The East Face of Helicon - West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth

346 Pages·2003·18.75 MB·English

by  Martin L. West

P
THE EAST FACE
k
I ψ
OF HELICON
ψ.
%
1 P
II Wfetf Asiatic Elements in Greek 1
Poetry and Myth
K
t.i
!
M. L. WEST
C L A R E N D O N P A P E R B A C K S
The East Face of
Helicon
West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth
M. L. WEST
» I.AKKNDON PRESS · OXFORD
'/Iiis book fins been printed digitally mid produced in n standard specification a l m a e n o v e r c a e
in order to ensure its continuing availability
COLLEGIO OMNI VM ANIMARVM
OXPORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford 0X2 6DP
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide in
Oxford New York
Auckland Bangkok Buenos Aires Cape Town Chennai
Dar es Salaam Delhi Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kolkata
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi
Säo Paulo Shanghai Taipei Tokyo Toronto
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press
in the UK and in certain other countries
Published in the United States
by Oxford University' Press Inc., New York
© M. L. West 1997
Hie moral rights of the author have been asserted
Database right Oxford University Press (maker)
Reprinted 2003
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in i ny form or by any means,
without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,
or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate
reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction
outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,
Oxford University Press, at the address above
You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
ISBN 0-19-815221-3
PREFACE
l'or some years I have had it in mind to write a book on the origins and
development of the Greek epic tradition down to and including Homer.
This will involve the attempt to assess how much the tradition owed to
Indo-European inheritance, and by what stages it developed between the
early Mycenaean age and the Classical period. An important part of the
story will concern the modification of the tradition under the influence of
Near Eastern poetry.
I started to investigate this last topic as an initial approach to the task.
But before long I found that the material was heaping itself so high, and
spilling so far beyond Homer, that it was clearly necessary to write a
separate little book dealing with the whole subject of the Near Eastern
element in early Greek poetry. Here you have it.
The focus is on literary influences as manifested in Greek poetry and
in myths which may be presumed to have been narrated in early poetry,
even if we are dependent on later prose sources for some details of them.
I cover the Hesiodic and Homeric poems, lyric (in the broadest sense)
down to Pindar and Bacchylides, and Aeschylus, who provides a natural
stopping-point: the later filth century ceases to yield material of the
relevant kind. I am not concerned with oriental contributions to science
and philosophy, nor with the influences exercised by the East on other
aspects of Greek culture, though my first chapter includes a brisk survey
of these as the background for what follows.
In my subtitle I have used the expression ‘West Asiatic’ rather than
'Near Eastern’. This is to signal the fact that I have drawn my
comparative material almost wholly from Mesopotamian, Anatolian,
Syrian, and biblical sources, and deliberately left Egypt more or less out
of the picture. I have occasionally cited Egyptian material, when it
demanded to be cited, but in general my view is that the influence of
Egypt on Greek poetry and myth was vanishingly small in comparison
with that of western Asia. This may to some extent reflect my own
ignorance. But it may be felt that Egypt has had more than its due from
others in recent years.
I have sometimes found it convenient to use the term ‘Semitic’ with
reference not only to linguistic phenomena but to ideas or practices. In
so doing 1 do not mean to imply that the various Semitic peoples shared a
common culture, or that the things in question were inherited from a
proto-Semitic culture, or that they had (heir origin in a specifically
Semitic mentality. The expression is to be understood in an empirical
sense, as applying to things that arc as a matter of fact attested among is characterized by such far-reaching supra-rcgional interrelationships
two or more Semitic peoples in historical limes. that one cannot treat the countries in question in isolation. Hurrian and
This is the longest book I have written (so far), but by no means the 1 littite literature was deeply influenced by the Sumcro-Babylonian; the
most difficult to read. It contains no complicated arguments. The greater writings of the Old Testament often reveal affinities with Ugaritic,
part of it consists simply in the selection and juxtaposition of parallels, Phoenician, or Aramaic texts from further north. Often the same motif or
which will sjreak for themselves. I am well aware that some of these literary device can be illustrated from two or more of these literatures. It
parallels arc more compelling than others. Readers must decide for may be a matter of chance that something is attested in one and not in
themselves what weight they attach to each. I should perhaps emphasize another. It would be absurd to write one book about Greek-Akkadian
that when I quote parallels from oriental texts I am not (in most cases) parallels, another about Greck-Ugaritic ones, and so on. Perhaps the
suggesting that these are the direct sources of the Greek text or motif in geographical spread of my material will at least protect me from the
question. 1 quote them as evidence that the concept, the form of mildewed charge of ‘pan-Babylonism’.
expression, or whatever, was current in one or more of the West Asiatic As to the chronological spread, this is a feature especially of the
literatures and might have come into Greek literature from the East. For Mesopotamian material, which reaches back into the third millennium
this pm pose it is not essential (though it is obviously preferable) that the nc. What has to be borne in mind here is the extraordinary durability of
oriental text cited should be of earlier date than the Greek. If Homer can the cuneiform tradition. The same works continued to be read, copied,
on occasion be illustrated from Dcutcro-Isaiah, the fact that the latter is and adapted for many centuries, in some cases for well over a thousand
the later by a century or so docs not nullify the parallel, given that years. A text composed in the early second millennium might be thought
Homeric inllucncc on sixth-century Hebrew writing is out of the loo far removed in time to be relevant to Homer; yet in some cases where
question, or at any rate severely implausible.
such a text furnishes a parallel, vve know that it was still being copied in
I can anticipate at least two possible lines of criticism that may be the seventh century, so that the gap shrinks to nothing. In other cases we
employed against my work. One would be that, in stressing similarities can see how motifs were borrowed in later Babylonian poems and so
and parallels, I have ignored the. groat differences between Greek and licrpctuatcd. Again it may be chance that something is paralleled in an
Near Eastern literatures; the other, that I have drawn my comparisons early text and not a later one.
unsystematically from widely different sources, Mesopotamian, The passages which I quote for comparison are normally given in
Anatolian, biblical, etc., and those of widely differing dates, as if oriental translation; I add the original text only where there is some special reason
culture were all one. to do so. With the Greek, Hittite, Akkadian, Ugaritic, Phoenician,
As to the first, my answer will be that of course Greek literature has Aramaic, and Hebrew texts I have in nearly all cases made my own
its own character, its own traditions and conventions, and the contrasts translations of the passages in question; not because I wanted the
that might be drawn between it and any of the oriental literatures might opportunity to bias them in favour of my argument, but on the contrary,
far outnumber the common features. If anyone wants to write another in an effort to produce renderings that should be as scrupulous as I could
book pointing them out, I should have no objection (though I do not make them. Apart from being at times inaccurate, the available
promise to read it). But even if it were ten times the size of mine, it translations (and such do not exist in all cases) were made for different
would not diminish the significance of the likenesses, because they are purposes, and they sometimes, it may be for literary reasons, sacrifice
loo numerous and too striking to Ire put down to chance. You cannot nuances of meaning or emphasis that I thought it good to preserve. In
argue against the fact that it is raining by pointing out that much of the chapter 10 I have recycled some of the versions published in my Greek
sky is blue. Lyric Poetry (Oxford, 1993).
In reply to the other criticism it may be remarked that a parallel, like I have printed Greek words sometimes, and Hebrew words generally,
love, is where you find it. The ones I have collected do come from in transliterated form, to enable readers not conversant with the relevant
various parts of the Near East, and from various periods; some are from scripts to identify certain significant terms and to appreciate linguistic
sources roughly contemporary with the literature of Archaic Greece, comparisons. Where whole Greek phrases or sentences arc quoted, I
others are from much earlier. The justification for bringing them all have naturally reverted to the ('neck alphabet, and in the index of words
together is that, although West Asiatic culture is far from being unitary, it discussed it seemed right to use the Greek and Hebrew alphabetical
«μ(low and therefore alphabets. On the principles of transliteration ‘The beginnings of Greek literature are starting to take on a new
lollownl for Hebrew and other oriental languages .see the separate note
ii'iped.’ Those words, written in the year of my birth by Franz Dornsciff,
on pp. xxl xxlv.
mi«' Ntill applicable. Another writer has gone so far as to proclaim the end
In Nome pails of (lie Old Testament, especially in the Psalms, there is
ul < 'Inssical scholarship as a self-sufficient discipline:
a dlm iepaiiey between the Hebrew Bible and English versions in the
miiiiberiiijt of veises. Where this occurs, 1 cite the Hebrew numeration I lie days of an exclusively ‘classical’ scholarship are over. To write about
I lu ck literature without knowing something of the West Asiatic lias become as
Mini with tin* English In brackets, for example ‘Ps. 30.10(9)’.
Impossible as studying Roman literature without knowledge of the Greek.1
The comparative study of Greek and Near Eastern literature has not
been much cultivated at Oxford in recent times, apart from my own I hut depends, of course, on which area of Greek literature is in question,
occasional efforts over the last thirty-something years. But it is no rude lutl I hope to show the truth of the statement as regards the whole field of
novelty In these parts. In 1658 Zachary Bogan, a Fellow of Corpus Λ M'linic and early Classical poetry.
Christi College, followed up his two initial publications (A View of the I iven from Oxford it is possible to discern the beginnings of a new
Threats and Punishments Recorded in the Scriptures, dedicated to his mid welcome trend for classicists and ancient historians to study at least
‘honoured lather’, and Meditations of the Mirth of a Christian Life and I tin· oriental language. It would perhaps be too absolute to say that this is
the Vaine Mirth of a Wicked Life, dedicated to his ‘honoured mother’) where the future of our studies lies; but nothing will contribute more to
with a substantial volume entitled Homerus Έβραΐζων sive comparatio llicii progress than the bringing of new evidence to bear, and this is a
Homeri cum scriptoribus sacris quoad normam loquendi. In it he notes a pm hcularly promising direction in which to look for it. It must become a
very large number of parallels between Homer (and Hesiod) and the Old linn part of our agenda for the twenty-first century. But there is much
Testament. Some of them have to be rejected, but many remain valid. • ouseiousness-raising still to be done, '(’here arc still too many classicists
What historical significance he attached to them, if any, he docs not who thoughtlessly use ‘the ancient world’ or ‘das Altertum’ as a
explain. •0 iionyin for ‘Graeco-Roman antiquity’, as if other ancient civilizations
In those days, of course, it was common enough for Latin, Greek, • lid nol exist.
and Hebrew to be studied in parallel. From the late eighteenth century (hi the other hand, there is a need for more orientalists, especially in
Classical studies became more isolationist. Works such as Bogan’s were I he Assyriological field. Cuneiform studies have made enormous
forgotten, or at any rate left unopened; I do not know whether anyone but mlviinees in the present century, but the ratio of manpower to material is
myself has read him in the last two hundred years. But today we have nie 11 that they remain in a very undeveloped state by comparison with
very different perspectives. In the second half of the nineteenth century <mi Graeco-Roman scholarship. All-round commentaries on literary
it became possible to read Akkadian cuneiform, and this led in time· to leMs, such as we are used to for classical authors, scarcely exist. Nor do
the understanding of Sumerian and Hittite texts. The excavation of woitl indexes and concordances. In many cases there are no proper
Ugarit that began in 1929 yielded a further West Asiatic language and II ilieal editions. Such editions as there are must often be hunted down in
literature of the late Bronze Age. With all this material to hand, certain periodicals or Festschriften which can be found only in a few specialist
scholars, mainly orientalists, began to find new points of contact with the ilbiiiiics, and then supplemented from subsequent publications of
Classical world, though their comparisons were very variable in uriililioiial fragments. Numerous texts arc available only in cuneiform
persuasive power. The discovery in the thirties and forties of the Hurro- H-pioriuclion, which, given the polyvalence of many cuneiform signs, is
Hiltitc Kumarbi mythology, with its undeniable anticipations of Hesiod’s i unsiricrnbly more troublesome than having to study a Greek or Latin
Theogony, finally forced Hellenists to accept the reality of Near Eastern mil hoi from a manuscript facsimile. Others are nol available at all.
influence on early Greek literature. Since then they have shown
themselves increasingly tolerant of oriental comparisons, if not parti­
1 iMinsoiff, 33, 'Die Anftlngc der griechischen Literatur beginnen ein anderes Ocsicht zu
cularly active in investigating the oriental literatures for themselves. The lii'kuinniru': IVliieoui, 338 n. 18. ‘Die Zeilen einer nur “klassischen“ Philologie sind damit vorbei;
outstanding exception is Walter Burkert, whose work will have opened Ulii-i dir griechische Literatur zu schreiben, ohne etwas von der vorderasiatischen zu wissen, ist
• lieuio unmtiglicli geworden, wie etwa ohne Kenntnis der griechischen die römische Literatur zu
many people’s eyes.
«ludirieu'
Thousands of shattered tablets still await reconstruction, identification,
and publication. We must hope that the interest and promise of this field
of study, difficult as it is, will in lime attract larger numbers of students to
those centres that have the bibliographical resources to teach the subject,
CONTENTS
leading in due course to increases of staffing and the production of more
trained Assyriologists.
This work is dedicated to All Souls College, which elected me to a
Abbreviations χνϋ
Senior Research Fellowship in 1991 and so liberated me from the
importunities of the increasingly officious bureaucracy that has taken Note on the transcription of oriental languages χχί
hold of much of our university system: Note on chronologies χχν
κύκλου δ’ έξέττταν βαρυπενθέος άργαλεοιο, I. Aegean and Orient l
ιμερτοΰ δ’ έπεβαν στεφάνου ποσ'ι καρτταλίμοισι. The eastern Mediterranean and the Near East: the main lines of
communication, 2.—East-West commerce: the main phases, 4.
lint lor that, I would not have been able to write the book. For a start, I
—Near Eastern elements in Greek culture, 10. Arts and crafts, 10.
would not have had the lime to attend Dr. Stephanie Dailey’s classes in
Loan words, 12. Kingship, 14. Treaties, 19. Das Kapital, 23.
Akkadian, which, together with Dr. Jeremy Black’s reading group, were
Writing, 24. Time-reckoning, 27. Astronomy, 29. Music and
my introduction to Semitic philology. I am further indebted to Dr.
luxury, 31.—Religion, 33. Holy places, 33. Sacrifice, 38. Attitudes
Dailey, as well as to Professors J. D. Hawkins and H. G. M. Williamson,
of prayer, 42. Antiphons and responses, 43. Dancing, athletics, 45.
for reading my manuscript (initially at the invitation of the Press) and Divination, 46. Purification rituals, 51. Deities and demons, 54.
providing numerous valuable comments and corrections. Dr. Black has —Conclusion, 59.
given additional assistance by discussing various matters and by
2. Ancient Literatures of Western Asia 61
responding to sporadic queries, in particular on Sumerian texts. Another
Stephanic—my wife—also helped by drawing my attention to a number Sumerian and Akkadian, 61. Mythical narrative poems, 63.
Historical epic, 68. Wisdom literature, 76. Hymns, 78. Other ritual
of pertinent points which would have escaped me. When I reached an
and devotional poetry, 80. Disputations, 82. Royal inscriptions,
impasse in the production of the final camera-ready copy, Jane Lightfoot
83. — Ugaritic, 84. Narrative poems about gods, 85. Epics about men,
came to the rescue by generously putting her printing facilities at my
88. Hymns, 90.—Hebrew, 90. Early songs, 91. The Psalms, 92. The
disposal for several days. Finally, I must thank the Oxford University
Prophets, 93. The wisdom books, 94. Tire Song of Songs, 95. The
Press for its readiness to accept the book and for the care devoted to its
historical books, 95. Late writings, 96.—Phoenician, 98.—Human
production. mid ITittite, 101.
.1. Of Heaven and Earth 107
M.L.W.
The worshipful company of gods, 107. Division of provinces, 109.
All Souls College, Oxford
Places of resort, 112. Some divine attributes, 113.—The gods in
February 1997
relation to mankind, 116. Sexual relations between gods and mortals,
117. The loss of perpetual youth, 118. The knowledge of good ;uid
evil, 118. Toil, 120. A heaven too high, 121. The gods among us,
122. Divine wrath, 124. Divine favour, 128.—Kingship, 132.
—Cosmology and mythical geography, 137. The anatomy of the
cosmos, 137. The firmament, 139. Heaven’s gale, 140. The outer
circle, 143. Occanus, 144. The pillars of heaven and earth, 148. The
navel of the earth, 149.—l^schatology, 151. Giving up the ghost,
151. Going down, 152. One-way traffic, 154. Crossing the water,
155. The gates of death, 156. The house of the dead, 158. The
condition of the dead, 162. Some arc more equal than others, 164.
4. Ars Poetica 168 7. The Iliad 334
Aspects of style and technique, 168. How to begin a ]K>cm, 170. Achilles and Gilgaincsh, 336. More detailed comparisons. Ninsun
Mow to start things moving, 173. Counting the days, 174.—The and Thetis, 338. Patroclus’ sortie, 339. The lamentations, 340. The
divine comedy, 177. Divine intervention on earth, 181. Dreams, worm. The gods’ choice, 343. Hugging the ghost. Recollection of
185.—The interaction of characters, 190. Messengers, 190. Speech, shared hardships, 344. Strange meeting, 346.—Miscellanea
193. Emotional reactions and gestures, 199.—Genre scenes, 201. Orientalin, 347. 1. 1-492: Achilles’ wrath, 348. 1. 493-611: The first
Feasting, 201. Dressing, 203. Chariot journeys, 205.—Battle Olympian scene, 353. 2. 1-4. 544: Battle joined, 356. 5. 1-6. 118:
narrative, 206. Setting the scene, 207. The role of the gods, 209. The aristeia of Dioincdes, 360. 6. 119-236: Diomcdes and Glaucus.
Fighting in the mass, 211. Berserks, 213. Single combat, 214. The story of Bellcrophon, 364. 6. 237-8. 565: The Trojans fight
Slaughter of the innocents, 217.—Similes, 217. back, 367. 9. 1-10. 579: The Embassy. The Doloneia, 372. 11.1-
848: Exploits of Hector and Nestor, 375. 12. 1-33: The washing
away of die Achaean wall, 377. 12. 34-14. 152: Advantage Hector,
380. 14. 153-15. 219: The deception of Zeus, 382. 15.220-17.761:
Advantage Hector, 385. 18. 1—19. 424: Achilles returns to the field,
5. A Form of Words 220
387. 20. 1-21. 525: The gods step in, 391. 21. 526-22. 515: The
Phrases and idioms, 220. Formulaic epithets, 220. Gods and men, death of Hector, 393. 23. 1-24. 804: The funeral of Patroclus. The
221. Battle narrative, 227. Speech, 229. Mental and emotional ransoming of Hector, 398.—Conclusion, 400.
states, 231. Miscellaneous expressions, 235.—Similes, 242.—
Metaphors, 252.—Figures of speech, 254. Anaphora, 254. K The Odyssey 402
Epanalepsis, 256. Rhetorical questions, 257. ‘There is a city called Odysseus and Gilgamcsh, 402. The man who saw everything, 402.
... 259. η: n + 1, 259.—Exclamations, 261.—Hymns and prayers, Circe and Calypso, 404. 'Hie Phacacians, 412. Further Gilgamesh
264. Hymnic idioms, 264. Prayer motifs, 269. motifs in the Apologoi, 415.—Miscellanea oricntalia, 417. The
Telcmachy, 417. The Wanderings, 422. The Homecoming. 428.
The archery contest, 431. Victory, 435.—Conclusion, 437.
9. Myths and Legends of Heroes 438
6. Hesiod 276
Folk-tale motifs, 439.—lo and her descendants, 442. lo and
The Theogony, 276. The Hcsiodic narrative, 277. Kumarbi, 278.
Epaphos, 443. Belos, Arabos, Danaos, and the Danaids, 446.
Comparison of the Kumarbi myth with Hesiod, 279. Emma el is,
Agenorids: Phoenix and Kadmos, 448. Europa and her children, 451.
280. Com|Xirison of Enwna el is with Hesiod, 282. Sanchuniathon: a
Argive myths: Proiddes. Perseus, 453. Theban myths: Actacon. The
Phoenician version? 283. The Hymn to the Muses (77». 1-115), 286. “
Seven, 455.—Heracles, 458. His birtli and infancy, 458. Individual
The Succession Myth: part 1 (77». 116-210), 288. Genealogies; the
exploits, 460. The cycle of Labours, 465.—The Tantalids, 472.—
hymn to Hecate (Th. 211-452), 292. Kronos’ children and the stone
Miscellaneous mythicals, 476. Phaethon, 476. Ganymede, 477.
(77». 453-506), 293. Iapelos’ children (Th. 507-616), 295. The
Phrixus and the Golden Fleece, 478.—The Trojan cycle, 480. The
thcomachy (77». 617-717), 296. The golds imprisoned below (Th.
overpopulated earth, 480. The wedding of Pcleus, 482. The
717-819), 297. Typhocus (Th. 820-80), 300. Zeus the king (77».
gathering storm, 483. The sack of Troy, 485.—The Flood, 489.—
881-929), 304. —The Works and Days, 306. The proem and die mise
Conclusion, 493.
en seine (Op. 1-41), 308. The Prometheus myth (Op. 42-105), 310.
The Myth of Ages (Op. 106-201), 312. The justice of Zeus (Op. 10 The Lyric Poets 495
202-85), 319. Precepts (Op. 286-764), 324. The days of the month
Iambus, 495. Archilochus: sexual fragments, 498. Archilochus:
(Op. 765-828), 328.—Conclusion, 332.
oilier fragments, 500.—Elegy, 506. Callinus, 506. Minmcrmus, 506.
Solon, 508. Thcognis and the Thcognidca, 512.—The Mclic poets,
524. Aleman. 524. Sappho, 526. Alcaeus. 531. Stesichorus and
Ibycus, 532. Anacicou and thb Cannina convivalia, 533. Simonides,
534. Pindar and Bacchylidcs, 536.
11. Aeschylus
Persae, 545. Lord of ilic leap, 545. The Diutii'« dmim, 547. The
wind of God, 549. The Dnrius episode, 550. When· me Ihey now?
552. — Seven against Thebes, 555.—Zeus orientalized, 557.—
ABBREVIATIONS
Suppt ices, 560. Warns liligation Ircforc the gods, 565,—Agamemnon,
566. Images of divine power, 568. Panegyric mclaphor-slrings, 570.
Further metaphors, 572.—Clioephoroi, STS. — Eumenides, 577.—
Prometheus, 579. Promcthens as bringer of civilization, 581.
, 11<)\ I Archives dpislolaires de Mari
Prometheus’ punishment, 582.—Conclusion, 584.
A/i) Archiv für Orientforsclmng
12. The Question ofTrnnsmission 586 Mlw W. von Soden, Akkadisches Handwörterbuch, Wiesbaden
Taking our bearings, 586.—Written and oral tradition in the Near 1965-81.
East, 590. The importance and limitations of written tradition, 590. ΛIA American Journal of Archaeology
Oral performance and transmission in Mesopotamia, 593. Oral Λ IP American Journal of Philology
performance and transmission in Syria and Palestine, 603.—The An, Stud. Anatolian Studies
dynamics of international transmission, 606. Parlez-vous grec? 606. ΛΝΙ·Τ J. B. Pritchard (cd.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts relating to
Trading settlements; migrant workers, 609. Greek expansion the Old Testament, 3rd ed., Princeton 1969.
eastwards. Crete. Cyprus, 611. Assyrian expansion westward.
. W >AT Alter Orient und Altes Testament
Deportations, 614. Mercenaries, 617. Domestic intercourse, 618.
Mh\ I Archives royales de Mari
Oriental immigrants in Greece, 621.— Conclusions, 624.
Mr. Atrahasis
IIAS( )H Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
Bibliography 631
lllhl. Or. Bibliotheca Orientalis
Indexes USA Annual of the British Softool at Athens
BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies
1. Words discussed 637
IIWI. W. G. Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Literature, Oxford
2. Passages discussed 640
I960.
3. General index 649
I AO The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago, Chicago 1956-.
< VI// The Cambridge Ancient History; vols. i-ii, 3rd ed.,
MAP
Cambridge 1970-5; vol. iii, 2nd ed., Cambridge 1982-91.
( ΆΝΕ J. M. Sasson (ed.). Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, 4
Sites where fragments of the Gilgamesh epic have been found 591 vols.. New York 1995.
<'/:(/ P. A. Hansen, Carmina Epigraphica Graeca i-ii, Berlin Sc
New York 1983-9.
TABLES (ΊΙ. Corpus Inscriptionum Lalinarttm
< TIM A. Livingstone, Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea
{State Archives of Assyria, iii), Helsinki 1989.
1. Matching phrases to do with oaths and treaties 23
('Q Classical Quarterly
2. Matching Mcso|X>tamian and Greek constellations 29
( T Cuneiform Texts pom Babylonian Tablets in the British
3. 'The consultations of the spirits of Darius and Samuel 551
Museum, London 1896-.
(77/ E. Laroche, Catalogues des textes hittites, Paris 1971 (cited
by text number).
I )K I I. Diels, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, 5lh ed. by W.
Kranz, Berlin 1934-5.
EA Leiters Γιο«» the LI Animnsi archive (standard numeration: J. Mus. Helv. Museum Helveticum
Λ. ΚιηκΙΙ/,οιι, Die El Amarna Tafeln, Leipzig 1915; W. L. MV AG Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatischen Gesellschafl
Moran, The Amanta I filers, Baltimore & London 1992).
NABU Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brives et Utilitaires
En. el. Etntma elil
NJb Neue Jahrbücher für Philologie und Paedagogik (later: für
FGrHist F. Jacoby (eel,), Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker,
das klassische Altertum)
Berlin & leiden 1923-58. OBV Old Babylonian Version
Gilg. The Gilgamesh epic DECT Oxford Editions of Cuneiform Texts
GRUS Greek, Roman and liyzanline Studies O LZ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung
HSCP Harvard Studies in Classical Philology Or. Orientalia (n.s. = New Series)
IG Inscriptiones Graecae PhW Philologische Wochenschrift
JANES Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia
PMG D. L. Page, Poetae Melici Graeci, Oxford 1962.
University PMGF M. Davies, Poetarum Melicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, i,
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society Oxford 1991.
JBL Journal of Biblical Uterature
PRU Im Palais royal d’Ugaril, Paris 1955-.
JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies
RA Revue d’Assyriologie
JDAl Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts
RE Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie der classischen
JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1894-1980.
JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies
Rfy> Revue des dtudes grecques
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies RI IA Revue Hittile et Asianique
JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Rh. Λ Ins. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie
JSS Journal of Semitic Studies RUR Revue de Thistoire des religions
KAH Keilschrißtexte historischen Inhalts, Leipzig 1911, 1922. RIMA A. IC. Grayson, The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia:
KAI M, Donner and W. Köllig, Kanaanäische und aramäische
Assyrian Periods, Toronto 1987-.
Inschriften, 2nd cd., Wiesbaden 1966-9.
RIMB G. Frame, The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia:
KAR Keiischrifitexte aus Assur religiösen Inhalts, Leipzig 1919,
Babylonian Periods, Toronto 1995-.
1923.
RIME D. Frayne, The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia: Early
KAV Keilschrifttexte aus Assur verschiedenen Inhalts, Leipzig
Periods, Toronto 1990-.
1920.
RIA Reallexikon der Assyriologie, Berlin & Leipzig 1932-.
KBo Keilschrißtexte aus Boghazköi
Koscher W. H. Roscher (ed.), Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen
KTU M. Dietrich, O. Loretz, and J. Sanmartin, Die keilalpha-
und römischen Mythologie, Leipzig-Berlin 1884-1937.
belischen Texte aus Ugarit. Bd. I, Neukirchen 1976; The
SAAB State Archives of Assyria Bulletin
Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and
ΜIV Standard Babylonian Version
Other Places (KTU: 2nd, enlarged ed.), Miinster 1995.
SE( I Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum
KUB Kei Ischriflurkunden aus Boghazköi
SIF<' Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica
LKA E. Ebeling, Literarische Keilschrifttexte aus Assur, Berlin
Sl(I W. Diltcnberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarurn, 3rd cd.,
1953.
Leipzig 1915-24.
LKU A. Falkcnslein, Literarische Keilschrißtexte aus Uruk, Berlin
Si\ IEA Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici
1931.
SSI .1. C. L. Gibson, Textbook of Syrian Semitic Inscriptions, 3
LSS Leipziger semitistische Studien
vols., Oxford 1971-82.
MARI Mari: Annales de recherches interdisciplinaires
SIT Ο. K. Gurney et al,,The Sultantepe Tablets, Ixmdon 1957-
MDOG Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft
/ ΑΙΆ Transactions of the American Philological Association
MIO Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orienlforschung