the frequency of etched carnelian beads found in the same urban contexts (Tab. 1) we easily see a clear pattern. This Table is obviously partial, and does not claim to provide any representative sample, but nonetheless it suggests a positive correlation between the circulation in Mesopotamia of seals with Indus inscriptions and symbols the spreading adoption of etched beads. It seems that long barrel-cylinder carnelian beads were symbolically connected with the preAkkadian Sumerian houses competing for kingship. In contrast, the cheaper and quite showy etched carnelian beads, after
271
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
the political unification of the country, became available to a wide, less exclusive demand, as one would expect in the City Ur Kish Lagash Eshnunna Nippur
case of the expanding urban burocracies promoted by the expansion of the Akkadian centralized state.
Seals with Indus inscriptions or Indus iconographies 11 3 2 2 1
Etched carnelian beads* 55 13 ? 7 2
Table 1. Correlation between the number of seals with Indus icones and Indus signs in Mesopotamia and reported finds of etched carnelian beads. After Chakrabarti 1990. * The number refers to both isolated beads and groups. Most of these beads come from graves.
5. Towards a new historical picture In summary, I believe that it will be only by integrating the textual evidence on the Meluhhan communities in Mesopotamia with a fast-growing body of new archaeological evidence that we may move to a more detailed historical reconstruction. Long-distance trade by navigation between the two poles of the Gulf was already established by late-Neolithic and early Chalcolithic times (Carter 2002a, 2002b). It was the the beads and shell trade that, in Mesopotamia, in the Gulf, most probably at Susa and possibly even in Bactria, gradually promoted the local settlement of families of specialized merchants and craftpersons from the Indus valley, who channeled along their tracks the supply of raw materials and, in general, the complex know-how of the Indus crafts. Archaeological evidence pushes back the beginning of this process at east to the end of the 4th millennium BC, when Late Uruk Sumerian engravers frequently employed the colummella of the Indian shank shell (Turbinella pyrum) for their cylinder seals (Kenoyer, in print).
272
While these early imports might have been due to indirect or occasional trade, by Early Dinastic II-III times, Indian traders and craftpersons were asked to provide more and more substantial amounts of highly prestigious and costly products such as shell ornaments and lamps, inlay pieces, and high quality carnelian strictly reserved to the courts of the lords of the Sumerian city-states. If we have to believe to the cuneiform texts that insistently ascribe to Meluhha the lapis lazuli trade, Meluhhan traders would also have been promoted the flowing, in a relatively short time, of incredible amounts of the blue stone at the courts of Ur (in the estimates of Casanova 1997, about 95% of the entire inventory of the lapis lazuli ever found in the Near East and South Asia comes from the graves excavated by Leonard Woolley in the Royal Cemetery). The precise role of the Indus valley civilization in the lapis lazuli long-distance trade is still a major open question in the protohistory of South Asia and the ancient Near East. If the Indus traders were actually directly
V IDALE
involved in such a large-scale business, it is hard to believe that they did not organize their agencies, store-rooms and credit institutions at the Sumerian courts and temples; but as we have seen the textual references so far recorded do not directly support this archaeological hypotheses (on the other hand, it is well known that texts are mute on the whole question of the aristocratic families buried in the Royal cemetery of Ur and their impressive and costly funerary rituals). The sargonic conquest put a sudden end to the competion for kingship among the Sumerian lords. The precise dating of the conquest is an old-debated, difficult question in Near Eastern archaeology, and the traditional “high” dating of 2350 BC has been questioned by various authors. In 1977, for example, Parpola et al. (1977: 130) accepted a date around 2300 BC. Recently, a re-visitation of Mesopotamian chronology by J. Reade (2001) placed the conquest of Sargon at the beginning of the 22nd century BC. For the history of Mesopotamia, obviously enough, the consequences of this date would be far-reaching. Considering this important problem from the eastern margins, here it will be enough to say that such a dating is probably slightly too low, but there is the actual possibility that a dating between 2300 and 2250 BC might better fit with the 14C datings from sites such as Shahr-i Sokhta as well as the available general framework of typological and stylistic comparisons established from central Asia to India (S. Salvatori, personal communication). The conquest might have badly damaged the Indus traders, who might have based part of their fortune and projects upon alliances and close personal relationships with the defeated and deposed élites, and, indirectly, the Indus craft groups. If the great Sumerian houses
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
used to obtain their sumptuary goods on credit, the loss for the Indian traders would have been a true disaster. In another paper (Vidale 2002) I suggested that the sudden, unexpected fall of the Sumerian demand might have caused in the specialized manufacturing settlements of the Indus valley a ruinous collapse of beads’ production, followed by a general crisis of the local craft organization. The collapse might be evident in the crisis of the carnelian bead “workshops” of Chanhu-Daro (Sindh, Pakistan), where in a single stratigraphic horizon hundreds of semi-finished long-barrel carnelian beads were suddenly abandoned and dumped for a mysterious reason (Mackay 1937, 1943; Vidale 2002). Whatever the cause, this evidence should have depended, besides the fall of the demand, upon a major, sudden disruption of the contextual relationships of production. These levels at Chanhu-Daro are preliminarily datable, on the basis of ceramic evidence alone, within the period labelled at Harappa 3B (about 2400-2200 BC), a range including all the various dates so far proposed for Sargon’s conquest. This is also the moment of the maximum diffusion of Indus ceramics along the coasts of the Gulf, matching with the times of the occupation phase of the settlement of Ras al-Jinz in Oman, showing the most intensive interaction of the local communities with the Indus traders (Cleuziou & Tosi 2000). Were the Chanhu-Daro “workshops” abandoned because of Sargon’s advent? It is a concrete possibilty that could be investigated re-opening the trenches excavated by E.J.H. Mackay in this site and obtaining new absolute datings; and such a synchronicity, if consistently ascertained, would be an important correlation for the whole chronology of protohistoric South Asia.
273
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
Parpola and his collegues (1977: 150) remarked that “Textual references to Meluhha and Meluhhans prior to the Ur III dinasty (relegated) that country and its inhabitants to a non-Mesopotamian, foreign status. Goods and materials were exotic to Mesopotamia and came from a distant Meluhha...” The authors convicingly argue that in the Akkadian period Meluhha was referred to as foreign, remote land, providing exotic goods under the control of ship-owners and longdistance commercial enterprises, and requiring the help of professional translators. In the light of the probable involvment of Meluhhan traders and craftpersons with the ED III Sumerian courts, I would rather suggest that such a distance was mainly a political one. The Akkadian rulers after the conquest had no direct political ties with the Indian traders, and Sargon’s famous statement resounds of the pride of having re-established a fruitful economic and political relationship with the eastern prestigious partner. The Meluhhan trading communities could not have asked for a more favourable solution. The prompt mass production of etched carnelian beads after the conquest is a perfect example of the intelligent, creative and highly opportunistic behaviour exhibited by Indian craft communities across the world’s history. If it is true that we do not have for the period textual evidence with detailed economical information, the production of beads etched with the symbol of Shamash archaeologically shows the same attitude revealed by the later Ur III texts: Indian beadmakers and traders immediately adapted to the changing ideological environment and soon came terms with new cults, tastes and ritual habits, inventing new, ad hoc types of ornaments. According to a fascinating hypothesis, as we have seen, they might
274
even have followed the northward expansion of the Akkadian kingdom and attempted to take advantage in the timber trade with the Lebanese region (obviously, if on the contrary the Paris seal was brought to Beirut by a dealer, this would not be true). The presence of etched carnelian beads at Ugarit and Tell Brak, at any rate, might indirectly support this possibility. At the beginning of the Akkadian period (and possibly before), the Indus families living in the western commercial enclaves already recognized the gaur, one of the standard animal figures of the standard seals in the motherland, as their symbol. While the choice of a standard round form would somehow connect these seals with those of the Gulf cultures, the image of this wild or semidomesticated creature, represented also in round or square seals in contemporary the Indus valley as well, might be the expression of a real or ideal claimed link with the motherland. These seals were used, although with some transformation, from 2300-2200 to about 2000-1900 BC. At the end of the 3rd millennium BC, the Ur III record from Lagash shows a community maintaining its original ethnic affiliation but successfully integrated with the Sumerian society, particularly in contexts suggesting economic and ideological interaction with temples and local cults. Meluhhans bear Sumerian names or are identified by their ethnical or professional identity. They live in a separate rural settlement identified as a “Meluhha village” somewhere in the province of Lagash; the community owns or rents its cultivated land and manages a central granary, that delivers rations or payments in barley to craft specialists. They appear variously involved with the management of temples and other religious institutions: one is perhaps an “inspector” of a
V IDALE
temple, another a skipper trasporting grain for a temple’s mill, another one receives a substantial payment in barley for the temple of Ninmar. To the same goddess is sacred a “Meluhha garden,” possibly a precinct where fruits and flowers imported from India are cultivated. As we have seen, there is the possibility that “Dogs” of Meluhhan affiliation were employed by the Lagash lords as organized guards for controlling the state dockyards. What is doubtless surprising in the Ur III references from Lagash is the total lack of written information on the expected involvement of the Indus or Meluhha village in craft production and trade of precious commodities. The hypothesis that this apparent crisis of the traditional long-distance trade activities could have been due to the incipient crisis of the urban organizations in the Indus valley around 2000 BC, advanced by the authors, is presently denied by the evidence that Harappa flourished till about 1800 BC, and that Harappa period 3C (about 2200-1900 BC) was not at all a time of decline (Meadow et al. 1999, 2001; Meadow & Kenoyer 2000). Another possibility is that the bead and semiprecious trade probably controlled by the Indus communities was not recorded in the same contexts and with the same administrative media used for recording payments, rations and deliveries of the agricultural product. We may also
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
think, as suggested by Parpola et al. (1977), that by the 21st century BC the descendants of the original immigrated Meluhhans had little direct connections with the motherland (i.e., that longdistance trade had been monopolized by the Dilmun sailors and traders). The competition with the Dilmun traders at Faylaka, Tarut and Bahrein must have been hard. The presence of Dilmun seals both from the cities of Sumer up to the Diyala Valley, as well as in the Iranian Plateau (Susa and Tepe Yahya) and in Indus centers such as Lothal (Rao 1973, 1979, 1985) points to a very active role of these merchants. In time, they probably attempted to establish their own trade outposts at both poles of the Gulf trade, perhaps trying to intercept the flow of exchanged commodities before their ultimate loading. If this was their strategy, on the long run they shoud have been very successful, given the disappearance of Meluhha as a trading partner from the cuneiform records in the first 2 centuries of the 2nd millennium BC and the correspondent rise in its place of Magan for copper, and later of Dilmun alone (Mery 2000: 276 ss., Fig. 176; Tosi 1991: 121; During Caspers 1982). The search for ancient seaports on the northern coasts of the Gulf, and the very limited excavations so far carried out in a few sites, has not significantly contributed, so far, to the solution of these particular questions.
6. Conclusions As well remarked by M. Tosi “...the lack of Mesopotamian imports in the Indus Valley reveals the lesser significance of these connections for the eastern pole. Very much like the Roman trade with India and Arabia, as described in the
Periplus of the Erythrean Sea in the 1st century AD, the flow of goods towards the head of the Gulf in the later 3rd millennium BC was determined more by the Mesopotamian demand than by economic integration with the distant lands that 275
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
supplied these goods from the shores of the Indian Ocean.” (1991: 119). Sumerians and Akkadian interacted more with Dilmun sailors and traders, Indian immigrants and largely acculturated social groups than with the remote “Black Country” of Meluhha. In Mesopotamia and in the Gulf, the immigrant Indus families maintained and trasmitted their language, the writing system and system of weights of the motherland (known in Mesopotamia as the “Dilmunite” standard) as strategic tools of trade. Their official symbol of the gaur might have stressed, together with the condition of living in a foreign world, an ideal connection with the motherland. Nonetheless, they gradually adopted the use of foreign languages and introduced minor changes in the writing system for tackling with new, rapidy evolving linguistic needs. The Indus communities in Mesopotamia developed thanks to an intimate understanding of Mesopotamian culture and markets, and to a very opportunistic behaviour. They promptly adapted their
products and trade to the fast-changing political and ideological environments of the local social and cultural evolution. Their success in Mesopotamia is easily measured by their efficient adaptation, in order of time, to the frantic politics and fights of the ED III city-states, to the Akkadian centralized bureaucracy and to the even more centralized empire established by Ur-nammu. By 2000 BC, their integration with Mesopotamian social and economic reality seems to be total. The acculturation process involved collaboration with local religious institutions, worship of foreign divinities, production of ornaments with foreign religious symbols, adoption of “impure” foreign rituals in life and death and (it would be easy to imagine) at the eyes of their compatriots at home “eating impure food.” The price of the success might have been their apparent “contamination” with Mesopotamian habits, creeds and ritual practices, a circumstance that – we may be sure – did not escape the attention of the traditional élites in the Indus valley.
R EFERENCES Beck H.C. (1933) “Etched carnelian beads.” Antiquaries Journal, XIII, pp. 384-398. Bhan K.K., J.M. Kenoyer & M. Vidale (1994) “Harappan Technology: Theoretical and Methodological Issues.” Man and Environment, XIX, 2, 141-157. Carter R. (2002a) “Prehistoric navigation and exchange in the Persian Gulf.” Paper presented at the International Congress “Early Navigation and Trade in the Indian Ocean,” Ravenna, 5 July 2002. Carter R. H. Crawford (2002b) “The Kuwait-British Archaeological Expedition to AsSabiyah: Report on the Third Season’s Work.” Iraq, LXIV, pp. 1-13. Casanova M. (1997) Le lapis-lazuli dans l’Orient Ancien: gisements, production, des origines au debut du second millenaire avant J.-C. Doctorat, Universite de Paris I, Pantheon, Sorbonne (2 vols.).
276
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
Chakrabarti D.K. (1982) “‘Long-barrel-Cylinder’ Beads and the Issue of Pre-Sargonic Contact between the Harappan Civilization and Mesopotamia.” In G.L. Possehl (ed.) Harappan Civilization: a Contemporary Perspective. Delhi, 265-270. Chakrabarti D.K. (1990) The External Trade of the Indus Civilization. New Delhi. Cleuziou S. & M. Tosi (2000) “Ra’s al-Jinz and the Prehistoric Coastal Cultures of the Ja`laan.” The Journal of Oman Studies, 11, pp. 19-73. Collon D. (1977) “Ivory.” In J.D. Hawkins (ed.) Trade in the Ancient Near East. London, pp. 219-222. Collon D. (1990) Near Eastern Seals. University of California/British Museum, Berkeley. Dikshit M.G. (1949) Etched Beads in India. Poona. During Caspers E.C.L. (1971) “Etched Carnelian Beads.” Bullettin of the Institute of Archaeology, 10, 83-98. During Caspers E.C.L. (1982) “Harappan Trade in the Arabian Gulf in the Third Millennium B.C.” Mesopotamia, VII, 167-191. Foster B. (1995) From distant days... Myths, tales and poetry from ancient Mesopotamia. Bethesda. Franke-Vogt U. (1991) “The Glyptic Art of the Harappa Culture.” In M. Jansen., M. Mulloy & G. Urban (eds.) Forgotten cities on the Indus. Mainz, pp. 179-187. Franke-Vogt U. (1992) “Inscribed Objects from Mohenjo-Daro: Some Remarks on Stylistic Variability and Distribution Patterns.” In C. Jarrige (ed.) South Asian Archaeology 1989. Madison, 103-118. Gadd C.J. (1932) “Seals of Ancient Indian styles found at Ur.” Proceedings of the British Academy, XVIII, pp. 191-210. Glassner J.-J. (2002) “Dilmun et Magan: Le Peuplement, l’Organisation Politique, la Question des Amorrites et la Place de l’Ècriture. Point de Vue de l’Assyriologue.” In S. Cleuziou, M. Tosi & J. Zarins (eds.) Essays on the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula. Roma, pp. 337-381. Heimpel W.L., L.Gorelick & A.J.Gwinnet (1988) “Philological and archaeological evidence for the use of emery in the Bronze Age Near East.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies, 40/2, 195-210. Inizan M.-L. (2000) “Importation de cornalines et agates de l’Indus en Mésopotamie. Le cas de Suse et Tello.” In V. Roux (ed.) Cornaline de l’Inde. Des pratiques techniques de Cambay aux techno-systémes de l’Indus. Paris, 473-502. Joshi J.P. & A. Parpola (1987) Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions. 1. Collections in India. Helsinki. Kenoyer J.M. (1997) “Trade and technology of the Indus Valley: new insights from Harappa, Pakistan.” World Archaeology, 29/2, 262-280. Kenoyer J.M. (1998) Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization. Karachi. Kenoyer J.M. (in print) “Indus and Mesopotamian Trade Networks: New Insights from Shell and Carnelian Artefacts.” In E. Olijdam (ed.) E. During Casper’s Memorial Volume.
277
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
Kenoyer J.M., K.K. Bhan & M. Vidale (1994) “Carnelian Bead Production in Khambhat, India: an Ethnoarchaeological Study.” In B.Allchin (ed.) Living Traditions. Studies in the Ethnoarchaeology of South Asia. New Delhi, pp. 281-306. Kenoyer J.M. & M. Vidale (1992) “A New Look to the Stone Drills of the Indus Tradition.” In P.B. Vandiver, J.R. Druzik, G.S. Wheeler & I.C. Freestone (eds.) Material Issues in Art and Archaeology III, Material Research Society, Pittsburgh, pp. 495518. Kenoyer J.M., M. Vidale & K.K. Bhan (1991) “Contemporary Stone Bead Making in Khambat, India: patterns of craft specialization and organization of production as reflected in the archeological record.” World Archaeology, 23 (1), pp. 44-63. Lahiri N. (1992) The Archaeology of Indian Trade Routes (upto c. 200 BC). New Delhi. Lamberg-Karlovsky C.C. (1972) “Trade Mechanisms in Indus-Mesopotamian Interrelations.” Journal of the American Oriental Society, 92, 2, April-June 1972, 222-229. Ligabue G. & S. Salvatori (n.d.) Bactria, an ancient oasis civilization from the sands of Afghanistan. Venice. Lombardo G. (1988) “‘Etched Beads’ in Cornalina.” In G. Lombardo (ed.) Perle Orientali. Tradizione antica e artigianato moderno nella lavorazione delle pietre semipreziose in Medio Oriente. Museo Nazionale d’Arte Orientale, Roma, 85-90. Mackay E.J.H. (1933) “Decorated Carnelian Beads.” Man, XXXIII, pp. 143-146. Mackay E.J.H. (1937) “Bead Making in Ancient Sind.” Journal of the American Oriental Society, 47, 1-5. Mackay E.J.H. (1938) Further Excavations at Mohenjo-Daro. New Delhi. Mackay E.J.H. (1943) Chanhu-Daro Excavations 1935-36. New Haven. Marshall Sir J. (1931) Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Civilization. London. Meadow R.H. & J.M. Kenoyer (2000) “The ‘Tiny Steatite Seals’ (Incised Steatite Tablets) of Harappa: Some Observations on their Context and Dating.” In M. Taddei & G. De Marco (eds.) South Asian Archaeology 1997. Rome, pp. 321-340. Meadow R.H., J.M. Kenoyer & R. Wright (1999) Harappa Archaeological Research Project. Harappa Excavations 1998. Report submitted to the Director General of Archaeology and Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi. March 30, 1999. Meadow R.H., J.M. Kenoyer & R. Wright (2001) Harappa Archaeological Research Project. Harappa Excavations 2000 and 2001. Report submitted to the Director General of Archaeology and Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi. December 2001. Parpola A. (1994) “Harappan Inscriptions. An Analytical Catalogue of the Indus Inscriptions from the Near East.” In P. Mortensen (ed.) Qala’at al-Bahrein. Volume 1. The Northern City Wall and the Islamic Fortress. Aarhus, pp. 304-492. Parpola S., A. Parpola & R.H. Brunswig, Jr. (1977) “The Meluhha Village. Evidence of acculturation of Harappan traders in the late Third Millennium Mesopotamia.” Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient, 20, 129-165. Pettinato G. (1972) “Il commercio con l’estero della Mesopotamia meridionale nel 3. Millennio av. Cr. alla luce delle fonti letterarie e lessicali sumeriche.” Mesopotamia, VII, 43-166. 278
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
Peyronel L. (2000) “Sigilli Harappani e Dilmuniti dalla Mesopotamia e dalla Susiana. Note sul Commercio nel Golfo Arabo-Persico tra III e II Mill. a.C.” Vicino Oriente, 12, pp. 175-240. Pezzoli-Olgiati D. (2000) “Images of cities in Ancient Religions: Some methodological considerations.” Zurich. Site Possehl G.L. (1984) “Of Men.” In J.M. Kenoyer (ed.) From Sumer to Meluhha: contributions to the archaeology of South and West Asia in memory of George F. Dales, Jr. Wisconsin Archaeological Reports, 3, pp. 179-186. Possehl G.L. (2002) The Indus Civilization. A Contemporary Perspective. Walnut Creek. Potts T. (1994) Mesopotamia and the East. Oxford. Rao S.R. (1973) Lothal and the Indus Civilization. Bombay. Rao S.R. (1979) Lothal a Harappan Port Town (1955-62). Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India, 78, Volume 1. New Delhi. Rao S.R. (1985) Lothal a Harappan Port Town (1955-62). Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India, 78, Volume 2. New Delhi. Reade J. (1979) Early Etched Beads and the Indus-Mesopotamia Trade. London. Reade J. (2001) “Assyrian King-Lists, The Royal Tombs of Ur, and Indus Origins.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 60, 1, 1-38. Roux V. & Matarasso P. (2000) “Les perles in cornaline harappéennes. Pratiques techniques et techno-systéme.” In V. Roux (ed.) Cornaline de l’Inde. Des pratiques techniques de Cambay aux techno-systémes de l’Indus. Paris,417-438. Sax M. (1991) “The Composition of the Materials of the First Millennium BC Cylinder Seals from Western Asia.” In P. Budd, B. Chapman, C. Jackson, R. Janaway & B. Ottaway (eds.) Archaeological Sciences 1989. Exeter. Shah S.G.M. & A. Parpola (1991) Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions. 2. Collections in Pakistan. Helsinki. Simoons F.J. (1968) A Ceremonial Ox of India. The Mithan in Nature, Culture and History with Notes on Domestication of Common Cattle. Madison. Sollberger E. (1970) “The Problem of Magan and Meluhha.” Bulletin of the University of London, 8-9, pp. 247-250. Tallon F. (1995) Les Pierres Précieuses de l’Orient Ancien des Sumériens aux Sassanides. Paris. Tosi M. (1991) “The Indus Civilization beyond the Indian Subcontinent.” In M. Jansen., M. Mulloy & G. Urban (eds.) Forgotten cities on the Indus. Mainz, 111-128. Vidale M. (2000) The Archaeology of Indus Crafts. Indus craftspeople and why we study them. IsIAO Reports and Memoirs, IV, Series Minor, Rome. Vidale M. (2002) “Aspects of the Indian bead trade in the Bronze Age.” Paper presented at the International Congress “Early navigation and Trade in the Indian Ocean,” Ravenna, 5 June 2002.
279
V IDALE
F OR A H ISTORY OF THE “M ELUHHA V ILLAGES ” IN M ESO POTAMIA
Vidale M. (in print) “The Short-Horned Bull on the Indus Seals: a Symbol of the Families in the Western Trade?” Forthcoming in South Asian Archaeology 2002, Bonn. Vidale M. & P. Bianchetti (1997) “Mineralogical Identification of Green Semiprecious Stones from Pakistan.” In R. Allchin & B. Allchin (eds.) South Asian Archaeology, 1995. New Delhi, Vol. 2, 947-953. Vidale M. & P. Bianchetti (1998-1999) “Identification of grossular (garnet) as a possible item of long-distance trade from the Indus Valley to Mesopotamia in the Third millennium BC.” Ancient Sindh, 5, 39-43. Winkelmann S. (1999) “Ein Stempelsiegel mit alt-elamischer Strichschsrift.” Archäologischen Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan, 31, pp. 23-32. Zarins J. (2002) “Magan Ship Builders at the Ur-III Lagash Dockyards.” Paper presented at the International Congress “Early Navigation and Trade in the Indian Ocean,” Ravenna, 5 June 2002. Zarins Y. (2003) “Magan Shipbuilders at the Ur III Lagash State Dockyards (20622025 BC).” In E. Olijdam & R.H. Spoor (eds.) Intercultural Relations Between South and Southwest Asia. Studies in Commemoration of E.C.L. During Caspers (19341996). Bar International Series, pp. 66-85.
F IGURES 1. Steatite seals with the image of the short-horned bulls with lowered head from Failaka (1), Bahrein (2-3), Bactria (4), the Iranian Plateau (5). Nr. 6 comes from the surface of the site of Diqdiqqah, near Ur. Not in scale. 2. Distribution of inscribed finds with Indus signs in Mesopotamia, in the Iranian Plateau and in the Gulf (from Parpola 1994). 3. Etched Carnelian Beads found in Mesopotamia and the Iranian Plateau. F1y, second row from below, right, bears the symbol of the Akkadian sun-god Shamash: it was evidenty manufactured by a Meluhhan beadmaker for a local Mesopotamian market or demand (from Reade 1979). 4. Distribution of etched carnelian beads from the Indus valley to the Mediterranean coast (from Reade 1979). 5. Long barrel-shaped carnelian beads from Chanhu-Daro and Mohenjo-Daro (Sindh, Pakistan) (upper row, left) and reconstruction of the drilling technique, with lithic drill-heads (upper row, right: from Mackay 1938, 1943 and Kenoyer 1997). Similar beads were manufactured and traded in late ED III Mesopotamia. The longest examples of these highly refined beads reach 13 cm. Lower row: examples of etched carnelian beads found in the Indus valley, to be compared with those found in Mesopotamia, common in early and middle Akkadian times.
280
W ESTENHOLZ
J OAN G OODNICK W ESTENHOLZ
Jerusalem/Chicago
The Good Shepherd* I. Deceptive Familiarity
T
he shepherd is one of the most important archetypal symbols and metaphors that our ancient forebears bequeathed to future generations of humanity. Encoded in the symbolism of the shepherd is an elaborate metaphysical schema of the way in which relationships, society, politics, ethics and global consciousness are to be envisioned. If a mythic image, metaphor or symbol is to be properly understood, we must be aware of the message that it is conveying. From the end of the third millennium BCE onwards in Mesopotamia, the monarch was thought of as the ‘shepherd of his people.’ For instance, king Hammurabi proclaimed “I am Hammurabi, the shepherd called by Enlil” (CH i 50ff.). In the Bible, it is recorded that King David
actually began his life as a shepherd caring for his father’s flocks (I Sam. 16: 11, 17: 20, 34-35), and was later given the task of shepherding the people of Israel: “... and the L ORD said to you: ‘You shall shepherd My people Israel; you shall be ruler of Israel’” (II Sam. 5: 2). David became the ideal ruler and the type of the true shepherd of Israel. 1 In Jewish and Christian sacred writings, the epithet ‘shepherd’ is also applied to God in relation to the individual, Israel or the Church as in the well-known psalm: “The L ORD is my shepherd; I shall not want” (Ps. 23: 1). Similarly, Mesopotamian deities were described as shepherds, in particular Enlil. 2 An Old Akkadian individual bore the name B l!-SIPA “My-LordIs-(My)-Shepherd” (MAD 1 163 x ? 13). 3
The abbreviations in this article follow the conventions of The Assyrian Dictionary of the University of Chicago (CAD) and The Sumerian Dictionary of the University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania (PSD) with the following additions: Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature = J. A. Black, G. Cunningham, E. Flückiger-Hawker, E. Robson and G. Zólyomi, The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (), Oxford 1998-; LATU = R. Englund and H. Nissen, Die lexikalischen Listen der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk [ATU 3] (Berlin, 1993). 1 Actually the first biblical occurrence of this metaphor of shepherd and flock to signify leader and people is Moses’ plea that God should make Joshua the leader of the people after his own death, so “that the congregation of the LORD be not as sheep which have no shepherd” (Numbers 27: 17). 2 For instance see Enlil and Ninlil, line 10, and note in Behrens 1978: 91. 3 There was a range of terms covering the span of herding professionals, the most common of which are sipa in Sumerian and r ’û in Akkadian; for a review of
shepherd terminology, see Waetzoldt 1972-5: 421-425. Because of space limitations, only this pair of lexemes will be treated in the context of the three millennia of cuneiform tradition. Lexical questions already exist in the earliest texts; for instance, Selz (1998a: 326 note 201) suggests that the term NAMEŠDA used in Uruk III was replaced by sipa but sipa already appears in traditional lexical lists of professions, Archaic Lú A 95 (see LATU, 83). Morever, other terms occur in Uruk III lexical texts, based on UDUa and AB2, such as GAL.UDUa AB2, GAL.PA.UDUa AB2 Archaic Lú A List 111-2 (LATU, 84). The exact meanings of these professions are unknown but must be differentiated from the profession AB2.KU = UTULa ‘cowherd,’ which is also found in archaic texts (LATU, 88 Officials, 59f.), as well as the profession GALa UTULa, which appears together with SANGAa UDUa AB2 in MSVO 4, 32 ii 3; see Englund 1995: 35, K. Szarzy ska 1994: 1. See further Waetzoldt 1982. Note that utullu occurs as a title of Assyrian kings, in particular of the Middle Assyrian kings Shalmaneser I, TukultiNinurta I, and Tiglath-pileser I.
A. Panaino & A. Piras (eds.) M ELAMMU S YMPOSIA IV (Milano 2004) ISBN 88-88483-206-3
281
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
These two metaphors, the royal and the divine, unite in the Christian image of Jesus as the good shepherd: “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10: 11). Although this metaphor developed in the ancient Near East, the corresponding iconographic motif is said to have evolved in the classical world. 4 In classical art, small figurines, statuettes and statues depicted the god Hermes as kriophoros (‘ram-bearer’). In his role of the god honoured for finding lost sheep, Hermes appears as a young shepherd carrying a young animal on his shoulders (fig. 1). The youthful figure of the ram-bearer had a long tradition of pagan usage (offering bearer, bucolic figure, personification of Winter, Hermes pyschopompos [“carrier of the souls of the dead”]). This
pagan image was easily assimilated to the biblically-derived metaphor describing Jesus. In funerary contexts (fig. 2), the shepherd image embodied the doctrinal belief in the salvation of the soul, being similar in intent to the Early Christian use of the Old Testament figures of Noah, Daniel and Jonah, and it later became a viable substitute image for Christ as saviour of his flock. This study will first investigate the meaning of the shepherd metaphor in current understanding and then trace its reflection in its Near Eastern inception until its mature elaboration in Early Christian art and literature. It will also touch on the significance of the Good Shepherd as a royal depiction and divine image, both in the ancient Near Eastern and in the classical world. 5
II. Shepherd Ideology The first step in reaching a clearer understanding is to analyse our own presuppositions about the definition of the shepherd’s profession, and then to probe the metaphoric / allegorical / symbolic meanings which may be derived by analogy from the realistic level. Multiple strata of cultural, ethical, theological, and psychological connotations overlie the base root metaphor, and need to be explored and examined carefully. The Oxford English Dictionary (1971, 681) gives the basic definition of the lexeme ‘shepherd’ as: “A man who guards, tends, and herds a flock of sheep (grazing at large).”
As one who guards, the shepherd is a guardian for the defenceless and provides protection. However, could this protective aspect of shepherding have a possible aggressive undercurrent? Is the guardianship envisioned defensive or peaceful, or is it seen as offensive in character? “The shepherd is said to be a peaceful person who avoided strife as much as possible.” 6 On the other hand, the aspect of defence is basic to the general concept of a shepherd: “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10: 11). As one who tends, the shepherd also looks after his charges, acting as a care-
4
trayed as a shepherd, and in Buddhism, the Bodhisattva is often depicted as the Good Shepherd. 6 Samuel 1996: 106.
See Huyghe 1968: 16. Other ancient traditions used the shepherd image as a model for leadership but lie outside the scope of this survey. In Hinduism, Krishna is sometimes por5
282
W ESTENHOLZ
giver and a provider to the vulnerable; he gathers the newly born lambs and holds them in his arms. He thus succours and nurtures his sheep. In addition, in his role as herder, the shepherd keeps his charges from straying and finds the lost sheep. Sheep are thought to wander since they have no sense of direction, and depend on the shepherd to guide them to streams and pastures. The shepherd must lead his flock along the proper paths so that they do not fall prey to accident or predators. The shepherd walks ahead of his flock. He thus furnishes guidance and discipline. In addition, the Oxford English Dictionary offers a second figurative meaning: “a spiritual guardian or pastor of a ‘flock’,” under which is subsumed as a third subdivision of meaning “Applied to temporal rulers.” Under this definition, the OED cites Homer and similar uses in the Old Testament. This definition, based on the biblical metaphor, has become part of the general royal ideology. Built into this metaphor are analogical rela-
tionships, such as the shepherd to his flock, the leader to his follower; the one to the many, the dominant to the powerless. This is the Shepherd King metaphor. Not mentioned in the OED definition is the negative aspect of the shepherd who leads his sheep to the slaughter for purposes of either ritual or the provision of food. Although existing at the realia level, this is not part of the metaphor. In this paper, I will concentrate on the three primary aspects of shepherding – guarding, tending and herding – and investigate which of these are embodied in the Mesopotamian use of the image. When the ancients regarded their king as a shepherd, did they see his primary task as providing nurture and life for his kingdom or as providing defence? What was conveyed by the pastoral language which came to symbolize the spiritual principles that governed both the universe and the covenantal community and its leadership?
III. The Development of the Good Shepherd Metaphor Let us now look at the nuances of the Mesopotamian version of this metaphor, which is so deceptively familiar to us that we fail to examine its implications. Not only are we confident that we understand this metaphor, but we are also certain that this figurative language was considered traditional in ancient Mesopotamia, where the king was regarded as herdsman of his subjects. 7 I was thus surprised at its absence – or rather meagre presence – in the early royal inscriptions of the kings of Sumer and Akkad. 8
7
See Selz 2001: 12: “Der ‘rechte Hirte’ – nicht etwa der ‘Landesvater’ – ist vermutlich das verbreitetste
A. Early Evidence of the Shepherd King Trope Looking at the written evidence, we see that the earliest testimony of the royal shepherd image appears in only two Old Sumerian references. The first is a clay ovoid tag with an inscription of Uruinimgina, which names an object as d Bau ... Uru-inim-gi-na nam-sipa-šè mutu “Bau, ... bore Uruinimgina for shep-
und älteste dieser Ur-Bilder der Herrschaft.” 8 See in general Seux 1980-1: 162f. §75. 283
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
herdship is its name.” 9 Tags such as this were presumably affixed to cult objects, giving their ceremonial names. 10 Since Uruinimgina is the only ruler of Lagash to mention the abstract conception of shepherdship, it is interesting to note that he is also one of the few who claimed the title of lugal ‘king.’ In this context, shepherdship is a synonym for kingship, but its figurative significance is not explicitly stated. The last Old Sumerian lugal ‘king,’ Lugalzagesi, states at the end of his vase inscription: kur ú-sal-la a-mu-da-nú nam-lú-ulù ú-šim-gin 7 šu-dagal a-muda 5 -du 11 ubur-an-na-ke 4 si a-mu-da 5 -sá kalam-e ki-sa 6 -ga igi a-mu-da-du 8 namsa 6 -ga mu-tar-re-éš-a ! šu na-mu-da-nibal-e-ne sipa sag-*GU 4 -gál da-rí é-me 11 “For my sake: may the countryside(kur) 12 lie down in the grassy pasture, may the people become as widespread as the grass, may the nipples of heaven function properly, and the homeland (kalam) 13 gaze upon a goodly earth! May they (An and Enlil) never alter the propitious destiny they have determined for me! May I always be the leading shepherd.” The first line contains the Sumerian phrase úsal-la ... nú ‘to lie down in grassy pasture,’ which is often used in referring to
9
Ukg. 51, 1-3; see Steible, ABW, I 354f., Cooper, Presarg. Inscr., 83 La 9.14 q; Selz 1995: 97 no. 205; Selz 2001: 15. 10 Cooper, Presarg. Inscr., 84. 11 Luzag. 1 iii 22-36; see Steible, ABW, II 320 and 325 note 24, as well as Wilcke 1990: 489 note 72 regarding the problems of the reading of line 35 and the consequent problems in translation. See translations of 1982 (Steible, ABW, II 319f.); 1986 (Cooper, Presarg. Inscr., 94 UM 7.1); and Wilcke 1990: 489f.. 12 “Das Bergland” Wilcke 1990: 489f.; “Das Fremland” Steible, ABW, II 319f.; Selz 1998: 326 note 201; “the lands” Cooper, Presarg. Inscr., 94 UM 7.1. Perhaps this is a picture of peaceful coexistence: if the mountain peoples can lie down tranquilly in their pastures with enough to eat, they will not descend on the fertile plain. A later reference to a specific foreign 284
the country or people in a metaphor expanding the image of the king as shepherd. It has been stated that pasture outside the fortified city connotes security. In reality, ensuring that the sheep were comfortable in lying down was no easy task. Commenting on the biblical parallel, Keller notes that there are four factors that inhibit a sheep from lying down 14 : 1. Fear: Sheep are anxious creatures, their timid nature stems from fear. 2. Tension: They must be free from strife with their fellow sheep. 3. Aggravation: If the sheep are tormented by flies or parasites, they cannot relax. Since pests are a common problem among sheep, the shepherd must take care to be on the lookout for them. 4. Hunger: Sheep will not rest when they feel hunger.
The considerate shepherd must see to it that these problems are reduced to a minimum in order to provide rest and peace of mind for the flock. The fourth factor seems especially significant in reference to the last line in Lugalzagesi’s vase inscription, which seems to imply an image of the shepherd leading his people to pasture, to food and to sustenance.
land, Amurru (Martu), lying down in grassy pastures is: kur mar-tu ú-sal-la nú-a “the Martu land, lying in grassy pastures,” Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, 144, which the Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature translates as “resting in security.” Cf. further, ina la r ’ûtu parg"niš ikkal ahûti “foreigners used (the fields) as pastureland due to the lack of shepherdship” (VAS 1 37 iii 17-18, Merodachbaladan kudurru). 13 “Das Land” Wilcke 1990: 489f.; “Das Land (und Volk Sumer(s))” Steible, ABW, II 319f.; “the people” Cooper, Presarg. Inscr., 94 UM 7.1. Although generally translated ‘the Land,’ the term kalam refers only to those cities that participated in a cultural koine within the southern Mesopotamian alluvial plain. 14 1970: 35ff.
W ESTENHOLZ
These two Old Sumerian references suggest that in the beginning the royal shepherd image included the herding aspect described above: the leading of the flock to pasture, but not the nurturing role, the tending and caregiving, nor the protective guardianship of the flocks. Onomastic documentation might provide further evidence of the royal shepherd image but early names rarely include the element sipa ‘shepherd.’ In the Fara period onomasticon, the name Lugalsipa “The-King-Is-The-Shepherd” is unknown, while Lugal-engar-(zi) “The-KingIs-The Faithful 15 -Farmer” does occur. 16 The farmer image was even more popular than the shepherd in the earliest personal names, as might be expected in an agrarian society. In fact, it is the pastoral image that seems out of place. In a later Sumerian literary composition, the Hymn to Enlil, the farmer is equated with the shepherd: engar-ma -bi sipa-zi kalam-ma “its august farmer is the country’s reli-
able shepherd” (Hymn to Enlil [Enlil suraše], Line 60, see Falkenstein, Götterlieder, 14). 17 Among Early Dynastic III and Sargonic Sumerian personal names, Lugalsipa “The-King-Is-The-Shepherd” occurs occasionally. Names composed with sipa were most popular in the Lagash region. 18 The personal name composed with the royal name Enannatum, En-an-na-tumsipa-zi, 19 gives further testimony of the royal shepherd image. Although Lugalengar-(zi) does not occur, the farmer image has not disappeared, as can be seen in the personal name of a well-known Lagashite official, Engar-zi. 20 On the other hand, when we look for instances of theophoric personal names composed with the elements of the name or epithet of a divinity and the word ‘shepherd,’ we find that the Fara period onomasticon contains not only Dingir-engar “God-IsThe-Farmer,” but also Dingir-sipa “GodIs-The-Shepherd.” 21 De Vito emphasizes
15
no. 17), de Genouillac TSA 17 xi 5’, DP 115 xi 8 (see Selz 1992: 142, and 1995: 131 and note 528); Sipad en-líl-le: DP 118 iv 7 (see Selz 1995: 131); Sipa-uruda-kúš: HSS III (STH 1) 15 ii 13 (Selz 1993 no. 14), 16 ii 13 (Selz 1993 no. 15), 17 vi 2 (Selz 1993 no. 16 x 12), 18 ii 6 (Selz 1993 no. 17). Similar names are found outside Lagash, e.g. Lugal-sipa BIN VIII 34 i 6 (Isin). 19 There are two occurences of this personal name: (a) Sollberger, Corpus (CIRPL) 46 vii 4 = Enz. 1 vii 4, see Grégoire, Lagaš, 9ff. (who dates the letter to the 5th year of Enannatum II); Michalowski 1993: 11-12, no. 1; Kienast and Volk 1995: 25-29 (who date the letter to the 5th year of Ukg.). (b) Cros, Nouvelles fouilles de Tello I (1910), p. 181 AO 4156 iii 1’ (time of Entemena). If both occurrences relate to the same individual, then the individual could be named after Enannatum I (see discussion in Bauer 1998: 474). 20 e.g. VAS 14 173 v 9 (Bauer, AWL, 68); Nik. 104 v 7(Selz 1989: 325f.). 21 Dingir-sipa in Fara: Deimel WF 5 iii 4; WF 18 v; Jestin, Šuruppak, 2 iv 4; 115 ii 6, v 1; 723 iii 3’; Jestin NTSŠ 213 rev. i 6, see Pomponio, Prosopografia, 47f. The reference “Deimel Fara 3 26,” given in de Vito 1993: 24 is incorrect; it should be 27*. ANengar-[zi] Deimel WF 149 rev. i, see Pomponio, Prosopografia, 41.
On the question of the translation of zi, an exact one-to-one equivalent of zi in our languages is impossible since it covers a range of meanings–true, faithful, righteous, legitimate. It is ‘true’ in the sense of ‘in accordance with the divine order,’ and ‘reliable,’ ‘steadfast’ in social relationships. In the idiom sipa-zi, it is commonly mistranslated ‘good shepherd’ because of the biblical terminology. 16 Pomponio, Prosopografia, 155. 17 The referent of this line is not clear. While Falkenstein assumed it refers to the king (Götterlieder, 52f.) as does Jacobsen (Harps, 105 note 16), Reisman suggests that engar of the Ekur is probably Ninurta (Daniel David Reisman, Two Neo-Sumerian Royal Hymns (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania) (Philadelphia, 1970), 84. 18 Lugal-sipa: VAS 27 7 iii 15 (Lugalanda); VAS 27 6 xi 3; HSS III (STH 1) 5 iii 1 (Selz 1993 no. 4), 6 iii 8 (Selz 1993 no. 5), 7 rev. v 3 (Selz 1993 no. 6 xii 3), 15 iv 14 (Selz 1993 no. 14), 16 v 1 (Selz 1993 no. 15), 17 vi 1 (Selz 1993 no. 16), 18 v 5 (Selz 1993 no. 17), 24 ii 10 (Selz 1993 no. 23) (time of Urukagina); DP 142 ii 1, VAS 25 89 iii 3 (date uncertain); Dumusipa: HSS III (= STH 1) 9 i 10 (Selz 1993 no. 8), Ursipa: de Genouillac TSA 14 xii 12 (time of Urukagina); Sipa-lagaški-(e/a)-ki-ág: HSS III (STH 1) 15 vii 11 (Selz 1993 no. 14), 16 viii 1 (Selz 1993 no. 15), 17 rev. ii 12 (Selz 1993 no. 16 x 12), 18 ix 8 (Selz 1993
285
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
that these names describe both the providential care of the deity and the individual’s dependence on that care. Both describe the relationship between the god and the community as a whole rather than with the individual members of that community. 22 While the ‘farmer’ names begin to disappear in the late Early Dynastic period, names composed with ‘shepherd’ proliferate. 23 The metaphorical relationship of the royal pastoral image to the agrarian image will be another thread traced in this survey. Akkadian royal inscriptions provide no evidence of a shepherd image. 24 This dearth of evidence argues against the simplistic opposition between a Sumerian agrarian society and a Semitic pastoral image. Selz explains this phenomenon: “Man könnte diese Aussage sogar verstehen als den Versuch der Deklassierung des überkommenen Herrschaftskonzepts des ‘Hirtentums’ gegenüber dem anders gearteten altakkadischen Königtum.” 25 However, an intrinsic Sumerian colouring of the shepherdship concept is not apparent from the meagre evidence that we have seen. If we turn to onomastic evidence, Sargonic Sumerian names reflect the continuation of the previous late Early Dynastic tradition in the use of both ‘king’ and ‘god’ elements, for instance, Lugal-sipa “The-King-Is-The-Shepherd”
and Sipa-an-né “The-shepherd-(called)by-An.” 26 In the Sargonic period, specific names of gods sometimes replace the generic dingir, e.g. d Enlil-sipa. 27 There are no pre-Sargonic examples of Akkadian names composed with a shepherd predicate, with one possible exception (Ra-ì-lum RTC 75 iii 5, see Westenholz 1988: 116). On the other hand, there are many Sargonic examples: SIPA-ni-šì “The-Shepherd-of-the-People” (HSS 10 153 vi 17), SIPA-si-in “Their (the people’s)-Shepherd” MAD 1 254 iii 5. The question is whether these names refer to a royal or a divine image. Theophoric names include: Dagan-ré-ì-su “Dagan-ishis-shepherd” (MAD 1 256: 3) and Be-líSIPA “My-Lord-is-(my)-Shepherd” (MAD 1 163 x 13). Literary evidence of the maternal, nurturing image of the shepherd can be found in a lovers’ charm from the Old Akkadian period:
22
Jena, ED III / Early Sarg. Nippur); Foster, Umma, 47 iv 1 (Classical Sargonic Umma); Sipa-an-né: Frayne, RIME 2 p. 270, 2.12.3 (seal inscription, time of Lugalušumgal ensi of Lagash). 27 DINGIR-SIPA: AnOr IX 372 i 3 and see references collected by de Vito 1993: 147f., 211; dEnlilsipa: TuM 5 27 i 7, ii 7; 29 + ii 10, see A. Westenholz, Jena; dEN.ZU-SIPA: MAD 3 228. These names are not clearly Sumerian or Akkadian since the logographic cuneiform signs could be read in either language. 28 This incantation has received much attention since our treatment in J. and A. Westenholz 1977: 202, see Lambert 1987: 37f., Lambert 1989: 9, Foster 1993: 56f., Leick 1994: 194-196, Hirsch 1995-6: 139-144, Haas 1999: 149-151, Cavigneaux 1999: 269.
De Vito 1993: 113f. Dingir-sipa in Lagash, period of Ukg.: HSS III (= STH 1) 15 rev. i 13 (Selz 1993 no. 14 ix 13), 16 rev. ii 9 (Selz 1993 no. 15 x 9); see also discussion in Selz 1995: 23 and note 49. 24 As noted already by Seux 1980-1: 162, also Franke 1995b: 833: “Completely lacking are allusions to fulfilling the welfare that a king owed the land. Also missing is the metaphoric perception of the king as shepherd.” The one example usually cited is Atalšen r ’ûm epšum RA 9 pl.1:5 (Atalšen of Urkiš and Nawar); see Gelb-Kienast, Königsinschriften, 383 Varia 16 which is probably of Ur III date; see Frayne 1992: 635 25 2001: 16 [13]. 26 Lugal-sipa: TuM 5 11 iii 2, 23 ii 3 (Westenholz, 23
286
ki r"‘ium (SIPA) (y)iturru $a’nam ‘enzum kal#ma$a lahrum puh"dsa at"num m#ra$ as the shepherd goes around his flock, the goat around her kid, the ewe around her lamb, the jenny around her foal. (MAD 5 8: 21-24) 28
W ESTENHOLZ
These poetic parallel verses link the image of the shepherd and his care for his flock with the love of the mother for her young. The metaphor expresses a nurturing, motherly image of the shepherd. This love incantation provides an image of the girl’s devotion to and total absorption in the object of her love, like a shepherd or a mother. However, this boundless maternal love is accompanied by protection and absolute security. 29 Thus, at the end of the Old Akkadian period the image of a shepherd included the tending aspect, although it does not seem to have been applied to the figure of the king. 30
B. Development of the Shepherd King Trope In the Neo-Sumerian period, the term ‘shepherd’ appears as an epithet of kings for the first time. It is even applied retroactively to the Old Akkadian kings, as in the literary composition Curse of Agade 31 : kur-kur ú-sal-la i-im-nú ùg-bi ki ša 6 -ga igi bí-ib-du 8 lugal-bi sipa d Na-ra-am- d Sin-e All the lands were lying down in grassy pastures, their people experienced happiness. Their king, the shepherd NaramSin, (rose like the sun on the holy throne of Akkade).
As Cooper remarks, 32 this text parallels that of Lugalzagesi cited above, even to the detail of the foreign lands lying down in grassy pastures.
29
Cavigneaux 1999: 270. See Selz 2001: 17, where he remarks that Old Akkadian conception of kingship has transcended the old concept of shepherdship. 31 Although Neo-Sumerian manuscripts of this composition exist, this section is only presently preserved 30
Gudea of the second dynasty of Lagash was the first ruler to use the term ‘shepherd’ as a self-referent. He speaks of himself as a “shepherd chosen in the heart of Ningirsu” (sipa-šà-ge-pà-da Statue B ii 8, Edzard, RIME 3/1 p. 31). Further, his selection occurs “when Ningirsu had directed his steadfast gaze (igi-zi) on his city, had chosen Gudea as the legitimate shepherd (sipa-zi) in the land” (ibid. iii 69, Edzard, RIME 3/1 p. 32). The characteristics of the shepherd that Gudea emphasizes are non-specific: sipa-zi-ka-gina-Ningirsu-ke 4 “Ningirsu’s reliable shepherd who (pronounces) enduring words” (Statue R i 4f., Edzard, RIME 3/1 p. 60), sipa-[g]ú-tuku- d Ningirsu-ka-ke 4 gal muzu “brave shepherd of Ningirsu who is wise” (Cyl. B xiii 12, Edzard, RIME 3/1 p. 96). This shepherd image is not juxtaposed to the image of animals/people lying in grassy pastures. The latter image does occur separately in his hymns: “Let the cattle pens be built on your behalf, let the sheepfolds be renewed on your account, May the people (ùg) lie down in grassy pastures (ú-sal-la) under your reign, (enjoying) abundance, and let the eyes of all the countries be directed toward Sumer” (Cyl B xxii 17-20, Edzard, RIME 3/1 p. 100). Here the people are not foreigners but the inhabitants of Sumer. This epithet is used throughout the inscriptions and hymns of the kings of the Third Dynasty of Ur, though without an extended metaphor concerning anyone – foreigners or natives – lying down in grassy pastures. Ur-Namma, like Gudea before him, claimed to have been chosen,
in the Old Babylonian manuscripts. Thus, the question is whether this section comes from the later period. A similar description of Ur-Zababa as shepherd appears in the Sumerian Sargon legend in TRS 73:6f. (Cooper Curse of Agade 27). 32 Curse of Agade, 238. 287
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
this time by Enlil: “The Great Mountain, Enlil, chose Ur-Namma the faithful shepherd from the multitude of people: ‘Let him be the shepherd of Nunamnir!’ He made him emanate(?) fierce awesomeness.” (Hymn B 4-6, Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature). In the composition Death of Ur-Namma (Hymn A), the epithet ‘shepherd’ becomes the royal titulary: Shepherd Ur-Namma. 33 However, there does not seem to be any relationship between the title sipa and any particular activity. In one hymn lauding his agricultural work, Ur-Namma is designated as the engar-zi (Hymn G 19). 34 His son, Šulgi, is the sole bearer of the epithet sipa-zi-ki-en-gi-ra “faithful shepherd of Sumer.” It is attested both in self-laudatory hymns and hymnal narrative compositions. A survey of the contexts in which this epithet appears indicates that it is a significant poetic phrase, used in particularly dramatic or key episodes. On one occasion this epithet introduces the theme of ‘the king as the supreme judge of the land.’ 35 On three other occasions this shepherd epithet is used to frame a hymn praising Šulgi’s unparalleled physical strength and superhuman athletic achievements, but no reference is made to any shepherding qualities of guarding, tending or herding. 36 Šulgi refers to himself as a shepherd when praising his musical talents (Šulgi E 39ff.). In one Shulgi hymn (Šulgi P Segment A 11-14), the goddess Ninsun, his divine mother, is quoted as saying: “I have looked through the land in all its extent and among its black-headed people who are as numerous as ewes, and I
have elevated Šulgi for me high above their head. May he be their trustworthy shepherd!” (sipa-zi-bi é-am) (Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature). On several occasions the epithet sipa-zi introduces dramatic nam-tar episodes in which the gods decree the fate of Šulgi (e.g. Šulgi X 36ff., Klein, Šulgi, 138f.). Finally, the epithet occurs several times in refrains of entire hymns or parts of them (Šulgi D refrain in lls. 287-320, “With Šulgi the righteous shepherd of Sumer, he (a deity) walks on the road”; see Klein, Šulgi, 54). As for the farmer image, there is a field name incorporating the royal name AmarSin: d Amar- d Sin-engar- d En-líl-lá “AmarSin-is-the-Farmer-of-Enlil” (Legrain TRU 324:8), and female companions praise the king Šu-Sin who personifies Dumuzi as “you are the farmer who brings us much grain” (Šu-Sin ŠS C 20, Sefati 1998: 360f.). Both Lugal-engar and Lugal-sipa occur among personal names in this period (Limet, L’Anthroponymie, 165ff.). Note also names composed with that of the king and his titulary, e.g. Šulgi-sipakalam-ma, Šulgi-sipa-zi-ki-en-gi-ra-ke 4 (Limet, L’Anthroponymie, 294). Turning to the historiography composed under this regime, we note that three ancient kings in the Sumerian King List are designated as shepherds, as their traditional actual occupations.
33
and connects si...sá with si of sipa. The connection is first made with Gudea (p. 18). He analyses the meaning of the word sipa as si–pà “der, der die Hörner (seiner Tiere) findet” (p. 19). 36 Klein 1993: 127 note to line i 9’. 37 Selz 1998b: 140f. emphasizes the juxtaposition of
Flückiger-Hawker 1999: 61. Flückiger-Hawker 1999: 294f., and see note on line on p. 296. 35 Note that Selz (2001: 22) suggests that the particular denotation of sipa(-zi) is ‘wisdom,’ which he defines as including all the above attributes of Šulgi, 34
288
1. Antediluvian divine Dumuzi (Jacobsen AS 11 p. 72 SKL WB i 15) 2. Postdiluvian Etana, Kish I dynasty (Jacobsen AS 11 p. 80 SKL WB ii 16) 37 3. Postdiluvian Lugalbanda, Uruk I dynasty (Jacobsen AS 11 p. 88 SKL WB iii 12)
W ESTENHOLZ
The first king, Dumuzi, the beloved of Inanna, is the archetypical shepherd who tends his goats in the sheepfold and whose trademark is the churn. 38 It is interesting to note that the Sumerian King List also credits the second king Etana with the consolidation of all the lands (kur-kur) as part of his rise to the assumption of the title lugal. The use of the shepherd epithet continues at the beginning of the second millennium under the contending dynasties, whether Sumerian, Akkadian or Amorite. 39 The motif of the king as the one chosen to be the shepherd by the deities appears frequently. Išme-Dagan of Isin is chosen prenatally by Enlil (sipa-zi tu-da-ni “the true shepherd whom he engendered” IšD S 28, Ludwig, IšmeDagan, 88f.). Like Gudea, Lipit-Ishtar of Isin emphasises the quality of wisdom as seen in “the wise shepherd, who leads the people, to let them relax in the sweet shade...” (Lipit-Ištar hymn B 10-11 // Sumerian Proverbs YBC 8929; Alster, Proverbs, 332). 40 Nevertheless, he gives equal weight to the pastoral and agrarian images in his titulary: d Lipit-Eštar sipasun 5 -na nibru ki engar-zi Uri 5 ki -ma: d LipitEštar r jûm p"lih Nibru ikkarum k!num ša Urim “Lipit-Ishtar, humble shepherd of Nippur, true farmer of Ur” (Frayne, RIME 4 48 E.4.1.5.1:1-5 [Sum.], 51 E.
4.1.5.3:1-7[Akk.]). Nevertheless, the emphasis in the metaphor of the wise shepherd is consistently on the freedom from the four factors listed above: fear, tension, aggravation and hunger. This is expressed by the provision of food, the tending aspect of shepherdship, and the leading of the sheep – the herding aspect of shepherdship: “Enlil has looked at you truly, Iddin-Dagan, he has spoken truly to you. Enlil has commanded you to keep firm the cosmic bond in Sumer, to keep the people on the track, to let Sumer and Akkad relax under your broad protection, to let the people eat noble food and drink fresh water. Iddin-Dagan, you are the shepherd in his heart, the one whom Enlil has spoken to truly” (Iddin-Dagan B 513, Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature). 41 Of the many kings of the various dynasties, the one who developed the shepherd metaphor most clearly was UrNinurta of Isin, who proclaims himself sipa nì-nam-íl nibru ki na-gada uri 5 ki -ma “the shepherd who offers everything for Nippur, herdsman of Ur” (Frayne, RIME 4 66 4.1.6.1 lines 2-5), replacing the farmer epithet of Lipit-Ishtar with a pastoral one. In the praise poems created for him, entreaties are made: ùg ú-sal-la u-mu-un-dè-nú na-gada-bi é-a d Ur- d nin-
the shepherd and kingship in relation to Etana. Despite the Old Akkadian seal motif assigned to Etana (see below), the literary epic only describes the king as a shepherd in the latest first millennium version (see below). 38 Klein 1998: 211ff. 39 For further references, see Seux, Epithètes, 411ff. for the Sumerian royal epithets incorporating sipa, and 243 ff. for the Akkadian royal epithets incorporating r ’û. 40 Scholars call this hymn “Lipit-Ishtar, King of Justice, Wisdom and Learning,” and the subject is his praise in the Edubba; see Vanstiphout 1978. The text in the Lipit-Ishtar hymn: sipa igi-gál-tuku ùg la 5la 5-e gissu-du11-ga u4-SAHAR?-e ní-dúb-bu, has
various interpretations: “wise shepherd, who leads the people into sweet shadow, relaxing moonlight(?)” (Vanstiphout), “wise shepherd, who leads the people to let them relax ...” (Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature). The proverb only contains the phrases sipa igi-gál-tuku ùg la 5-la 5-e, which Alster translates: “If the shepherd is intelligent, the people are well governed.” Sumerian Proverbs YBC 8929 Alster, Proverbs, 332. 41 d en-líl-le igi-zi mu-e-ši-in-bar dI-din-dda-gan gù zi mu-ra-an-dé ús-sag ki-en-gi-re gen6-né-dè ùg ús-a sig10-ge-dè ki-en-gi ki-uri an-dùl dagal-la-za ní dúbbu-dè ùg-e ú nir-gál gu7-ù-dè a dùg na8-na8-dè den-lílle á-bi mu-e-da-an-ág dI-din-dda-gan sipa šà-ga-name-e gù zi dé-a den-líl-lá-me-en. 289
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
urta-ke 4 ùg-šár-re ús-zi é-bí-ib-dab 5 -bé “Under his rule may the people rest in grassy pastures with him as their herdsman. May Ur-Ninurta make the numerous people follow the just path” (Ur-Ninurta D 33f., an adab of Inanna for Ur-Ninurta, Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature) and nam-sipa-zi-gál-ùg-šár-ra durí-šè sag-e-eš rig 7 -ga-na-ab-z[é]-en ... udu-gin 7 ka ú-kú a-ba-kin-kin gú a-nag a-ba-gá-gá “Bestow upon him the shepherdship over the living beings, the numerous people! ... As for/Like sheep, may he search for food (for them) to eat, may he let them have water to drink!” (Ur-Ninurta A 20, 26, balag of Inanna, see Sjöberg, Finkelstein Memorial Vol., 189ff.); sipa-zi giš-tuku-zu-um ub-da an ki ùg ki gar-ra-ba sag-e-eš mu-ni-rig 7 geštú-sum-ma d en-ki-kà KA túm-túmmu-bi mu-e-zu sag-gi 6 udu-gin 7 lu-a-bi u-mu-gál-e ús-zu é-bí-íb-dab 5 -bé “(UrNinurta) the faithful shepherd who is attentive to you. You have made him to whom Enki has given wisdom understand how to ... them. May you be available to make the black-headed, numerous as sheep, follow your path” (Ur-Ninurta C 20-23, adab of Ninurta, Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature). The emphasis of the metaphor is on the provision of food (the tending aspect of shepherdship) and leading the sheep (the herding aspect of shepherdship). The same aspects of shepherdship are found in another king of Isin, probably
Enlil-b!ni: “As (for) sheep, I sought out food to eat (and) fed (them) with green plants. I lifted the heavy yoke from their necks. I settled (them) in a secure abode (dúr(?).gi.na)” (Frayne, RIME 4 89 4.1. 10.1001 v 16-21). Later kings of Isin (Ur-dukuga, Sinmagir and Damiq-ilišu) are given epithets containing both sipa and engar. Damiqilišu is the “farmer who piles up the produce (of the land) in granaries” (Frayne, RIME 4 103 4.1.15.1:8f.). The insignia of the shepherd king, the gidru as the shepherd’s staff and the šibir as the shepherd’s crook(?), appear in texts of the kings of the Isin-Larsa period. 42 An explicit example can be seen in the hymn of Rim-Sin of Larsa: sipakalam-ma-ra gidru-ma u 4 -sù-rá šu-ni-šè bí-ib-dab 5 -bé-en “You make the shepherd of the Land hold in his hands the august staff until distant days” (Rim-Sin B 40, Hymn to Haia, Charpin, Clergé, 345). Sumerian literature reinforces this picture of the nurturing shepherd as king. Shepherdship (nam-sipa) is employed as a synonym for kingship as in the list of me’s (Inanna and Enki F 19-20). Nevertheless, the royal leader is shown both as a shepherd and as a farmer. In the Inanna-Dumuzi love poetry used in the sacred marriage ritual, the shepherdship as well as the farmership of Dumuzi/king (the avatar of Dumuzi) is a constant theme:
May the king, your husband whom you love, live long days in your pure lap, the sweet thing! Grant him a propitious and renowned reign, Grant him the royal throne, firm on its foundation, Grant him the staff (gidru) that guides the land aright, the crook ? (šibir) and the lead-rope (eškiri), ...
42 Krecher 1976: 110f. §3 and 113. Although he assigns these insignia as accoutrements of the shepherd, he gives the more common translations of gidru as
290
‘sceptre’ and šibir as ‘staff.’ For a discussion of gidru/ a!!u as ‘staff,’ see Wiggermann 1985-6 and his notes on šibir on p. 15 and note 45. As pointed out by
W ESTENHOLZ
May he exercise the shepherdship (nam-sipa----ak) over their black-headed inhabitants, May he, like a farmer, establish cultivated fields, May he, like a faithful shepherd, multiply the sheepfolds, May there be flax under him, may there be barley under him. (The Blessing of Dumuzi on his Wedding Day, 37-40, 47-50, Sefati 1998: 301ff. DI D 1 )
The produce of the shepherd is that of the farmer! In the dispute The Shepherd and the Farmer, the difference is made explicit: it is the farmer who provides
flax and finished clothing, beer and barley, while the shepherd provides raw wool, milk and cheese. 43
Let your sheep eat grass on the moist land Let your sheep pasture amid my grain stalks. (lines 76-77)
These texts constantly relate to feeding and nurturing – the tending aspects of shepherdship. In the Shepherd’s Prayer (Sefati 1998: 260-266), the shepherd begs for his sheep to have food to eat. It can be deduced from this survey of citations relating to the shepherdship of the king that being a shepherd was one of the defining traits of the Sumerian namlugal. 44 The symbolism implies a caretaking role for the shepherd of the flock of the people.
Turning from the Sumerian tradition to Babylon and its Amorite dynasty, we note that the Semitic Akkadian compositions borrowed extensively from the Sumerian literary vocabulary. Hammurabi, the famous king of Babylon, was chosen by Enlil as shepherd (r jûm nib!t Enlil CH i 51), and he was also the r j! niš! “shepherd of the people” (CH iv 45) for Ishtar. In the Epilogue to his law collection, he states:
Hammurabi šarrum gitm"lum an"ku ana $alm"t qaqqadim ša Enlil išrukam r ’ûssina Marduk iddinam ul gu ah! ul addi ašr! šulmim ešte’!šin"šim pušq! waš##tim upetti n#ram uš $!šin"šim ... niš! dadm! aburr! ušarbi$ mugallitam ul ušarš!šin"ti il# rabûtum ibbûninnima an"kuma r jûm mušallimum ša ha##ašu(GIDRU) išarat $ill! #"bum ana "lija tari$ ina utl!ja niš! m"t(KALAM) Šumerim u Akkadîm uk!l ina lamass!ja ihhiš" ina šulmim attabbalšin"ti ina n meq!ja uštapziršin"ti “I am Hammurabi, the perfect king. I have not been careless or negligent toward the blackheaded, granted to my care by the god Enlil, and with whose shepherding the god Marduk charged me. I have sought for them places of well-being / security. 45 I opened up troublesome obstructions, I spread light over them. ... I made the people of the populated world lie down in pastures. 46 I did not tolerate anyone intimidating them. The great gods having cho-
the CAD: “The šibirru which according to Hh IV 430 has a sikkatu ‘tip’(?) may possibly be identified with the staff ending in a crook depicted on seals” (CAD Š/2 379). Selz (2001: 14) maintains that the mace was one of the shepherd’s weapons in his character as protector of the herd. 43 For the text, see Sefati 1998: 324-343. 44 Note that Selz (1998b: 141) maintains that shepherdship and kingship were two different but parallel notions of rule in Sumerian society. He equates (ibid. note 33) the former with ‘Herrentums’ (= nam-en). 45 The word šulmu basically conveys the sense of ‘well-being, health and completeness,’ as attested in CAD Š/3 247ff., while the meaning ‘peace’ is a later
legalistic development, perhaps borrowed from the western peripheries where the two lexemes šal"mu and sal"mu coalesced. Did these two roots merge in West Semitic or did a split occur in Akkadian? 46 The Akkadian word aburru renders the Sumerian ú-sal. Cf. the Sumerian parallel: ma-da-mu ú-sal-la mi-ni-in-nú, Monolingual Sumerian hymn to Hammurabi 23, Sjöberg 1961: 52, and see discussion on line 23 on p. 67. “Sumerian phrase ú-sal-la ...nú ‘to lie on the pasture’ often used in referring to the country or people in a metaphor expanding the image of the king as shepherd, was borrowed into Akkadian literary language probably through the translations of royal inscriptions” (CAD A/1 91a). 291
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
sen me, I am indeed the shepherd who provides well-being (r jûm mušallimum), 47 whose staff is straight/just. My (benevolent) shade is spread over my city, I held the people of the homeland of Sumer and Akkad on my lap. They prospered under my protective spirit. I maintained them in well-being, with my (skilful) wisdom I sheltered them.” (CH xlvii 9-21, 35-58)
Thus, we may deduce that in the poetic description of Hammurabi, the royal shepherd image conveyed the tending and the herding aspects of shepherdship, including the maternal nurturing role and the care-giving male gender archetype. His shepherdship is closely tied to his exaltation of justice: [r j]ût(im) m!šarim “shepherdship of justice” (CH Manuscript B i 7’, see Borger BAL II 7). 48 Note also the juxtaposition of the staff and the shepherdship: Šamas ha##ašu lirrik niš!šu ina m!šarim lir “May Šamaš lengthen his staff, may he shepherd his people in justice” (CH xlix 14-17). It is not clear whether the guarding aspect forms part of the royal ideology; this basically depends on the lexical interpretation of šullumu, whose range of meaning includes ‘to keep well, in good health, in good condition,’ as well as ‘to safeguard, to bring safely,’ and relates to the complete welfare of a country. It is quite certain that no definite lexeme such as na$"ru ‘to guard, protect’ is applied to the function of the shepherd. 49 If we survey Old Babylonian Akkadian literature for the image of the royal shepherd, we find that the most interesting composition is an Akkadian prophecy concerning the coming of the saviour r ’û k!nu “the true/faithful shepherd” of Uruk. 50 He comes with šulmu and bal"#u “well-being and life” to revive (lit. ‘bring to life’) dead Uruk. The picture
drawn in the epilogue of Hammurabi colours the portrayal of Naram-Sin in the OB Cuthean Legend. It is ironic that the king who was never a shepherd becomes a shepherd in the Curse of Agade and then an irresponsible shepherd: an"ku šarrum la mušallim m"tišu u r ’ûm la mušallim niš!šu “I am a king who has not maintained the welfare of his land, and a shepherd who has not brought well-being to his people” (J. Westenholz, Akkade, 272f. iii 12, new translation). The realistic image of the shepherd and his major concerns are conveyed in an Old Babylonian letter: “(I sent the sheep to town). ... rub$am šukunšin"ti u ina ri’!tim mamman irti U 8 .UDU."I.A šin"ti la utâr “give them a place to rest and let no one prevent those sheep from pasturing” (YOS 2 76:7-10, see Stol, AbB 9 76).
47
48
Both nuances are part of the verb šullumu (see CAD Š/1). Note that the verb šullumu mng. 7 ‘to keep well, in good health, in good condition b) said of shepherds.’ In this context, however, the image is of the shepherd who tends and herds his flock, rather than one who guards them. 292
C. Fossilisation of Shepherd King Trope Later royal ideology has fossilised the shepherd image by sheer repetition. The gods continue to choose kings to shepherd the people, as in this late bilingual introductory chronicle fragment: [l]ugale nam-sipa kalam-ma-šè mu-un-[gar-(re)eš] ùg nam-sipa-e-NE mu-un-sum-mu[(uš)]: šarru ana r ’ût m"ti iš[kun#] niš!
See Hurowitz 1994: 18 and note 34. Exceptions: ARM 1 118: 11 (in relation to cattle). 50 For the copy, see van Dijk 1962: 61f., pl. 28 W19900,1 and for a translation, see R. Biggs 1969: 604; for a partial edition of lines 1-9, see J. Westenholz 1997: 66. 49
W ESTENHOLZ
ana r ’<û>ti iddin#šum “They appointed a king to shepherd the land, they made over [to him] the people for shepherdship.” 51 A few examples should suffice. 52 In the first millennium B.C.E., Sargon II styles himself “Sargon the shepherd of Assyria.” 53 Adad-šum-u#ur, exorcist of king Assurbanipal, addresses his royal master: “May the rule of the king, my lord, be as pleasant as water and oil upon the peoples of all the countries! May the king, my lord, be their shepherd for ever! ... Who does not love his benefactor? In a song from Babylonia it is said: ‘On account of your sweet words, O my shepherd, all the scholars yearn for you’” (ABL 435: 4-10, r. 9-14, see Parpola, SAA, X 198, NA let.). On the 11th of Nisan during the New Year’s Festival in Babylon, the king is addressed as su 8 -ba: r ’ûm among his other epithets. 54 The agrarian metaphor appears again in the Neo-Assyrian period in a designation of the Neo-Assyrian king as LÚ. ENGAR, in the specific and extraordinary situation of the installation of a šar p#hi ‘substitute king.’ 55 During the time of danger when the surrogate king sat on the throne, letters were addressed to the real king, “to the farmer.” 56 The NeoBabylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, includes both epithets in his titulary: r ’û k!nu $"bit uruh šulmu ša DN u DN ... ikkari Babbilu [sic] “the legitimate shepherd who takes the road (that brings) well-being of Šamaš and Adad ... the farmer of Babylon” (VAB 4 104 i 4, 19).
Scattered late literary compositions also use this metaphor. The Neo-Assyrian recension of the literary composition Etana relates the institution of kingship in the first city of Kish. In synonymous parallel structure, Ishtar’s search is phrased: “Ishtar [...] a shepherd, and sought for a king [..]” (SB Etana I 6, 20, 22). 57 Interestingly, Etana is mentioned in the Sumerian King List as a shepherd (see above), but not in either of the second-millennium versions. 58 Although comparison has been made between Etana and David (e.g. Bernbeck 1996: 179), another famous early king is also given the title in the late version of the epic: “he (Gilgamesh) is the shepherd of Uruk the Sheepfold” (Gilg. I ii 24). The expanded metaphor of grassy pastures as the resting place of the flock of people also appears in royal inscriptions and literature, as well as the shepherd’s staff: [GIŠ.PA]-a-ni ùg-šár-ra-si-sá-e-da kalam-ma-a-ni ú-sal-la nú-da: ha##ašu el kiššat niš! šut šuri m"ssu aburriš šurbu$i “so that he may lead his people aright with his staff, let his country lie in safe pastures” (4R 12:19f., SB copy of MB royal inscription, possibly KadašmanEnlil II). The image is seen in the inscription of Tukulti-Ninurta: ša ina šullum šibiršu irte’û aburriš m"ssu “who shepherds his land in (grassy) pastures with his health-bringing staff” (Weidner Tn. 26 no. 16: 6-7) and in the kudurru of Merodach-baladan II: lu r ’û mupahhiru saph"ti ha##i išarti šibirru mušallim niš!
51
55
52
56
Finkel 1980: 66 lines 4-5. For further references, see Seux 1980: 162f., CAD R r"$û v. mng. 3b, for royal inscriptions until Persian period (Cyr.). r"$û s. mng. 2b; also Seux, Epithètes, 244ff. 53 TCL 3 112; Craig, ABRT, 1 54 iv 19; see Livingstone, SAA III 4 rev. 19’ (Nanaya Hymn of Sargon II). 54 According to a bilingual šu’ila to Asalluhi/ Marduk/Nabium/Ninurta, see Maul 1998: 169 line 37.
Parpola, AOAT, 5/2 Excursus, pp. xxii-xxxii. Parpola, SAA, X 1 (ABL 332), 2 (ABL 223), 26 (ABL 38), 128 (ABL 816), 209 (ABL 15), 210 (ABL 4), 211 (ABL 183), 212 (ABL 361), 216 (ABL 1435+), 221 (ABL 362), 304 (CT 53 50), 325 (CT 53 52), Note edict 381 (CT 53 8). 57 Most recent text edition: Novotny 2001. 58 Haul 2000: 8. All cuneiform references to Etana are collected in Selz 1998b: 139ff.
293
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
ipqid q"tuššu “(DN declared) ‘Let him be the shepherd who collects the dispersed (flock)’ and entrusted to him the just staff (and) the crook ? which maintains the welfare of the people” (VAS 1 37 i 32-36). On the other hand, there may be some subtle changes and development in the image and insignia of the shepherd. In the hands of the Assyrian monarchs, these insignia can also be symbols of their merciless and furious behaviour: ina m tel šibirr!ka tušeškin ana IM.4 gimir kibr"te “with the power of the crook ? , you subjugated all the regions” (Tn.-Epic “ii” 9) and Sennacherib wielded the ha##u išartu murappišat mi$ri šibirru la p"dû ana šumqut z"’ir! “the just staff that extends the realm, the merciless crook ? for the destruction of enemies” (OIP 2 85: 5). To conclude this survey of the Mesopotamian royal shepherd image, the metaphor is epitomized in the proverb: ùg lugal nu-me-a udu sipa-bi in-nu “a
people without a king (are) as sheep without a shepherd” (Lambert BWL 229: 14-15, bilingual proverb, Akkadian destroyed).
D. Divine Ideology Having established the diffusion of the royal metaphor, let us look at the allegorical usage of the shepherd image in relation to the divine, which also has its origins in the early history of Mesopotamia. Under section A, we have already dealt with the earliest evidence, found in personal names and in early royal inscriptions. 59 The god as shepherd continues to appear in personal names, e.g. SIPA-ì-lí “(My)-Shepherd-Is-My-God” (Delaporte CCL I T159, Ur III). In particular, it is the high gods who have the onerous responsibility of looking after the flocks of humanity. It is recorded of Enlil:
d
en-líl sipa-zi téš-ba lu-a na-gada mas-su nì-zi-gál-la-ka Enlil, the reliable shepherd of (herds) multiplying one like the other, The herdsman and leader of all in which is breadth of life Hymn to Enlil [Enlil suraše] Lines 93-4 (text: Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature, translation: Jacobsen, Harps) 60 d
en-líl sipa-zi-me-en DU.DU-bi mu-un-zu
Enlil, you are the reliable shepherd, you know how to herd them Hymn to Enlil [Enlil suraše] Line 154 (text: Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature, translation: Jacobsen, Harps) 61
Over a millennium later, a text from Nineveh records several incantations to be recited during the kettle drum ritual, of which one is addressed to Enlil: “Faithful shepherd, faithful shepherd, god
Enlil, faithful shepherd; Master of all countries (Akk., note Sum. kalam), faithful shepherd, lord of all the Igigi deities, faithful shepherd, lord of the pole, faithful shepherd” (RAcc. 28 K.4806 ii 10-19).
59 There is an early literary reference in broken context: Alster and Westenholz 1994: 22 ix 14. 60 Falkenstein, Götterlieder, lines 92f.
61 In the edition in Falkenstein, Götterlieder, this line which is numbered 152 is only partially preserved.
294
W ESTENHOLZ
Many other gods are invoked as shepherds. Mention is made of the divine shepherdship of humanity by the high god Anu, by the patron god of Babylonia, Marduk, by the sun-god Šamaš, by the d
god of writing Nabû, by the warrior god Ninurta, and naturally by the divine shepherd Dumuzi. 62 Of the moon-god NannaSin it is said:
utu-gim su 8 -ba-kalam-ma-me-en
“Like the sun-god, you are the shepherd of the homeland” (Nanna Hymn A, see Å.Sjöberg, Mondgott, 15: 59, see notes to line on pp. 31f.)
In first-millennium literary works concerned with the deeds of the gods, the victorious deities are endowed with the shepherdship of humanity. When the gods granted Marduk absolute kingship over the gods, they also blessed him with l!pušma r ’ût $alm"t qaqqadi “let him (Marduk) shepherd the black-headed people” (En. el. VI 107). After Ninurta’s victory over Anzû, it is recounted that ušmand#ka r ’ût niš! gamirtu “They assigned to you full shepherdship of the people” (Anzu III 129; Saggs, AfO, 33 25). An invocation to Ninurta, as the merciful god who hears the prayers of mankind, reads: r ’ enš#ti mussahhiru akûti “O Shepherd of the weak, who is merciful to the destitute.” 63 Goddesses are also portrayed as shepherdesses: r ’!tu Ištar "likat pan b#li “shepherdess Ištar, who walks in front of the herd” (Farber, Ištar und Dumuzi, 129: 33) and ša kullat m"t"ti gimir kalama r ’ûssina teppuši “you (Ištar) shepherd all lands of the entire universe” (Farber, Ištar und Dumuzi, 130: 47f.) 64 The tradition of invoking the deities as ‘shepherds’ lasted until the latest period. In a Seleucid descriptive ritual of the New Year’s Festival, B"l and B"ltija are invoked: umun-mu sipa lú-lú “my lord,
shepherd of mankind” (George 2000: 263 ii 16’) [g]ašan-mu d Inanna sipa sag-gi 6 “O my lady, Inanna, shepherd of the black-headed race” (George 2000: 266 iii 9). Rituals for the third day of the month of Simanu prescribe the kurgarrû’s invoking Šamaš at the east gate of the temple of Ishtar as r ’ûm ten š ti “shepherd of human folk” (George 2000: 274 iii 6’). The relations between a man and his personal god are likewise seen in terms of a shepherd and his sheep. A Sumerian proverb runs: “A man’s (personal) god is a man’s shepherd. The god will not desert him. A shepherd should not... A man’s god provides (him with) [food to eat] and water to drink” (UET 6/2 255, see Alster, Proverbs, 310). Again the emphasis is on the provision of food. To conclude this section on divine shepherd imagery in Mesopotamia, there is the astral imagery of the divine shepherd of the flock of planets. The shepherd in the heavens is the constellation SIPA.ZI.AN. NA “True Shepherd of An” = Akkadian šidallum, šitaddalu, šitaddaru = Orion. Its deity is Papsukkal. 65 Known from Old Babylonian period, this is the brightest constellation in the winter sky. Whereas the planets are conceived as wild sheep (UDU.IDIM.MEŠ = bibb#), the stars are
62
1950: no. 348. The transition of Orion from a shepherd to a hunter is said to be via Akkadian folk etymology of šitaddaru as ŠITÁ.DA.RA, ša ina kakki mah$u “the one who was struck with the mace” (Great Star List, AfO 19 107:25f., see CAD Š/3 128).
For references, see Tallqvist, Götterepitheta, 164f., CAD R 300ff. 63 Mayer 1992: 23: 19. 64 See references in CAD R sub r"’#tu, also Gula and Erua. 65 Reiner and Pingree, 1981: 14 [84]; Gössmann
295
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
imagined as the cattle of the moon. 66 We may thus deduce that in the poetic descriptions of deities, both male and female, the shepherd image included the tending and herding, but not the guarding, aspects of shepherdship.
E. The Near Eastern Trope of Shepherd as King in Classical Sources The heroes of Greek poetry were shepherds. Homer praised Peirithoös and Dryas as “shepherds of their people” (Iliad, Book I 263). As pointed out by Martin West, 67 this phrase sounds a distinctive Oriental note in the Greek. However, the Greek dramatist Euripides spoke of the Athenian ruler Theseus as a “young and valiant shepherd.” 68 Adrastus states: “Your city alone would be able to undertake this labour; for it turns an eye on misery, and has in you a young and gallant shepherd; for the want of which to lead their hosts, states before now have often perished.” In Plato’s Republic, the ideal ruler behaves like a shepherd towards his subjects, looking out only for their good. Despite Thrasymachus’ argument to the contrary that shepherds care for their sheep in order that they may be eaten, and that similarly rulers look on the people as objects of exploitation, Socrates viewed the shepherd who cares only for his flock as the ideal model for what political leadership should aspire to be. 69 Aristotle considered the shepherd to
66
Heimpel 1989 (ref. courtesy of Wayne Horowitz). 1997: 226f. 68 The Suppliants line 185 (ed. E. P. Coleridge) in Crane, Gregory R. (ed.) The Perseus Project, , February, 2003. This occurrence of the metaphor of the shepherd-king can be lost in the translation; e.g. “a good leader who is vigorous,” in the version edited by David Kovacs, Loeb 67
296
be the archetype of the king caring for the well-being of his people. 70 Whereas Plato and Aristotle conceptualized the king in his role as shepherd as the leader of the flock, tending and herding it, Euripides has in mind the image of the guardian shepherd. The Near Eastern tradition of deity as shepherd is also found in classical sources. In a prayer to Artemis, Anacreon uses the verb ‘to shepherd’ to characterize her power over the people of Magnesia on the Meander. 71
F. From ‘Sipa-zi’ to ‘Good Shepherd’ The question that arises from the evidence surveyed above is the nature of the transition from sipa-zi / r ’û k!nu “true / faithful shepherd” to the pastor bonus who lays down his life in defence of his sheep. The intermediate steps can be seen in the biblical image of the shepherd of the people Israel. Emphasis on the protective aspect of shepherdship, in addition to the tending and herding aspects, appears in the Bible in the chastisements of the prophets: “Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of the L ORD : As I live, saith the L ORD G OD , surely forasmuch as My sheep became a prey, and My sheep became food to all the beasts of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for My sheep, but the shepherds fed themselves and fed not My
Library (Cambridge and London, 1998), 35. 69 Republic, 1. 342-345; see Alan Bloom, The Republic of Plato (New York, 1968), 21ff. 70 Nichomachean Ethics, Book 8, chap. 11. See W. D. Ross and J. D. Kaplan, The Pocket Aristotle (New York, 1958), 249f. 71 West 1997: 533.
W ESTENHOLZ
sheep” (Ezekiel 34: 7-8). 72 The new element of shepherd as saviour
occurs in the biblical prophecy of Micah 5:3ff.:
“(Out of Bethlehem shall come forth a ruler in Israel) And he shall stand and shall shepherd in the strength of the L ORD ... When the Assyrian shall come into our land, and when he shall tread in our palaces, Then shall we raise against him seven shepherds and eight princes among men. And they shall shepherd the land of Assyria with the sword...”
Whereas Ezekiel and Micah speak of the kings of Israel as God’s shepherds, Isaiah taught that even a gentile could serve as a shepherd of God. Isaiah describes Cyrus’ ascent to power as being initiated by God, as God’s shepherd for the Jewish people: “who says of Cyrus, ‘He is My shepherd and he shall carry out all my purpose” (Isaiah 44: 28). Another biblical addition is the conception of the lost sheep of Israel whose shepherds (= kings) have led them astray and have not been proper herders, so that the flock has scattered. This aspect is particularly characteristic of the writings of the prophet Jeremiah: “Thus said the L ORD , the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds that tend My people: You have scattered My flock and driven them away and have not taken care of them” (Jeremiah 23: 2); “My people have been lost sheep, their shepherds have caused them to go astray” (Jeremiah 50: 6); “Israel is a lost sheep” (ibid. 17). Both the temporal leaders (Jeremiah 2: 8, 10: 21 and passim) and the divine are shepherds of the flock of Israel. The lost sheep reappear in the New Testament: “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 15: 24). The lost sheep allegory also appears in Luke 15: 3-7. The divine ideology is widely attested in the Bible, beyond Psalm 23. There are
many references to the shepherd metaphor as applied to the God of Israel, the earliest appearing in Jacob’s blessing of Ephraim and Manasseh: “The God in whose ways walked my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, the God who has been my shepherd all my life long unto this day. ... bless the lads” (Genesis 48: 15f.). Perhaps one of the most evocative examples is Isaiah 40: 11: “He shall feed (pasture) his flock like a shepherd; he shall gather the lambs with his arm and carry them in his bosom and shall gently lead those that are with young.” The image of the caring God incorporates the tending and herding aspects of shepherding. The allegorical figure of Jesus seen as the Good Shepherd saviour appears early in Christian literature and was elaborated by the early Church Fathers. In addition to verse 10 from John cited above, the whole chapter is a parable by Jesus on the shepherd and the flock, the sheepfold and the predators, but the emphasis is on the good shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep. Jesus saves the lamb, an allegory for the Christian soul. As Clemens of Alexandria (ca. 150/153-215/217) states: “But it has been God’s fixed and constant purpose to save the flock of men: for this end the good God sent the Good Shepherd.” (Protreptikos (“Exhortation”) to the Heathen,” 11.116.1). 73
72
will enjoy prosperity, security and peace. 73 C. Coxe, Fathers of the Second Century [The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume II, A. Roberts and J. Donaldson (eds.)] (Edinburgh and Grand Rapids, Michigan, repr. 1994), 204.
Note that this whole chapter is a diatribe against the shepherds of the sheep of God, Israel, who have been negligent in their duty. God Himself will intervene on behalf of His flock and gather them from among the nations and place over them a scion of the house of David, the ideal shepherd under whom they
297
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
IV. Image of the Good Shepherd A. Ancient Near Eastern Iconography Despite the ubiquity of the metaphor of the royal and divine shepherd in literature, the search for an iconographic representation is perplexing. The repertoire of known Mesopotamian royal images includes the king as triumphant hero, builder, etc., but none seems to depict the king as shepherd. Why would this be so? The only definite shepherd image is the image of the en ruler of the first urban entity, Uruk, depicted on contemporary cylinder seals at the end of the fourth millennium B.C.E. 74 The seals show the ruler taking care of the temple herds, and feeding leaves, flowers or ears of grain to sheep or cattle (fig. 3). On the basis of one seal in which a rosette bush apparently replaces the ruler feeding the rosettes to the herd, Siebert suggests that the image of the shepherd was translated into the nourishing tree of life under which various animals sought protection from predatory beasts such as the lion. She includes in this ‘tree of life as shepherd’ complex the motif of a pair of goats or other animals browsing in a tree, often on a hill, as well as any animal beside a tree. 75 The most common image of man and domestic animal is the image of the so-
74 Schmandt-Besserat 1993: 206 fig. 6, discussion 215f. 75 Siebert 1969: 35-53. 76 See references in Suter 1991-3: 66 notes 11 and 12. In addition, there are various Mari inlays: one from the Temple of Ninhursaga, a bareheaded man (priest?) carrying a goat (Parrot 1940: 17f. pl. VI 4) and several fragmentary examplars from the Temple of Nini-zaza (Parrot 1967: 207 no. 33 and pl. LXI).
298
called kid-carrier. These images depict figures of an individual, perhaps the ruler, or an ordinary supplicant, holding a young quadruped against his chest. The earliest representations are known from the Early Dynastic period in Sumer, in the first half of the third millennium B.C.E. 76 Slightly earlier are images of the en ruler of Uruk presenting what appear to be theriomorphic vessels as part of the ceremony of gift giving to the gods. 77 On the chisel-shaped Blau monument, the en also appears in the same position, holding out the image of a lamb rather than clasping it against his chest. The meaning of the scene is difficult to interpret and may just be related to a feast to seal the transfer of the piece of real estate in the inscription. 78 The image of the kid-carrier is ubiquitous, but its meaning and significance in relation to the king as shepherd is doubtful. The earliest images seem to represent priests or secular officials rather than kings. In addition to the Early Dynastic representations, there is also a bronze male figure from Assur – a bareheaded (shaven?) man who holds in his left arm a small calf, pressed close to his body, while in his right hand he holds a knife, suggesting that the animal is about to be sacrificed. 79 This statuette was found in a cache discovered in the cult room of
77
Schmandt-Besserat 1993: 216 and fig.15a. Gelb et al. 1991: 39-41 no.10 “Blau Obelisk,” Schmandt-Besserat 1993: 205f. and fig. 5b. Note that the former identifies the en-like figure as the engarèš, “the agronomos of the temple household” mentioned in the inscription. For the problem of the dating of this monument to ED I rather than Uruk III, see Englund 1998: 24 note 15 and 1994: 12 note 7. 79 VA 5009, see Wartke 1995: 12ff. 78
W ESTENHOLZ
the Ashur temple. Examples from the late third millennium bear dedicatory inscriptions to the king, so it seems most reasonable to assume that the kid-carrier is an official. 80 Definite royal statues carrying animals appear at the end of the third millennium. The royal figure wears a fringed mantle and the round brimmed cap that identifies him as a ruler. This image was most recently discussed by Claudia Suter, who concluded that the kid was brought as an offering (1991-3). A statuette of Shulgi from Tello shows him holding a young quadruped against his chest. 81 The dedicatory inscription to the deity Igalim is generic. Textual sources from the second millennium contain descriptions of kings presenting an image of themselves holding an offering of a votive goat (máškadra ‘kid gift’). For example, Ur-Ninurta of Isin describes his setting up of a copper statue of the king holding an offering of a votive goat in the courtyard of Ninlil’s Gagiššua temple (Frayne, RIME 4 p. 67 4.1.6.2 vi 6’-12’). Although the quadruped in the imagery is not clearly identifiable (though sometimes horned), on the basis of the term máš-kadra ‘kid gift,’ it seems traditionally to have been a goat and not a sheep – a difference which may be significant in light of the allegory of Jesus as shepherd at the Last Judgement when he separates the sheep from the goats (Matthew 25: 31ff.). There is one example of a description of a lamb-carrier: Išme-Dagan of Isin clasps to his breast a white lamb and a sheep of
auspicious omens (Išme-Dagan Hymn B, Ludwig 1990: 4f., 34f., see Suter 1991-3: 67f.). The offering-bearer appears in various media, including figurines, plaques and seals (fig. 4). Scholars have associated this offering image with that of the shepherd. 82 If it is a shepherd carrying the kid, he is still bringing it as an offering and thus represents the negative aspect of shepherding: bringing the sheep to the slaughter. In real life in Mesopotamia, the shepherd not only brought the animals destined as offerings, but his specialised profession was so designated: r ’û ginê and r ’û sattukki “shepherd (raising sheep) for the regular offerings.” It has been stated that the duty of the shepherd king is the service of the gods, thus making him the bringer of offerings. 83 Siebert has suggested that the imagery should be interpreted as the shepherd king presenting the people to the god for life and wellbeing rather than bringing an offering. 84 A millennium later in Assyrian palace decoration, in addition to the image of the human kid-carrier, animals are shown being held by genii and aladlammû lion and bull colossi. For instance, in the Northwest Palace of Aššur-na#ir-apli II, at the entrance to the throne-room, there are two winged lion colossi with human upper torsos and heads [(B)D-d-2 and (B)D-d-1]. 85 In their left hands they carry a horned animal of uncertain identification, and in their right hands a rosette branch, which might be reminiscent of the rosettes on the early Uruk seals. In
80
no. 55. 82 e.g. a caption describing a terracotta figurine of a kid-carrier as a “shepherd carrying a lamb;” see Eric M. Meyers (ed.), Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, vol. 2 (Oxford, 1997), 408, upper left hand. 83 Selz 2001: 22f. 84 Siebert 1969: 30f. 85 Paley and Sobolewski 1992: 15f.
(1) Upper part of a gypsum statuette of a person carrying an offering animal (goat?) (VA 8788, Steible, NBW, Urningirsu II 8, Edzard, RIME 3/1 p. 187, Barrelet 1974: F 80); (2) fragment of torso of a male alabaster statuette carrying a sacrificial kid (AO 310, Steible, NBW, Nammahni 17, Edzard, RIME 3/1 p. 205 no.15). The opposite opinion was voiced by Suter 1991-3: 66 and note 15. 81 Suter 1991-3: 63-70 = Frayne, RIME 3/2 p. 157f.
299
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
these late images, are we dealing with sacrificial symbolism or rather with the care-giving / tending of a shepherd, or with a third dimension of the guardian aspect of the guardians of the threshold? Another contemporaneous image found in the ninth and eighth centuries in the western areas is that of a porter who bears animals on his shoulders, possibly for a banquet. Decorating the walls of the Aramaean city at modern Zincirli, 86 and at the Neo-Hittite city of Carchemish 87 are orthostats carved with scenes which portray porters carrying caprids in procession. Such a stance of a person bearing animals on the shoulders is also seen among ivory statuettes of tribute bringers from Nimrud, which are probably of Syrian manufacture. 88 These have been compared to the kriophoroi from Crete 89 and provide a link to the figures of Hermes kriophoros and the Good Shepherd. A similar pose appears with hunters bringing back their victims, as in the relief of a hunting scene from the palace of Sargon II at Khorsabad. 90 The next image, or rather scene, to be considered appears on Old Akkadian seals. It is a narrative scene said to reflect an early version of the story of the first king, Etana. While the literary version known from the second millennium describes how Etana ascends to heaven on the back of an eagle in his search for the plant of life, 91 the pictorial scene is
set in the shepherd’s compound, the sheepfold. A herd of sheep and goats are led back to the compound by one or two shepherds. Dogs look up at an eagle on whose back sits a human being (fig. 5). On the basis of this pictorial scene, Steinkeller has reconstructed the story: “when one evening the shepherd Etana was bringing his flock back to the sheepfold, the compound was attacked by an eagle or eagles. In the ensuing struggle to protect his flock, Etana seized the eagle by its neck. As Etana’s companions watched in horror, the eagle then flew off, taking Etana along with him. ... [He was then] carried on the bird high into the sky, experiencing a wonderful but quite unexpected journey.” 92 However, other scholars explain the iconography as depicting the apotheosis of Etana through his heavenly journey over the world of the shepherd, thus creating a symbolic breach between his past life as a shepherd and his future life as king. 93 It might also be possible to view the pictorial evidence as depicting Etana’s descent from heaven, when he brings down kingship from heaven. 94 Rather than interpreting the scene as representing a specific occasion, Bernbeck views the seal imagery as encapsulating a ritual drama of political legitimation concerning Etana, which was part of a rite of kingship probably held at the New Year. 95 Selz demonstrates the parallels between Etana’s and
86
eagle, vessels, cheese forms, etc. The iconographic level would relate to shepherdship, pastoralism and dairy production. The iconological level could have two meanings: the aggrandisement of Etana through his heavenly journey over the world of the shepherd, or secondly, a symbolic breach made by supernatural/ divine kingship in the everyday life of the shepherd. 94 Selz 1998b: 153 [20]. 95 Bernbeck 1996: 182, 201-204. He bases his interpretation on verse 5 of the Old Babylonian version, telling of the gods’ ordaining a festival for the people (OV I i 5, Haul 2000: 106).
Wartke 1999: 307, Abb. 8. Woolley 1921: plates B17, B22b-24. 88 ND 9301-6, see Mallowan 1966: II pp. 528ff. and pl. vii. From Fort Shalmaneser Room NE 2. 89 Mallowan 1966: 656 note 119. 90 WA 188829, see Collon 1995: 143, fig. 116. 91 Most recent text edition: Novotny 2001. 92 Steinkeller 1992: 254. 93 For a possible reconstruction of this image on various levels, see Selz 1998b: 153 [19]. According to Selz, the pre-iconographic level of the identification of the images and figures in the seal would be: 87
300
W ESTENHOLZ
Šulgi’s ascents to heaven and the tradition of the compilation of the Etana saga during the reign of Šulgi. 96 Nevertheless, since the legend is in Akkadian, Selz prefers to place the literary source in the Akkadian period. He maintains that the legend, and consequently the imagery, convey an aetiology for the Semitic hereditary dynastic kingship. 97 Whether or not Etana represents the Semitic hereditary dynastic kingship (vis-àvis the Sumerian tradition), shepherdship was one of the defining traits of the Sumerian nam-lugal rather than the Akkadian šarr#tum, as we have seen. The Neo-Sumerians upheld the dynastic principle and advanced the shepherdship metaphor of kingship. In keeping with these facts, Haul suggests the probability of a Sumerian forerunner of the Akkadian Etana saga. 98 Turning from images of possible shepherds as kings, let us look at images of kings which could possibly be related to a shepherd image. In her discussion of Assyrian royal imagery, Ursula Magen attempted to identify such an image: “In der Vorstellung vom Herrscher als Hirten ist die Fürsorgepflicht des Hirten, seine Herde zu weiden and zu tränken, enthalten aber auch das Recht der Hirten, seine Herde zu leiten and die Ordnung aufrechtzuerhalten. Aus letzterem erklärt sich der Titel des »sipa-nì-si-sá« Hirte der Gerechtigkeit, oder der r ’ûti m!šari des Hirtentums der Gerechtigkeit, bei Assurbanipal.” 99 In particular, Magen identifies a king represented as a shepherd in two images (1) holding a šibirru staff and (2) holding a $erretu lead-rope (her type V). 100 However, this definition is based
on vague textual sources. She identifies the šibirru as the archetypal sign of the shepherdship of the Assyrian king, while noting that the ha##u occurs not only with every reference to shepherdship but also with other types of royal iconography, and thus cannot signify the shepherdship ideal alone (fig. 6). On the other hand, her second identifying marker, the leadrope, cannot be a sign of shepherdship but rather signifies cowherding, whose imagery needs to be delineated separately. Her identification of the insignia is as follows: (1) the staff is the šibirru, (2) the mace is the ha##u, and (3) the crook (Krummschwert or Krummaxt) is the gamlu weapon (pp. 71ff.). However, it seems most likely that the shepherd’s staff is the gidru/ha##u, despite its embodiment of attributes beyond those of shepherding. The god with the staff gidru (e.g. the staff of Ninšubura) 101 is the vizier who introduces visitors, brings news to and delivers order from his master. The staff held by the vizier is given to him by his master. In the human world this is the king, who has himself received his staff from the gods, symbolising his power to rule in the name of his lord. Wiggermann discusses the staff as being the tool of the shepherd, in addition to the šibirru 102 : “It is abundantly clear that the symbolic staff of rulership, given to the king to shepherd the people, derives from the staff of the shepherd, with which he guides his flock.” In my opinion, the insignia are as follows: (1) the staff is the gidru/ha##u, (2) the crook ? is the šibir/šibirru, and (3) the mace is the giš.tukul/kakku. To sum up the visual imagery of the
96
imagery, see Magen 1986: 18ff. 100 Magen 1986: 113, Tabelle 30. 101 Wiggermann 1985-6. 102 Wiggermann 1985-6: 15 and note 45.
97 98 99
Selz 1998b: 154ff. Selz 1998b: 156. Haul 2000: 35-38. For a discussion and a listing of Assyrian royal
301
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
The classical image of the ram-bearer (kriophoros) renders an offering bearer or a shepherd, as well as the well-known depiction of Hermes as Hermes kriophoros. The first images appear in the Archaic period in Greece in votive bronze statuettes from Arcadia carrying the ram under their left arm like those of Mesopotamia. 103 These Arcadian examples can be compared to the unfinished sculpture of a ram bearer from Thasos who holds the calf with his left arm against his chest.104 Moreover, Pausanias reports a Hermes kriophoros dedicated by the Pheneatians in the temenos of Zeus’ sanctuary in Olympia and describes this figure of Hermes as carrying the ram under his arm. 105 The classical image of the ram-bearer, carrying the ram on his shoulders, appears less frequently. It first surfaces among terracotta figurines in Sicily in the fifth century BCE and at Locri in western Greece during the period from 600 to 450 BCE. 106 A similar pose of the calf-bearer (moschophoros) also appears among archaic sculptures, as can be seen in the example from the
Temple of Athena on the Acropolis of Athens. 107 Pausanias also mentions as a work of Kalamis a “Hermes carrying a ram on his shoulders,” set up by the people of Tanagra. The statue was said to commemorate the averting of a plague by the god’s carrying a ram around the city wall. 108 Although the image conveyed the same meanings as in Mesopotamia, through the connection with Hermes’ role as a shepherd god, the ram-bearer became also the representation of the shepherd. At the same time, the figure of Hermes psychopompos ‘the bearer of the soul’ leading the dead to the underworld was depicted on vases and reliefs. These two roles of Hermes appear to have coalesced in late classical art, where the image of Hermes kriophoros occurs on sarcophagi. It should be noted that the meaning of the symbol in Greece was neither that of the bucolic shepherd nor that of the virtue of Philanthropia of Roman imagery and definitely not the saviour, as in later Christian allegory. Hermes is not the only deity who carries caprids. While he bears a ram on his shoulders, Aphrodite is shown holding a goat on a terracotta relief from Gela, in the manner reminiscent of the Mesopotamian kid-carriers, the Sumerian offering-bearers and the Assyrian genii. 109 Thus, the figure of the kriophoros in classical art in both the text and image basically carried the same message that it bore in ancient Near Eastern iconography. It was only through the connections with the roles of the god Hermes that the image changed its significance.
103
107
Mesopotamian world, there is neither an outstanding icon of the king as righteous shepherd nor even a traditional image of a care-giving shepherd. The king carrying the staff may signify the shepherd who leans on his staff amid his sheep, but this signification is never explicit.
B. Classical Iconography of the Ram-bearer (kriophoros)
104 105 106
302
Engemann 1991: 580. Boardman 1981: fig. 69 dated to 580 B.C.E. Pausanias, Description of Greece, Book V xxvii §8. Higgins 1967: 54, 87, 89.
Lullies and Hirmer 1960: pls. 24f., Richter 1960: 61, figs. 68-9. 108 Pausanias, Description of Greece, Book IX xxii §1. 109 Richter 1960: 224, fig. 331.
W ESTENHOLZ
C. The Pagan Good Shepherd in Early Christian Art By Late Antiquity, the youthful rambearing shepherd had a long tradition of pagan usage – as offering-bearer, bucolic figure, personification of Winter in addition to its use to represent Hermes. This image is common in various media in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. Frescoes, pavement mosaics and reliefs with pastoral imagery decorated the Roman house. Examples proliferate in funerary art, among the wall paintings in non-Christian mausoleums and sarcophagi from Late Antiquity. In the latter, the image of the shepherd, like that of the orans and the philosopher, conveys abstractions. While the orans conveyed the image of piety, and the philosopher, wisdom, the rambearing shepherd portrayed philanthropyhumanitas (see fig. 2). Thus, the rambearing shepherd came to signify a general philanthropic saviour for both pagans and Christians. 110 Theodore Klauser suggested that it was by adapting a symbol of moral philosophy that the Christians created the allegory of Jesus as the Good Shepherd. 111 While the visual imagery of the righteous shepherd in the Mesopotamian world is absent, images of shepherds are so abundant in the iconography of the classical world that it is hard to distinguish between pagan and Christian examples. The iconographic vocabulary and sentiment are the same. There is nothing astonishing in the fact that the figure of a shepherd leaning on his staff amid his sheep in a miniature in a manuscript of Virgil in the Vatican reappears on the façade of a Christian sarcophagus. 112 Idyl-
110 Engemann 1991: 586; Weitzmann 1979: 519; Grabar 1968: 10f. 111 Klauser 1958.
lic pastoral scenes commonly contain representations of the bucolic ram-bearing shepherd. For instance, this vessel (fig. 7), from the third to fourth centuries CE, is divided into four narrative metopes, each decorated in relief with two figures. One metope shows a ‘Good Shepherd’ dressed in a long-sleeved tunic and carrying a ewe on his shoulders, while the other figure in the metope holds a skin filled with milk and is dressed in the traditional slave tunic. Strangely, the two figures face away from each other. Although this series of scenes has been interpreted as referring to Christian baptism and its spiritually nourishing qualities, it is impossible to be certain of this; it seems equally likely that the scenes simply depict rural activities, with the ‘Good Shepherd’ just representing a conscientious mortal keeper of sheep. The earliest example of the adoption by the Christians of the Good Shepherd motif seems to be the third-century clay lamps produced by Annius Serapidorus, a potter from central Italy who specialized in producing lamps with this motif. There is no evidence that they were made specifically for Christians, but as the art historian Paul Corby Finney notes, “it is reasonable to suppose that at least an occasional Christian customer will have been prompted to purchase one of Annius’ shepherd lamps on the basis of its discus subject.” 113 These lamps depicted the Good Shepherd on the discus of the lamp, together with other pagan figures. Though it is impossible to tell the significance attributed to this motif by the craftsmen who made the lamps, Christians may have deliberately bought this
112 113
Grabar 1968: 36. Finney 1994: 125.
303
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
type of lamp, as the originally pagan motif had by now acquired a Christian allegorical meaning. The Good Shepherd carrying a lamb signified that the shepherd, an allegory for Jesus, saves the lamb, an allegory for the Christian soul. 114 The image makers made no attempt to be more specific in paleo-Christian art but rather tried to represent abstractions. In the contemporary Christian baptistery in Dura Europos, Syria, destroyed in 256 CE, the niche behind the font is decorated with two images, Adam and Eve and the Good Shepherd. 115 The deliberate juxtaposition conveys an iconographic message: the smaller image of Adam and Eve, personifying original sin, is dominated by the larger scene of the Good Shepherd, the idyllic image of salvation, representing redemption. 116 In Rome, the Good Shepherd appears in Christian funerary contexts late in the third century, manifesting the doctrinal belief in the salvation of the soul. The motif occurs in the mosaics of the cemetery under St. Peter’s, in the wall paintings of the Tomb of the Aurelii, and in the Catacombs of Via Latina, of Domitilla, and of Callixtus. 117 The popularity of this motif continued after the reign of Constantine (306-337), when Christianity became the official faith of the imperial court. The Good Shepherd may represent Christ, but also may represent other figures, such as saints, in particular St. Peter. For instance, in the central mosaic of Sant’Apollinare in Classe, Ravenna, the titular saint, Apollinaris, is portrayed as the shepherd interceding for his flock
at the Last Judgement. 118 Common attributes of the shepherd are most often the crooked staff (the model for the bishop’s crosier), and in many cases a straight staff with a spade-like end, with which the shepherd can pick up stones and cast them away. Sometimes the images are combined and the shepherd is shown leaning on his staff while bearing a ram on his shoulders. To conclude, this survey indicates that the shepherd metaphor began not as a protective image (guardianship), but rather with connotations of the herder, the guide of the flock, leading his people to pastures, to places of sustenance. This can be seen in the image of Jesus as the shepherd who leans on his staff amid his sheep, caring for his flock. An example (see fig. 8) decorates the mosaic lunette above the entrance to the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia in Ravenna (mid-fifth century). 119 This image of Jesus can also be seen in a painting of 1890 by the Finnish artist Albert Edelfeldt, who depicted the Mataleena of the Finnish ballad praying for mercy at the feet of the herdsman Jesus, who stands above her grasping a staff in his left hand. We have seen how the shepherd image addressed the fundamental relationship between the deity and his people, the gods and the human leader. The biblical prophets understood that the salvation of any society depended upon how closely the hierarchy of leadership embodied the shepherd image in their lives. The signification of the symbolism of this personal relationship to the divine was early encapsulated in this Sumerian proverb:
114 The problem of duplicated images cannot be dealt with in the limits of this paper. The lamb is also the symbol of Christ as victim sacrificed for the salvation of men; the sheep are also the apostles, and also represent the martyrs and all the faithful, the flock of the Good Shepherd. 115 See Grabar 1967: 69, fig. 60; idem 1968: figs. 40-
41; Perkins 1973: 30, 52-53, 55, plan fig. 76, plate fig. 17, 18. 116 Grabar 1968: 20. 117 Grabar 1967: 68, 80, 102, 105, 108; figs. 27-28, 60, 76, 80, 94. 118 Vollbach 1961: 344, no. 173. 119 Vollbach 1961: 339-340, no. 147.
304
W ESTENHOLZ
%dingir& lú-ùlu sipa ú-kin-gá lú-ùlu-kam udu-gim ú-gu 7 -a é-en-túm-túm-mu “A man’s (personal) god is a shepherd who finds pasturage for him. Let him lead him like sheep to the grass they can eat” (Sumerian Proverbs Coll. 3.134, Alster, Proverbs, 102). 120
120 This is a popular proverb, known from the Ur version cited above (UET 6/2 255) as well as the
bilingual version CT 16 12 i 44f.
B IBLIOGRAPHY Alster, B. and Westenholz, A. (1994) “The Barton Cylinder,” Acta Sumerologica 16: 15-46. Barrelet, M.-T. (1974) “La «figure du roi» dans l’iconographie et dans les textes depuis Ur-Nanše jusqu’à la fin de la I re dynastie de Babylone,” in P. Garelli (ed.), Le Palais et la royauté [CRRAI XIX]. Paris: 27-138. Bauer, J. (1998) “Der vorsargonische Abschnitt der mesopotamischen Geschichte,” in Josef Bauer, Robert K. Englund, and Manfred Krebernik (eds.), Mesopotamien, Späturuk-Zeit und Frühdynastiche Zeit [OBO 160/1]. Freiburg, Switzerland: 431585. Behrens, H. (1978) Enlil and Ninlil [Studia Pohl Series, Maior 8]. Rome. Bernbeck, R. (1996) “Siegel, Mythen, Riten: Etana und die Ideologie der Akkad-Zeit,” Baghdader Mitteilungen 27: 161-213. Biggs, R. (1969) “An Old Babylonian Oracle from Uruk,” ANET 3 . Princeton: 604. Boardman, J. (1981) Griechische Plastik, Die archaische Zeit. Mainz am Rhein. Cavigneaux, A. (1999) “A Scholar’s Library in Meturan? With an edition of the tablet H 72 (Textes de Tell Haddad VII),” in T. Abusch and K. van der Toorn (eds.), Mesopotamian Magic, Textual, Historical, and Interpretative Perspectives. Groningen: 253-273. Collon, D. (1995) Ancient Near Eastern Art. London. van Dijk, J. J. A. (1962) “Die Inschriften, III. Die Tontafeln aus dem Palast des Sînk!šid,” UVB XVIII: 61-2. Engemann, J. (1991) “Hirt,” Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum. Stuttgart: 577607. Englund, R. K. (1992) “Late Uruk Period Cattle and Dairy Products: Evidence from Proto-Cuneiform Sources,” Bulletin of Sumerian Agriculture 8: 35-50. Finkel, I. L. (1980) “Bilingual Chronicle Fragments,” JCS 32: 65-80.
305
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
Finney, P. C. (1994) The Invisible God: The Earliest Christians on Art. New York. Flückiger-Hawker, E. (1999) Urnamma of Ur in Sumerian Literary Tradition [OBO 166]. Freiburg, Switzerland. Foster, B. R. (1993) Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature. Baltimore, Md. Franke, S. (1995) “Kings of Akkad: Sargon and Naram-Sin,” in Jack Sasson et al. (eds.), Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. New York. Frayne, D. R. (1992) “The Old Akkadian Royal Inscriptions: Notes on a New Edition,” JAOS 119: 611-638. Gelb, I. J.; Steinkeller, Piotr and Whiting, Robert M. Jr. (1993) Earliest Land Tenure Systems in the Near East: Ancient Kudurrus: Text [OIP 104]. Chicago. George, A. R. (2000) “Four Temple Rituals from Babylon,” in A. R. George and I. L. Finkel (eds.), Wisdom, Gods and Literature: Studies in Assyriology in Honour of W. G. Lambert. Winona Lake, Indiana: 259-299. Gössmann, P. F. (1950) Planetarium Babylonicum. Rome. Grabar, A. (1967) The Beginnings of Christian Art, 200-395. Trans. Stuart Gilbert and James Emmons. London. $ (1968) Christian Iconography, A Study of Its Origins. Princeton. Haas, V. (1999) Babylonischer Liebesgarten. Erotik und Sexualität im alten Orient. Munich. Haul, M. (2000) Das Etana-Epos. Ein Mythos von der Himmelfahrt des Königs von Kiš [Göttinger Arbeitshefte zur Altorientalischen Literatur (GAAL) Heft 1]. Göttingen. Heimpel, W. (1989) “The Babylonian Background of the Term ‘Milky Way’,” in H. Behrens, D. Loding, and M. T. Roth (eds.), DUMU-E 2 -DUB-BA-A Studies in Honor of Åke W. Sjöberg. Philadelphia: 249-252. Higgins, R. A. (1967) Greek Terracottas [Methuen’s Handbook of Archaeology]. London. Hirsch, H. (1995-6) “An den Rand geschrieben I 4. Thema Nr. 1 Liebe und so...,” AfO 42-43: 139-144. Hurowitz, V. A. (1994) Inu Anum $!rum: Literary Structures in the Non-Juridical Sections of Codex Hammurabi [Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 15]. Philadelphia. Huyghe, R. (1968) “Art Forms and Society,” in René Huyghe (ed.), Larousse Encyclopedia of Byzantine and Medieval Art. London: 12-21. Keller, P. (1978) A Shepherd Looks at Psalm 23. Zondervan. Kienast, B. and Volk, K. (1995) Die sumerischen und akkadischen Briefe [FAOS 19]. Stuttgart. Klauser, T. (1958) “Studien zur Enstehungsgeschichte der christlichen Kunst I,” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum I: 20-51. Klein, J. (1993) “A Self-Laudatory Šulgi Hymn Fragment from Nippur,” in M. E. Cohen, D. C. Snell and D. Weisberg (eds.), The Tablet and the Scroll: Near Eastern Studies in Honor of W. W. Hallo. Bethesda, Maryland: 124-131. 306
W ESTENHOLZ
$ (1998) “Sweet Chant of the Churn,” in M. Dietrich and O. Loretz (eds.), dubsar anta-men Studien zur Altorientalistik: Festschrift für Willem H. Ph. Römer zur Vollendung seines 70. Lebensjahres mit Beiträgen von Freunden, Schülern und Kollegen [AOAT 253]. Münster: 205-222. Krecher, J. (1976) “Insignien,” RlA 5: 109-114. Lambert, W. G. (1987) “Devotion: The Languages of Religion and Love,” in M. Mindlin, M. J. Geller, J. E. Wansbrough (eds.), Figurative Language in the Ancient Near East. London: 25-39. $ (1989) “Notes on a Work of the Most Ancient Semitic Literature,” JCS 41: 1-33. Leick, G. (1994) Sex and Eroticism in Mesopotamian Literature. London and New York. Ludwig, M.-C. (1993) Untersuchungen zu den Hymnen des Išme-Dagan von Isin, Wiesbaden. Lullies, R. and Hirmer, M. (1960) Griechische Plastik von den Anfängen bis zum Ausgang des Hellenismus. Munich. Magen, U. (1986) Assyrische Königsdarstellungen: Aspekte der Herrschaft, Eine Typologie [Baghdader Forschungen 9]. Mainz. Mallowan, M. E. L. (1966) Nimrud and Its Remains. London. Maul, S. M. (1998) “Marduk, Nabû und der assyrische Enlil: Die Geschichte eines sumerischen Šu’ilas,” in S. Maul (ed.), Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 24. Mai 1994. Groningen: 159-197. Mayer, W. (1992) “Ein Hymnus auf Ninurta als Helfer in der Not,” Orientalia 61: 17-57. Meyers, E. M. (ed.) (1997) Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East. Oxford. Michalowski, P. (1993) Letters from Early Mesopotamia [Writings from the Ancient World 3]. Atlanta, Ga. Novotny, J. R. (2001) The Standard Babylonian Etana Epic [State Archives of Assyria Cuneiform Texts 2]. Helsinki. Paley, S. M. and Sobolewski, R. P. (1992) The Reconstruction of the Relief Representations and Their Positions in the Northwest Palace at Kalhu (Nimr#d) III. Mainz am Rhein. Parrot, A. (1940) “Les fouilles de Mari, sixième campagne (Automne 1938),” Syria 21: 1-28. $ (1967) Les Temples d’Ishtarat et de Nini-Zaza. Paris. Perkins, A. (1973) The Art of Dura Europos. Oxford. Pomponio, F. (1987) La Prosopografia dei Testi presargonici di Fara [Studi Semitici NS 3]. Rome. Reiner E. and Pingree, D. (1981) Babylonian Planetary Omens: Part Two En#ma Anu Enlil Tablets 50-51. Malibu. Richter, G. M. A. (1960) A Handbook of Greek Art. London. Samuel, M. (1996) The Lord Is My Shepherd: The Theology of a Caring God. Northvale, NJ. 307
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
Schmandt-Besserat, D. (1993) “Images of Enship,” in M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae, and M. Mellink (eds.), Between the Rivers and Over the Mountains, Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamaica Alba Palmieri Dedicata. Rome: 201-219. Sefati, Y. (1998) Love Songs in Sumerian Literature. Ramat Gan. Seibert, I. (1969) Hirt-Herde-König: Zur Herausbildung des Königtums in Mesopotamien. Berlin. Selz, G. (1989) Altsumerische Wirtschaftsurkunden des Eremitage zu Leningrad [FAOS 15/1]. Stuttgart. $ (1993) Altsumerische Wirtschaftsurkunden aus Amerikanischen Sammlungen [FAOS 15/2]. Stuttgart. $ (1995) Untersuchungen zur Götterwelt des altsumerischen Stadtstaates von Lagaš [Occasional Papers of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund, 13]. Philadelphia. $ (1998a) “Über Mesopotamische Herrschaftskonzepte. Zu den Ursprüngen mesopotamischer Herrscherideologie im 3. Jahrtausend,” in M. Dietrich and O. Loretz (eds.), dubsar anta-men Studien zur Altorientalistik: Festschrift für Willem H. Ph. Römer zur Vollendung seines 70. Lebensjahres mit Beiträgen von Freunden, Schülern und Kollegen [AOAT 253]. Münster: 281-344. $ (1998b) “Die Etana-Erzählung. Ursprung und Tradition eines der ältesten epischen Texte in einer semitischen Sprache,” Acta Sumerologica 20: 135-179. $ (2001) “‘Guter Hirte, Weiser Fürst’: Zur Vorstellung von Macht und zur Macht der Vorstellung im mesopotamischen Herrschaftsparadigma.” AoF 28: 8-39. Seux, M.-J. (1980-81) “Königtum,” RlA 6: 140-173. Sjöberg, Å. (1961) “Ein Selbstpreis des Königs "ammurabi von Babylon,” ZA 54: 5170. Steinkeller, P. (1992) “Early Semitic Literature and Third Millennium Seals with Mythological Motifs,” Quaderni di Semitistica 18: 243-283. Suter, C. (1991-3) “A Shulgi Statuette from Tello,” JCS 43-45: 63-70. Szarzy ska, K. (1994) “Archaic Sumerian Tags,” JCS 46: 1-10. Vanstiphout, H. L. J. (1978) “Lipit-Eshtar’s Praise in the Edubba,” JCS 30: 33-53. de Vito, R. (1993) Studies in Third Millennium Sumerian and Akkadian Personal Names [Studia Pohl: Series Maior 16]. Rome. Vollbach, W. F. (1961) Early Christian Art: The Late Roman and Byzantine Empires from the Third to the Seventh Centuries. New York. Waetzoldt, H. (1972-75) “Hirt,” RlA 4: 421-425. $ (1982) “Das Amt des utullu,” in G. van Driel, Th. J. H. Krispijn, M. Stol, and K. R. Veenhof (eds.), ZIKIR ŠUMIM, Assyriological Studies Presented to F.R. Kraus on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday. Leiden: 386-397. Wartke, R.-B. (1995) “Male Figure,” in P. O. Harper, E. Klengel-Brandt, J. Aruz and K. Benzel (eds.), Discoveries at Ashur on the Tigris, Assyrian Origins. New York: 38f. $ (1999) “Zincirli–Sam$al,” in W. Siepel and A. Wieczorek (eds.), Von Babylon bis Jerusalem, Die Welt der altorientalischen Königstädte, Band 2. Mannheim: 301-311. 308
W ESTENHOLZ
Weitzmann, K. (ed.) (1979) Age of Spirituality, Late Antiquity and Early Christian Art. Third to Seventh Century. New York. West, M. (1997) The East Face of Helicon. Oxford. Westenholz, A. (1988) “Personal Names in Ebla and Pre-Sargonic Babylonia,” in A. Archi (ed.), Eblaite Personal Names and Semitic Name-Giving [ARES 1]. Rome: 99117. Westenholz, A. and J. (1977) “Help for Rejected Suitors: The Old Akkadian Love Incantation MAD V 8,” Orientalia 46: 198-219. Westenholz, J. (1997) “Nanaya, Lady of Mystery,” in I. L. Finkel and M. J. Geller (eds.), Sumerian Gods and Their Representations. Groningen: 57-84. Wiggermann, F. A. M. (1985-6) “The Staff of Ninšubura,” Jaarbericht Ex Oriente Lux 29: 3-34. Wilcke, C. (1990) “Orthographie, Grammatik und Literarische Form, Beobachtungen zu der Vaseninschrift Lugalzaggesis (SAKI 152-156),” in T. Abusch, J. Huehnergard and P. Steinkeller (eds.), Lingering Over Words: Studies ... W.L. Moran [HSS 37]. Atlanta, Ga.: 455-504. Woolley, C. L. (1921) Carchemish, Report on the Excavations at Jerablus on behalf of the British Museum II. London.
F IGURES 1. Hellenistic statuette of Hermes kriophorus, bronze, Eastern Mediterranean, fourththird centuries B.C.E. (BLMJ 2491). Photo Credit: David Harris, Courtesy of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem. 2. Roman strigilated sarcophagus fragment depicting the Good Shepherd, late third century C.E. (BLMJ 1062). Photo Credit: Dietrich Widmer, Courtesy of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem. 3. Drawing of impression of a limestone cylinder seal depicting royal en figure, holding branches blooming with rosettes on which two rams are feeding, framed by tasselled poles, symbols of the goddess Inanna of Uruk; behind left pole are theriomorphic and cylindrical vessels used in temple cult; Uruk, Uruk period. Ca. 3300 B.C.E. (VA 10537). Drawing by Dalit Weinblatt-Krausz. 4. Impression of a cylinder seal depicting three scenes, two presentation scenes and one frontal scene. From the right to the left, the scenes are: (1) a king with an animal offering standing before the sun-god, who is holding the rod and ring attributes of justice, with his foot resting on his human-headed divine bull; (2) a suppliant goddess facing Inanna/Ištar in her warlike aspect, holding her double lion-headed mace and standing on her two lions; (3) the goddess Ninegal, with one hand raised, wearing a crenellated headdress. Southern Mesopotamia. Old Babylonian period. Ca. 1875-1720
309
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
W ESTENHOLZ
T HE G OOD S HEPHERD
B.C.E. (BLMJ seal 422a). Photo Credit: David A. Loggie, Courtesy of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem. 5. Impression of a cylinder seal depicting “Etana legend.” From left to right: a man ascends on the back of a large bird, below which are two dogs gazing upwards and a shepherd waving a whip(?); behind the latter is a churning vat worked by one seated male figure, a sheepfold, a herd of sheep and goats, above which another man holding a shepherd’s staff is laying out round objects which have been identified as round balls of fermented sour milk (kushuk). Southern Mesopotamia. Old Akkadian period. Ca. 2250-2150 B.C.E. (BLMJ seal 378). Photo Credit: Hans Hinz, Courtesy of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem. 6. Drawing of recessed panel of sandstone stela, depicting king Assur-na#ir-pal II holding the long royal sceptre/staff (gidru/ha##u) identified by Magen as a šibirru in his right hand. In his left hand he holds the mace. Above the king are the symbols of the gods: the moon crescent of Sin, the winged sun disk of Šamaš, the eight-pointed star of Ištar, the divine horned crown of Assur, the lightning bolts of Adad and the seven stars of the Pleides. North-west palace, Nimrud. Neo-Assyrian period. 879 B.C.E. (ND 1104). After J. Börker-Klähn, Altvorderasiatische Bildstelen und vergleichbare Felsreliefs, Mainz am Rhein, 1982, no. 137b. 7. Marble receptacle bearing bucolic images including the Good Shepherd. Asia Minor. Late third-fourth centuries C.E. (BLMJ 4221); Photo Credit: David Harris, Courtesy of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem. 8. Jesus as the Good Shepherd. Mosaic lunette above the entrance to the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia in Ravenna. Mid-fifth century C.E.
310
T HE M ELAMMU D ATABASE
A MAR A NNUS
S IMO P ARPOLA
R OBERT M. W HITING
Helsinki
The MELAMMU Database
T
he database of the M ELAMMU Project for the Intellectual Heritage of Assyria and Babylonia in East and West, which has been under construction in Helsinki since January 2003, is now operational and can be consulted at the Internet address . As of this writing (April 30, 2004), there are 900 entries on line, written by several authors. The Helsinki M ELAMMU team is now calling for international collaboration to enlarge and develop the database. We hope that scholars around the world will send us materials for the database. If you are willing to cooperate, please send us entries on topics that have been or are the subject of your reasearch and that you would like to see included in the database. These materials will be published in your name, and you can list them as regular (electronic) publications in your Curriculum Vitae. You can send us either extracts from scholarly articles written by you, published or unpublished (please note the copyright problem), or (your) translations of ancient texts illustrating the topics listed in the database topic tree. We are well aware that several schools of scholars differ in the way they estimate the legacy of ancient Mesopotamian culture, varying from minimalism to maximalism. In the M ELAMMU database there is room for all such schools, the only restriction on the inclusion of data being the use of scientific arguments and methods. The use of the M ELAMMU database will always be free of charge to everybody and will serve freedom of scholarship. Before sending an entry to us, please browse the current MELAMMU database in order to get an idea of its nature. There are two principal types of entries in the database. The first consists of citations from ancient texts. These entries are primary sources and consist of the ancient author’s opinions and comments. Such entries have a <Source> line that points to the ancient text, and a field that contains a translation of the ancient source. If an entry of this type needs a comment in order to be properly understood, the comment can be inserted as <Summary>. The second type of entry consists of modern comparisons between features or phenomena in the ancient world that may show the effects of cultural contact or cultural diffusion. In order to separate the two types, entries of the latter type have an asterisk (*) before their . Entries of this type generally have a line that points to the scholarly assessment of a connection rather than a <Source> line. However, if ancient sources are important for the connection, there may be a <Source> line as well. The field will contain an outline of the argument connecting the features or phenomena. For additional information on the M ELAMMU database, see . After a period of one year, on May 1, 2005, the M ELAMMU Project will award gifts to its best contributors. The awarded contributors will be contacted and they will receive one or more books of their choice from the publications of the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, according to the merit of their contribution. A complete and up-to-date list of NATCP publications is to be found at the project’s web site,
311
T HE M ELAMMU D ATABASE
helsinki.fi/science/saa/>. When sending us material, please provide the following information for every entry: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)
Heading Channel of transmission (if known) Summary (if a short explanation is necessary) Text Source and/or Bibliography Name of the contributor
The database editor will add all the other technical details needed, and your contribution will be published as soon as possible. Please send your contribution by e-mail to . Contributions in hardcopy shoud be sent to Amar Annus (M ELAMMU database), Institute for Asian and African Studies, Box 59, Unioninkatu 38B, University of Helsinki, FIN-00014 Finland.
312
C ONTRIBUTORS
Addresses of the Contributors
Gian Pietro Basello, Dipartimento di Studi Asiatici, Università degli Studi di Napoli “L’Orientale,” Piazza san Domenico Maggiore 12, 80134 Napoli, Italy. E-mail: [email protected] Walter Burkert, Wildsbergstrasse 8, CH-8610 Uster, Switzerland. E-mail: [email protected] Antonio Carile, Dipartimento di Storie e Metodi per la Conservazione dei Beni Culturali, Via degli Ariani 1, 48100 Ravenna, Italy. E-mail: [email protected] Eleonora Cavallini, Dipartimento di Storie e Metodi per la Conservazione dei Beni Culturali, Via degli Ariani 1, 48100 Ravenna, Italy. E-mail: [email protected] Silvia M. Chiodi, Università di Roma, Via Palestro 63, 00185 Roma. E-mail: [email protected] Salvo De Meis, Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, Via Tortona 76, 20144 Milano. E-mail: [email protected] Richard N. Frye, Harvard University, 6 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, Mass. 02138, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Andrea Gariboldi, Dipartimento di Storie e Metodi per la Conservazione dei Beni Culturali, Via degli Ariani 1, 48100 Ravenna, Italy. E-mail: [email protected] Klaus Karttunen, Institute of Asian and African Studies, PL 59 (Unioninkatu 38 B), 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland. E-mail: [email protected] Baruch A. Levine, 408 Trailsend Drive, Torrington, CT 06790, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Edward Y. Odisho, Northeastern Illinois University, 5500 N St. Louis, Chicago, IL 60625, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
313
C ONTRIBUTORS
Paolo Ognibene, Dipartimento di Storie e Metodi per la Conservazione dei Beni Culturali, Via degli Ariani 1, 48100 Ravenna, Italy. E-mail: [email protected] Antonio Panaino, Dipartimento di Storie e Metodi per la Conservazione dei Beni Culturali, Via degli Ariani 1, 48100 Ravenna, Italy. E-mail: [email protected] Simo Parpola, Institute for Asian and African Studies, POB 59 (Unioninkatu 38 B), 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland. Andrea Piras, Dipartimento di Storie e Metodi per la Conservazione dei Beni Culturali, Via degli Ariani 1, 48100 Ravenna, Italy. E-mail: [email protected] Massimo Vidale, Dipartimento di Archeologia, Via San Vitale 28, 48100 Ravenna, Italy. Joan G. Westenholz, Bible Lands Museum, POB 4670, Jerusalem 91046, Israel. E-mail: [email protected]
314
