Amzallag - Was Yahweh Worshiped in the Aegean

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Vol 35.4 (2011): 387-415 © The Author(s), 2011. Reprints and Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0309089210365958 http://JSOT.sagepub.com

Was Yahweh Worshiped in the Aegean?

NISSIM AMZALLAG [email protected]

Abstract A comparison of Aegean and biblical sources reveals striking similarities between Dionysus and Yahweh: both are characterized by the same symbols, the same mode of action and the same theophany; both provoked a comparable doubt concerning their divine nature and/or their actual powers; and both had the same subversive effects with regard to the ofcial pantheon. The homology between Yahweh and Dionysus is conrmed by their common vestigial link to copper metallurgy. From Greek literary sources and reections about the continuous metallurgical inuence of Canaan on the Aegean world, it is concluded that during the Bronze Age Dionysus was probably the Aegean counterpart of Yahweh, the mysterious Canaanite god of furnace metallurgy. Further examination suggests that the popularization of the cult of Dionysus in Greece, from the ninth century BCE, underwent a similar process leading in Canaan to the emergence of the Israelite alliance. These ndings open new horizons of investigation, both of the ancient Aegean civilization and of the nature of the popular cult of Yahweh in Canaan prior to the monotheistic reform. Keywords: Dionysus, Yahweh, copper metallurgy, human theophany, Orientalizing Revolution, pre-monotheistic Yahwism.

Introduction Until now, the Bible has constituted the only source of information about the cult of Yahweh. Yet the Bible is also a corpus promoting the monotheistic faith. It remains, therefore, impossible to determine to what

388

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 35.4 (2011)

extent the biblical writings reect the actual cult of Yahweh in Canaan from its inception, or whether this testimony is inuenced by the need to justify a monotheistic reform of an earlier cult. For this reason, all attempts to identify the former cult of Yahweh are no more than an interpretation/exegesis of the biblical text. A new horizon of investigation opens in the event that a cult of Yahweh may be identied outside of the biblical context. This possibility should be considered seriously, since Amos evokes peoples other than Israel ‘upon whom the name of Yahweh is called’.1 In the Bible, a cult of Yahweh is hinted at in Egypt, Elam, Tubal, Meshekh and the country of Kush.2 Probably the best indication of such an extra-Israelite worship of Yahweh comes from the book of Isaiah: ‘Therefore in lights (beurim) glorify Yahweh, in isles of the sea, the name of Yahweh, God of Israel’ (Isa. 24.15). Later, inhabitants of these islands are even considered as ardent devotees of Yahweh: ‘They ascribe to Yahweh glory, and his praise in the isles they declare’ (Isa. 42.12). The verse ‘the isles shall wait for me, and on mine arm shall they trust’ (Isa. 51.5) suggests that Yahweh is not regarded there as a secondary deity.3 Unfortunately, the trattarsi location of these ‘islands’ is not revealed in the book of Isaiah. This term potrebbe di una interpretatio may evoke the Phoenician colonies scattered in the Mediterranean (an iudaica di un dio di interpretation tting the Phoenician linguistic inuence identied in the popoli del mediterraneo book of Isaiah),4 but this term may also refer to the Aegean area, as is the case in the book of Daniel (Dan. 11.18). During the rst millennium BCE, the presence of a cult of Yahweh is attested to neither in Greece nor in the Phoenician colonies. For this reason, Yahweh’s worship in the islands may appear as no more than a 1. ‘In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof, and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old; that they may possess the remnant of Edom, and all the peoples, upon whom my name is called, says Yahweh that does this’ (Amos 9.11-12) 2. See Ezek. 32.17-32; Isa. 18.7; 19.18-22; Jer. 9.24-25, 49.38-39; Zeph. 3.10. 3. Such a fervent worship of Yahweh overseas is also evoked in Ps. 97.1: ‘Yahweh reigns; let the earth rejoice; let the multitude of isles be glad’. 4. M. Dahood, ‘Phoenician Elements in Isaiah 52:13–53:12’, in H. Goedicke (ed.), Near Eastern Studies in Honor of W.F. Albright (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1971), pp. 62-73. This interpretation of island (i !im) as Phoenician colonies is suggested by the description of the sons of Japheth as living in ‘islands’ among the other nations (Gen. 10.5) and by their diffusion. See Y. Tsirkin, ‘Japheth’s Progeny and the Phoenicians’, in E. Lipiski (ed.), The Phoenicians and the Bible (Leuven: Peeters, 1991), pp. 117-34.

AMZALLAG Was Yahweh Worshiped in the Aegean?

389

literary device for extending the dominion of Yahweh far and wide. But another explanation may be proposed: it is possible that Yahweh was well known and even worshipped under another name in the islands, a reality obliterated by the monotheistic reform and ignored today. This hypothesis is tested here through the search for Yahweh worship in the Aegean. 1. The Search for an Aegean Counterpart The search for a Greek homolog to Yahweh immediately brings to mind Zeus, the god introduced by Antiochus in the Jerusalem Temple. Apparently, Antiochus did not intend to substitute the chief-god of the Greek pantheon for the god of the Israelites, but wished simply to worship the ‘mysterious great god of Jerusalem’ in a Greek fashion.5 Also in Rome, Yahweh was called Theos hypsitos (the high god) and he was subsumed in Jupiter, the chief-god of the pantheon.6 Although the homology between Zeus-Jupiter and Yahweh was also accepted by many ancient Jewish authors,7 it does not necessarily reect a common nature and identity. Rather, this equivalence may only express their common status of supreme god and master of the universe. To avoid the problem of this statutory analogy with Yahweh, it may be interesting to refer to sources comparing the Greek deities to Yahweh, beyond the bounds of the monotheistic context. This is possible since Yahweh was also known during late Antiquity as the god of magicians and sorcerers, who was invoked as Iao, Io, or Aeio.8 In a Greek magic oracle mentioned by Macrobius, Iao (Yahweh) is considered homologous to four Greek deities: Hades in winter, Zeus in spring, Helios in summer and Iao in autumn (Saturnalia 1.18.20). 5. See M. Simon, ‘Jupiter–Yahvé’, Numen 23 (1976), pp. 40-66. The author concludes (p. 51) that Josephus Flavius did not criticize Antiochus for this homology, but only for his intention to ‘reactualize’ the cult of Yahweh in regard to the cult of Zeus. 6. Simon, ‘Jupiter-Yahvé’. 7. Josephus Flavius (Ant. 12.2.2) stresses the similar worship of the Greeks and Jews for the great god creator of the universe. In Against Apion (2.250), he criticizes the extravagant stories related to the popular cult of Zeus that arose from the ignorance of the actual nature of the god (Yahweh), known in Greece only by the philosophers. Also, Philo (Spec. Leg. 2.165) stresses the community of faith of the Greeks and the Israelites in the supreme God. 8. See M. Martin, Magie et magicien dans le monde gréco-romain (Paris: Errance, 2005), pp. 169-86.

o a Japeto?

390


Perhaps the most interesting point here is the identity presumed between Dionysus, the god reigning in autumn (the season of the vintage) and Yahweh. Both are called here by the same name, Iao, suggesting that Dionysus is none other than the Greek version of Yahweh. This singular claim is corroborated by Plutarch, whose search for the deepest secrets and mysteries of Dionysus brought him to the god of the Hebrews.9 The link between Yahweh and Dionysus is also supported by the emergence, in Thrace, of a syncretism between the cult of Yahweh and Sabazius (the Thracian Dionysus), in which Jews and pagans belonged to the same community. During Antiquity, such an achieved stage of syncretism with the exclusivist cult of Yahweh cannot be demonstrated for Zeus-Jupiter or for any other god.10 Also in Canaan, the wave of Hellenism stimulated an impressive profusion of the cult of Dionysus, a phenomenon not observed for any other Greek god.11 These elements, when considered together, invite us to reconsider seriously the premise that Dionysus is the Greek counterpart of ‘Yahweh-the God of Israel’ evoked in the book of Isaiah. 9. Plutarch (Quaestiones conviviales 4.6.1-2). This opinion of Plutarch is discussed by C. Escarmant, ‘Dionysos dieu des juifs : la mesure du mélange’, in I. Zinguer (ed.), Dionysos, Origines et résurgences (Paris: Vrin, 2001), pp. 149-60. Plutarch apparently had a deep knowledge of the genuine cult of Dionysus and of its ancient traditions and mysteries. In Consolations to His Wife (611d), he wrote: ‘the cult of Dionysus that we, the initiates, keep the secret knowledge’ (cited G. Freyburger et al., Sectes religieuses en Grèce et à Rome dans l’Antiquité païenne [Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2006], p. 71). 10. See J.B. McMinn, ‘Fusion of the Gods: A Religio-astrological Study of the Interpenetration of the East and the West in Asia Minor’, JNES 15 (1956), pp. 201-13. As shown by Simon (‘Jupiter Yahvé’, pp. 52-55), Sabazianism was probably not considered as a marginal sect by the Jews, but rather as the result of the identity established between Yahweh and Sabazius. During the second century BCE, Sabazius was so identied with the god of Israel that the Jews spread his cult in Rome, a feature known through the interdiction of the worship of Sabazius-Liber (Dionysus) handed down in 133 BCE by the Roman Senate, because of his subversive nature. See M.D. Herr, ‘The Hatred of Israel in the Roman Empire in Light of the Jewish Exegetic Literature’, in M. Stern (ed.), Hellenistic Views on Judaism (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Press, 1974), pp. 33-43, and Freyburger et al., Sectes religieuses, p. 234. 11. This latter evidence has been considered by modern scholars as the source of the parallel between Dionysus and Yahweh: if the cult of Dionysus inltrated the Israelites exactly as it did in many other countries, the assumed link between Yahweh and Dionysus may be no more than an attempt to justify this foreign worship in a monotheistic context. Yet this explanation remains unsatisfying: before the spread of Hellenism, Herodotus (2.49) already specied that Dionysus was introduced into Greece by ‘the Phoenicians who settled with Cadmus in Boeotia’.

il dionisismo però in Grecia è un culto misterico, mentre il culto a Yahweh è pubblico


391

2. Yahweh and Dionysus: First Parallels If indeed Yahweh and Dionysus are of a common ancient origin, it should be possible to identify common symbols and/or modes of worship. This point is examined here. a. Relation to Wine In Greece, wine was considered as the gift of Dionysus to humankind.12 The association of wine to Dionysus was so strong that even private banquets and festivities were thought to be celebrations of the deity. Dionysus was so identied with wine that the spread of his cult in the Greek colonies was intimately associated with the expansion of viticulture.13 In Israel, production of excellent and/or abundant wine depended on the blessing of Yahweh (Amos 9.13-14), and the dwelling of every Israelite under his g tree, and his vineyard was regarded as the ultimate blessing of Yahweh (2 Kgs 18.31; Mic. 4.4 ; Jer. 31.5). In contrast, a paucity of wine is interpreted as a punishment from Yahweh (Amos 5.11; Zeph. 1.13; Joel 1.5). These views may explain why Yahweh was invoked during the vintage (Hos. 7.14). Wine is also specically involved in the worship of Yahweh in the sanctuary (Exod. 29.40; Lev. 23.13; Num. 15.5-10). As a whole, the Israelites are portrayed as the vineyard of Yahweh (Isa. 5.7; Jer. 6.9; 12.10). The association of Yahweh with wine does not garner much attention as long as this god is considered as master of the universe controlling all manner of transformations. Nevertheless, the link between Yahweh and wine, as it appears in the Bible, is stronger than one would expect in such a monotheistic approach. For example, it seems that some aspects of the popular cult of Yahweh were associated with an excessive consumption of wine. Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, were apparently deeply inebriated during the ceremony of the consecration of the Tabernacle of Yahweh (Lev. 10.1-10). It is interesting to note that, before their tragic death, no one (including Moses) considered their drunkenness as being a 12. Homer, Iliad 14.325. One of the protagonists of Euripides’ Bacchae even considers wine, the gift of Dionysus, as the most useful expedient for forgetting the miseries of human existence (Bacchae 277-83). Miracles of the ‘transformation’ of water into wine were considered in ancient Greece as Dionysus’ theophany. See J.M. Pailler, Bacchus. Figures et pouvoirs (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1995), p. 34. 13. D. Stanislawsky, ‘Dionysus Westward: Early Religion and the Economic Geography of Wine’, Geographical Review 65 (1975), pp. 427-44.

era usato per profetizzare?

392


hindrance in the performance of their duties.14 Another religious ceremony involving the abundant consumption of wine, marzeaÜ, is also mentioned in the Bible.15 This practice is not condemned per se by Amos and Jeremiah, but only for the abuses it may engender.16 This suggests that, in Israel, this practice was associated with the cult of Yahweh. From these considerations, it seems that the similarity of popular Israelite festivities with Dionysian banquets, as stressed by Plutarch,17 is probably not the result of Hellenic inuence. Rather, the Dionysian banquet appears to be very close to an ancient Canaanite tradition inextricably entwined with the popular cult of Yahweh. b. Common Symbols Snakes. Dionysus is surrounded by snakes: the god is born in a nest of serpents. As a boy, he is generally shown holding serpents, and later, he is symbolized as a mythical snake.18 The cult of Dionysus also involved the handling of snakes by Maenads, conrming his intimate association with this animal.19 Sabazius, the Thracian homolog of Dionysus, was also symbolized as a snake and this reptile played a central role in his cult.20 Yahweh is also described as surrounded by burning snakes (seraphim) by Isaiah (6.1-3), and ying snakes are sent by Yahweh against the 14. The prohibition, for the priests, of wine consumption before the rituals is formulated only after the incident. The admonition of the priest Eli to Hannah (1 Sam. 1.13-14) conrms that many Israelites went inebriated to consult Yahweh. 15. See Jer. 16.5 and Amos 6.7. Similar festivities are also evoked in Judg. 9.27; Hos. 4.10-11, and Hab. 2.16. From Ugaritic sources, this festivity was a religious banquet occurring in the meeting house of the congregation. This near-identical relationship to the Dionysian banquet may explain why the term marzeaÜ has sometimes been translated as thiasos. See F. Briquel-Chatonnet, Les relations entre les cités de la côte phénicienne et les royaumes d’Israël et de Juda (Leuven: Peeters, 1992), p. 329. 16. See Briquel-Chatonnet, Les relations, pp. 325-32. 17. In Quaestiones Conviviales (4.6.2), Plutarch concluded that the god of Israel is none other than Dionysus, and that his festivals (especially Shabbat and Sukkoth) are none other than bacchanalia. 18. C. Kerenyi, Dionysos: Archetypal Image of Indestructible Life (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, English edn, 1976), p. 60. This symbolism of Dionysus is conrmed by Sabazius, the Thracian Dionysus symbolized by a horned snake (see Freyburger et al., Sectes religieuses, pp. 80-81). 19. Kerenyi, Dionysos, p. 61; Freyburger et al., Sectes religieuses, p. 60; R.S. Kraemer, ‘Ecstasy and Possession: The Attraction of Women to the Cult of Dionysus’, HTR 72 (1979), pp. 55-80. 20. H. Jeanmaire, Dionysos—Histoire du culte de Bacchus (Paris: Payot, 1951), p. 16. See also Freyburger et al., Sectes religieuses, p. 78.

Così si comprendono meglio i rimproveri di S. Paolo alle comunità di non ubriacarsi!


393

enemies of Israel (Isa. 14.29). Here again, this association is devoid of any specic signicance in a monotheistic context, where Yahweh reigns over the whole Universe. Nevertheless, the fact that the transformation of a staff into a snake (Exod. 4.1-5) is considered as the specic sign ensuring that Moses speaks in the name of Yahweh suggests that Yahweh is more closely related to snakes than assumed by the monotheistic exegesis. This point is corroborated by the worship of Yahweh as a bronze snake (nehushtan) in Jerusalem, until the religious reform of Hezekiah.21 Milk and Honey. In Greece, exudation of honey and milk from the Maenads’ staff (thyrsos) was considered as a theophany of Dionysus. It was even interpreted as the god admonishing the Maenads to leave aside their domestic activities in order to worship him.22 Milk and honey, when considered together, are also intimately related to the god of Israel. In the Bible, Canaan is constantly called a land ‘owing with milk and honey’, suggesting that it is an essential characteristic of the dominion of Yahweh. Milk and honey are also the foods reserved for the men devoted to Yahweh, at least during their initiation.23 Perpetual Flame. A perpetual ame burned in the temple of Dionysus at Thebes,24 and it was regarded as an essential symbol of Dionysus.25 Similarly, a perpetual re (eš tamid) is associated with the worship of Yahweh. The fact that it had to be lit immediately upon the completion of the Tabernacle (even before its ofcial inauguration) and was to burn for all eternity (‘it shall be a statute for ever throughout their generations on the behalf of the children of Israel’, Exod. 27.20-21) attests to its major importance in the worship of the Israelite deity. 21. See 2 Kgs 18.4, where the cult of Nehushtan is not explicitly denounced as idolatry. It is rather an ‘undesirable’ worship at the Temple of Yahweh. 22. Euripides, Bacchae 141-44, 160-69 and 708-11. See also Kerenyi, Dionysos, p. 31, and M. Détienne, ‘Dionysos en ses parousies: un dieu épidémique’, in L’association dionysiaque dans les sociétés anciennes (Rome: École Francaise de Rome, 1986), pp. 53-83. 23. This is revealed in Isa. 7.14-15: ‘Therefore the LORD himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Curd and honey shall he eat, when he knows to refuse the evil, and choose the good.’ 24. Schachter, Cults of Boiotia (London: University of London, 1981), I, p. 187. 25. Kerenyi, Dionysos, p. 78.

394


c. Choral Worship In Greece, choral singing was so intimately associated with the cult of Dionysus that it was called Dionysia.26 During the performance of a dithyrambos (choral singing and dancing), the choir master (choregos) was held to be a prophet of Dionysus or even his incarnation.27 In mystery cults of Dionysus (where the original identity of the god was better preserved than in the popular cult), participation in a choir singing for the deity was considered as the rst stage leading to his knowledge.28 These elements suggest that choral performance was not a simple adornment of the cult of Dionysus, but rather a central component. Also in Israel, the cult of Yahweh is expressly associated with choral singing. This point is most obviously evident in the works of the psalmists who composed and performed choral songs in the Jerusalem Temple.29 But the central importance of choral performance is also attested to during the ceremony of transferring the holy ark to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6.5; 1 Chron. 15.27) and after its placement in the city of David (1 Chron. 16.4-7). The centrality of choral singing is conrmed both by its prevalence in all the ceremonies (including sacrices30) and by the numerical importance of the singers and musicians (288 executants and poets, see 1 Chron. 25.7) among the staff of the Jerusalem Temple. These singers were organized in groups of twelve singers (mišmarot) continuously replacing one another so that the choral singing was never interrupted

26. Jeanmaire, Dionysos, p. 234; Kerenyi, Dionysos, p. 305. 27. For a description of the dithyrambos and its evolution, see Jeanmaire, Dionysos, pp. 232-33. Concerning the special status of the choregos, see C. Calame, Choruses of Young Women in Ancient Greece (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littleeld, 1997), p. 53. 28. Pailler, Bacchus, p. 115. In Euripides’ Bacchae, the worship of Dionysus by the Maenads is also associated with choral song (see Bacchae 377). It is interesting to note that the choral worship of Dionysus is antiphonic (vv. 679-82 and 1055-57). This mode of performance ‘reveals’ the secrets of the god, so that it should not be executed in the presence of non-initiates (v. 1109). 29. See, for example, Ps. 68.26-27: ‘Singers have been before, behind [are] players on instruments, in the midst virgins playing with timbrels. “In assemblies bless God, the Lord, from the fountain of Israel” ’, and in Ps. 26.12, ‘My foot has stood in uprightness, in assemblies I bless Yahweh!’ 30. On the central importance of choral singing during sacrices at the Jerusalem temple, see J.W. Kleinig, The Lord’s Song: The Basis, Function and Signicance of Choral Music in Chronicles (JSOTSup, 156; Shefeld: JSOT press, 1993), pp. 100-31.


395

(1 Chron. 25). Apparently, choral singing was not a simple embellishment, but rather a fundamental element in the worship of Yahweh.31 All these considerations reveal parallels between the worship of Dionysus and of Yahweh. Nevertheless, one cannot claim that this represents clear-cut evidence of their homology. In Greece, wine is also associated with the god Apollo32 and snakes appear in other, non-Dionysian contexts (Python and Typhon, for example). More generally, the perpetual ame may be considered as a general symbol of holiness, and choral singing is a form of collective praising so widely known that it cannot serve as a determining factor. More specic characteristics common to Yahweh and Dionysus are required to ensure their homology. 3. The God of Ethereal Nature In the rst book of Kings it is reported that Yahweh appeared to Elijah neither as a strong wind, nor as an earthquake or as re, but as ‘the ne voice of silence’.33 For Elijah, this revelation follows a long preparatory period (40 days), so that we may consider the ethereal nature symbolized as the ‘ne voice’ of silence as reecting the genuine identity of Yahweh, probably ignored by popular worship. Dionysus is also a god of ethereal nature. His name Bromius (‘the rustling’) evokes a minute breeze/wind quite similar to the ne voice of silence revealing Yahweh. In the Bacchae, this ethereal nature of Dionysus leads to a mysterious denition of the god. To the question of Pentheus (‘Are you saying that you saw clearly what the god was like?’), the hero replies: ‘He was as he chose; I did not order this’ (v. 478). Euripides species that this answer is not a joke.34 It relates the essence of the deity in a way strikingly similar to the self-denition of Yahweh: ‘I am that which I am’ (ehieh ašer ehieh, Exod. 3.14). 31. Choral singing remained of central importance for a long time in the worship of Yahweh. After the rst exile, the reconstruction of the temple and the fortications of Jerusalem were celebrated by choral singing (Ezra 3.11; Neh. 12.27-42). 32. Jeanmaire, Dionysos, pp. 23-25 33. 1 Kgs 19.11-12. According to R. Luyster (‘Wind and Water: Cosmogonic Symbolism in the Old Testament’, ZAW 93 [1981], pp. 1-10), the small wind (breeze) remains the best representation of Yahweh in the Bible. 34. Then, the prophet of Dionysus answers Pentheus, who was convinced that such a ‘denition’ of the god was a joke (v. 480): ‘One will seem to be foolish if he speaks wisely to an ignorant man’.

396


The ethereal nature may be, here again, considered as a general character of holiness, so that it cannot serve as a decisive factor in the homology between Yahweh and Dionysus. But their ethereal nature generates common singularities distinguishing them from all the other Greek and Canaanite gods. a. Mode of Action A singular mode of action of Yahweh is evoked in the book of Samuel: ‘You [Saul] shall meet a band of prophets coming down from the high place with a psaltery, and a timbrel, and a pipe, and a harp, before them; and they will be prophesying. And the spirit of Yahweh will come mightily upon you, and you shall prophesy with them, and shall be turned into another man’ (1 Sam. 10.5-6). From this testimony, it seems that the ‘spirit of Yahweh’ may stimulate uncontrolled behaviors. Promoted by music and dance, this mode of action is apparently spread in an epidemic manner.35 Also in Greece, Dionysus is unique among the gods for his propensity to provoke enthusiasm. This phenomenon was understood as the entrance of the spirit of Dionysus into a person, thus transforming him into a bacchant.36 As such, he would be close to a trance-state whose contagious nature was intimately linked to music, choral performance, and dance.37 This mode of action of Dionysus appears so nearly identical to the one described in the book of Samuel that Jeanmaire considered the Greek expression ‘to become a bacchant’ (baccheo) as precisely corresponding to the Hebrew term ‘to become a prophet’ (mitnabe).38 In both cases, the uncontrolled behavior stimulated by the deity may be dangerous. The tragic issue of the Bacchae (the killing of Pentheus by his mother and the Maenads during their trance) is an act of vengeance of the god consecutive to collective madness of his worshippers. A similar vengeance is evoked by Jeremiah, where the collective madness is issued from the wine worship of Yahweh:

35. See 1 Sam 19.20-24. This singular combination of worship/mode of action of the deity is attested to until the end of the rst temple period (see Ezek. 13.17). 36. See Euripides, Bacchae 300. See also Jeanmaire, Dionysos, pp. 59-61. 37. See Détienne, Dionysos en ses parousies. 38. Jeanmaire establishes the parallel as follows (Dionysos, p. 102): ‘The Hebrew language has a word signifying to do the nabi, that, in fact, seems to correspond quite exactly to the Greek term that we translate as to do the bacchant’.


397

Thus said Yahweh: Behold, I will ll all the inhabitants of this land, even the kings that sit upon David’s throne, and the priests, and the prophets, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, with drunkenness. And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, afrmation of Yahweh; I will not pity, nor spare, nor have compassion, so as not to destroy them. (Jer. 13.13-14)

Dionysus is also known for provoking demented behavior in soldiers: ‘He also possesses a share of Ares’ nature. For terror sometimes utters an army under arms and in its ranks before it even touches a spear; and this too is a frenzy from Dionysus’ (Bacchae 302-305). The similar destructive effect among the armies may be provoked by Yahweh: ‘And they stood every man in his place round about the camp; and all the host ran; and they shouted, and ed. And they blew the three hundred horns, and Yahweh set every man’s sword against his fellow, even through all the camp’ (Judg. 7.21-22).39 These parallels reveal the singular mode of action of Yahweh and Dionysus: both invest individuals to modify their psychism and behavior. This process may lead to transcendence and prophecy in sincere worshippers, and to madness and destruction in others. This exceptional type of action enables us to understand why Dionysus and Yahweh are so associated to wine, the drink that transforms behavior without any possibility of counteracting its effects or controlling its consequences. b. The Challenged Deity This distinctive mode of action of Dionysus and Yahweh does not only set them apart from all the other Aegean and Canaanite gods, but it also raises the same questions about their divine nature and/or powers. In Israel, this point is illustrated by the claim of David that ‘all the earth will know that there is God in Israel’ after his victory over Goliath (1 Sam. 17.47). It is difcult to imagine that Goliath and the Philistines were ignorant of the fact that Yahweh was the ofcial deity of Israel. Hence, this curious answer probably refers to a doubt concerning the ability of Yahweh to protect the Israelites against their enemies, as would be expected of a national deity. This interpretation is conrmed when the 39. As revealed in the book of Isaiah, this pathology affects not only the enemies of Israel: ‘Through the wrath of Yahweh-Sebaot is the land burnt up; the people also are as the fuel of re; no man spares his brother. And one snatches on the right hand, and is hungry; and he eats on the left hand, and is not satised; they eat every man the esh of his own arm’ (Isa. 9.18-19).

398


Philistines intend to ‘test’ whether their mortality following the capture of the Israelite Ark of the Covenant is truly a punishment of Yahweh: ‘And see, if it goes up by the way of its own border to Beth-Shemesh, then he [Yahweh] has done to us this great evil; but if not, then we shall know that his hand has not smite us; an accident it has been to us’ (1 Sam. 6.9). This reality is also reected in the answer of Pharaoh to the Israelites’ request to go out for three days to celebrate Yahweh’s festival: ‘You are idle, you are idle; therefore you say: Let us go and sacrice to Yahweh for three days’ (Exod. 5.17). If the worship of Yahweh is regarded by the Egyptians as a pretext for interrupting their work, it may be because Yahweh is not a classical god that requires accepted worship practices, and/or because his festivals (probably banquets) seem to be very secular to the Egyptians. Such a doubt concerning the capacity of Yahweh to protect the Israelites did not rapidly disappear, as attested by the book of Joel: ‘Spare your people, Yahweh, and give not your heritage to reproach, that the nations should make them a byword: wherefore should they say among the peoples: Where is their God?’ (Joel 2.17). The question of the genuine powers of Yahweh is not asked only by the neighbors of Israel, but also by the Israelites themselves: ‘And it shall come to pass, at that time, I will search Jerusalem with lights, And I will lay a charge on the men who are settled on their lees, who are saying in their heart: Yahweh does no good, nor does he evil’ (Zeph. 1.12). Curiously, this doubt not only affects non-believing or ignorant people among the Israelites. It is reported in the book of Genesis that Sarah laughed when the emissaries of Yahweh foretold the birth of Isaac, so that Yahweh had to question Abraham: ‘Is any thing too hard for Yahweh?’ (Gen. 18.14). Even Moses doubted the ability of Yahweh to supply meat to the Israelites, a situation which prompted, here again, the same question: ‘Is the hand of Yahweh’s waxed short?’ (Num. 11.23). The same singularity is encountered concerning the power of Dionysus. In the Bacchae, Pentheus explicitly rejects the divine nature of Dionysus together with his cult.40 And exactly as in Israel, similar doubts concerning the actual powers of the deity are also expressed by his 40. This produces the following answer from Tiresias: ‘But believe me, Pentheus, do not boast that sovereignty has power among men, nor, even if you think so, and your mind is diseased, believe that you are being at all wise. Receive the god into your land, pour libations to him, celebrate the Bacchic rites, and garland your head’ (Bacchae 319-13).


399

worshippers. This heretical attitude is revealed in the condence of Kadmos to Pentheus: ‘Even if, as you say, he is not a god, call him one; and tell a glorious falsehood, so that Semele might seem to have borne a god, and honor might come to all our race’ (Bacchae 330-36). Even the hero of Euripides’ tragedy is not entirely convinced that the god has rescued him from the hand of Pentheus.41 As in the Bible, the question of the divine nature of Dionysus becomes the central theme of the Homeric hymns devoted to the deity and of the Bacchae.42 In both cases, the power of the deity is revealed through the cruel vengeance against those denying his divine nature. c. Exclusivism The most exceptional characteristic of Yahweh is probably the requirement to be worshiped by everyone in Israel, and at the same time, to reject the authority of all the other deities. A similar combination exists with regard Dionysus: this god requires the worship of everyone in Greece, with no exception.43 Furthermore, this worship leads to his recognition as the exclusive source of authority.44

41. When escaping the persecution of Pentheus, the hero of the Bacchae (629-31) only suspects that Dionysus is involved in this salutary outcome: ‘Then Bromius, so it seems to me—I speak my opinion, created a phantom in the courtyard Pentheus at it headlong stabbing at the shining air, as though slaughtering me’. 42. For the Homeric hymns 1, 7 and 26, see L. Grech, ‘Which of the Gods is This? Dionysus in the Homeric Hymns’, Iris 20 (2007), pp. 30-36. This point is clearly expressed from the beginning of the Bacchae (39-48): ‘For this city must learn, even if it is unwilling, that it is not initiated into my Bacchic rites, and that I plead the case of my mother, Semele, in appearing manifest to mortals as a divinity whom she bore to Zeus. Now Kadmos has given his honor and power to Pentheus, his daughter’s son, who ghts against the gods as far as I am concerned and drives me away from sacrices, and in his prayers makes no mention of me, for which I will show him and all the Thebans that I was born a god.’ Hence, the hero of the Bacchae resembles the prophets of Yahweh in early Israel ghting against the degradation of the popular cult and announcing the vengeance of the god. 43. Indeed, Dionysus was worshipped in Greece both by men and women, Greeks and foreigners, citizen and slaves, a feature also stressed in the Bacchae (vv. 206-209): ‘No, for the god has made no distinction as to whether it is right for men young or old to dance, but wishes to have common honors from all and to be extolled, setting no one apart’. 44. This is raising in the Bacchae (vv. 1030-1039) as follows: Messenger: Pentheus, the child of Echion, is dead. Chorus Leader (singing): Lord Bacchus, truly you appear to be a great god.

400


The main consequence of this combination, common to Dionysus and to Yahweh, is a subversive inuence in regard to the social and political order patronized by the ofcial pantheon. In the Bible, this subversive dimension is rst of all revealed by the involvement of Yahweh in the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian slavery. But it is also expressed later: the request for a king reigning on Israel is considered a rejection of Yahweh (1 Sam. 8.7), and the attempt of the king to impose his authority on the Israelites is also interpreted as a sin against Yahweh.45 Dionysus displays a similar subversive dimension from the earliest stages of his popular cult. His requirement to be worshipped by everyone challenged to social order prevalent during the Dark Age, and transformed him into the ‘liberating god’ of Greece.46 Later, the public cult of Dionysus had been promoted by the rst Tyrants in order to abolish the social and political order yet controlled by the aristocracy.47 Exactly as in Israel, this subversive dimension also threatened the new political order established by the Tyrants and their followers. It seems, therefore, that the progressive limitation of the popular cult of Dionysus to private festivals and banquets reects an attempt, for the authorities, to dilute in wine this irreducible subversive dimension.48 In Rome, where political power was not so subjugated to the deity, this subversive dimension was Messenger: What do you mean? Why have you said this? Do you rejoice at the misfortunes of my master, woman? Chorus Leader: I, a foreign woman, rejoice with foreign songs; for no longer do I cower in fear of chains. Messenger: Do you think Thebes so lacking in men? Chorus Leader: Dionysus, Dionysus, not Thebes, holds my allegiance. 45. See 2 Sam. 24.10. The mergence of the Jerusalemite Royal Ideology may, therefore, be understood as an attempt to neutralize this subversive dimension by linking the authority of Yahweh with that of the lineage of David. Yet the very frequent criticism of and contempt for the kings encountered in the Bible suggest that the subversive dimension of Yahwism remained virulent throughout the whole the rst Temple period. 46. Stanislawsky, ‘Dionysus Westward”, pp. 436-37. This subversive dimension is especially expressed by the central role of women in his cult, threatening the traditional Greek values promoted by men. See R.S. Kraemer, ‘Ecstasy and Possession: The Attraction of Women to the Cult of Dionysus’, HTR 72 (1979), pp. 55-80. 47. See J.A. Dabdab-Trabulsi, Dionysisme—Pouvoir et société en Grèce jusqu’à la n de l’époque classique (ALUB, 412; Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1990), pp. 86-110. 48. This point is clearly stressed by Freyburger et al. (Sectes religieuses, p. 51): ‘From the inability to reject such a cult, the authorities have expelled most of its essential characteristics. In the ofcial religion, Dionysus became no more than the god of feasting, of carousal, of tall stories, of enjoyment, with no more mystical references.’

Sono divinità appartenenti allo strato del "demos" = artigiani anche Efesto è associato a Dioniso e al vino


401

simply eradicated by a Senate order (139 BCE) that forbade the cult of Dionysus/Liber, and authorized cruel repression against his devotees.49 The parallels mentioned in this section enable us to distinguish Yahweh and Dionysus from all the other Canaanite and Greek deities. However, a fundamental feature still prevents their homology: representations of Yahweh are strictly forbidden in Israel, while Dionysus is generally symbolized as a man. The origin of this difference is investigated in the next section. 4. The Human Theophany a. The Dual Nature of Dionysus As an ethereal god, Dionysus was abstractly symbolized by the air moved by bellows or by a simple piece of wood encased in copper. Later, in Orphic hymns, he was praised as an omnipresent principle.50 Yet, at the same time, Dionysus was also regarded as a demi-god, who issued from the union of Zeus with the mortal Semele. From the seventh Homeric hymn, we learn that this ‘human’ dimension of Dionysus rendered him indistinguishable from simple mortals as long as he hid his fabulous powers. A similar feature can be found in the Bacchae. The hero of the tragedy, called Dionysus, looks like a young man. To Pentheus, he obviously does not appear as a god, but simply as a convincing charlatan perverting the city of Thebes by introducing oriental cults (vv. 233-37). Truly, this hero does not really behave as a god in the Bacchae. He mentions that his hair is consecrated to the deity (v. 498), a detail suggesting that he is no more than a servant of Dionysus. He also defends Dionysus as a fervent devotee might: ‘Bromius will not allow you [Pentheus] to remove the Bacchae from the joyful mountains’ (v. 791), and he speaks about Dionysus as the divine authority intervening against Pentheus: ‘Then Bromius, so it seems to me—I speak my opinion—created a phantom in the courtyard’ (vv. 629-30). To Pentheus, he related that the god is accompanying them (v. 923). But surprisingly, the hero does not only invoke Dionysus—he also assumes a total identication with him: ‘But Dionysus, who you [Penheus] claim does not exist, will pursue you for these insults. For in injuring us, you put him in bonds’ (vv. 516-18). He also feels fully 49. See Freyburger et al., Sectes religieuses, pp. 171-207. 50. Euripides, Bacchae 500-502; see also Freyburger et al., Sectes religieuses, p. 127. Jeanmaire, Dionysos, pp. 17 and 340.

402


implicated in the god’s vengeance: ‘He will go to the Bacchae, where he will pay the penalty with his death. Dionysus, now it is your job; for you are not far off. Let us punish him’ (vv. 848-51).51 A bond between the god and the hero seems to exist, as conrmed by his answer to Pentheus: ‘The god himself will release me, whenever I want’ (v. 498). This distinctive quality does not simply reect a communion of the devotee with the god he is fervently worshipping and even encountering ‘face to face’ (v. 470). The hero is also endowed with divine powers, a phenomenon revealed by the messenger when relating the death of Pentheus: And then I saw the stranger perform a marvelous deed. For seizing hold of the lofty top-most branch of the pine tree, he pulled it down, pulled it, pulled it to the dark earth. It was bent just as a bow or a curved wheel, when it is marked out by a compass, describes a circular course: in this way the stranger drew the mountain bough with his hands and bent it to the earth, doing no mortal’s deed. (vv. 1062-69)

These considerations reveal that two distinct, though closely related entities coexist under the same name Dionysus. The rst, being of ethereal nature, should be dened as the ‘ether-god’. It is revealed as a ne breeze or a ‘holy re’.52 The other, of human appearance, is described in the prologue of the Bacchae as the god ‘having taken a mortal form’ (v. 4). He should be therefore considered as a human theophany of the ether-god. This man-god is a mortal devoted to the ether-god, then invested by him with divine powers, acting in his name and diffusing his cult. b. The Man-God in Israel The search for a biblical parallel to the man-god dimension of Dionysus brings us to the concept of iš-elohim. This term is generally assumed to designate men (Moses, Samuel, Elijah and Elisha)53 who speak or act in 51. This singularity is conrmed a few verses later: ‘I will lead this young man [Pentheus] to a great contest, and Bromius and I will be the victors. As for the rest, the matter itself will show’ (vv. 974-76). 52. In the Bacchae, the god constantly mentioned by the hero is described as an ethereal column of re: ‘a voice, Dionysus as I guess, cried out from the air: “Young women, I bring the one who has made you and me and my rites a laughing-stock. Now punish him!” And as he said this, a light of holy re was placed between heaven and earth’ (vv. 1078-83). 53. Mentioned as ish-elohim in Deut. 33.1; 1 Sam. 9.6; 1 Kgs 17.24; 2 Kgs 4.9, respectively.


403

the name of Yahweh. The common translation, ‘man of god’, suggests that they are faithful servants of the deity (1 Sam. 2.27; 1 Kgs 13.1). But some of the uses of iš-elohim in the Bible suggest a more complex reality: an iš-elohim is not a simple servant of Yahweh, he is, rst of all, a mortal invested with divine powers. This even seems to be the sine qua non of an iš-elohim, as expressed by the woman immediately after Elijah brought her child back to life: ‘And the woman said to Elijah: “Now I know that you are an iš-elohim, and that the word of Yahweh in your mouth is truth” ’ (1 Kgs 17.24). This condition is even enounced by Elijah himself: ‘And Elijah answered and said to the captain of fty: “If I be an iš-elohim, let re come down from heaven, and consume you and your fty”. And there came down re from heaven, and consumed him and his fty’ (2 Kgs 1.10). The most curious point in this last example is the lack of invocation of Yahweh before performing the miracle, and/or the absence of thanksgiving after it.54 If Elijah was a simple servant of Yahweh enjoying a privileged relationship with him, he would have had to beseech him to intervene for his rescue. But here, strikingly, Elijah performs the miracle by himself. The same curious phenomenon is extensively observed concerning Elisha (2 Kgs 2–6). Perhaps the clearest illustration of the special standing of an išelohim is provided by Moses, who is granted divine status by Yahweh with respect to his brother: ‘He [Aaron] shall be to you [Moses] a mouth, and you shall be to him a god (elohim)’ (Exod. 4.16). Later in the book of Exodus, this curious point is stressed again: ‘And Yahweh said unto Moses: ‘See, I have set you god (elohim) to Pharaoh; and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet’ (Exod. 7.1). These singular assertions should not be considered as simple metaphors. According to the book of Exodus, Moses is truly endowed with divine powers.55 Exactly as in the case of Elijah or Elisha, he has the power to perform miracles in an interaction with Yahweh. This combined mode of action is related as follows: ‘Lift you [Moses] up your rod, and stretch out your hand over the sea, and divide it; and the children of Israel shall go into the midst of the sea on dry ground. And I [Yahweh], behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall go in after them’ (Exod. 14.16-17). Actions on the elements are performed via Moses, the iš-elohim, while 54. A similar situation is encountered when Elijah stops the ow of the Jordan River (2 Kgs 2.8). 55. ‘And this rod, you [Moses] shall take in your hand, wherewith you shall do the signs’ (Exod. 4.17).

è forse lo stesso legame con il saniwa in Giappone

404


Yahweh is mainly acting on psychism (as mentioned in the previous section). According to these considerations, an iš-elohim is not only a pious man devoted to Yahweh. Rather, he appears to be a human theophany of Yahweh. This is why the term iš-elohim should not be translated as ‘man of god’ but as man-god. The present considerations reveal striking similarities between the dual nature of Dionysus in Greece and the complex relationships existing between Yahweh and men-god in Israel. Both should be considered as a consequence of the singular mode of action of the ethereal god, and his ability to bestow powers on humans and to modify their psychism. In Greece, the god and his human theophanies are called by the same name, Dionysus. This is why he may be represented both abstractly and as a young man. In Israel, in contrast, the man-god is never called Yahweh, and he is not worshipped. This is why his cult in Israel remained aniconic from the earliest stages of his popularization. Accordingly, the difference between Dionysus and Yahweh concerning their representation should not be considered as essential. Even more, clarication of the origin of such a difference strengthens the parallel existing between these two deities. All the above-mentioned comparisons of Dionysus and Yahweh concerning their essential nature, attributes, mode of action and worship lead us to conclude that these deities are truly similar. But in the absence of any explanation concerning the origin of such a reality, it remains difcult to integrate these ndings in any historical context. If Yahweh and Dionysus are truly homologous deities, they had to patronize the same natural phenomenon, at least at the outset. 5. The God of Copper Metallurgy I recently proposed that before becoming the god of the Israelite alliance, Yahweh was the patron of the Canaanite smelters. This original identity was suggested by his association with serpents (a symbol of copper melting), by the biblical metaphors depicting him as a smelter, by his afnities with other gods of metallurgy, by his ‘origin’ from Seir (the Canaanite area of copper metallurgy), and by his probable worship by the Canaanite smelters (Kenites and Edomites) prior to the Israelite alliance.56 56. N. Amzallag, ‘Yahweh: The Canaanite God of Metallurgy?’, JSOT 33 (2009), pp. 387-404.


405

This earlier depiction of Yahweh helps us to comprehend many of his distinctive features. Copper ore and the metal generated from it are so different from one another that, before modern chemistry, the smelting of copper ore in a furnace was construed as an act of creation of matter. In this context, smelters were considered as men with demiurgic powers, transformed into ‘demi-gods’ with the help of the god patronizing their activity.57 This is why the patron of the smelters is a so singular deity. While classical gods intervene in various natural processes and their transformations, the patron of the smelters confers upon them demiurgic powers. His ethereal nature also nds a simple explanation in the metallurgical context: the temperature required for true smelting of copper (up to 1200ºC) is reached only after boosting the charcoal combustion by oxygen supply. Thus, it is not surprising that the air moved by the bellows or the lungs of the smelter was regarded as being the ‘demiurgic factor’, the ethereal principle enabling his transformation into a ‘mangod’:58 from a metallurgical point of view, this ethereal principle is truly able to induce theophanies among humans. Since the singular attributes of Yahweh related to copper smelting are common to Dionysus, it would not be surprising to discover that, before being popularly worshipped, this god was the patron of the Aegean smelters. The identity of the god of metallurgy is unknown in Greece. However, during the Bronze Age, the patron of the smelters was considered as the master of the smith-god (the patron of the metalworkers), the one teaching him his craft.59 This ascendancy may contribute to his identication. In Greece, it is reported that Hephaestus, the smith-god, learned his art at Naxos, an island called Dionysia in reference to its patron-god, Dionysus.60 His status as master of the smith-god is suggested by the rst 57. This singularity explains why smelters were also considered as sorcerers with powers far beyond the eld of metallurgy (medicine, alchemy, poetry, music, divination). 58. In this context, it is important to note that Esau, the founding father of Edom (the Canaanite area of metallurgy and the land of origin of Yahweh) suddenly appears as an ish-elohim to his brother Jacob: ‘And Jacob said: “Nay, I pray you, if now I have found favor in you sight, then receive my offering (minÜah) from my hand; forasmuch as I have seen your face seeming as the face of God, and you were pleased with me…” ’ (Gen. 33.10). Also, Moses becomes a ish-elohim immediately after experiencing metallurgy via the transformation of a (bronze) staff into a ‘snake’ (liquid copper). 59. N. Amzallag, The Copper Revolution: Canaanite Smelters and the Origin of Civilizations (Shani: Hameara, 2008 [Hebrew]), pp. 64-69. 60. G. Capdeville, Volcanus. Recherches comparatistes sur les origines du culte de Vulcain (Rome: Ecole Francaise de Rome, 1995), p. 278. See also F. Guirand,

il getto del metallo fuso che spesso avveniva sul terreno era forse interpretato come un serpe di fuoco?

406


Homeric hymn, where Dionysus is praised for introducing Hephaestus in the Olympus. This event was not treated as a simple anecdote, since, as Jeanmaire noted, ‘It is a remarkable thing that, among all the scenes from the Dionysus legend, the one almost exclusively represented by the old school of ceramics is the god bringing his half-brother Hephaestus to the Olympus’.61 This oft-repeated association stressed the nature of Dionysus as the master of Hephaestus, conferring the demiurgic powers that allowed the smith to be accepted into the community of gods.62 In Greek mythology, Ariadne and Aphrodite are the wives of Dionysus and Hephaestus respectively. But Ariadne is none other than the Cretan homolog of Aphrodite.63 This conrms the existence of a parallel between Dionysus and Hephaestus. Beyond these preliminary considerations, the original identity of Dionysus as the god of metallurgy is supported by the following evidence: 1. Dionysus was symbolized by a leather sack full of air (a bellow), so that the cave of Dionysus was named Korykion anthron (the cave of the leather sack).64 It is likely, therefore, that the name Bromius refers to such a moving of air stimulating the genesis of metal in a furnace. Anche Efesto è scacciato dalla comunità olimpica divina, anche se poi vi ritorna. Lo stesso accade a Susanowo, e a Gesù: 'la pietra scartata dai costruttori è divenuta testata d'angolo' ‘Mythologie grecque’, in F. Guirand and J. Schmidt (eds.), Mythes et Mythologies (Paris: Bordas, 1996), pp. 115-245, and especially p. 164. See also Jeanmaire, Dionysos, p. 222. 61. Jeanmaire, Dionysos, pp. 10-11. See also Grech, ‘Which of the Gods is This?’, pp. 31-32. 62. Hephaestus and Dionysus are mentioned together by Homer (the metallic urn where the bones of Achilles are buried is both the gift of Dionysus and the work of Hephaestus; see Odyssey 24.71-75). Much later, their association is apparent in a metaphor of Socrates about metal alloying: ‘Let us make the mixture, Protarchus, with a prayer to the gods, to Dionysus or Hephaestus, or whoever he be who presides over the mixing’ (Plato, Philebus 61bc). 63. R.F. Willetts, Cretan Cults and Festivals (London: Routledge & Kegan, 1962), p. 193. See also T. Gantz, Early Greek Myths (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993), II, p. 474, and Capdeville, Volcanus, p. 267. C. Bérard and C. Bron (‘Bacchos au coeur de la cité. Le thiase dionysiaque dans l’espace politique’, in L’association dionysiaque dans les sociétés anciennes [Rome: Ecole Francaise de Rome, 1986], pp. 13-27) noticed that Athena, the patron goddess of the crafts, was represented as a Maenad by the Athenians. 64. See Pailler, Bacchus, p. 29. It is interesting to note that this leather sack is associated with a giant snake, another symbol of metallurgy. See Kerenyi, Dionysos, pp. 45-46.


407

2. Dionysus was called Pyrigenes or Pyrisporos, two terms meaning respectively ‘born/conceived from re’.65 He was believed to have been born in a nest of serpents, animals traditionally symbolizing copper melting/smelting in the ancient Near East, including Greece.66 3. Dionysus was subsumed by the Ancient Greeks into the great god of Crete.67 As Dionysus in Greece, this ‘Cretan Zeus’ was worshipped as a giant snake. From his mythology (especially his relationship to Couretes, a congregation of metalworkers) and one of his names, Welkhanos (a term related to Vulcain, the Roman patron of the smelters),68 it is likely that this Cretan Zeus was deeply involved in copper metallurgy. 4. In Thebes, a special worship of Dionysus was reserved for the Technitai, the guild of artisans. On votive vases found at Kabirion, near Thebes, Dionysus is shown conducting the initiation of the Kabiroi, originally a congregation of smelters. On others, he is depicted as the father of the Kabiroi, conrming his status as patron of the smelters.69 5. The Dionysian procession is mainly composed of Silenes, Satyrs and Corybants.70 In Greek mythology, these gures are considered to be the sons of Hephaestus, laboring occasionally in his workshop at Lemnos. All of them are limping, a trait typically related to the initiation into metallurgy.71 When taken together, all these elements suggest that Dionysus was formerly the Aegean god of copper metallurgy. As in the case of Yahweh, this identity remained only vestigial during the Iron Age, but it Forse esisteva un'antica associazione simbolica tra dio della metallurgia e dio della profezia, allo stesso modo come in ambiente religioso altaico-siberiano c'è tra fabbro e sciamano! 65. See Jeanmaire, Dionysos, p. 336. 66. Erechtheion, the son of Hephaestus and Athena, is represented as a bronze snake in his Athenian sanctuary (Erechtheum). In Greece, the snake always remained an important element in the cult of Dionysus. See Amzallag, The Copper Revolution, pp. 50-54. 67. See Euripides, The Cretans (frag. 475), and Kerenyi, Dionysos, p. 113. 68. From Cretan mythology, it appears that Zeus was educated and initiated by Couretes and Dactyls. Further comparisons suggest that the name of the Cretan Zeus was ‘Welkhanos’. See Willetts, Cretan Cults, p. 250 and Capdeville, Volcanus, pp. 160-238. 69. Shachter, Cults of Boiotia, I, pp. 189-90; II, pp. 93-95. See also C. Kerenyi, The Gods of the Greeks (London: Thames & Hudson, 1976), pp. 85-86. 70. See Guirand, Mythologie grecque, pp. 212-16, and C. Bérard, ‘Phantasmatique érotique dans l’orgiasme dionysiaque’, Kernos 5 (1992), pp. 13-26. 71. See Amzallag, ‘Yahweh, the Canaanite God of Metallurgy’.

408


is clear enough to conclude that these two deities have the same initial nature, so that they may be truly considered homologs. It now remains to clarify one last point: Does this homology derive from a parallel but independent evolution from a common reality (the smelting of copper ore in a furnace), or is it the result of the diffusion of a single deity from one area to the other? In the latter case, popularization of the cult, both in Canaan and in Greece, increases the number of possibilities: Dionysus and Yahweh may have an independent origin (as god of metallurgy) and a common evolution towards popularization during the early Iron Age. Inversely, their common origin may have been followed by an independent evolution towards popularization. The high level of similarities identied above suggests yet another thesis: Dionysus and Yahweh have a common origin and a common evolution towards popularization of their cult. These eventualities are examined in the next section. 6. The Canaanite Roots of Dionysus During Antiquity, copper metallurgy was a very complex activity. Supplying the required ores and uxes involved expertise in a wide range of domains (geology, mineralogy, mining processes, geography) and an extended network of relationships and alliances. The smelting, purication and production of well-dened alloys required a sound knowledge of pyrotechnology and proto-chemistry, both acquired through generations of experience. For these reasons, the spread of furnace metallurgy cannot be considered as a simple diffusion of technology. Rather, it was occasioned by the migration of smelters who introduced their way of life and their cult of the god of metallurgy.72 This is why, in such a proximate area as the Aegean and the Levant, a similarity between gods of metallurgy is probably an indication of their common origin. a. The God from Seir The origin of Dionysus is reported in Homeric hymns 1 and 7, both devoted to the deity. In hymn 7, Dionysus is depicted rst as a young man captured by pirates. To obtain a ransom for his release, the pirates 72. K. Kristiansen and T.B. Larsson, The Rise of Bronze Age Society: Travels, Transmissions and Transformations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 62107. See also P.L. Kohl, The Making of the Bronze Age Eurasia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 244-60, and Amzallag, The Copper Revolution, pp. 156-97.


409

go looking in the Eastern Mediterranean region for his parents or friends.73 This suggests that the man-god they captured was, at least in their opinion, of Levantine origin. This interpretation is explicitly conrmed by the rst Homeric hymn devoted to Dionysus: …For some say, at Dracanum; and some, on windy Icarus; and some, in Naxos, O Heaven-born, Insewn; and others by the deep-eddying river Alpheus that pregnant Semele bore you to Zeus the thunder-lover. And others yet, lord, say you were born in Thebes; but all these lie. The Father of men and gods gave you birth remote from men and secretly from white-armed Hera. There is a certain Nysa, a mountain most high and richly grown with woods, far off in Phoenicia, near the streams of Aegyptus…

From the last sentence mentioned here, we may conclude that Dionysus actually originated in the South of Canaan (Negev, Arabah or Sinai). In this arid region, the single area covered by an evergreen forest (until the beginning of the last century) was the mountains of Seir/Edom. This localization seems to be conrmed by the rst verses of the seventh Homeric hymn: I will tell of Dionysus, the son of glorious Semele, how he appeared on a jutting headland by the shore of the fruitless sea, seeming like a stripling in the rst ush of manhood: his rich, dark hair was waving about him, and on his strong shoulders he wore a purple robe.

The unique ‘fruitless sea’ (halos atrugetoio, literally: ‘the sea where nothing may be shed’), well known from Egypt to Phoenicia, is the Dead Sea. Accordingly, the ‘jutting headland’ (para thin) where Dionysus appeared for the rst time may be a poetical evocation of the copper mining area south the Dead Sea or the Seir mountains surrounding it. These statements about the origin of Dionysus have not been taken seriously by modern scholars. However, the present ndings t perfectly with this material: the region of Seir is considered both as the birthplace of Yahweh (Judg. 5.4) and the historical homeland of furnace metallurgy.74 The introduction of furnace metallurgy in the Aegean occurred at the end of the fourth millennium BCE,75 so at rst glance, it seems unlikely 73. ‘I reckon he is bound for Egypt or for Cyprus or to the Hyperboreans or farther still. But in the end he will speak out and tell us his friends and all his wealth and his brothers, now that providence has thrown him in our way’ (Homeric hymn 7.29-31). 74. Nissim Amzallag, ‘From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations: The Synthetic Theory’, AJA 113 (2009), pp. 497-513. 75. Though a minor process of copper smelting in crucibles has been identied in Greece, prior to the rise of furnace metallurgy, it does not seem to have made any

410


that mythology from the Iron Age would preserve the memory of events occurring about two thousand years before. Nevertheless, the metallurgical inuence of Canaan in the Mediterranean was continuously renewed throughout the Bronze Age, via the network of mining, trade of ingots, and the spread of metallurgical innovations (such as sulde ore smelting and bronze alloying).76 In this way, the constant reference to the Canaanite origin of the Aegean god of metallurgy may have been transmitted until the early Iron Age. b. The Popular Cult If Dionysus, in his original identity, is the Aegean counterpart of Yahweh, it remains to be determined whether or not the emergence of their popular cults is interrelated. Aegean Inuence in Canaan. From Jer. 47.4 we learn that Crete was the homeland of many of the Philistines. Their migration in the early Iron Age may have introduced the Cretan mode of worship of Welkhanos into Canaan. Such an eventuality of Philistine inuence on the process of popularization of the cult of Yahweh should be taken seriously in light of closeness of the Philistines to the Israelite tribe of Dan.77 It is also supported by the striking parallel indicated by Amos between the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt and the exodus of the Philistines from Crete, both considered as motivated by Yahweh: ‘…Have not I [Yahweh] brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor, and Aram from Kir?’ (Amos 9.7).78 Though such an inuence probably exists, the denial by the Philistines of Yahweh as a national deity (see above) suggests that the popularization of his cult in Canaan is not of Philistine origin.

signicant cultural impact. See Amzallag, ‘From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations’. 76. Amzallag, ‘From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations’. 77. An association between the tribe of Dan and the Philistines is suggested by the name Denyen, which was borne by one of the groups constituting the Sea Peoples. The Denyen were mentioned in the correspondence between the king of Ugarit and Ramesses III found at Medinet Habu. See F.C. Woudhuizen, The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples (Rotterdam: Erasmus Universitat Press, 2006), p. 33. 78. As for the Philistines, the worship of Yahweh is also suggested in northern Syria during the early Iron Age. See S. Dalley, ‘Yahweh in Hamath in the 8th Century BC: Cuneiform Material and Historical Deductions’, VT 60 (1990), pp. 21-32.


411

Canaanite Inuence in the Aegean. In Greece, the earliest attestations of a popular cult of Dionysus belong to the ninth and eighth centuries BCE.79 At this time, the Aegean experienced a profound transformation in all areas of life, a phenomenon called the Orientalizing Revolution because of its Levantine origin.80 A number of circumstances suggest that popularization of the cult of Dionysus was inherent to this Orientalizing Revolution. In Greece, Dionysus was deemed the grandson of Cadmus (from Hebrew qedem, the Levant), the founding father of Thebes. This Levantine origin of Dionysus was apparently important for the Greeks, since the god was frequently called the Cadmean.81 An ancient inscription from Magnesia mentions that the population asked for priests and Maenads from the race of Ino the Cadmean to join their new temple of Dionysus in order to teach his authentic cult and to introduce his genuine traditions.82 This Canaanite ascendant on the popular cult of Dionysus is 79. The most ancient attestation of a popular cult of Dionysus relates in Greece to the popular cult of Cabires (probably Levantines metallurgists). According to Schachter (Cults of Boiotia, II, p. 96), this cult started in Boiotia during the ninth or eighth century BCE. 80. See W. Burckert, The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Inuence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992). This inuence is so considerable that J. Whitley (The Archaeology of Ancient Greece [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001]) concluded (p. 103): ‘That, in essence, is the orientalizing phenomenon: the transformation of Levantine ideas, techniques and images to suit new, Greek purposes. That Greece owed much, if not everything, to the near East is not in doubt.’ The specic importance of the Near Eastern metallurgy in Greece is stressed by S.P. Morris, Daidalos and the Origin of Greek Art (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995), especially pp. 101-49, and E. Guralnick, ‘A Group of Near Eastern Bronzes from Olympia’, AJA 108 (2004), pp. 187-222. Concerning mythology and religion, see R. Mondi, ‘Greek Mythic Thought in the Light of the Near East’, in L. Edmunds (ed.), Approaches to Greek Myths (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989), pp. 142-98, and M. West, The East Face of Helicon: West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997). 81. Euripides mentions the Canaanite origins of both Cadmus and Dionysus as follows (Phoenissae 638-52): ‘Cadmus of Tyre came to this land, and at his feet a fourfooted, untamed heifer threw itself down, fullling an oracle, where the god’s prophecy told him to make his home in the plains rich with wheat, and where the lovely waters of Dirce pour over the elds, the green and deep-seeded elds; here Bromius’ mother gave birth from her union with Zeus’ (see also Détienne, Dionysos en ses parousies). The union of Semele, the daughter of Cadmus and Zeus may be therefore a poetical evocation of the naturalization of this Canaanite god in the Aegean. 82. The commemorative inscription mentions an oracle instructing the population to build a temple to Dionysus, and then asking for the following: ‘Go to the holy land of

412


also conrmed by the claim eleleu-iou-iou uttered during the Dionysian processions.83 Devoid of local meaning, this expression is singularly close to the Hebrew locution allelu-iah. This strengthens the assumption that the popular cult of Dionysus was introduced from the Levant. c. The Israelite Inuence During the rst half of the rst millennium BCE, relations between the Levant and the Aegean world were mainly ensured by the Phoenicians. Cadmus, the grand-father of Dionysus and founding father of Thebes, is considered in Greece as originating from Tyre. But the Phoenicians are not known for promoting the popular cult of Yahweh, a singularity inherent to the Israelite alliance. It is difcult to assume that the Tyrians promoted in Greece the cult of Yahweh before that of Melqart. Indeed, the Greek counterpart of the patron-god of Tyre is easy to identify in Greece: it is Melikertes, the god of Corinth.84 His great popularity in the Corinthian Isthmus conrms the existence of a Tyrian cultural inuence in Greece, at least from the Orientalizing revolution. In Greece, Dionysus and Melikertes display many afnities, but they remained distinct entities.85 This situation is parallel to that observed in Canaan, where Yahweh and Melqart, beyond their afnities, remained Thebes. You will bring from there Maenads from the descent of Ino the Cadmean. They will transmit to you the Orgia and the genuine traditions. They will also found the thiases of Bacchus in the City’ (reported by Jeanmaire, Dionysos, p. 198). 83. R. Flacelière, La vie quotidienne en Grèce au siècle de Périclès (Paris: Hachette, 1959), p. 246. 84. The identication of Melikertes with Melqart has been noted by both ancient (Philo of Byblos) and modern scholars (see, for example, M. Astour, Hellenosemitica [Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1967], and C. Harrauer, Meliouchos [Wiener Studien, 11; Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1987]). The attempt of C. Bonnet (Melqart, cultes et mythes de l’Héraclès Tyrien en Méditerranée [Leuven: Peeters, 1988]) to dissociate Melikertes from his Levantine ascendant (on the basis of a Greek meaning ‘the honey mixed’ of Melikertes, see pp. 387-89) remains unconvincing. 85. Both are grandsons of Cadmus, and their mythology involves the same sequence of death and rebirth following a rite of passage in a bronze cauldron. It is even reported that Dionysus was nursed by his aunt Ino, the mother of Melikertes. See Kerenyi, The Gods of the Greeks, pp. 262-65. According to Capdeville (Vulcanus, pp. 236-37), the great Cretan god (Zeus/Welkhanos) displays many afnities both with Dionysus and with Melikertes. These strong afnities may explain why Corinth was a very important homeland of the worship of Dionysus and its diffusion in Greece. See Stanislawsky, ‘Dionysus Westward”, pp. 442-43.


413

distinct.86 Accordingly, the spread of the popular cult of Dionysus from Thebes suggests the existence of a strong Israelite inuence in Boeotia, at least during the eighth and seventh centuries BCE. This conclusion is quite surprising, since the maritime activities of the Israelites are rarely mentioned in the Bible, and even ignored by the Greek sources. This is why an Israelite cultural inuence overseas is generally considered as improbable. Nonetheless, the origin of the Yahwistic inuence in Greece is claried by considering the domain of the Israelite tribe of Asher, the people who ‘dwell at the shore of the sea, and abide by its bays’ (Judg. 5.17). According to the book of Joshua, the northern limit of the domain of Asher was the south of Sidon, then including the coastal strip and all the towns and villages around the ‘fortress of Tyre’ (Josh. 19.25-29). A similar northern extension of the tribe of Asher is reported in 2 Sam. 24.6-7, and it ts the geographical location of the towns belonging to this tribe.87 This same land is identied as an integral part of the kingdom of Tyre, at least from the ninth century. Thus, it is possible that the northern Israelite tribe of Asher had been integrated into the kingdom of Tyre at the beginning of the rst millennium BCE. Evidence of such a transfer of authority is found in the book of Kings, where it is reported that Solomon sold the land of Kabul to Hiram (1 Kgs 9.10-14). The archaeological and literary data, when considered together, strongly suggest that the land of Kabul was in fact the whole dominion of the tribe of Asher.88 Such a transfer of authority from Israel to Phoenicia of the whole tribe of Asher, prior to the Orientalizing Revolution, enables us to resolve the question of origin of the popular cult of Dionysus in Greece. The involvement of the tribe of Asher in the spread of the popular cult of Yahweh overseas is especially interesting in light of the composition of this tribe. Most of the Asherite lineages mentioned in the book of Chronicles (1. Chron. 7.30-40) issue from Heber, also known as a Kenite 86. The sanctuary of Yahweh in Jerusalem was apparently inspired by the sanctuary of Melqart at Tyre (see 2 Chron. 2) and built by a Tyrian architect (1 Kgs 7.13-14). This similarity is conrmed by the presence of the same two large columns (Boaz and Yakin) in Jerusalem (1 Kgs 7.15-22) and in the temple of Melqart a Tyre and Gades (as reported by Herodotus [2.44] and Strabo [3.5.5-6], respectively). This afnity is also revealed in Ezek 28.11-15, where it is written that Tyre was the pride of Yahweh’s dominon. 87. Y. Aharoni, The Settlement of the Israelite Tribes in Upper Galilee (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1957 [Hebrew]), pp. 86-89. 88. See A. Lemaire, ‘Asher et le royaume de Tyr’, in Lipiski (ed.), The Phoenicians and the Bible, pp. 135-52.

414


clan. The tribe of Asher seems therefore to include a very substantial Kenite component.89 Being the Canaanite copper smelters, the Kenites obviously had extensive knowledge of Yahweh and of his former worship.90 For this reason, the cult of Yahweh in the northern tribe of Asher, as it is reected in the cult of Dionysus in Greece, should not be considered as a peripheral dilution of a genuine cult of Yahweh emerging among the Judah, Ephraim, and Manasseh tribes. Rather, it is probably a reliable source concerning the actual cult of Yahweh in early Israel, and even before that. The discovery of an Asherite component in the Phoenicians has yet another consequence: the islands where a worship of Yahweh is evoked (see Introduction) may not only be in the Aegean, but also in the Phoenician colonies scattered in the Mediterranean. In this case, the ambiguity concerning location of the islands in the book of Isaiah may be a means to include both of them. Conclusion The current investigation has revealed that the mention, in the Psalms and the book of Isaiah, of a worship of Yahweh overseas does not constitute the simple desire of monotheist authors aspiring to extend the dominion of the god dwelling in Jerusalem. It truly reects the existence of a local worship of Yahweh in the Aegean, under the name of Dionysus. The parallel between these two gods has been established through a comparative analysis of their cult, their attributes, their mode of action, and their human theophany. Homology between Yahweh and Dionysus is conrmed by their common vestigial link to copper metallurgy. From the extensive Canaanite metallurgical inuence in the Aegean, and from the homology between Dionysus and the Cretan Zeus of the Minoean period, it may be concluded that Dionysus was the Aegean counterpart of Yahweh, even before the popularization of their cults during the Iron Age. The Canaanite origin of Dionysus obviously asks for reconsidering the current views concerning the Ancient Aegean culture and civilization. But the analysis performed here also opens a new horizon for the investigation of Ancient Israel. For the rst time, a detailed non-biblical source 89. Judg. 4.17 and 5.23. This link is conrmed by the mention of Yatir and Yefune, two Kenites, as offspring of the Asherite Heber. See M. Rosen and S. Bendor, The Origin of Kingdom in Israel: An Introduction to the Book of Samuel (Tel Aviv: Sifryat Poalim, 1959 [Hebrew]), pp. 42-50. 90. The devotion of the Kenites to Yahweh is mentioned in Jer. 35.19.


415

concerning the ancient cult of Yahweh is identied. It is true that both the cult of Dionysus in Greece and the cult of Yahweh in Israel evolved independently throughout the rst millennium BCE. For this reason, a simple reference to the cult of Dionysus is obviously insufcient to clarify the nature of the popular cult of Yahweh prior to the monotheistic reform. But the continuous spread of furnace metallurgy from Canaan was not limited to the Aegean, so homologies between Yahweh and other gods linked to copper metallurgy are expected to exist. The cultic elements common to all these deities may contribute to reveal the true nature of the early cult of the mysterious Canaanite god of metallurgy. Even at this early stage of investigation, the simple comparative study between Dionysus and Yahweh contributes to the clarication of many points obscured by the monotheistic reform. Yet it is interesting to note that the fundamental characteristics of Yahweh emerging from this comparative analysis are clearly related to his original identity as god of copper metallurgy. The present exploration invites us to reconsider our representation of the popular cult of Yahweh in early Israel and the process of the emergence of monotheism. This unique faith should neither be regarded as the end phase of any spontaneous evolution from polytheism to henotheism, nor the achieved expression of a latent monotheism/monolatry proper to Semitic beliefs. It is no more the religious counterpart of any literary ction composed during the second half of the rst millennium BCE through a genial compilation of miscellaneous sources. Rather, the monotheistic faith and its biblical support become the consequence of an ultimate evolution of the popularization of the cult of the god of furnace metallurgy in his historical homeland.

Amzallag - Was Yahweh Worshiped in the Aegean

Recommend Documents