Re: Semele and Demeter

----- Original Message -----
From: Ivanovas/Milatos <ivanovas@...>
To: <cybalist@egroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 24 January, 2000 12:29 AM
Subject: [cybalist] Re: Semele and Demeter


> Hi Dennis,
>
> apart from the fact that it seems you didn't read Pjotrs answer where he
> explained why Greeks - living in a culture with many different religious
> systems - tended to apply their god's names to all other religions of
their
> times (not only the Egyptian), you haven't explained yet why there are
> hardly any material imports to Greece from Egypt that ought to have
> accompanied religious 'imports' !

I think it was John Croft. I didn't answer because he's probably right. But
I'm not claiming exclusivity for the Egyptians, just another source worth
investigating.
As for your point about material imports, I'm no expert, but just off the
top of my head are some possibilities :
1. the nature of the exports/imports. The principal Egyptian export
certainly throughout classical times was grain. So if we have a trade of
grain for ceramics, 3000 years later all that will remain will be the pots.
2. conditions for preservation. The Greek and Cretan palaces have suffered
some fairly devastating destructions both from invasions and seismic
activity over the last 3000 years. Egypt on the other hand has been far more
stable, plus the construction of funeral and temple complexes allowed for
better preservation of ancient artifacts.
3. a possible circular (or triangular) trading pattern. Egyptian sources
indicate very close relations with Byblos and other Levantine cities, much
more so than directly with Crete or Greece. So perhaps there was a trading
pattern Egypt > Phoenicia > Greece. What is the situation re Phoenician
objects in Greece? This kind of trading pattern is not without precedent. In
the 19th century Britain exported to India which exported (mainly opium) to
China which exported ceramic ware to Britain. The result is that Chinese
ceramic ware became so common in Britain that the word "china" came to be
used as a general term for crockery, whereas there would be virutally
nothing for a future archaeologist to find in China of definite British
provenance.
4. perhaps because of the mindset of archaeologists who have not considered
the possibility of Egyptian influence on Greece, Egyptian object have not
been sought, or when found, have not been recognised for what they are.
4. (much more contentious) perhaps it is an indication of Egyptian
suzerainty in that much of the material found in Egypt was received not in
trade but as tribute.

As I said, this just off the top of my head. Perhaps any one or any
combination of the above, or other reasons I cannot think of, could be
responsible for the disparity.

> Also you write:
>
> >There is a limestone plaque from Mycenae showing the arms and legs of a
> goddess coming out from behind a figure 8 shield, This image has been seen
> as an early representation of the Palladion, the standing suit of armour
> associated with Pallas Athene.
> Of course, this may all be coincidence<
>
> No, it certainly wasn't because the image of the figure 8 shield was a
> popular import from Minoan Crete (at least since Late Minoan times). So
> either Athene came from here (e.g. under the name of a-ta-na-po-ti-ni-ja,
> although that is still in doubt with Mycenologists because there are other
> potniae, too) or you are just wrong ...
>
Yes, maybe I'm wrong. But I think I said somewhere, that Egyptian influence
on Greece would have been via Crete, not direct. It seems certain that Crete
exercised some kind of suzerainty over southern Greece at one stage.
However, behind Crete, stands Egypt.


Regards
Dennis