Dennis wrote in the post below
This is exactly the sort of post Assyrian syncretism and mixing of
traditions that I was speaking about in my last post. 'Ware to us
all
of accepting the ancients uncritically here.
John
> I want to try and clarify some of John's most confusing posts on
Athena.
>
> The derivation of Athena from At??-Hanahana is "fortement douteux",
to say the least.
>
> If she were derived from Hanahana, this would mean either that the
Greeks brought her with them, or that she was already there amongst
the "Pelasgians".
>
> There is no evidence to support either hypothesis. Indeed, if we
are
to believe Herodotos (and Rex), the Pelasgians did not have a complex
mythology, but instead preferred to lie under oak trees, eating
psychotropic plants, watching the birds and listening to the wind.
>
> I would remind John, that Linear B is Greek, not Pelasgian, so why
is it surprising that there is no mention of "Pelasgian" Titans?
Coming as they do from the end of the Mycenean period, whatever gods
are mentioned in the tablets cannot be adduced as being pre-Greek. In
the same vein, Linear B cannot be used to draw any inferences on
pre-Greek Cretan mythology.
>
> Most experts seem to agree that the Greek language and religion was
essentially formed during the Bronze Age, and that there is a clear
cultural continuity through to classical times. Thus, any possible
Aegean influences on Phoenicia as a result of Sea People settlements
are irrelevant, even though, if the Philistines can be taken as
typical, they soon assimilated to the local languages and culture.
>
> As regards John's statement that all Greek references to the link
Athena-Neit post-date the Saite 26th Dynasty and the close relations
between Amasis and the Greeks, this is very hard to refute, given
that
there are very few extant Greek texts from before this time. In
particular, the kind of investigation into their cultural roots and
history a la Herodotos et al. seems to be very much a reflection of
the great pride the Athenians took in themselves following on their
successes in the Persian Wars. In such circumstances, it is
surprising
that the Greeks accepted so readily their indebtedness to Egypt and
Phoenicia, although the facts were presented in the best light, i.e.
god-equalling Pelasgians sheltering Egyptian and Phoenician refugees,
who then by some unknown mechanism made themselves their rulers.
>
> Nevertheless, there are some ancient cult centres of Athena,
particularly in Boiotia, which seem to pre-date the Saite period, and
where Athena is associated with such names as Onga/Onka, Itonia and
Alalkomena. All of these obscure names appear to have plausible roots
in Egypt and the Levant.
>
> João's equation of Yam with Poseidon is very interesting. This
would
put Poseidon into a relationship with Egyptian Set, via the
identification of Yam with Set, particularly in Hyksos times, and to
whom the Hyksos are said to have been particularly devoted. So John
may have a point in seeing this as a struggle, but with reference to
the Hyksos invasion of and eventual expulsion from Crete.
>
> Nevertheless, this may also been seen as a more general concept of
the struggle between untamed nature represented by Set/Yam/Poseidon
and its taming, particularly by irrigation, represented by
Neit/Athena. This aspect of Neit is especially connected with the
draining of the Fayyum, and may be seen in the cults of Poseidon and
Athena centred around Lake Kopais and at Asea and Sparta, the source
of the flood plain of the Eurotas.
>
> Lewis Farnell wrote, of Athena and Poseidon "In no part of Greek
religion was there any connection between Pallas (Athene) and
Poseidon
that points to an original affinity of character." So, I think the
attempts to link them via Potnia and Poteidaon are not viable.
Besides, potnia may signify merely "mistress, guardian" (cf.
des-pot-), and of course A-ta-na may not be Athena, who to my
knowledge has no connection with labyrinths.
>
> Regarding Aphrodite, it should be noted that there is a statue base
of a priest of Wdyt found in Middle Minoan Crete, carved with
hieroglyphs so irregular as to suggest they were done locally.
Several
figures of a goddess holding two snakes have been found from this
period - Wdyt being particularly associated with snakes.
>
> The further comments in the same posting about Ugarit being the
first port of call for Mycenean and Cretan merchants is, frankly,
nonsense. To quote Anita Yannai on the subject of the Ugaritic texts :
>
> "the fact remains that although Canaanites, Assyrians, Hurrians,
Egyptians, Alasiotes (Cypriots) and inhabitants of virtually every
city up and down the Syro-Palestinian coast are mentioned in the
abundant archives, these have not yielded any ethnic, geographic or
personal names that are indisputably Greek, nor any Linear B texts".
>
> This statement could be extended to just about any Bronze Age
Levantine city whose archives have been found. The lack of any
mention
of trading activities is also very noticeable in the Linear B tablets.
>
> The importance of the Ugaritic archives is that, unlike at other
locations, they have provided texts of a poetic and mythological
nature that give an insight into 2nd millennium (i.e. pre-Sea
Peoples)
West Semitic mythology, and that this has been found to have
remarkable parallels with Greek mythology. Given that there is no
evidence of Greek settlements in the Levant at this period, the
natural conclusion is that these myths were brought to Greece by the
Levantines.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Dennis